SAS Soldier 'Quits'
 

[url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/03/12/nsas12.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/03/12/ixhome.html:72613]Link[/url:72613]

[quote:72613]An SAS soldier has refused to fight in Iraq and has left the Army over the "illegal" tactics of United States troops and the policies of coalition forces.

After three months in Baghdad, Ben Griffin told his commander that he was no longer prepared to fight alongside American forces.

Ben Griffin
Ben Griffin told commanders that he thought the Iraq war was illegal

He said he had witnessed "dozens of illegal acts" by US troops, claiming they viewed all Iraqis as "untermenschen" - the Nazi term for races regarded as sub-human.

The decision marks the first time an SAS soldier has refused to go into combat and quit the Army on moral grounds.

It immediately brought to an end Mr Griffin's exemplary, eight-year career in which he also served with the Parachute Regiment, taking part in operations in Northern Ireland, Macedonia and Afghanistan.

But it will also embarrass the Government and have a potentially profound impact on cases of other soldiers who have refused to fight.

On Wednesday, the pre-trial hearing will begin into the court martial of Flt Lt Malcolm Kendall-Smith, a Royal Air Force doctor who has refused to return to Iraq for a third tour of duty on the grounds that the war is illegal. Mr Griffin's allegations came as the Foreign Office minister Kim Howells, visiting Basra yesterday, admitted that Iraq was now "a mess".

Mr Griffin, 28, who spent two years with the SAS, said the American military's "gung-ho and trigger happy mentality" and tactics had completely undermined any chance of winning the hearts and minds of the Iraqi population. He added that many innocent civilians were arrested in night-time raids and interrogated by American soldiers, imprisoned in the notorious Abu Ghraib prison, or handed over to the Iraqi authorities and "most probably" tortured.

Mr Griffin eventually told SAS commanders at Hereford that he could not take part in a war which he regarded as "illegal".

He added that he now believed that the Prime Minister and the Government had repeatedly "lied" over the war's conduct.

"I did not join the British Army to conduct American foreign policy," he said. He expected to be labelled a coward and to face a court martial and imprisonment after making what "the most difficult decision of my life" last March.

Instead, he was discharged with a testimonial describing him as a "balanced, honest, loyal and determined individual who possesses the strength of character to have the courage of his convictions".

Last night Patrick Mercer, the shadow minister for homeland security, said: "Trooper Griffin is a highly experienced soldier. This makes his decision particularly disturbing and his views and opinions must be listened to by the Government."

The MoD declined to comment.[/quote:72613]

[quote:f337d]Mr Griffin, 28, who spent two years with the SAS, said the American military's "gung-ho and trigger happy mentality" and tactics had completely undermined any chance of winning the hearts and minds of the Iraqi population.[/quote:f337d]

....I agree.

Rather then building another thread around Iraq..I'll just post this since it has relevance...

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/mid ... 350776.ece

I agree as well, we went in too heavy handed and sent in kids instead of men. I think the bulk of our marine force is not equipped to win this war, they are only equipped for killing. No matter what the coalition does for Iraq, I think the Iraqi opinion towards the US is negative and its a bit late to change it now. This country fucked up again.

[url=http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060312/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/uncle_sam_wants_you;_ylt=AoJqtkB1zyTYqfxWolGeeYWs0 NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3b2NibDltBHNlYwM3MTY-:864a3]Another relevant article[/url:864a3]

What the troops are tasked with doing now is policing. Soldiers are not police officers.

good for him.

screw him, too many "ifs' or "probably" in his statement. War is hell. Im sure many civilians were aressted. How can you tell until they are innocent or guilty until interigated

Takes alot of balls to do what he has done...SAS guys go through alot. Stackem your post reminds me about what most of the conservatives are saying at mp.net "this guy is just a pussy" "no truth in his statements" etc. You have to admire in some way that a "professional" soldier would do such a thing.

Just to think about it, his situation must be aweful. He mentioned it was the hardest decision he's made in his life. Potentially facing prison, more than likely being called a coward. Having this facing him, and to bite the bullet and do it, must be a huge decision.

Seriouisly you cant just label him a coward or a pussy, for this type of decision to be made (especially someone from the SAS). Maybe what he has said in the article actually did happen.

I never called him anything. I said "screw him" it is just one mans opinion, thats all. I respect what he has done to reach the level he has within his army but if your statements are iffy than it isnt worht the paper its printed on. Im sure you could find another soldier to refute every statement he made, who would that make right? Neither because that would also be one mans opinion.


I just dont see it as news

[quote="Sgt>Stackem":c9d0f]How can you tell until they are innocent or guilty until interigated[/quote:c9d0f]what kind of interrogation are you referring to?

[quote="Sgt>Stackem":13e9b]
I never called him anything. I said "screw him" it is just one mans opinion, thats all. I respect what he has done to reach the level he has within his army but if your statements are iffy than it isnt worht the paper its printed on. Im sure you could find another soldier to refute every statement he made, who would that make right? Neither because that would also be one mans opinion.


I just dont see it as news[/quote:13e9b]

I mean this isn't just a regular type army joe..SAS is a elite unit in the british army..this guy worked very hard to become a SAS memeber..then he just suddenly gives it all away, that really is something if you ask me..this is the FIRST SAS member to do this in a long time. I don't see why you conservatives are saying that his statements are wrong, he may have some hyperbolic statements.. but prove them to me and others that they are all wrong. And don't bring that question back to me because I'm not the one in denial of this man's opinion of how the war is immoral.

[quote=Machette]I mean this isn't just a regular type army joe..SAS is a elite unit in the british army..this guy worked very hard to become a SAS memeber..then he just suddenly gives it all away, that really is something if you ask me..this is the FIRST SAS member to do this in a long time. I don't see why you conservatives are saying that his statements are wrong, he may have some hyperbolic statements.. but prove them to me and others that they are all wrong. And don't bring that question back to me because I'm not the one in denial of this man's opinion of how the war is immoral.[/quote:4b648]


he may be right on, he may be some whack job. I dont know, you dont know. It is just an opinion. Opinions are never wrong, you may have a different opinion but that wouldnt make mine, his or anyone elses wrong

do you think he is making this up or do you think he is overreacting? what?

not sure what to make of it. It is one guy ranting about something. I have never heard of him before. I dont know if he was a problem within the military, I dont know if his wife just left him and he is pissed at the world. I think it isnt news, thats all

The fact that he is one of many shows, either he is the only to have the courage to stand up to an "immoral" war, or he is in the company of brave men but he is one of a very few that feel the way he does. Since, as you say, he is in an elite outfit, I am assuming the second theory is closer to correct. Furthermore, when he signed up for the military he had to know that he would not always agree with the policies of the government and that he possibly would have to follow orders in a war that he did not personally agree with. I don't think he will have much chance in court. For him to win he will have to prove that following the order to fight is "immoral". I think that is going to be a tall order.

He didnt quit purely becuase it was imoral, but because it was illegal and he was not fighting for the people of iraq or even his own government. He was there to enforce the policies of the United states. He did not agree with the policies, and they are not his governments there for not his policies, so he decided to leave.
But the fact that the government gave him a discharge and no court marshal but they are still bringing to court a doctor who did want to go on a THIRD tour in Iraq is stupid of them to do.
And stackem, that whole thing about we need to interrogate people to find out if they are innocent or not if absolutly fucking insane. You should be ashamed of yoruself for saying that. The United states should not drag people out of their houses and tourture them to be sure they havent done anythign bad. Hell would you like to be eating dinner then get arrested just ot make sure you arent maybe planning a plot against the government? Leave the people alone or else they will plot against the government. And hte troops need to be replaced with Iraqi police ASAP and get the USA troops out. ITs not their country to police and they should not be there now that the war is over.

[quote="Unknown_Sniper":c8808]... but because it was illegal and he was not fighting for the people of iraq or even his own government. .....[/quote:c8808]

If his government deployed him then he is fighting for his own government. Also, I failed to mention this the first time, the fact that he served two terms before deciding it was "illegal" just shows that when he was told he was going back he just came to that conclusion as a way to get out of it.

As for interrogating people, they only interrogate people who they suspect are involved in terrorist activity. If, you are sitting at your dinner table, and your local police believe you are involved in a crime, they have every right to come in and take you (by force if necessary) down to the police station for questioning.

You guys really need to open your eyes..That's all I'm going to say.

Seriouslly...can your President EVER do anything wrong? Ive never seen anyone even remotly think anything hes done is bad yet in this forum from his followers.

Well, most recently, he was totally wrong (IMHO) about letting a foreign company run US ports. He is also wrong (as was Pres. Clinton) in the way the government is dealing with China. He's also wrong for not being tougher on illegal immigration.

But in Iraq he is right and I admire him for having "the courage to stand up" for what he believes in.

Hitler had the courage too.

I really do admire your position Colonel, I really do. But why don't you inform me among many others on this fourm about some good news from Iraq. None of that "the iraq people are free from Saddam insane" stuff either..because I bet if you went into baghdad or any other major city and even some villages they would say they "want electricity, water, security" Iraq was controlled by a strong arm dictator for years and he knew how to control the masses, by fear. How is America going to control Iraq? Everyday I open the newspaper and read news on the internet I see constant bombings, kidnappings, ransoms...what good have you brought these poor people?

Yarrrrrrrrrrrrrr

[img] "I am William Wallace. And I see a whole army of my countrymen,
here in defiance of tyranny! You have come to fight as free men. And
free man you are! What will you do without freedom? Will you fight?"
"Two thousand against ten?" - the veteran shouted. "No! We will
run - and live!"
"Yes!" Wallace shouted back. "Fight and you may die. Run and you
will live at least awhile. And dying in your bed many years from now,
would you be willing to trade all the days from this day to that for
one chance, just one cahnce, to come back here as young men and tell
our enemies that they may take our lives but they will never take
our freedom!"
[/img]

[quote="Unknown_Sniper":8f70d]
And stackem, that whole thing about we need to interrogate people to find out if they are innocent or not if absolutly fucking insane. You should be ashamed of yoruself for saying that. The United states should not drag people out of their houses and tourture them to be sure they havent done anythign bad. .[/quote:8f70d]


try to follow my train of thought, the army gets intel saying some bad guys are at a certian location. The army goes there and grabs everyone, they itnerrogate everyone. If they are not the ones they are looking for they are released. There is no way possible to know who is who without interrogating them.
To interrogate someone does not mean torture them. You added that, I never said to torture them. Those innocent people are living in a war zone, my dinner table is not, so your comparision is not worthy

[quote="Sgt>Stackem":0d224][quote="Unknown_Sniper":0d224]
And stackem, that whole thing about we need to interrogate people to find out if they are innocent or not if absolutly fucking insane. You should be ashamed of yoruself for saying that. The United states should not drag people out of their houses and tourture them to be sure they havent done anythign bad. .[/quote:0d224]


try to follow my train of thought, the army gets intel saying some bad guys are at a certian location. The army goes there and grabs everyone, they itnerrogate everyone. If they are not the ones they are looking for they are released. There is no way possible to know who is who without interrogating them.
To interrogate someone does not mean torture them. You added that, I never said to torture them. Those innocent people are living in a war zone, my dinner table is not, so your comparision is not worthy[/quote:0d224]

You do know 98 % of this intel is crap from other civy's around the area right ? SUCH as a possible neighbor who has a massive bone to pick with another, ect ect. It is the only way to get this crap and it is extremely unreliable.

the army fucks up all the time, its worse than any payroll department. most troops on the ground dont speak arabic/farsi and how long does it take to clear someone who is innocent? meanwhile your stuck in abu gahriab (sp?) getting fucked by inbred prison guard rejects, dogs, batons and tasers for being at the wrong place at the wrong time. what if youre innocent? you think any of the guards give a shit? to them ,anyone in there is guilty and is ripe for an ass fucking.

No problem. But this will take awhile and my ADD is kicking in so I proabably won't get to everything.

First, the reason that you are reading it in the paper is because the press is now taking an interest. If they had taken an interest before we were there you would realise that the number of kidnappings, bombings, deaths etc. are far less now than they were when Saddam (and don't forget his sons) was in his heyday. The simple explanation of "what good have you brought these people" is that now a handful are dying (mostly at the hands of muslims from other countries) versus the half million or more under Saddam.

Regardless of what Saddam was doing to his own people I believe that he was a threat to the US and the world. If you don't believe that ask the folks in Kawait. Does being a bad guy give us the right to attack him? No. But he was given several ultimatums by the UN and he ignored them. He was even told "if you don't coorperate we will attack" in a resolution passed by the UN. He did not cooperate.

As for "the good news" from Iraq. The war is over. We won. IMHO what is going on now is not war, but terrorist acts by folks that don't want the Iraqi people to have the freedom to govern themselves. And the real good news is that the Iraqi people want us there and do not need to be controlled by America. They will control themselves as they set up their own government. Heck, it took these USofA years to set up a government that worked.

I'm sure that nothing Stackem or I say will convince any of you youngsters that there is anything in this world worth fighting for. But in our group of guys that play online together we have several retired vets, we have several active military guys, we have a grandma that has a nephew in Iraq, and we even had a retired guy sign on with a firm to go and guard the palace in Afghanistan for a year or so. The stories that these guys tell of what is happening over there and the letters that they receive from friends and relatives, are 100% positive about progress being made, 100% positive about the relationship that the military has with the locals and 100% positive in their commitment to their mission. Are there going to be a few guys that are not happy? Sure. Is the press going to harp on these few negative, unhappy souls instead of the overwhelming number of happy, motivated soldiers? You can bet your life on it.

More later. I have to save the little strength left in my fingers to snipe Judas in BF2.


BTW - Pyro, actually Hilter was a coward. That's why he murdered so many people.... and why he killed himself.

I can't fucking beleive someone as bright as your are Colonel can't fucking conceive how much of a fucking disater Iraq has been. Stop dreaming up your fantasy Iraq.. AND start conceding some ground on this topic.

[quote="Short Hand":1efda]I can't fucking beleive someone as bright as your are Colonel can't fucking conceive how much of a fucking disater Iraq has been. Stop dreaming up your fantasy Iraq.. AND start conceding some ground on this topic.[/quote:1efda]


you could swollow that pill too

Firstly your comment about the drop in kidnappings is false. This article was published in 2003 so it is alittle outdated - http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0910/p05s02-woiq.html
But today on some blog I found a link to the washington post and it said that 30-50 are being kidnapped in Iraq each day..EACH DAY. I don't have the link because I visit alot of sites each day searching for the news. If you don't believe me, thats fine.

Yes the media has a fascination with Iraq. I wonder why? I leave that question to you to answer.

You also seem optimistic that you won the war, no point in me saying anything else because that is a pretty strange comment none the less.

It's nice to know you have vets in your internet clan. I have a question to you though. Do you have kids? If you "appreciate" what America is doing in Iraq, why don't you have your kids sign up and fight for your country, make them do a tour of duty in Iraq, have them walk the streets of Sadr city and hope for the best. Would you do such a thing? Have them fight for a war which you and your fellow country men were so blindly drawn in to.

I encourage you to read this article. It was just recently published so it has good statistics on it..I posted it on the first page but I'm sure most people didn't want to read it because it is too long.

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/mid ... 350776.ece

First of all, Ninty is right. The military is not a police force. They are not trained as police officers. That's why there are MPs. At this point they are out of there element.

I had a contractor working for me who served years ago in the Iraqi Replublican guard and who still has family in Bahgdad who would disagree with your sentiment that being without Saddam is something trivial.

I'm not sure if you're trying to imply that the Iraqi people are merely "untermenschen", to steal the term from the article, but it seems like you're saying the only way to control the masses in Iraq is through fear and dictatorship.

I would also like to point out that the majority of the left-wing, in this country at least, initially supported the war. Now, that it has become a bit messy, all they do is criticize. No one from the left is offering any constructive ideas about how to clean up the mess. This is the reason that they won't win the Presidency the next time around either.

It's not that I "don't believe you", I respect your opinion, I just don't agree with your conclusions. Sure, you can find articles that talk about kidnappings increasing among the average people. I think the article said something like "the average person did not fear kidnapping under the former regime." But who were they interviewing? A person that posed no threat to Saddam? A person that wasn't on the Olympic soccer team? Of course if someone sees an incresse in crime in their neighborhood they think it is that way all over. Same in the US. Total crime may be down but if it is up in your area then that's all you know. Once they have kidnapped and murdered a half a million then I'll change my opinion.


There is a difference between fighting a "war" and putting down a terrorist uprising. To me, war is two armies slugging it out. What we are doing now, IMO, is more of a police action than it is a war. Saddam's army was defeated and many of his soldiers are now working side-by-side with allied troops. I know everybody loves to keep talking about war, but to me the "war" is over and now we are fighting common terrorists. (which is one reason I could see them releasing some of the guys at Gitmo - if they are POW's then let them go - if they are terrorists keep them there)

Yes I do have kids. Two girls. If they wanted to volunteer then I would support them. BTW - I don't think we were blindly drawn into anything.



I read it the other day. Interesting perspective. I once had a statistics professor that said he can make stats say anything he wanted them to. Both sides in this arguement use stats to prove their point. In the end it comes down to whether we are going to allow terrorists to blow up the WTC, Pentagon, subways around the world, buses in countries around the world, etc. and not do anyting about it, or whether we are going to take the fight to them and "all who harbor them".




LOL - maybe I'm not as bright as you think I am. LOL - or maybe Iraq is not a disaster. During WWII there were many in the US who did not agree with the war. There were even anti-war protesters. I don't mind folks voicing their opposition to us going to Iraq. Healthy debate is what makes democracy work. In fact, I think it is kinda funny that some folks in Iraq are now openly protesting. I wonder if they see the irony in the fact aht if they had done that when Saddam was in power that he would have had them killed.

I see what you are saying tomxtr. But this republican guard..were does his family live and are they alittle wealthy or middle class? From what I read in books from independent journalists to ones working for magazines such as the new yorker..they all say the same thing. Once the CPA came in and did their debaathification process many people lost jobs. Then water, electricity shortages made people grow angry. I know many people turned out for the elections and voted. But I really think America has to leave, Iraqis want the soliders gone, the soldiers themselves want to leave and many americans want to pull out.

No I am not implying that Iraq, now, needs a dictator. I know I build sentences strange..but that was not my intended message. Basically I was questioning how the new government will be able to control the sunnis, shia and the kurds all in one province.

And lastly, I was for the war like I said in that political belifs thread. I wanted to see Saddam gone and see Iraqis free from a tyrant. But somewhere along the roads America took a wrong turn in Iraq. You guys really undermined the capabilities of the insurgents. And can that last remark be used to describe if you speak out against your country you are unpatriotic..or am I just thinking things? The left wants america out of Iraq...thats it.

And Colonel if you don't agree with the statistics thats fine.

Violence + turmoil = better rankings. Anything the media can make a big deal about over there, they will. That's the definitive answer for you.

Vance, you always were a quick thinker.

I agree with the statistics. I am just interpreting them differently. And I am more likely to look at the statistic of 500,000 murdered under Saddam (the "government" at the time) and a handful, comparatively speaking, since he was gone - and zero of those by the ruling government (those that are being killed are being killed by terrorist, not the ruling authority. Big difference.

And all the "no electricity" arguments are old. Yes, the country was largely without power after we bombed the crap out of it. But. at least according to the letters from the front that I've seen, that is not a substantial problem now.

What will you say once the civil war takes full effect and another million die ? WILL you still be gung ho for this ?

Staffan de Mistura, UNDP representative, May 2005

THE STATISTIC:

5.2 average number of hours of electricity in Baghdad homes