Society/Culture Victoria Cross winner Ben Roberts-Smith - Allegations of war crimes

[CheapCharlie]

Couple of news stories doing the rounds relating to past details of Ben roberts-smith

Victoria Cross winners now need to have spotlessly clean personal records?

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/fed...r-most-decorated-soldier-20180801-p4zuwp.html

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-10/ben-roberts-smith-denies-accusations-of-misconduct/10106652

 

[Kurve]

Couple of news stories doing the rounds relating to past details of Ben roberts-smith

Victoria Cross winners now need to have spotlessly clean personal records?

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/fed...r-most-decorated-soldier-20180801-p4zuwp.html

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-10/ben-roberts-smith-denies-accusations-of-misconduct/10106652

When appointed to DV councils, One Punch and Stay Kind campaigns, yes probably imo even if he's being horribly exploited.

So, I'm conflicted.

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

It's a conflicted message to use them in anti-violence campaigns regardless of what type of person this Roberts-Smith is.

 

[Kurve]

It's a conflicted message to use them in anti-violence campaigns regardless of what type of person this Roberts-Smith is.

Agree. I raised that in another thread actually, it's inconsistent.

 

[Thegibbsgamble]

So he is accused of war crimes.

Well.

Forcing men under his command to kill unarmed men.

Well.

Taking a side chick to an official function.

Well

Aligning himself with a radical femminest paid thousands to oppress men.


Wow wee


There is way to much detail in this for it to be tall poppy syndrome.

I think we need to have gratitude for those who have spoke up and risked more than thier lifes in attempting to bring dignity and honor back to our armed forces.

These guys are the real heroes

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

It'd be appreciated if a journo covering another instance of Australian troops allegedly killing unarmed civilians could avoid the 'fog of war' line.

 

[Thegibbsgamble]

It'd be appreciated if a journo covering another instance of Australian troops allegedly killing unarmed civilians could avoid the 'fog of war' line.

The army program the soldiers minds to carry out thier agenda. Wind them up into killing machines. The soldiers are fed properganda to dehumanise the enemy.

But the guy in question here famously lectures us about Afghanistan saying he knows things that we don't about how bad the Afghans are and he can't say. He told us to trust him. He used his decoration to aid weight to his lecture

Those of us aware of the true nature of what we were doing in Afghanistan.

Alarm bells go off

 

[JackOutback]

Couple of news stories doing the rounds relating to past details of Ben roberts-smith

Victoria Cross winners now need to have spotlessly clean personal records?

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/fed...r-most-decorated-soldier-20180801-p4zuwp.html

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-10/ben-roberts-smith-denies-accusations-of-misconduct/10106652

No, they don't need spotlessly clean records. However, avoiding war crimes and assaulting women should be a minimum standard anyone is held to.

This is the risk in holding soldiers up for national adulation.

 

[Bomberboyokay]

Sounds like a real ******* piece of work. His political ambitions need to be derailed by this. Liberals have already given us *os Andrew Hastie and Jim Molan.

 

[CheapCharlie]

No, they don't need spotlessly clean records. However, avoiding war crimes and assaulting women should be a minimum standard anyone is held to.

This is the risk in holding soldiers up for national adulation.

If the allegations are found to be true, do you think he should have been awarded the VC?

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

If the allegations are found to be true, do you think he should have been awarded the VC?

If the allegations are true, he should be tried as a war criminal.

 

[JackOutback]

If the allegations are found to be true, do you think he should have been awarded the VC?

He was awarded the medal for risking his life in battle and saving others; no amount of being a s**t bloke changes that, so yes, I am comfortable with his being awarded. However, the VC carries with it a certain amount of prestige and public profile, if they were aware of the alleged war crimes, perhaps something a little less high profile should have been in order. And just as he is entitled to accolades for some of his behaviour, he should also be held to account for others.

 

[Malifice]

It's a conflicted message to use them in anti-violence campaigns regardless of what type of person this Roberts-Smith is.

I kind of agree.

Why appoint a trained and decorated killer of people onto an an anti-violence board?

No offence to Ben but that doesn't really make sense.

Plenty of other committees he's be better suited for IMO.

 

[Malifice]

If the allegations are found to be true, do you think he should have been awarded the VC?

The VC for Australia is awarded for 'the most conspicuous acts of gallantry in the face of the enemy'.

By gallantry they mean the [bravery in combat] meaning of the word and not [being polite to women] meaning of the word. The fact the word carries those two totally different meanings is historically interesting and significant (it stems from Knighthood and Chivalric ideals).

Leaving the above aside the sole criterion is battle courage. The most extreme of selfless bravery, in direct combat and the face of the enemy, usually at great personal cost (many VC's are awarded posthumously).

I largely dont care how much of a s**t bloke someone is. You get awarded one, it's yours for life.

I could envision certain situations where a person might forfeit the right to the award, but it would have to be something beyond the pale.

 

[CheapCharlie]

He was awarded the medal for risking his life in battle and saving others; no amount of being a s**t bloke changes that, so yes, I am comfortable with his being awarded. However, the VC carries with it a certain amount of prestige and public profile, if they were aware of the alleged war crimes, perhaps something a little less high profile should have been in order. And just as he is entitled to accolades for some of his behaviour, he should also be held to account for others.

That's the difficulty that awarding Valor medals is now becoming

I'm of the view that the VC should be awards based purely on the act of valour in battle. Whether the guy is a hit bloke or not or has some past unsavoury history, that shouldn't be a factor in awarding the VC

I can see a near future where recipients are vetted before receiving the honor

 

[Gough]

To become an SAS member in the first place I'm not sure that you're going to be the sort of bloke you'd happily take home to meet mum, or have your daughter introduce you to.

 

[CatFan79]

The guy has the perfect look, big guy, chiseled jaw etc. Give him a VC, what a perfect advertisement for our continued occupation of a country we had no right to invade in the first place. Not to mention the lies we're fed regarding why we're actually there.

Glorifying soldiers has always been a form of war propaganda.

 

[Freo Big Fella]

To become an SAS member in the first place I'm not sure that you're going to be the sort of bloke you'd happily take home to meet mum, or have your daughter introduce you to.

This - behind enemy lines in Afghanistan at that time is a pretty singular situation to be thrown into. I don't know how productive ex post facto speculation really is.

What I find interesting is the desire (both my Murdoch and by Seven West - where Roberts-Smith works) as some sort of leftist conspiracy to discredit the SAS, when reading between the lines this seems to be coming from ex-regiment figures who seem to be a bit shitty with former colleagues building media and political careers off the back of their collective achievements.

If the investigation uncovers genuine war crimes (deliberate shooting of civilians, torture of prisoners etc) there needs to be action and those involved need to be prosecuted. Pinging people for split-second decisions they got wrong in battle situations though? I don't know if that's as fair.

 

[CheapCharlie]

To become an SAS member in the first place I'm not sure that you're going to be the sort of bloke you'd happily take home to meet mum, or have your daughter introduce you to.

From my experience, I'd say the opposite

 

[CheapCharlie]

I could envision certain situations where a person might forfeit the right to the award, but it would have to be something beyond the pale.

What situations can you see that the person might forfeit the award?

If the person was,post award,found to have not done the action which led to receiving the award, I can see a case there

 

[JackOutback]

That's the difficulty that awarding Valor medals is now becoming

I'm of the view that the VC should be awards based purely on the act of valour in battle. Whether the guy is a hit bloke or not or has some past unsavoury history, that shouldn't be a factor in awarding the VC

I can see a near future where recipients are vetted before receiving the honor

I agree that medals are awarded for actions on the battlefield, and as I said, being a s**t bloke won't disqualify you. War crimes should; murdering innocent civilians suggests one's valor is malleable at best.

 

[Malifice]

What situations can you see that the person might forfeit the award?

If the person was,post award,found to have not done the action which led to receiving the award, I can see a case there

8 VCs were stripped off British Soldiers for subsequent bad conduct (mostly minor offences) at the turn of last century until King George used his royal prerogative to stop it happening (and it hasnt happened since). That was the old Imperial VC that Australians used to be awarded till 1991.

Under the Letters Patent that establish the award of the separate 'VC for Australia' in 1991, Her Majesty has provided that the Governor General of the Commonwealth of Australia can remove the entitlement to the VC after the award of it (or of any other Gallantry award).

No guidelines are given in the Letters Patent as to when the GG should exercise this power.

I would expect that a recipient of the award, who subsequently engages in gross misconduct or serious offending would expect a review as to their ongoing entitlement of the award. It would take something pretty serious though.

Examples include treason, rape, murder and that kind of thing (which would almost certainly result in removal of the entitlement to wear the VC, use the post-nominals and receive the VC annual pension).

For lesser offences, it would need to be some pretty reprehensible conduct contrary to the notions of 'Gallantry' before your entitlement to the Award got called into question.

 

[CheapCharlie]

I would expect that a recipient of the award, who subsequently engages in gross misconduct or serious offending would expect a review as to their ongoing entitlement of the award. It would take something pretty serious though.

Examples include treason, rape, murder and that kind of thing (which would almost certainly result in removal of the entitlement to wear the VC, use the post-nominals and receive the VC annual pension).

For lesser offences, it would need to be some pretty reprehensible conduct contrary to the notions of 'Gallantry' before your entitlement to the Award got called into question.

I wouldn't like to see the VC stripped , even for later murder or assault charges
If the act of bravery was done at the time and the award given for that, it should stand alone

This interesting article came up on a soldier who was stripped of his VC after being convicted of bigamy.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/history/526592/War-veteran-stripped-Victoria-Cross-medal

 

[CheapCharlie]

I agree that medals are awarded for actions on the battlefield, and as I said, being a s**t bloke won't disqualify you. War crimes should; murdering innocent civilians suggests one's valor is malleable at best.

hypothetically..
If someone is awarded a VC for an action then sometime later kills an innocent civilian, should the VC be rescinded?

 

[Malifice]

I wouldn't like to see the VC stripped , even for later murder or assault charges
If the act of bravery was done at the time and the award given for that, it should stand alone

This interesting article came up on a soldier who was stripped of his VC after being convicted of bigamy.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/history/526592/War-veteran-stripped-Victoria-Cross-medal

I disagree. Like any Honor or Award it should be able to be rescinded if your later conduct is particularly bad.