Jump to content

Betrayed Warriors: The SAS Veterans Facing Legal Persecution


Recommended Posts

Posted
On 3/10/2025 at 7:03 PM, Social Media said:

This officer points to a fundamental “displacement between decision-makers and the delivery end.” He believes that politicians and military leaders must fully comprehend the implications of sending soldiers into conflict zones. “Leaders that truly take time to understand their decisions to go to war or join coalitions would understand what they are asking people to do. That often means killing people, especially for the special forces, and this was the case in Northern Ireland, Iraq and Afghanistan. If you are going to tell people to carry out those operations, then the government must make sure they are properly protected months and years down the road – otherwise you’ll end up with no one wanting to do it.”

This is "Beyond The Pale" and absolutely disgusting, speaking as a bredren.

They should apply for asylum in the US. In about 6 months there are going to be job openings for them as "Security" for American mining companies in Ukraine. Their job would remain the same but the pay would go up 20 fold. Bet that would improve their recruitment. 😁

Posted
8 hours ago, KhunLA said:

MOD EDIT: [Quoted post removed for fair use policy and misrepresenting the lengthy article]

 

 

Don't mess with the SAS 

  • Thanks 2
Posted
16 hours ago, KhunLA said:

Yes I have, and I voluntarily enlisted, not drafted/conscripted.  Thank you.

 

Read the link I provided, about the incident in question, and explain to me, why they had to kill 4 people, that were not shooting at them ?

 

They fired 570 rounds, that almost 2 full 30 round mags for 10 people, or 1 mag for 20 people, to kill 4 people.

 

Yea, I think that's a bit excessive.

Thank you for responding, and good for you serving. I also volunteered and served for 22 years, though part of that was in Territorials.

 

I'm somewhat surprised that you think the SAS is bothered by a bit of ultraviolence though, as that is the sort of guys we want doing the really hard yards that not many want to do.

 

Far as I'm concerned, someone wants to be a terrorist or a freedom fighter, don't complain if it ends badly.

I'm not bothered if some bad guys end up in a box, rather than a cell, costing the taxpayer money.

Posted
26 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I'm not bothered if some bad guys end up in a box, rather than a cell, costing the taxpayer money.

Can't argue that, if they know they were the perpetrators of terror.  Next time be smart, CYA and don't leave any witnesses.

 

IRA targeted civilians, and once you do that, whether govt officials or not, you lose all support.  Invade & occupy doesn't get much support either from me either, and with the lying MSM, you unfortunately don't know who to believe. 

 

I'm a fan of due process, being on the other side of that process at times.  Why I don't trust authoritarian folks at times, knowing how bent they can be.   

 

Hard to dispute the findings and judgement of 'excessive force' when 570 rounds are fired :cheesy:

Posted
1 hour ago, KhunLA said:

Can't argue that, if they know they were the perpetrators of terror.  Next time be smart, CYA and don't leave any witnesses.

 

IRA targeted civilians, and once you do that, whether govt officials or not, you lose all support.  Invade & occupy doesn't get much support either from me either, and with the lying MSM, you unfortunately don't know who to believe. 

 

I'm a fan of due process, being on the other side of that process at times.  Why I don't trust authoritarian folks at times, knowing how bent they can be.   

 

Hard to dispute the findings and judgement of 'excessive force' when 570 rounds are fired :cheesy:

Everything I know about the SAS says that they are a highly professional group and they don't go around killing people for no good reason. If they killed those guys, they had good reason to do so.

In any event, this is obviously political BS years later- if it was wrong at the time it would have been dealt with at the time.

Posted
1 hour ago, KhunLA said:

Hard to dispute the findings and judgement of 'excessive force' when 570 rounds are fired

 

 

Given it took thousands of rounds to kill one soldier in WW2, 570 for 4 is quite economical.

 

https://historicalbattles.quora.com/How-many-bullets-were-fired-during-World-War-II

During World War II, an estimated 45,000 rounds of small arms ammunition were fired to kill one enemy soldier.

  • Haha 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...