Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Diplomatic Immunity for US military

    Share

    kvs
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2533
    Points : 2666
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Another example of US exceptionalism and abuses

    Post  kvs on Wed Apr 08, 2015 1:12 am

    http://m.thenation.com/blog/203617-us-soldiers-and-contractors-sexually-abused-least-54-children-colombia

    When Colombian men rape Colombian women, it is news. When US soldiers and private defense contractors are the rapists, not so much. Last week, FAIR noticed that not one major media organization in the United States has covered the charge, reported in Colombia (and online in English by the invaluable Medellín-based >Colombia Reports), "that US military soldiers and contractors had sexually abused at least fifty-four children in Colombia between 2003 and 2007 and, in all cases, the rapists were never punished–either in Colombia or stateside–due to American military personnel being immune from prosecution under diplomatic immunity agreements between the two countries." Nor, as far as I can tell, have any of the State Department's allied human rights groups made mention of the allegations.

    The media silence goes hand in hand with the official immunity granted not just to US diplomats, but soldiers and employees of shadowy private security firms hired by Washington to carry out much of Plan Colombia. One of the rapes occurred in 2007 and was reported in the Colombian press. It was allegedly committed by Army sergeant Michael J. Coen and an employee of a private security contractor, César Ruiz. The victim was a 12-year-old girl. "They abducted her, they drugged her, they took her to the air base near the town of Melgar and raped her, they took videos of her," the victim's mother told reporters. Then they drove her into town and pushed her out of their car in front of a church. The crime was well covered in Colombia, but a search of Proquest news turned up only one item in English the United States, a translation of a piece that was part of reporting in Spanish published by the Nuevo Herald (affiliated with the Miami Herald) by Gonzalo Guillén and Gerardo Reyes:

    The U.S. government has made little effort to investigate a U.S. army sergeant and a Mexican civil contractor implicated in Colombia in the rape of a 12-year-old girl in August 2007, according to an El Nuevo Herald investigation. The suspects, Sgt. Michael Coen and contractor Cesar Ruiz, were taken out of Colombia under diplomatic immunity, and do not face criminal charges in the United States in the rape in a room at Colombia's German Olano Air Force Base in Melgar, 62 miles west of Bogota.



    Meanwhile the US media is looking for all sorts of dirt in Russia and just making up lies about.

    magnumcromagnon
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4468
    Points : 4659
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: Diplomatic Immunity for US military

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Wed Apr 08, 2015 1:32 am

    kvs wrote:http://m.thenation.com/blog/203617-us-soldiers-and-contractors-sexually-abused-least-54-children-colombia

    When Colombian men rape Colombian women, it is news. When US soldiers and private defense contractors are the rapists, not so much. Last week, FAIR noticed that not one major media organization in the United States has covered the charge, reported in Colombia (and online in English by the invaluable Medellín-based >Colombia Reports), "that US military soldiers and contractors had sexually abused at least fifty-four children in Colombia between 2003 and 2007 and, in all cases, the rapists were never punished–either in Colombia or stateside–due to American military personnel being immune from prosecution under diplomatic immunity agreements between the two countries." Nor, as far as I can tell, have any of the State Department's allied human rights groups made mention of the allegations.

    The media silence goes hand in hand with the official immunity granted not just to US diplomats, but soldiers and employees of shadowy private security firms hired by Washington to carry out much of Plan Colombia. One of the rapes occurred in 2007 and was reported in the Colombian press. It was allegedly committed by Army sergeant Michael J. Coen and an employee of a private security contractor, César Ruiz. The victim was a 12-year-old girl. "They abducted her, they drugged her, they took her to the air base near the town of Melgar and raped her, they took videos of her," the victim's mother told reporters. Then they drove her into town and pushed her out of their car in front of a church. The crime was well covered in Colombia, but a search of Proquest news turned up only one item in English the United States, a translation of a piece that was part of reporting in Spanish published by the Nuevo Herald (affiliated with the Miami Herald) by Gonzalo Guillén and Gerardo Reyes:

    The U.S. government has made little effort to investigate a U.S. army sergeant and a Mexican civil contractor implicated in Colombia in the rape of a 12-year-old girl in August 2007, according to an El Nuevo Herald investigation.  The suspects, Sgt. Michael Coen and contractor Cesar Ruiz, were taken out of Colombia under diplomatic immunity, and do not face criminal charges in the United States in the rape in a room at Colombia's German Olano Air Force Base in Melgar, 62 miles west of Bogota.



    Meanwhile the US media is looking for all sorts of dirt in Russia and just making up lies about.

    Takes plenty of Vaseline to be a US vassal state.

    andalusia
    Corporal
    Corporal

    Posts : 86
    Points : 130
    Join date : 2013-10-01

    Diplomatic Immunity for US military

    Post  andalusia on Tue Jun 16, 2015 12:00 am

    I think any country that agrees to diplomatic immunity for the US military is completely stupid.  American foreign policy is notorius for committing evil acts in foreign countries. I know the US sometimes tries to bribe poor foreign governments in return for diplomatic immunity but I think any government that caves in is a sell out.        

    http://fair.org/blog/2015/03/26/colombian-report-on-us-militarys-child-rapes-not-newsworthy-to-us-news-outlets/comment-page-1/#comments

    whir
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 812
    Points : 851
    Join date : 2015-04-27

    Re: Diplomatic Immunity for US military

    Post  whir on Tue Jun 16, 2015 10:06 am

    andalusia wrote:I think any country that agrees to diplomatic immunity for the US military is completely stupid. American foreign policy is notorius for committing evil acts in foreign countries. I know the US sometimes tries to bribe poor foreign governments in return for diplomatic immunity but I think any government that caves in is a sell out.
    Spain is one of those countries, that also negotiates it's own status of forces agreements with every single country where Spanish troops and militarised police (Guardia Civil) are deployed abroad like Iraq or Central African Republic, where British soldiers repeatedly raped and mutilated an Iraqi civilian and French troops sodomised boys as young as age nine at the end of 2013 while protecting CAR civilians.

    Ranting about US military is a bit childish when there are is a plethora of examples from other armies to the point of UN running paternity tests amid peacekeeper sexual abuse claims.

    andalusia
    Corporal
    Corporal

    Posts : 86
    Points : 130
    Join date : 2013-10-01

    Diplomatic Immunity for US military

    Post  andalusia on Thu Jun 18, 2015 12:53 am

    Ranting about US military is a bit childish:

    No they are not. While your examples of these other western powers militaries did is unjustified; the French did vow to prosecute any soldiers involved. In the Colombian example, these US troops that did these horrendous crimes probably will get off because of the diplomatic immunity agreement between the two governments.

    http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/International_War_Crimes/US_Against_ICC.html

    Hey Whir try reading this:

    Why does the US fear the ICC might be used by other nations for “political” purposes? Why would the US not want its personnel investigated and, if warranted, tried for crimes against humanity? The answer is complex but lies along the lines of its very involved foreign policies.

    For decades, the US has been involved in various regions around the world, sometimes propping up dictators and other unpopular regimes. The US has been known to sell many arms and provide training to many human rights abusers. Much of this was done during the Cold War, and the US often said it did this because it was better than these nations “going Communist.” Invoking the “Domino Theory”, if just one nation was to fall outside its sphere of influence, then others could follow. Hence, the US became very involved in most areas of the world.

    Chalmers Johnson, president of the Japan Policy Research Institute and professor emeritus at the University of California, has written many books on Japan and Asia, and about US hegemonic power. In 2000, his book, Blowback; The Costs and Consequences of American Empire was published (Henry Holt/Owl Books). In it, he details some context for the US opposition to the ICC and is quoted at some length here:



    Largely by design, much of America’s imperial politics takes place well below the sight lines of the American public. Throughout the world in the wake of the Cold War, official and unofficial U.S. representatives have been acting, often in covert ways, to prop up repressive regimes or their militaries and police forces, sometimes against significant segements of their own populaces. Such policies are likely to produce future instances of blowback who origins, on arrival, will seem anything but self-evident to the American public.

    Every now and then, however, America’s responsibility for its imperial policies briefly comes into public view. One such moment occurred ... [when much of the] world voted to establish an international criminal court.

    ... With his opening speech to the conference [In Rome when the ICC was being established] American ambassador Bill Richardson managed to infuriate virtually every human rights group on earth and led many delegates to accuse the United States of “neo-colonial aspirations.” The United States, he said, would support only a court that received its cases solely from the U.N. Security Council, where a single American vote can veto any action.

    American officials claim that they must protect their two hundred thousand troops permanently deployed in forty countries from “politically motivated charges.” They maintain that, due to America’s “special global responsibilities,” no proceedings can be permitted to take place against its soldiers or clandestine agents unless the United States itself agrees to them. In essence, America’s leaders believe that their “lone superpower” must be above the very concept of international law — unless defined and controlled by them.

    The terms of the treaty setting up the court specifically include as war crimes rape, forced pregnancy, torture, and the forcible recruitment of children into the military. The United States objected to including these acts within the court’s jurisdiction, claiming that the court should concern itself only with genocide. The French at first joined the United States in opposing the treaty because ... France feared that its officers and men could be charged with complicity in [the Rwandan] genocide [where France had trained the Hutu-controlled Rwandan military]. Afer a clause was added to the treaty allowing signatories to exempt themselves from the court’s jurisdiction for its first seven years, France ... agreed to sign.

    This escape clause was still not enough for the United States. Its representatives held that because the “world’s greatest military and economic power ... is expected” to intervene in humanitarian catastrophes wherever they occur, this “unique position” makes its personnel especially vulnerable to the mandate of an international criminal court capable of arresting and trying individuals. He did not deal with the question of whether war crimes charges against Americans might on some occasions be warranted, nor did he, of course, raise the possibility that if his country intervened less often in the affairs of other states where none of its vital interests were involved, it might avoid the possibility of even a capricious indictment.

    — Chalmers Johnson, Blowback; The Costs and Consequences of American Empire, (Henry Holt/Owl Books, 2000/2001), pp.64-67

    Chalmers continues, noting historian Rudolph Rummel’s estimate that in the 20th century, 170 million civilians have been victims of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. He notes the observation of Michael Scharf of the American Society of International Law that although there was a pledge of “never again” during the Nuremburg Trials after World War II, that pledge seems to have become “again and again”. This therefore raises the importance of international treaties, laws, and institutions such as the ICC. Chalmers continues:

    At Nuremburg, the United States pioneered the idea of holding government leaders responsible for war crimes, and it is one of the few countries that has an assistant secretary of state for human rights. Its pundits and lawmakers endlessly criticize other nations for failing to meet American standards in the treatment of human beings under their jurisdiction. No country has been more active than the United States in publicizing the idea of “human rights,” even if it has been notably silent in some cases, ignoring, implicitly condoning, or even endorsing acts of state terrorism by regimes with which it has been closely associated.... The American government displays one face to its own people (and its English-speaking allies) but another in areas where the support of repressive regimes seems necesasry to maintain American imperial dominance. Whenever this contradiction is revealed as in Rome, Americans try to cover it up with rhetoric about the national burden of being the “indispensible nation,” or what the ... world’s “reluctant sheriff.”

    — Chalmers Johnson, Blowback; The Costs and Consequences of American Empire, (Henry Holt/Owl Books, 2000/2001), p.68

    It would appear then, that a key fear the US has in the ICC is that its own crimes (or support for such crimes) against humanity will be highlighted by an international institution if it is not under the control of the US (or, by proxy, the United Nations Security Council). This would then undermine the ability of the US to project its power around the world, something its neo-conservative Bush Administration want to exploit as the sole remaining super power, as explained on this site’s section on Military Expansion.

    Walther von Oldenburg
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 895
    Points : 952
    Join date : 2015-01-23
    Age : 25
    Location : Oldenburg

    Wall Street Journal celebrates atomic bombings of Japan

    Post  Walther von Oldenburg on Fri Aug 07, 2015 6:34 pm

    They are gettin better every day:
    http://www.wsj.com/articles/thank-god-for-the-atom-bomb-1438642925

    jhelb
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 419
    Points : 483
    Join date : 2015-04-04
    Location : Previously: Belarus Currently: A Small Island No One Cares About

    Re: Diplomatic Immunity for US military

    Post  jhelb on Fri Aug 07, 2015 7:07 pm

    Good! And yet the Japanese remain American Asslickers.

    VladimirSahin
    Master Sergeant
    Master Sergeant

    Posts : 364
    Points : 384
    Join date : 2013-11-29
    Age : 25
    Location : Some redneck state in the US.

    Re: Diplomatic Immunity for US military

    Post  VladimirSahin on Fri Aug 07, 2015 7:55 pm

    jhelb wrote:Good! And yet the Japanese remain American Asslickers.

    +1

    Svyatoslavich
    Senior Sergeant
    Senior Sergeant

    Posts : 253
    Points : 264
    Join date : 2015-04-22
    Location : Buenos Aires

    Re: Diplomatic Immunity for US military

    Post  Svyatoslavich on Fri Aug 07, 2015 11:38 pm

    jhelb wrote:Good! And yet the Japanese remain American Asslickers.
    Yes, the Japanese elite. Go ask Okinawans what they think about US troops in their island.

    Walther von Oldenburg
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 895
    Points : 952
    Join date : 2015-01-23
    Age : 25
    Location : Oldenburg

    Re: Diplomatic Immunity for US military

    Post  Walther von Oldenburg on Fri Aug 07, 2015 11:47 pm

    LOts of Americans share this opinion - I simply never thought the biggest newspaper in America  would go far enough to publish this BS.

    The Japanese reading this are not happy, that's for sure. Some survivors are still alive and lots of people have lost siblings, parents, grandparents etc. in the bombing.

    higurashihougi
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2130
    Points : 2245
    Join date : 2014-08-13
    Location : A small and cutie S-shaped land.

    Re: Diplomatic Immunity for US military

    Post  higurashihougi on Sat Aug 08, 2015 7:04 am

    Atomic bombs, like Dresden, Tokyo, Khâm Thiên, Bạch Mai,... all have the tactics of causing terror by killing as many civilian as possible.

    Something very similar to Al-Qaeda.

    jhelb
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 419
    Points : 483
    Join date : 2015-04-04
    Location : Previously: Belarus Currently: A Small Island No One Cares About

    Re: Diplomatic Immunity for US military

    Post  jhelb on Sat Aug 08, 2015 12:31 pm

    Svyatoslavich wrote:Yes, the Japanese elite. Go ask Okinawans what they think about US troops in their island.

    I don't want to sound rude but Asians, Hispanics, Africans are really disliked in the US and yet these guys believe that the US likes them.

    higurashihougi wrote:Atomic bombs, like Dresden, Tokyo, Khâm Thiên, Bạch Mai,... all have the tactics of causing terror by killing as many civilian as possible.

    Something very similar to Al-Qaeda.

    IIRC, using Agent Orange in Vietnam caused far more damage than the atomic explosion in Japan.

    Moreover, unlike Japan, Vietnam did not go to war with the US.

    I hear the current generation of young Vietnamese have a good opinion of the US, but I am unable to understand why. Maybe they feel that the US will help them in case of a war with China.

    kvs
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2533
    Points : 2666
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Re: Diplomatic Immunity for US military

    Post  kvs on Sat Aug 08, 2015 12:49 pm

    jhelb wrote:
    Svyatoslavich wrote:Yes, the Japanese elite. Go ask Okinawans what they think about US troops in their island.

    I don't want to sound rude but Asians, Hispanics, Africans are really disliked in the US and yet these guys believe that the US likes them.

    higurashihougi wrote:Atomic bombs, like Dresden, Tokyo, Khâm Thiên, Bạch Mai,... all have the tactics of causing terror by killing as many civilian as possible.

    Something very similar to Al-Qaeda.

    IIRC, using Agent Orange in Vietnam caused far more damage than the atomic explosion in Japan.

    Moreover, unlike Japan, Vietnam did not go to war with the US.

    I hear the current generation of young Vietnamese have a good opinion of the US, but I am unable to understand why. Maybe they feel that the US will help them in case of a war with China.

    It's the same effect as in eastern Europe. American pop culture and consumer trash is greatly desired. It is material gratification
    and humans have it as a major brain function defect. You could see it at play when New World aboriginals were practically selling
    themselves over glass beads, mirrors and various other trinkets. Of course they paid a heavy price for this material lust. The
    youth of Vietnam will live the Maidan toilet life if they keep on dreaming of American shit.

    higurashihougi
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2130
    Points : 2245
    Join date : 2014-08-13
    Location : A small and cutie S-shaped land.

    Re: Diplomatic Immunity for US military

    Post  higurashihougi on Sat Aug 08, 2015 3:19 pm

    jhelb wrote:I hear the current generation of young Vietnamese have a good opinion of the US, but I am unable to understand why. Maybe they feel that the US will help them in case of a war with China.

    Indeed the 5th columnists are using China as a scapegoat, they are trying to create a myth about Captain America vs Evil China.

    Which is totally bullshit. We didn't see the glorious Captain America show up when Russia punished the Sockpuppetshivili.

    I don't know if I should dig a hole and bury my face in there.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Diplomatic Immunity for US military

    Post  GarryB on Tue Jul 19, 2016 11:17 am

    Ironically sometimes it is the US military that has to bite its tongue... in Afghanistan there is a culture of child abuse... and grown men Afghan officials like police chiefs and military officers that abuse young boys as a cultural thing.

    Have read some terrible stories of US personel making complaint after complaint about what amounts to raping young boys repeatedly by government officials that falls on deaf ears because the US military command don't care.

    The world is not a nice place and the US military is not actually there to make it better except in terms of wallet lining for the 1%.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Walther von Oldenburg
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 895
    Points : 952
    Join date : 2015-01-23
    Age : 25
    Location : Oldenburg

    Re: Diplomatic Immunity for US military

    Post  Walther von Oldenburg on Tue Jul 19, 2016 11:49 am

    GarryB wrote:Have read some terrible stories of US personel making complaint after complaint about what amounts to raping young boys repeatedly by government officials that falls on deaf ears because the US military command don't care.
    Sorry Garry, why should US command care? It's Afghans' own business to sort out shit in their own counntry (in the US, sentences for paedophilia are often higher than for murder). If tgey can't do that, we can't either... and shouldn't try.

    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5630
    Points : 6283
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: Diplomatic Immunity for US military

    Post  Viktor on Tue Jul 19, 2016 10:42 pm

    Most if not all couuntries in EU signed such pact with US. Sadly but true.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Diplomatic Immunity for US military

    Post  GarryB on Wed Jul 20, 2016 10:34 am

    Sorry Garry, why should US command care? It's Afghans' own business to sort out shit in their own counntry (in the US, sentences for paedophilia are often higher than for murder). If tgey can't do that, we can't either... and shouldn't try.

    Because the whole point of US foreign policy is assimilation... The US will think the world is OK when it looks at the world and sees itself.

    There is no prime directive in US foreign policy and the US openly imposes sanctions on those countries that do not conform to its will.

    Why should the US military command care about gay people in the Army?

    If there are rules about same sex sexual relations between military personnel there should also be rules about sexual relations between adults and children.

    You can claim it is not Americas business to impose its standards and rules on other countries but that is just exactly what they are doing... and have been doing for quite some time.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Walther von Oldenburg
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 895
    Points : 952
    Join date : 2015-01-23
    Age : 25
    Location : Oldenburg

    Re: Diplomatic Immunity for US military

    Post  Walther von Oldenburg on Wed Jul 20, 2016 11:41 am

    GarryB wrote:Because the whole point of US foreign policy is assimilation
    Assimilation of what? US soldiers stationed in KSA weren't even allowed to bring Bibles for their own use (not preaching)
    GarryB wrote:There is no prime directive in US foreign policy and the US openly imposes sanctions on those countries that do not conform to its will.
    Does paedophilia among the Afghan people threaten US national interests?
    GarryB wrote:If there are rules about same sex sexual relations between military personnel there should also be rules about sexual relations between adults and children.
    Between US MILITARY PERSONNEL. Do Afghan government officials count as "US military personnel"?
    GarryB wrote:You can claim it is not Americas business to impose its standards and rules on other countries but that is just exactly what they are doing...
    No, they aren't. They never forced KSA to abolish Sharia. They never forced Japan to abolish the monarchy What enforcement of standards are you talking about?.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Diplomatic Immunity for US military

    Post  GarryB on Thu Jul 21, 2016 1:25 pm

    Assimilation of what? US soldiers stationed in KSA weren't even allowed to bring Bibles for their own use (not preaching)

    Assimilation of the world to all things American...

    And not being allowed to take bibles was probably for their own good... ie self preservation.

    Does paedophilia among the Afghan people threaten US national interests?

    If the US can't tolerate Russia not being gay friendly how can it stand training kiddie fiddlers?

    Between US MILITARY PERSONNEL. Do Afghan government officials count as "US military personnel"?

    So US personel could take their children for the locals to molest and that would be OK right?

    No, they aren't. They never forced KSA to abolish Sharia. They never forced Japan to abolish the monarchy What enforcement of standards are you talking about?.

    They got american democracy... ie no more than two terms of elected leaders etc etc.

    And this is what democracy is or isn't and we will bomb anyone who opposes us.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Walther von Oldenburg
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 895
    Points : 952
    Join date : 2015-01-23
    Age : 25
    Location : Oldenburg

    Re: Diplomatic Immunity for US military

    Post  Walther von Oldenburg on Fri Jul 22, 2016 3:44 pm

    In United States it's not the military that conducts investigations of pedophilia - it's up to police, prosecutors and civilian courts to gather the evidence, arrest the crtiminals and sentence them. So if US Army does not deal with this kind of things in their own country, why should they do that in a foreign country?

    Pedophilia in Afghanistan does not endanger US national/security interests and it's up to Afghan government to solve that problem.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Diplomatic Immunity for US military

    Post  GarryB on Sat Jul 23, 2016 11:19 am

    The US military has its own rules and also its own police and structures to police itself.

    Or are you trying to say if a civilian shoots a US military person that it is nothing to do with the US military... it would be a local civilian matter?

    Of course the problem generally isn't local people shooting US personel... normally it is US military raping and murdering those pretty little Japanese girls.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Walther von Oldenburg
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 895
    Points : 952
    Join date : 2015-01-23
    Age : 25
    Location : Oldenburg

    Re: Diplomatic Immunity for US military

    Post  Walther von Oldenburg on Sat Jul 23, 2016 1:20 pm

    GarryB wrote:The US military has its own rules and also its own police and structures to police itself.
    Itself - well said.
    GarryB wrote:Or are you trying to say if a civilian shoots a US military person that it is nothing to do with the US military... it would be a local civilian matter?
    That civilian would be tried by a civilian court. If a soldier killed a civilian he would be under jurisdiction of either a military or a civilian court, depending on circumstances.

    But do Afghan officials classify as "US military personnel"? No, they are civilian employees of a foreign (Afghan, not American) government and they are under jurisdiction of Afghan courts, not American ones.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Diplomatic Immunity for US military

    Post  GarryB on Sun Jul 24, 2016 12:11 pm

    Itself - well said.

    Look at the first post in this thread.

    US personnel... military and civilian rape children and are not punished...

    It does not police itself properly.

    When a US commander of a vessel arrived home after murdering over 200 Iranians on an airbus in Iranian air space and firing a missile from Iranian waters being the murder weapon the commander of that vessel got a commendation medal...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Sponsored content

    Re: Diplomatic Immunity for US military

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 10:10 pm


      Current date/time is Fri Dec 09, 2016 10:10 pm