President Trump: Making America Great Again...

[Moliere]

Team TDS only cares about kids dying to the extent that the deaths can be leveraged as a cudgel against Trump.

Like I said, not all dead brown kids are created equal.

Waters right. He’s offensive, but right.

[Commando]

Team TDS only cares about kids dying to the extent that the deaths can be leveraged as a cudgel against Trump.

Like I said, not all dead brown kids are created equal.

Uh huh. Whereas you don't care about kids dying at all where Trump and his policies are responsible. Especially if they're brown. No need to clarify where you stand- we get it.

[frank ryan]

Uh huh. Whereas you don't care about kids dying at all where Trump and his policies are responsible. Especially if they're brown. No need to clarify where you stand- we get it.

I'm sure you've never done any pro-bono work or stuff of the sort to help immigrant children, whereas Walter has dedicated his life to helping Pakistani kids.

Walter is the one with Trump Derangement Syndrome, challenging all criticism of the man, only arguing with his critics on this board.

[Bo Diddley]

Maybe United American Patriots can talk Trump into pardoning one more war criminal. He would never do that, would he?

While celebrating recent pardons of military service members either convicted of or charged with war crimes, the nonprofit military justice advocacy group United American Patriots announced that the next individual they’ll support – Army Staff Sgt. Robert Bales.

Bales is currently serving a life sentence without parole in the military prison at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas after he pleaded guilty to killing 16 Afghans, while on deployment in the Panjwai district, Kandahar province, Afghanistan on March 11, 2012. The act has been called one of the worst atrocities of the war.

[frank ryan]

Maybe United American Patriots can talk Trump into pardoning one more war criminal. He would never do that, would he?

Disgusting

[Eddie]

Never having been in combat - so having no understanding of the stress involved and the high emotions of life and death and watching your buddies go down - I tend to take a pretty forgiving approach to decisions that soldiers (and police, really) are making in a split second that may result in the wrong people being harmed and killed. Not that it's OK - but I understand that the work they do is messy and sometimes tragic mistakes are made.

All that aside - there are also situations where known atrocities are committed by people who are clearly bad actors. What would be the motivation of this group of veterans to defend someone who is clearly doing something bad? In my profession - we want those kinds of people stomped out to keep the rest of us from getting a bad reputation. Do military personnel see it differently?

[Goatnapper'96]

Never having been in combat - so having no understanding of the stress involved and the high emotions of life and death and watching your buddies go down - I tend to take a pretty forgiving approach to decisions that soldiers (and police, really) are making in a split second that may result in the wrong people being harmed and killed. Not that it's OK - but I understand that the work they do is messy and sometimes tragic mistakes are made.

All that aside - there are also situations where known atrocities are committed by people who are clearly bad actors. What would be the motivation of this group of veterans to defend someone who is clearly doing something bad? In my profession - we want those kinds of people stomped out to keep the rest of us from getting a bad reputation. Do military personnel see it differently?

I think it is becoming a tribal oneupmanship. The Democrat President pardons or commutes the sentence of a preferred member of one of their tribe's beloved identities. So now the Republican is throwing red meat to one of their identities. I don't think there is a great deal of analysis that includes rule of law, but a lot of analysis of who this might please and whose head this might make explode.

These types of calls are best made by the military judicial system and it already spoke. Those decision makers have the experience to fight through the fog of combat to fairly adjudicate the laws that govern men and women in uniform.

[Bo Diddley]

I think it is becoming a tribal oneupmanship. The Democrat President pardons or commutes the sentence of a preferred member of one of their tribe's beloved identities. So now the Republican is throwing red meat to one of their identities. I don't think there is a great deal of analysis that includes rule of law, but a lot of analysis of who this might please and whose head this might make explode.

These types of calls are best made by the military judicial system and it already spoke. Those decision makers have the experience to fight through the fog of combat to fairly adjudicate the laws that govern men and women in uniform.

I think you're spot on here, both identifying the motivation for the pardons, and who should determine when a soldier crosses the line.

I've seen firsthand the negative effects of soldier misconduct. Our engineer battalion spent a year in Baghdad working on various projects that built a rapport with the people there--rebuilding schools, repairing the 14th of July suspension bridge, repairing the city zoo, etc. This scandal hit just before we came back home, and our rapport with the people was gutted. It felt like all of the good work and good will that we worked so hard to do was undone.

I have a lot of empathy and love for my brothers and sisters who put it all on the line, and experience the horrors of war. The military justice system is fair because a jury of your peers are the ones best qualified to pass judgement on your actions as a soldier. I'm sickened by what's going on right now to undercut the UCMJ.

*This statement represents my own personal opinion, and is in no way endorsed by the Utah National Guard or the United States Army.

[Eddie]

Thanks, Goat & Bo - what you're saying makes sense to me as well.

If you don't mind me asking now that I've had a minute to read the article above - their argument is that this group doesn't think the men in question
got a fair or constitutional trial? What is the biggest different between a civilian trial and a military one? I'm just trying to figure out why they would think a military trial somehow violates rights and isn't as fair as a civilian trial. Particularly since they seem to be arguing not that things were done in this particular case that could've made it unfair - but that military trials in general are unfair.

[Commando]

Thanks, Goat & Bo - what you're saying makes sense to me as well.

If you don't mind me asking now that I've had a minute to read the article above - their argument is that this group doesn't think the men in question
got a fair or constitutional trial? What is the biggest different between a civilian trial and a military one? I'm just trying to figure out why they would think a military trial somehow violates rights and isn't as fair as a civilian trial. Particularly since they seem to be arguing not that things were done in this particular case that could've made it unfair - but that military trials in general are unfair.

Are they complaining that the burden of proof is lower for the prosecution in a military trial? Could that be because the stakes are lower for soldiers that commit murder?

[Bo Diddley]

Are they complaining that the burden of proof is lower for the prosecution in a military trial? Could that be because the stakes are lower for soldiers that commit murder?

I'm not familiar with a lower burden of proof. Pretty sure it's still BRD. The complaints I've heard was that there was something akin to a witch hunt going on.

[Commando]

I'm not familiar with a lower burden of proof. Pretty sure it's still BRD. The complaints I've heard was that there was something akin to a witch hunt going on.

Me neither- I'm just guessing, since that kind of charge in a civilian setting would carry a BRD burden, and maybe it's lower for the JAGs- no idea.

[Commando]

I'm not familiar with a lower burden of proof. Pretty sure it's still BRD. The complaints I've heard was that there was something akin to a witch hunt going on.

Sounds legit. Gee, where have I heard that before?

[Bo Diddley]

Thanks, Goat & Bo - what you're saying makes sense to me as well.

If you don't mind me asking now that I've had a minute to read the article above - their argument is that this group doesn't think the men in question
got a fair or constitutional trial? What is the biggest different between a civilian trial and a military one? I'm just trying to figure out why they would think a military trial somehow violates rights and isn't as fair as a civilian trial. Particularly since they seem to be arguing not that things were done in this particular case that could've made it unfair - but that military trials in general are unfair.

JP could do a much better job in answering your questions, but I'll add my 2 cents. UCMJ serves to keep good order and discipline in the ranks. In some ways, it reminds me of administrative law. The military is the employer, and UCMJ serves as a deterrent to breaking the rules. In some ways, it serves to fill the void when crimes are committed in a combat zone. What are you going to do, turn the soldier over to the locals?

I'm pretty sure the Supreme Court ruled that they have jurisdiction over UCMJ. I'm not sure what the basis is for calling UCMJ unconstitutional. If the SC is on board, I think it should be good 2 go.

[frank ryan]

I think it is becoming a tribal oneupmanship. The Democrat President pardons or commutes the sentence of a preferred member of one of their tribe's beloved identities. So now the Republican is throwing red meat to one of their identities. I don't think there is a great deal of analysis that includes rule of law, but a lot of analysis of who this might please and whose head this might make explode.

These types of calls are best made by the military judicial system and it already spoke. Those decision makers have the experience to fight through the fog of combat to fairly adjudicate the laws that govern men and women in uniform.

Pardoning war criminals is a newer development. Trump has been much willing to use the pardon for political reasons much more so than his recent predecessors from either party. Resist the urge to act like his behavior is typical or normal when it is not.