Should a soldier be excused if he went on a rampage.

[scandium]

Originally Posted by kiwi_2005

The US have managed to keep there cool for this long apart from the odd killings that shouldn't of happened, that they should be excuse for what recently happened where the soliders involved should be sent home and delt with accordingly but they should note that this is war and terrible things happen therefore treatment instead of prison would be more appropriate. Imagine nearly every day seeing your fellow men some probably very close to you blown to bits or badly injured, with a country that blames you even though your trying to help them.

One could use such arguements to excuse all kinds of behaviour. Not to say that these killings happened in a vacuum, or should be considered that way, but to simply excuse it and give them treatment? What about if the guy's fuse is a little longer and he doesn't blow until after he gets home, then goes on this kind of rampage in his own home town, slaying women and children execution style there? Do you excuse that as well and suggest he simply needs some treatment? One might be tempted to respond "but this was in the heat of the moment," to which I would reply that this is not considered a valid defence in criminal matters and justly so. Sure Iraq is a hell hole, and yes an IED had just gone off. Its also a war zone so I don't see how either of these factors should surprise anyone.