Breaking the Silence: Former UK Special Forces Reveal Allegations of War Crimes

[Chomper Higgot]

4 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

Nonsense.

 

Allegations by unnamed sources. Excuse me if I don't cry myself to sleep about something that most likely never happened.

 

If proven true in a court of law, let's discuss again - once we know all the facts. Until then, I will leave the pearl clutching to the experts, you and Chomps.  

I have a feeling if these allegations lead to prosecutions and trials you’ll be objecting to the those too.

 

But if you are indeed arguing allegations made that have not been tested in court are nothing to be concerned about, then that really would be a change of outlook worth noting.

 

[JonnyF]

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

I have a feeling if these allegations lead to prosecutions and trials you’ll be objecting to the trials.

 

 

When is the trial?

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, JonnyF said:

 

When is the trial?

Read my post again and see if you can spot the ‘if’.

[JonnyF]

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

Read my post again and see if you can spot the ‘if’.

 

You mean there is no trial scheduled based on these allegations by unnamed sources?

[Chomper Higgot]

13 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

You mean there is no trial scheduled based on these allegations by unnamed sources?

I didn’t say there was, nor did I say there will not be.

 

Lets see the range of reactions if there is.

 

 

 

[ChicagoExpat]

1 hour ago, Cameroni said:

 

Indeed, and as these were seasoned special forces soldiers who fought in Afghanistan and knew the fighting age of combatants there, ie that the Taliban did have 16 year olds fighting, very clearly that boy must have been much younger than 16. Because they made a special point to say "clearly" not of fighting age. So anyhing from 8,9,10 or 11 is probable.

 

Not just that he was  extremely young, but he was handcuffed and they shot a defenseless child basically. That's just incredible.

 

 

If true, yes, it's bad.

[ChicagoExpat]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The false moral equivalency was introduced by Jonny.

 

I and others called it out.

 

You’re objecting to ot having been called out

No, I'm not.  I'm objecting to exactly what I said I was objecting to.  Nothing more, nothing less.

[ChicagoExpat]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I need to update this observation.

 

Not so much ‘crickets’ as the very people who engage in outrage over an equivalence being drawn between the actions of a State Military and those of a Terrorist Organization are no longer silent.

 

They now themselves engaging in that very same equivalence.

 

How the wind blows?!

It blows like a fart, in this case.  Glad you admit your original observation was wrong -- we all saw that.

[Cameroni]

9 minutes ago, ChicagoExpat said:

If true, yes, it's bad.

 

Do you think special forces soldiers make a habit out of calling out their own fellow comrades for shooting children dead that are handcuffed?

 

I doubt it. If these soldiers say this happened, then it did happen.

 

The fact that even now people claim this is just "hearsay" after witnesses from the UK's own special armed forces came forward to say they saw it just shows how much soldiers must get away with it normally.

 

The usual course of action would likely be that the victim's family calls the crime out, only for the armed forces to deny it, and nobody ever believes it happened. 

 

Even now with witness reports from actual special forces soldiers who were there saying "we saw this", some people out of tribal loyalty want to white wash it as "hearsay".

 

Imagine how often the victims would have made the allegation WITHOUT UK soldiers supporting it and the crime therefore went unpunished.

[ChicagoExpat]

1 hour ago, RuamRudy said:

 

No, as I have been trying to help you realise, you were (and remain) wrong. 

 

Here was the pathetic attempt to equivalise and justify the actions of the British Army by comparing them to those of the Taliban:

 

Thanks, but I'll put my reading comprehension against yours any day of the week -- and when everyone except you (and Higgot) understands the opposite of what you claim you meant -- you're the one with the problem.  So let's clear it up once and for all -- tell us plainly-- you WEREN'T making a moral equivalence between the two?  Here's your chance to show me I'm wrong and if I was I will own it.  I already know what you'll do... but surprise me.

[JonnyF]

16 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I didn’t say there was, nor did I say there will not be.

 

Lets see the range of reactions if there is.

 

 

 

 

Maybe you should relax your grip on those pearls until there is?

[ChicagoExpat]

1 minute ago, Cameroni said:

I doubt it. If these soldiers say this happened, then it did happen.

Judge, jury, and executioner, that's you.

 

Actually, I've seen PLENTY of guys who "turn against the system" with exaggerations, outright lies, or missing information.  So, no, I don't buy "then it did happen."

[ChicagoExpat]

40 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Well, you keep killing civilians in a country you shouldn't even be in, and you really can't complain, when the victim's family and fellow country persons, kill your own civilians, for a damn good reason.

 

You know, that 'eye for an eye' thingy, and 'paybacks are a bitch'   Wait for it ....

 

 

 

I keep killing civilians?  Wow.  Not me, sister.  

[coolcarer]

BBC’s latest  unsubstantiated and hearsay attack piece on Uk’s and probably the worlds finest specialist fighting force. Keeping the streets of the UK clean of terrorists. 

[BLMFem]

2 hours ago, Yagoda said:

Publicly smearing COMBAT veterans is scumbaggery of the highest order. You got something, put them on trial before other COMBAT veterans, who are the only ones entitled to judge.

What an inane statement. That's like saying alleged rapists can only be judged by rapists.

[Purdey]

Teach soldiers to kill and then be shocked that they killed people? Seems too much to ask.

[jesimps]

3 hours ago, ChicagoExpat said:

That's a disgusting statement.

There are about half a dozen hard lefties on this forum and they've already quickly waded in with their condemnation of the Brit Special Forces and NATO. The same ones that turn a blind eye to atrocities committed by the Taliban, Hamas, China, Russia etc

[JonnyF]

14 minutes ago, ChicagoExpat said:

Judge, jury, and executioner, that's you.

 

Actually, I've seen PLENTY of guys who "turn against the system" with exaggerations, outright lies, or missing information.  So, no, I don't buy "then it did happen."

 

Exactly.

 

Many soldiers come back mentally damaged or hold a grudge against the armed forces for whetever reason. The idea that it must be true because it allegedly came from an unnamed "former soldier" is ridiculous.

 

I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if the unnamed source turned out to have links to The Taliban and was paid by The BBC for the interview, not unlike the kid in that bleeding heart Gaza documentary (who had family links to Hamas) that they ended up having to apologize for - again.   

[RuamRudy]

15 minutes ago, jesimps said:

There are about half a dozen hard lefties on this forum and they've already quickly waded in with their condemnation of the Brit Special Forces and NATO. The same ones that turn a blind eye to atrocities committed by the Taliban, Hamas, China, Russia etc

 

You have shown a total failure to understand this thread and the posts made. It is possible to condemn the individual without condemning the organisation. I don't believe you will find a soul on this thread who would advocate for the abolition of the British Armed Forces; it is the rot within it, however, that is damaging the reputation of the vast majority, and should be properly dealt with. 

[josephbloggs]

2 hours ago, sungod said:

 More likely 16 or 17

Ah, that's ok then.

[Cameroni]

26 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Many soldiers come back mentally damaged or hold a grudge against the armed forces for whetever reason. The idea that it must be true because it allegedly came from an unnamed "former soldier" is ridiculous

 

So we have the scenario of former UK soldiers  saying they saw their fellow UK soldiers killing a handcuffed child, and then we have the scenario of former UK soldiers claiming their own fellow soldiers killed a handcuffed child because they are "mentally damaged" or "hold a grudge against the armed forces".

 

Hmmmm, yah, real hard to decide which is more likely here. Just using Occam's razor it's obvious.

 

Obviously this happened. Special forces soldiers don't denounce their comrades, unless something really off happened. Which it clearly did here.

 

 

[newbee2022]

9 hours ago, Social Media said:

 

In an unprecedented move, former members of the United Kingdom's elite Special Forces have publicly come forward to describe harrowing accounts of alleged war crimes committed by their colleagues in Iraq and Afghanistan. Speaking to BBC Panorama, these veterans recounted chilling experiences that paint a deeply troubling picture of routine extrajudicial killings carried out under the cover of darkness and silence.

 

 

One former SAS operative recalled a particularly disturbing event in Afghanistan: "They handcuffed a young boy and shot him. He was clearly a child, not even close to fighting age." According to this veteran, the killing of detainees had become disturbingly commonplace. “They'd search someone, handcuff them, then shoot them,” he said. Afterwards, operatives would remove the plastic handcuffs and stage the scene by “planting a pistol” on the body to justify the shooting.

 

These testimonies, now emerging more than a decade after the alleged crimes took place, extend far beyond the timeframe of the three years currently under investigation by a UK public inquiry. For the first time, the Special Boat Service (SBS), the Royal Navy's elite regiment, is also implicated in similar allegations, including the execution of unarmed and wounded individuals. A former SBS member described some troops as having developed a “mob mentality,” and described their actions as “barbaric.” He added, “I saw the quietest guys switch, show serious psychopathic traits.

They were lawless. They felt untouchable.”

 

 

Deployed to safeguard British forces from Taliban threats, these units operated in deadly environments where 457 UK troops lost their lives and thousands more were injured. Yet, within these war zones, the former special forces members claim rules were routinely ignored. “If a target had popped up on the list two or three times before, then we'd go in with the intention of killing them, there was no attempt to capture them,” said one SAS veteran. “Often the squadron would just go and kill all the men they found there.”

 

One SAS witness described how killing became “an addictive thing to do” and claimed some operatives were “intoxicated by that feeling” while operating in Afghanistan. “There were lots of psychotic murderers,” he stated, adding that “on some operations, the troop would go into guesthouse-type buildings and kill everyone there. They'd go in and shoot everyone sleeping there, on entry. It's not justified, killing people in their sleep.”

 

Eyewitnesses also detailed how wounded individuals were deliberately executed, in clear violation of international law. In one instance, during an SBS operation, a medic was attending to a wounded person when “one of our blokes came up to him. There was a bang. He'd been shot in the head at point-blank range,” a veteran said. “These are not mercy killings. It's murder.”

 

The testimony included claims that junior team members were explicitly told by senior operatives to kill detainees. Phrases like “he's not coming back to base with us” or “you make sure he doesn't come off target” were used as coded instructions. These detainees had surrendered, were unarmed, and often handcuffed—protections afforded to them under British and international law.

 

The BBC also obtained new video evidence and accounts of an SAS operator allegedly executing numerous individuals during a six-month tour. One former colleague described him as “notorious in the squadron, he genuinely seemed like a psychopath.” In one incident, this operator reportedly slit the throat of an injured Afghan man. “He wanted to, you know, blood his knife,” a witness recounted.

 

According to the veterans, the chain of command within UK Special Forces was aware of the killings. “I'm not taking away from personal responsibility, but everyone knew,” said one. “There was implicit approval for what was happening.” To avoid scrutiny, operatives reportedly planted fake weapons—known as “drop weapons”—next to bodies and falsified reports. “The reports were a fiction,” said one former SAS operator. Another added, “We understood how to write up serious incident reviews so they wouldn't trigger a referral to the military police.”

 

Former Afghan officials, including President Hamid Karzai, reportedly raised their concerns repeatedly with British authorities. “He consistently, repeatedly mentioned this issue,” said Dr. Rangin Dadfar Spanta, former Afghan national security adviser. Gen Douglas Lute, a former U.S. ambassador to NATO, stated, “There was no senior Western diplomat or military leader who would have missed the fact that this was a major irritant for him.”

 

Lord David Cameron, Prime Minister during the period now under scrutiny, was reportedly informed of these issues. A spokesperson for Cameron told the BBC that “to the best of Lord Cameron's recollection” the concerns were about NATO forces in general and not specific to UK Special Forces. The spokesperson also emphasized that “any suggestion that Lord Cameron colluded in covering up allegations of serious criminal wrongdoing is total nonsense.”

 

Bruce Houlder KC, former director of service prosecutions, stated his hope that the inquiry will determine how much Cameron knew. “You need to know how far the rot went up,” he said.

 

While the UK lacks parliamentary oversight for its Special Forces, unlike the U.S. and France, ultimate strategic responsibility rests with the Prime Minister, Defence Secretary, and Head of Special Forces. As the public inquiry unfolds, these testimonies may be key to uncovering the full extent of alleged criminality within Britain’s most secretive military units.

 

  Adapted by ASEAN Now from BBC  2025-05-13

 

 

Not surprising.

Documented over the years by journalism 

[JonnyF]

1 minute ago, Cameroni said:

 

So we have the scenario of former UK soldiers  saying they saw their fellow UK soldiers killing a handcuffed child, and then we have the scenario of former UK soldiers claiming their own fellow soldiers killed a handcuffed child because they are "mentally damaged" or "hold a grudge against the armed forces".

 

Hmmmm, yah, real hard to decide which is more likely here. Just using Occam's razor it's obvious.

 

Obviously this happened. Special forces soldiers don't denounce their comrades, unless something really off happened. Which it clearly did here.

 

 

 

But we don't know if UK soldiers said it.

 

They are "unnamed sources" played by voice-over actors on a TV program.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

 

Exactly.

 

Many soldiers come back mentally damaged or hold a grudge against the armed forces for whetever reason. The idea that it must be true because it allegedly came from an unnamed "former soldier" is ridiculous.

 

I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if the unnamed source turned out to have links to The Taliban and was paid by The BBC for the interview, not unlike the kid in that bleeding heart Gaza documentary (who had family links to Hamas) that they ended up having to apologize for - again.   

So now you call into question the mental health of a veteran giving his eyewitness testimony and go further by suggestion links to a terrorist organization.

 

Are there no depths to the depravity of your arguments?

 

[JonnyF]

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

So now you call into quest the mental health of a veteran giving his eyewitness testimony and go further by suggestion links to a terrorist organization.

 

Are there no depths to the depravity of your arguments?

 

 

I have seen no evidence of any veteran.

 

All I have seen is an unnamed source whose alleged words were read by a voice over actor on a TV show.

 

Who/Where is this veteran you speak of?

[Cameroni]

4 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

But we don't know if UK soldiers said it.

 

They are "unnamed sources" played by voice-over actors on a TV program.

 

That's a fair point. Obviously these sources have to be unnamed because there is a code of conduct among special forces soldiers, and if the real name of the accuser comes out they would face substantial consequences such as ostracism, personal attacks and similar.

 

However, this allegation will no doubt be investigated by the British courts, who will then establish the identiy of this UK soldier. 

 

I do trust the British courts fully to establish the actual course of events.

[coolcarer]

5 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

So now you call into quest the mental health of a veteran giving his eyewitness testimony and go further by suggestion links to a terrorist organization.

 

Are there no depths to the depravity of your arguments?

 

What veteran? An alleged veteran giving an alleged account of what he allegedly saw.

[Presnock]

5 hours ago, JonnyF said:

I'm sure The Taliban were all sticking to the rules. 

Absolutely!  But unless all those leaders at all levels understand what a particular war or area within a warring country before they send in probably a small force, then I believe that people just don't understand what these engagements are about nor the condiitions that "civilized" soldiers are raised in and then exposed to these other totally different worlds and are expected to follow ALL the rules. When an enemy can fight using rally relaxed laws while we are required to be Mr. Nice guy while those bad guys are shooting at you then one wonders what the F$%k are we doing here?.   Been there, exposed to that crap.  Doesn't make for a happy nor "peaceful" chap. IMHO

[sungod]

35 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

You have shown a total failure to understand this thread and the posts made. It is possible to condemn the individual without condemning the organisation. I don't believe you will find a soul on this thread who would advocate for the abolition of the British Armed Forces; it is the rot within it, however, that is damaging the reputation of the vast majority, and should be properly dealt with. 

 

 

Really?

 

You seem to have condemned the entire British military with your previous statement.

 

'So you are equating UK forces to the Taliban? Certainly they both seem to have been indiscriminate in their murder of innocent civilians.'

[Cameroni]

Unlike many other countries, including the US and France, the UK has no parliamentary oversight of its elite special forces regiments. Strategic responsibility for their actions falls ultimately to the prime minister, along with the defence secretary and head of special forces.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cj3j5gxgz0do

 

That sounds bad, but the Ministry of Defence has a good record of putting armed forces operatives on trial in such cases.

 

The truth will come out.

 

Not least because for once journalists are not busy lying but doing their job. Once again one has to applaud the British media.