May I suggest that you look seriously at the case of Mr Mousa in Iraq, who was so maltreated by British soldiers to the extent that he actually died. I think that you will find that the judge actually refers to the total lack of co-operation from the army in bringing evidence to the court. The judge also refrrred to colonel Mendonca and one of the reasons why he was found not guilty after the case was that he thought that Mendonca was in fact following orders.
The army also manifestly failed to protect the local population from insurgent attacks, and also who failed to stop the looting, but were seen and filmed by one of their own laughing as youths were beaten after being detained. It strikes me that many people have very selective memories, clouded by events in Afghanistan, in respect of our total failure in Iraq. I look forward with interest to the inquiry into the Iraq war, the events leading up to the war, the conduct of the war, and our involvement in the subsequent occupation, with our allies.
We must look at the instructions which are now under investigation in America with regard to Mr Cheyney, and also the evidence given by John Hutton to parliament in February to the effect that parliament had not been given the whole truth by previous holders of his post in respect of the number of individuals detained by soldiers and either handed over to the Americans or Iraqi authorities.
As for soldiers refusing orders then I agree with you that whilst in the field then it is incumbent for soldiers to follow lawfully given orders. But consider this. If a British soldier is serving with senior officers of another nation then must that soldier follow the orders of that senior officer of the other nation, where the orders are illegal in respect of the treatment of prisoners in respect of that other nation.
I fully understand the problem with respect to refusing orders. However, I would say that if a soldier served in a country where an illegal war was fought, a war of aggression, based on a lie, then that soldier has a moral authority to refuse to return to that country to continue with the illegal actions. I know of at least one case where a soldier has refused orders to return to the occupation, and that he was given an honourable discharge, rather than face courts martial and dishonourable discharge after a prison sentence. There must be an investigation into how many soldiers actually went AWOL during the Iraq conflict, or who refused to serve and were subsequently given medical exemptions
May I remind you of a former Fl Lt in the air force, Kendall-Smith who served a prison term and was dishonourably discharged for refusing orders. I am of the firm belief that our soldiers signed up to serve their Queen and country, and to defend it, not to commit illegal acts in a war which really was none of our business, if the war was illegal then all the activities in that war are illegal, therefore, the problems go right to the top. Soldiers follow orders, but who gives those orders, it was not the ordinary foot soldier who was on trial at Nurembourg, it was the leaders, the givers of orders, who were tried at Nurembourg. The foot soldiers suffered summary justice being either shot or hung without any formal trial.
War Crimes
May I suggest that you look seriously at the case of Mr Mousa in Iraq, who was so maltreated by British soldiers to the extent that he actually died. I think that you will find that the judge actually refers to the total lack of co-operation from the army in bringing evidence to the court. The judge also refrrred to colonel Mendonca and one of the reasons why he was found not guilty after the case was that he thought that Mendonca was in fact following orders.
The army also manifestly failed to protect the local population from insurgent attacks, and also who failed to stop the looting, but were seen and filmed by one of their own laughing as youths were beaten after being detained. It strikes me that many people have very selective memories, clouded by events in Afghanistan, in respect of our total failure in Iraq. I look forward with interest to the inquiry into the Iraq war, the events leading up to the war, the conduct of the war, and our involvement in the subsequent occupation, with our allies.
We must look at the instructions which are now under investigation in America with regard to Mr Cheyney, and also the evidence given by John Hutton to parliament in February to the effect that parliament had not been given the whole truth by previous holders of his post in respect of the number of individuals detained by soldiers and either handed over to the Americans or Iraqi authorities.
As for soldiers refusing orders then I agree with you that whilst in the field then it is incumbent for soldiers to follow lawfully given orders. But consider this. If a British soldier is serving with senior officers of another nation then must that soldier follow the orders of that senior officer of the other nation, where the orders are illegal in respect of the treatment of prisoners in respect of that other nation.
I fully understand the problem with respect to refusing orders. However, I would say that if a soldier served in a country where an illegal war was fought, a war of aggression, based on a lie, then that soldier has a moral authority to refuse to return to that country to continue with the illegal actions. I know of at least one case where a soldier has refused orders to return to the occupation, and that he was given an honourable discharge, rather than face courts martial and dishonourable discharge after a prison sentence. There must be an investigation into how many soldiers actually went AWOL during the Iraq conflict, or who refused to serve and were subsequently given medical exemptions
May I remind you of a former Fl Lt in the air force, Kendall-Smith who served a prison term and was dishonourably discharged for refusing orders. I am of the firm belief that our soldiers signed up to serve their Queen and country, and to defend it, not to commit illegal acts in a war which really was none of our business, if the war was illegal then all the activities in that war are illegal, therefore, the problems go right to the top. Soldiers follow orders, but who gives those orders, it was not the ordinary foot soldier who was on trial at Nurembourg, it was the leaders, the givers of orders, who were tried at Nurembourg. The foot soldiers suffered summary justice being either shot or hung without any formal trial.