Better tried by twelve than carried by six.

The most succinct comment I saw in regard to this story was "Ridiculous.", and that it certainly is.

The bare bones:

'Capt. Robert Semrau is accused of shooting, "with intent to kill," an unarmed male civilian during an October battle in which Afghan, Canadian and British soldiers defended the capital of Helmand province, Lashkar Gah, from an insurgent attack.' I personally commend him on shooting "with intent to kill", as that is the only way to do it, but there are others that seem to differ.

There was a three-day battle resulting in over 100 dead bad guys (Taliban, etc.), which is indicative of, hmm, let me think, a war, maybe? In fact it's a Counter-Insurgency fight, the messiest type against an enemy that doesn't wear uniforms. It also takes place in a country that has now seen three straight generations of war, and the locals know to keep out of situations like this.

That last fact is one that you won't see in the papers too much, but EVERYONE in Afghanistan knows to stay away from battles, troops in contact (TICs)and get out of the way of our convoys. There are no spectators for a big fight; if there was an apparently unarmed Fighting Age Male (FAM) he was possibly a suicide bomber, most likely a spotter.

The charges against Capt. Semrau are bullshit and will most likely quietly be dropped or he'll be found Not Guilty at a Court Martial. I don't have any information on this other than the news report, but I've been in his position ('tho I never had to shoot anyone) and I know that the troops can't afford to be wondering if they'll be charged for doing what needs to be done under the circumstances.

If the media or the Army think the locals need this foolishness, here's what the senior ANA officer on the ground (most likely a former Mujaheddin with decades of fighting experience in his homeland) had to say:

'On Thursday, an Afghan army general who was present during the battle said he had not heard of any soldier engaging in "inappropriate conduct" in connection with death of the suspected insurgent.

According to Gen. Sher Muhammad Zazai, so many Taliban militants were killed that it would be hard to say how each of them died.'

There is a bit more background in the North Bay Nugget, of all places, but none of that suggests to me that anybody's going to jail over this. Regardless, I'd be most interested to know how this even became an issue, let alone turned into a news story and charges against a guy sent to do a highly dangerous job in a shit-hole part of a failed country that is no threat to Canada. I have a lot of previous posts about what I think of Afghanistan, but this is a new angle.

Our soldiers are put in bad situations requiring judgement calls, and unless Capt. Semrau tied this guy up and put a bullet in the back of his head, there is no crime or rational basis for charges. Kids will watch you over there, at least as long as it's safe to do so, but if FAMs are looking at you immediately before or after a major battle in an unstable area, they are up to something. If buddy was watching us and talking to people on a cell phone or radio, that only means one thing and that's a belligerent activity.

"Unarmed observer" in this context is not a UN drone put somewhere to report on things that nobody has any intention of doing anything about. They report on troop strengths, movements, timings, tactics, equipment, and even spot for mortars and ambushes. Again, I don't have the facts, but this is to try to give the uninitiated some idea of why someone who is not obviously armed could be considered a legitimate military target. The suicide bomber thing is too obvious as well.

As for a "coverup", whoever thinks that is the cause of the delay between incident and it making the news has no clue about how ponderously administrative things move in the military.

I hope this whole thing disappears as soon as legally possible, but Capt Semrau's tour is now ruined if the fighting, IEDs, and constant low-level stress didn't manage to do it already. Again I speak from experience that frequently in a war zone your most implacable enemy is the military/political bureaucracy, NOT the opposition. I wish Rob the best of luck against his new enemies: the media and the Military Justice System.