SAS in Iraq - Arrest warrant issued

http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-13444962,00.html


This was posted on another forum I frequent and the posters point of view was "why do we bother trying to help these people" , namely the Iraqis.


Seems odd to hold that point of view if you ask me. If what is being reported transpires to be true then I see absolutely no reason why the Iraq authorities don't have the right to arrest and convict these undercover soldiers. As British soldiers they are liable to prosecution under the Geneva convention for a start and secondly I thought the whole idea was to hand over authority to the new authorities in Iraq. Seems to me that we're only prepared to do that under the terms that suit us maybe?

What are all your views on this particular story?


GTM

 

I think that we don't know anything like enough of this particular issue to be able to comment. As the SAS generally perform their tasks undercover it's likely to take a while before the full truth emerges.

The Iraqi judge said that they were wanted in connection with the deaths of several Iraqis during a confrontation with the British Army and warned that the two men could face a life sentence if found guilty of deliberately killing an Iraqi civilian during a disturbance.

Of course it's quite right that they should be severely punished if they deliberately killed any civilians but I wonder where the judge got his information from and how neutral it was.

The British military spokesman, Major Steve Melbourne, said: "We are not fully aware of the issue of these warrants "But what I must say is they have no legal basis for the issue of these."

This leads me to think that it's too early for us to start making judgements.

Regards
Steve M

 

The army have already politely told the Iraqi authorities that the judge has no authority over them and to get stuffed.
Good for them.

Bob

 

So are you saying that should it turn out that they did deliberately kill civilians, that the authorities of Iraq have no legitimate claim to the right to justice ? I was always led to believe that the reason we were there was to give the Iraqis back their country and the right to self determination. How are we going to expect to help calm the friction caused by such a distinction in our rhetoric ie "we want to give you a free and just county back" and our actions ie "while we are here you have no authority". I think the Iraqis can be justifiably agrieved at such a situation don't you? or do you believe they should just be eternally thankful to us for all time? give us their oil for free maybe as a thank you?

If you use that logic we should become the lap dogs of America for saving us from the Nazis and ironically the Americans should be the puppets of France for liberating them from the British in the first place.


GTM

 

it's a complex situation that shouldn't be judged at this distance.