Australian Army Discussions and Updates

[Goknub]

Did the guy actively try to surrender, raise his hands or say "I surrender" in his language? Doesn't look like it. His mistake.
Was the guy wounded? No
Was he wearing protected symbols (Red Crescent, etc) No

He remains an enemy combatant and can be killed, armed, unarmed or asleep in his bed. Just as German Wehrmacht cooks and clerks could be killed in WW2.

I suspect it will come down to the broader picture. What was the info on the guy? Was he Taliban? What was the mission? None of that is in that video.

 

[Volkodav]

If he has done the wrong thing it is for the COURTS to decide, not 4 corners, not politicians, not people on social media.
Peace out

The question is more about the fact that there was an enquiry and he was cleared, despite the damning evidence of the video. The shock and discomfort from ADF and government indicates that there is a disconnect between the evidence and the result of the internal investigation.

Had there been an appropriate level of investigation, collection and examination of evidence backing the findings of the internal investigation then defence would be able to brief the defmin and other appropriate parties who would right now be telling the ABC to go jump. Reality check, the government do not like the ABC, if there was any doubt as to the accuracy of the reporting multiple PMs would be screaming from roof tops, they are not.

 

[Takao]

Did the guy actively try to surrender, raise his hands or say "I surrender" in his language? Doesn't look like it. His mistake.
Was the guy wounded? No
Was he wearing protected symbols (Red Crescent, etc) No

He remains an enemy combatant and can be killed, armed, unarmed or asleep in his bed. Just as German Wehrmacht cooks and clerks could be killed in WW2.

I suspect it will come down to the broader picture. What was the info on the guy? Was he Taliban? What was the mission? None of that is in that video.

I'd suggest your understanding of ROE is incorrect - especially of the ROE applicable to Afghanistan v Germany or North Africa.

There is a significant civilian population in Afghanistan. There is no uniform indicating he is a combatant (note you can never assume civilian attire = enemy but you can assume enemy uniform = enemy). This individual was not a cook or clerk in a uniform.

Furthermore, you don't have to actively surrender. Just lying there, unless there is a weapon actively threatening the Australian (which, in the interest of fairness - may be on the other side) he is not a combatant. If you have the time to ask two different people "do you want me to drop this ****" then he isn't a threat.

He was wounded. Quake did damage. The dogs always do damage.

Finally, lets assume this bloke is Taliban. The biggest Taliban. You may have the ability to kill him (although still wounded, so - no. And a PW - so no), but then I'm charging you for stupidity. You had a prospective intelligence source and you killed him without interrogation. Feel free to leave the SAS and the Army for dumbness.

I have to say, if you were my subordinate and that was your read of ROE you'd be facing some hefty retraining. I'd also be looking at removing you from any command position. It appears wrong in general, and that's before we address specific ROE in this case.

 

[Takao]

The question is more about the fact that there was an enquiry and he was cleared, despite the damning evidence of the video. The shock and discomfort from ADF and government indicates that there is a disconnect between the evidence and the result of the internal investigation.

Had there been an appropriate level of investigation, collection and examination of evidence backing the findings of the internal investigation then defence would be able to brief the defmin and other appropriate parties who would right now be telling the ABC to go jump. Reality check, the government do not like the ABC, if there was any doubt as to the accuracy of the reporting multiple PMs would be screaming from roof tops, they are not.

It would have been nice to see not just "Trooper C suspended" today, but also "Investigators suspended" today. Having learnt some of the history of this video, in addition to telling Trooper C to **** off, there is a few above him that can join him.

And then the poor bastards left have to build up their, and our, reputation again...

 

[old faithful]

Can't believe you have decided this bloke be is guilty of murder based on an interview with 1 ex soldier, and a 4 corners episode.
You know nothing at all that is fact, only what you saw. You know nothing about what happens before or after that footage.
You quote ROE and what you think you would do blah blah blah without any knowledge of the operation
You don't know who he was or what he had done. Or what had to be done afterwards. You have already decided he guilty based on very limited knowledge.
You, both Volk and Take, are not fit for jury duty. You make up your mind based on emotion and very limited information,based on an entertainment program. Clap clap clap.
See you mob, staysafe and wash your hands.

 

[Volkodav]

It would have been nice to see not just "Trooper C suspended" today, but also "Investigators suspended" today. Having learnt some of the history of this video, in addition to telling Trooper C to **** off, there is a few above him that can join him.

And then the poor bastards left have to build up there, and our, reputation again...

Exactly, the vast majority do their job well, put themselves on the line, some even go above and beyond building relationships with the local community, then something like this happens and next thing the blokes son, cousin, uncle, who never gave a damn about the Taliban, goes out and kills or tries to kill anyone they see in a similar uniform, maybe a medic, a doctor, an engineer, someone who has only ever helped the locals and built trust.

Definitely agree on the need for consequences for any higher ups who may have been involved in a cover up or turning a blind eye. If the bosses aren't seen to do the right thing, how are their subordinates meant to learn how to behave.

 

[Volkodav]

I have been investigated. I'm sure a lot of you saw the 4 corners on Don Dale episode where the PM called for a Royal Commission the next day, as a knee jerk reaction. After a children's commission, and a surpreme court case, most of the 4 corners report was shown to be out of context for the dramatization of the entertainment show. The jurno won an award! Ha!
We as people on the ground (prison officers, not youth justice officers) were called into assist in a very difficult situation. We used chemical agents and because that was the best option, and when explained in court, it was proven to be the best option .
So my point is, leave the witch hunt to the courts, please stop burning this bloke at the stake before ALL the facts are known.
It's a bit like the NT cop charged with murder recently after shooting a young man in a remote community. He was charged with murder, and harassed by people on the streets of Sydney and Melbourne before any facts were released.
Please leave this to the courts.
You have the opinion of one operator and 4 corners, and you accept they are correct because of what you see on tv or read in media. You don't know the full story yet, and neither do I
It looks terrible on TV.
Just as I did gassing a poor child.
Maybe we should have let a dog in? Maybe we could have gone in with Shields and batons, both of those options would have resulted in hospital. We used the least harmful option, and 4 corners edits the footage and hangs us out to dry, for the sake of a sensational story.

I thought you and the other guards queried the order to use gas because it was kids and you suspected the situation had been caused by the incompetence and bad behavior of the youth justice officers as well as being blown out of proportion by them?

Serious question, considering the professionalism and compassion I have seen from you and so many other officers in the adult facilities, in particular those working with violent, mentally disturbed inmates, doesn't it P you off that you are judged by the subpar performance and behaviour of the youth justice officers? They screw up and you guys are labelled as violent thugs, even though you did everything in your power to calm and avert the situation others caused.

 

[old faithful]

You have the facts wrong there again Volk .
The YJOs do a very difficult job, and have their hands tied. That's why they called us in.
Dosnt it P you off when you hear how bad ASC is? And how bad the Collins class is?
Do you really think the investigation a out this incident was a cover up just to save soldier C ass?
Do you even know how a military investigation goes?
You would rather believe ACA for grown ups (4 Corners) than a proper military investigation?
Did it occur to you that this mission might have been a black op?
Did Bin Laden aim a weapon at a navy seal? Was the General BelGrano in an exclusion zone?
Leave it to the courts,. And it may really have deep conseques for an already hamstru g ADF.
If the bloke did execute a civi who should t have been killed, and the court finds it so, then so be it
But we should t judge the bloke any more than we should judge the cop who shot the young man at Yuendameu.

 

[Volkodav]

You have the facts wrong there again Volk .
The YJOs do a very difficult job, and have their hands tied. That's why they called us in.
Dosnt it P you off when you hear how bad ASC is? And how bad the Collins class is?
Do you really think the investigation a out this incident was a cover up just to save soldier C ass?
Do you even know how a military investigation goes?
You would rather believe ACA for grown ups (4 Corners) than a proper military investigation?
Did it occur to you that this mission might have been a black op?
Did Bin Laden aim a weapon at a navy seal? Was the General BelGrano in an exclusion zone?
Leave it to the courts,. And it may really have deep conseques for an already hamstru g ADF.
If the bloke did execute a civi who should t have been killed, and the court finds it so, then so be it
But we should t judge the bloke any more than we should judge the cop who shot the young man at Yuendameu.

Inaccurate reporting more than annoys me, but what annoys me even more is working with people who are doing the wrong thing. You are doing your best, most of your colleagues are doing their best but a small minority or even a couple of individuals are willfully doing the wrong thing. It makes you look bad, it makes the organisation look bad, and it can actually cost good people far more than it costs the bad apples, who usually have their next thing lined up.

Ok lets say this was when you were in the RAR, it was bloke in another platoon who did this, you know it was unjustified, you know no one in your section wouldn't have done it, you know your platoon commander wouldn't have tolerated it, and would have crucified anyone who did it, but the other platoon commander was different the Company OC didn't want to know. The bloke gets away with it for a while then it comes out and you are all labelled murderers because of one bloke doing the wrong thing and others protecting him.

 

[old faithful]

Inaccurate reporting more than annoys me, but what annoys me even more is working with people who are doing the wrong thing. You are doing your best, most of your colleagues are doing their best but a small minority or even a couple of individuals are willfully doing the wrong thing. It makes you look bad, it makes the organisation look bad, and it can actually cost good people far more than it costs the bad apples, who usually have their next thing lined up.

Ok lets say this was when you were in the RAR, it was bloke in another platoon who did this, you know it was unjustified, you know no one in your section wouldn't have done it, you know your platoon commander wouldn't have tolerated it, and would have crucified anyone who did it, but the other platoon commander was different the Company OC didn't want to know. The bloke gets away with it for a while then it comes out and you are all labelled murderers because of one bloke doing the wrong thing and others protecting him.

Let's say this happens when I was in the RAR, the bloke was in a another section, and tasked to man a cut off position10 km to the north for a company assault on Saddam's hide out. They come across a sentry posing as a civilian , he has a phone and is seen making a call. The Scout chases and catches him. He asks his secco what to do. The secco recalls his orders, he must be in cut off position in 2.5 hours prior to a company attack by another company. He decides he can't risk taking him prisoner, and can't wait for an extraction, and tells the dig to slot him, then moves on to continue his mission that another 108 men need him to do. He made a tactical decision on the spot , quickly. It may be morally wrong,but he needed to make a call, and he did.

Volk, we can run through many what ifs....endless, we don't know, might never know. It's not important to me. Op sec is more important, the media need to be kept away from entertainment and scandal, and just report the news.

 

[John Fedup]

I don’t know anything about this nor do I really know what the exact details of the Canadian airborne regiment’s incident in Somalia 30 years ago. What I do know is our airborne regiment was disbanded because pollies didn’t like the bad PR. This was all because of a couple of guys and a less than idea regimental commander so stupid shit can have some excessive blowback. That being said, over deployment to these hell-holes is shit waiting to happen.

 

[InterestedParty]

I am not trying to justify anything but I would hate to think how many war crimes would have been uncovered in WW1, WW2, Korea and Vietnam if soldiers had been wearing helmet cams. From my readings in WW1 soldiers often shot opponents who put up their hands as they were being overrun after doing their best to kill them 5 seconds earlier.
My Dad was in RAF Bomber command and there are many who consider the whole command to have been war criminals because of the terror bombing of cities. I honestly cannot say if it was right or wrong morally but I cannot judge using todays standards.
Sometimes it is the scale that causes a problem, kill hundreds or thousands its war, kill one or two and its murder
I am deeply sympathetic and respectful to anyone who has ever had the courage to wear a uniform and who has been put in a position of killing someone in the service of our country, its something that you must live with and I cannot imagine what demons it forces you to live with.

 

[vonnoobie]

Never being in the forces and not willing to take a stand one way or the other for or against the actions with out knowing the particulars around said mission looking purely at the internal investigation side of things is there any actual unbiased party or person who will review said investigation to ensure that it was fair and accurate? As much as bad soldiers and officers can cause problems with locals when it all comes down to it it is those investigating that can change the entire outcome with the locals. So is there any system in place to peer review and internal investigation?

 

[old faithful]

Yes there is.

 

[south]

Never being in the forces and not willing to take a stand one way or the other for or against the actions with out knowing the particulars around said mission looking purely at the internal investigation side of things is there any actual unbiased party or person who will review said investigation to ensure that it was fair and accurate? As much as bad soldiers and officers can cause problems with locals when it all comes down to it it is those investigating that can change the entire outcome with the locals. So is there any system in place to peer review and internal investigation?

At present the case has been referred to the AFP and Soldier C has been stood down, I guess on some sort of leave. Soldier stood down over alleged shooting of unarmed Afghan man

If the AFP find enough evidence he will likely be charged. In addition expect the IGADF to come out with a more comprehensive report covering a wider time slice.

further reading for anyone interested. I'd pay attention to 5.13, 5.16, 5.18 through 5.20. https://www.defence.gov.au/adfwc/documents/doctrinelibrary/addp/addp06.4-lawofarmedconflict.pdf

Have a great day, wash your hands, and keep social distancing.

 

[ngatimozart]

Yes there is.

@old faithful You, I and others have been in defence forces and subject to to military law, so we are familiar with the processes. I suggest that you could explain the ADF system for internal investigation and peer review, for those of us who aren't acquainted with it.

 

[SMC]

Could I suggest that we put a halt on the discussion. It is currently under investigation and nothing said here will change the outcome. Lets move back to discussing less emotive subjects please.

 

[alexsa]

A

Could I suggest that we put a halt on the discussion. It is currently under investigation and nothing said here will change the outcome. Lets move back to discussing less emotive subjects please.

Agree ... It appears that a lot of this is based on conjecture and each has a point. Suggest we avoid a vitrolic arguement on the thread.

 

[aussienscale]

A

Agree ... It appears that a lot of this is based on conjecture and each has a point. Suggest we avoid a vitrolic arguement on the thread.

Was going to suggest the same, this is a very touchy subject, and a very emotional one too, lets cool this down a bit and we need to let the process take its course !

 

[Boagrius]

Quick question for those in-the-know - does the Army have any plans to pursue a C-RAM/UAV capability in the future? The shift from RBS-70 to NASAMS is a big step up in many respects, but it doesn't strike me as an ideal solution in the VSHORAD space, especially where C-RAM and C-UAV is concerned(?). I remember mutterings about Skyranger 35mm + Boxer on DTR some time ago but nothing since.