Gurkha does his job and is going to be punished for it.

Never take anything that The Daily Mail prints as the whole truth, they have a long history of sensationalism and misrepresenting the facts.

As no one has pontificated what actually happened, I'll ask this...

Why was it down to a private soldier to take this decision? Where were his NCO or officer? Why couldn't a positive ID have been made by the soldiers on the ground? Could DNA have been taken, either hair or even fingers? That he was "grassed up" by one of his own might just be part of the "untold" story.

For the most part, the British play by the rules in which they are signed up to. The Geneva Convention is one of them...that the Taliban don't play by the same rules as us doesn't matter. In fact because they don't play by the same rules makes them our enemy.

You would all agree that the desecration of dead people is wrong. That the bodies of US servicemen been dragged through the streets of Mogadishu was a disrespectful thing. Somalis didn't play by "our rules", should we change our standards because of this?

I find it interesting that Americans have such a nostalgia for the days of the British Empire, but for worse and for better they are over.

Far from being just a mountain warrior race, an expendable shock troop of the Empire, the Gurkhas are now fully integrated into the British Army. They must abide by the same rules set out for all servicemen, regardless of tradition and legend.

This is a kukhri forum and to say such things probably amounts to blasphemy but you must know that the Gurkha is a well loved and highly respected man in modern British culture.

That this Private "Johnny" Gurkha will be made an example of PC is not likely IMHO.

Most British people would probably think it fair enough what he did. The PM would be an ass to allow him to be punished, removing him from his unit at a time of deployment is probably punishment enough for this young man.

Flame me away....
Johnny

P.S. Esav, I've noticed several times that you like poetry, I like this and I want to say that I like and respect you. :)
 
interesting that Americans have such a nostalgia for the days of the British Empire
Click to expand...

Whoah! Easy with the broad strokes, there. I'm no fan of buggery, kidnapping, or the lash. All very present in the greatest tool of the Brits, their navy. :mad:
 
Well stated, Yorkshireboy.

It is not so much a matter of being politically correct as it is a matter of respect, Honor and integrity. Just because the enemy does nasty things to ours, doesnt mean we should have a free pass to do equally/more disgusting things to them. It is better to take the high road. The Taliban/Al Queda has already proven that they act animalistic with no regard to human life, even innocent non-combatant lives. This is and will be their downfall in the eyes of the world and with Allah/God.
 
Spectre said:
Whoah! Easy with the broad strokes, there. I'm no fan of buggery, kidnapping, or the lash. All very present in the greatest tool of the Brits, their navy. :mad:
Click to expand...

Thank you Spectre, a comment that would usually be expected in whine and cheese.

But as the Empire was active for the two world wars, and things you talk about are before that, I might hit you with the broad strokes of slavery in the USA and segregation in American fighting units.

:yawn:
 
Karda said:
Well stated, Yorkshireboy.

It is not so much a matter of being politically correct as it is a matter of respect, Honor and integrity. Just because the enemy does nasty things to ours, doesnt mean we should have a free pass to do equally/more disgusting things to them. It is better to take the high road. The Taliban/Al Queda has already proven that they act animalistic with no regard to human life, even innocent non-combatant lives. This is and will be their downfall in the eyes of the world and with Allah/God.
Click to expand...

A voice of reason, thank you.

The Gurkha stand high in the British role of honour, their honesty, integrity, bravery and selfless service has given the Regiment Of Gurkhas so many VC's.
 
Whoa, is this Whine and Cheese??? I must be lost.

Aside from that, I wish luck to the soldier, and hope he gets through everything alright.
 
Well last week 3 Gurkhas were killed by an undercover Taliban, So personaly I think quite a quite few Afghans will die over that, & for sure some will lose thier heads whether dead or alive. Hope the squady isnt made a scapegoat, but who knows?

I always notice how the Taliban never seem have prisoners to show off or exchange, So how the Brits & Yanks die when cornered without enough immediate backup probably doesnt match the Geneva convention either.

Murder & mutilation has been common in Afghanistan for centurys, They tortured & mutilated the Russians in the last round of squabaling over who would control that area, I find it hard to belive thats any different today.

The Gurkhas & Afghans were doing such deeds to each other in both the 19th & 20th centurys as well, they are old adversarys.

All IMHO of course.

Spiral
 
Karda said:
Well stated, Yorkshireboy.

It is not so much a matter of being politically correct as it is a matter of respect, Honor and integrity. Just because the enemy does nasty things to ours, doesnt mean we should have a free pass to do equally/more disgusting things to them. It is better to take the high road. The Taliban/Al Queda has already proven that they act animalistic with no regard to human life, even innocent non-combatant lives. This is and will be their downfall in the eyes of the world and with Allah/God.
Click to expand...

I'm going to take exception to this solely on the grounds that this Gurkha was ordered to bring back positive ID that they killed the right guy. They were under heavy fire, and he accomplished his mission without getting ev en more of his squad mates killed trying to "respect" the enemy.

Also, an enemy that has no respect from you, deserves none in return.

Which segues into:

Yorkshire Boy: the fact that the Taliban do not abide by the Geneva convention DOES matter. Several conditions MUST be met, in order for the Geneva Convention to apply. The enemies must be:
1.) Uniformed members of a nation's military. Insurgents, terrorists, or soldiers of a natioln's army not in uniform are NOT protected.
2.) The party has to have signed the Geneva Convention to be protected. Did the Afghan government sign the Geneva Convention (talking about the government at the time the Convention was signed, as it would also apply to the Taliban unless they officially removed themselves from its roster.). If not, they are not protected, i.e. we are not bound to give them the protections under the treaty even though we did sign it. Same for the other conditions.
3.) They also have to abide by the treaty. If one side does not abide by the treaty, then the other side is not bound by it either.

The same conditions apply to The Hague accords -- which is why we can shoot them with whatever we damn well please (not to mention the US never signed The Hague accords).

Both the Geneva Convention and The Hague Accords were written to protect soldiers honorably engaged in war, and specifically DO NOT protect those who act dishonorably -- like our enemies do today. Hey, if they want to put on uniforms and fight soldier to soldier, then I'll afford them all the respect a good enemy deserves. But they are neither honorable, nor respectable.


Furthermore, this event is not without precedent. When the Royal Marines were fighting in Malaya, it was STANDARD PRACTICE to have the Gurkhas -- and RMs -- bring back onl;y the heads of the enemy for identification purposes.

So, how about this scenario: They go to retrieve the body of the guy they killed and came under heavy fire. One asks another "How can we get the body out now?" Senior guy says "Well, we used to just bring back the heads, that should be good enough." No disrespect or dishonor involved.

It's just a case of the socialist media and bureaucrats who don't know the story or understand the circumstances roasting the guy's [Edited For Content] on a spit.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Now, on a lighter note.
Taken from a post on WarriorTalk:

You’ve got to love the Gurkas.
During WWII the British were considering making a Gurka unit airborne. The Sergeant Major of the Gurkas was asked if his men would consider jumping from airplanes from 800-feet.
The Gurka SM looked concerned and asked, “Could we jump from 300-feet?”
In response the British officer said that it was unlikely that the parachutes would function at such a low altitude.
The Gurka SM exclaimed, “Oh! We’re going to use parachutes?”
They are tough little brown guys.
 
As i said before, It's not about the Geneva Convention, Hague Accords or Political Correctness, It is about Honor, Integrity and the moral high ground. I believe the last thing anyone wants is anymore beheading, except for the Fanatics. If we go disrespecting them by beheading their dead they are liable to find more live heads to take in retribution. We must maintain that we care about laws and morality, even as we take out as many of them as we can. If we resort to Animalistic behavior and carelessless of life as the insurgents/terrorists have....then we are no better than they are. It will only prove to breed more hate and recriutment for the enemy.

That all being said, I believe that the Brave young gurkha should not be in the position he is in unless he went against orders of not taking heads. It is his C.O.'s responsiblity to have informed him. It could possibly be there was some form of miscommunication or lack of communication in his unit. It also could be that he did this act of his own volition. Until we know more of the specifics, this would all be pure conjecture.
 
Last edited:
Karda said:
If we go disrespecting them by beheading their dead they are liable to find more live heads to take in retribution. We must maintain that we care about laws and morality, even as we take out as many of them as we can. If we resort to Animalistic behavior and carelessless of life as the insurgents/terrorists have....then we are no better than they are. It will only prove to breed more hate and recriutment for the enemy.
Click to expand...

Nothing we do or don't do will change the behavior of these people at all. They generate all the hate they need within their own culture.

Taking a head for identification in the heat of battle shows no disrespect to life as the man was already dead.

The Ghurka may well have saved the head from the ravens and dogs waiting their turn at the feast.
 
Esav Benyamin said:
Nothing we do or don't do will change the behavior of these people at all. They generate all the hate they need within their own culture.

Taking a head for identification in the heat of battle shows no disrespect to life as the man was already dead.

The Ghurka may well have saved the head from the ravens and dogs waiting their turn at the feast.
Click to expand...

:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:

We can all surmise what is right and what is wrong but to judge what should be done in a battlefield condition against an enemy that shows no quarter to you or the men you are standing next to is silly and you can not possible tell how you would of reacted or what you would have done.

I think that the Gurka did his job his duty and earned a place of honor and respect for accomplishing his mission

There is no wrong or right in war and sometimes ya just have to pick a side

I would pick to be on the Gurkas side not the terrorists
 
The right way, the wrong way, the Army way. You and yours come out of battle alive and the enemy dead, that's what you were sent there for. The lawyers weren't there to help when you needed them; they shouldn't get a say after the fact.
 
I am sad to call myself an Englishman. The Gurka regiment is very loyal never questions an order,they are always ready,true warriors and this is how we repay them with hanging this young soldier out to dry with no defense. This is totally unacceptable! the government should grow a pair and protect him.We all freaking know the taliban have no problem chopping heads off on camera! So what the crap is this about them being unhappy this is WAR.
 
The taliban videotape live beheadings that are deliberately done to inflict as much as torture as possible to the victim with a rusty butterknife and the brits are drawing moral equivalency with this ghurka's actions?

Didn't know infantry soldiers are expected to take pictures during a hot battle... Thought that's what war photographers are for!!

Mini rant: If you're gonna send your soldiers to war then you tell them to kick butt and take heads. And if that means bringing back lopped off heads cause that messes with the rest of your enemy's minds then go for it.

Go hard or go home.
 
KRBurke said:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...rdered-UK-beheading-dead-Taliban-fighter.html

This is unbelieveable. The Taliban behead their enemies all the fricking time. ALIVE. They have no respect for others, but this brave soldier, under ORDERS to prove he got the right guy, is under fire.

This is not acceptable.
Click to expand...

While unorthodox perhaps and something that might be used as an example of what not to do as part of a training exercise, I frankly don't get it. Intent, as they say, was lacking here. By his own admissions, he was attempting to prove the identify of a dead combatant while under fire. Dragging a body or taking a photo if you don't have a camera may simply not be feasible. Demeaning a dead enemy was not the goal. I'm hopeful for this brave lad at the hands of the British military tribunal. The risk remains they will make an example of this chap to scare the Gorka regiments into keeping their manhackers sheathed. Bureaucracy at work.

-E
 
If he was just getting the head for ID then privately he should get a pat on the back for ingenuity.

I bet that there was talk of reprisals for the death of the 3 soldiers by the taliban - and then this guy appears with a head under his arm. I would say they were stuck between a rock and a hard place. If the officers commend him for it they could be knee deep in heads by the end of the week.

As long as he is not disciplined for it - I think I could live with the decision.

Tam
 
Karda said:
As i said before, It's not about the Geneva Convention, Hague Accords or Political Correctness, It is about Honor, Integrity and the moral high ground.
Click to expand...

Well, my part about the Geneva convention was aimed at YorkshireBoy, if you look again. He said it doesn't matter if they violate the Geneva convention or not, when, in fact, according to the convention itself, it does matter.

Moral high ground?

Nicest way I can put this is: Have you ever been to war?
When you're out there, the guy on your left, and the guy on your right are all that matters. You keep them alive, they keep you alive. If it means cutting off someones head so that you can complete your mission, and keep more of your guys alive, you do it. There is no honor in getting more of your guys killed to not "desecrate" the dead -- they're dead, there's nothing more you can do to them. There is also no honor in failing your mission (their mission would have failed if they did not bring back positive ID. In fact more would have to be sent out, and possibly die, determining if this guy really was dead, or find and kill him if he wasn't.

Furthermore, the enemy has no honor, and has no respect, and they deserve none in return. These are the guys that kick their daughters to death for forgetting to feed the family goat. They give women 100 lashes in their soccer stadium for daring to go in public without a veil, behead them for daring to be teachers, etc. They behead civilians live to create fear in their enemies (little do they understand that this does not create fear in Americans -- and as far as I can see Brits, or apparently gurkhas -- but anger).

They capture our soldiers and skin them alive, they rip off body parts, electrocute them, whip them, etc. Just look into some Israeli history to see what muslims do to female soldiers. No, they deserve no honor, no respect, and no quarter. Due to their practices with captured soldiers, our guys are told they are better off fighting to the death than be captured.

I'm glad I'm not in the military anymore, because I'd be court-martialed so fast it isn't funny.

If it created fear in my enemy and kept more of my guys alive, I'd lop off taliban heads all day and place them on pikes around the perimeter of my FOB.

It worked for the Romanians and Kazakhs, and they understood how these people have to be dealt with.

Even Ghengis Khan could not control them, that's why he decided to simply wipe them out. Remember in Red Dawn, when the teacher was talking about the Khan and how he got all his men in a circle, and killed everything in their path until they met in the middle? It was in Afghanistan that he did that. Because it's the only option.

War is about killing people and breaking things. There is no "nice" about it, and "honorable rules" are great, but only if both sides abide by them. If they don't the gloves have to come off or you will lose.

ETA, this post probably isn't real palatable to many here, so for my good and everyone else's I'm just going to stay away from this topic from now on, OK?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top