Capt. Robert Semrau Charged With Murder in Afghanistan

[TimBit]

We'll agree to disagree.  And I imagine we have different definitions as to what constitutes "leadership".

But leadership without context is pointless. A CEO is a leader... so can be an academic. A military leader, however, is a member of a professional military, belonging to a nation-state, and therefore must exercise his/her leadership within the context of the law. Otherwise you are an irregular or a mercenary.

 

[zipperhead_cop]

But leadership without context is pointless. A CEO is a leader... so can be an academic. A military leader, however, is a member of a professional military, belonging to a nation-state, and therefore must exercise his/her leadership within the context of the law. Otherwise you are an irregular or a mercenary.

Oh, there is a context to my personal definition, but it seems there are not that many people who "get" it.  And of the ones who do "get" it, there are those who still choose to tow a different line.  My definition is scarier and holds more risk for both myself and my organization(s).  However, in my experience the risk is worth it for the sake of the team and to be true to what I hold dear.  And it isn't a wonton or ill conceived thing either. 

That being said, I'll not get into the weeds on this.  Bottom line IMO, if 2Lt Semrau did put those shots into that dying combatant he had to know somewhere in his mind that at such time as it came to light he would get jackhammered.  Knowing that and doing it anyway because it was the right thing to do, IMO, is a type of leadership. 

It just happens that it isn't the type of leadership our CF will tolerate. 

 

[ArmyRick]

Zipperhead_cop,

I think you pointed it out exactly. It was a solid call but one the CF can not tolerate. I just pray that us and our comrades in arms never have to face such a difficult morale dilema again. It really is catch 22. Do the morally right thing and suffer the legal consequences or do the legally right thing and perhaps suffer the moral consequences (Its obvious 2Lt Semrau has a conscious).

 

[McG]

Isn't that what consideration is?

LoAC does allow consideration of military necessity.  However, if one wants the argue a defence of military necessity, that person will need to show there was a necessity and not maybe a possibility of a necessity. 

Oh, there is a context to my personal definition, but it seems there are not that many people who "get" it.  And of the ones who do "get" it, there are those who still choose to tow a different line.  My definition is scarier and holds more risk for both myself and my organization(s).  However, in my experience the risk is worth it for the sake of the team and to be true to what I hold dear.  And it isn't a wonton or ill conceived thing either. 

Is this going back to your earlier position that a "team player" is someone who will cover-up his fire team partner's gross misconduct even at grave risk to the larger Canadian Forces?  Now a "leader" is someone who will take on-duty action that is perfectly contrary to the clearly understood directions and expectations of the Canadian Forces (also the Canadian public & LoAC for that matter), and then quietly hopes the matter goes unnoticed?  It is those sorts of "leaders" and "team players" that, if allowed to flourish, will bring us into another Somalia incident.

I don't know former Capt Semrau.  He may be an absolutely great guy and a usually above average leader.  However, he did not demonstrate leadership through what he did that day and the subsequent hope that the incident would stay quietly unnoticed.

 

[the 48th regulator]

LoAC does allow consideration of military necessity.  However, if one wants the argue a defence of military necessity, that person will need to show there was a necessity and not maybe a possibility of a necessity. 
Is this going back to your earlier position that a "team player" is someone who will cover-up his fire team partner's gross misconduct even at grave risk to the larger Canadian Forces?  Now a "leader" is someone who will take on-duty action that is perfectly contrary to the clearly understood directions and expectations of the Canadian Forces (also the Canadian public & LoAC for that matter), and then quietly hopes the matter goes unnoticed?  It is those sorts of "leaders" and "team players" that, if allowed to flourish, will bring us into another Somalia incident.

I don't know former Capt Semrau.  He may be an absolutely great guy and a usually above average leader.  However, he did not demonstrate leadership through what he did that day and the subsequent hope that the incident would stay quietly unnoticed.

I am not a fan of doing the whole  type of post, however, MCG you have nailed my complete feeling with regards to what a Leader should be, with your post.

+300

dileas

tess

 

[Jarnhamar]

Speaking generally,

If your father/mother/son/daughter was on their death bed dying, in pain, suffering their last minutes of life and you in your heart (with a dose of common sense) knew they weren't going to make it and they asked you to end their pain and suffering, would you?

Or if they couldn't speak but you knew they had minutes to live in pain and you had a chance to unplug them and let them go quickly you would still insist on keeping them going to suffer those last minutes while help might come so they could most likely die en route to the hospital?

Semrau is guilty of compassion and not letting the chain of command know what he did. Is that worthy of kicking him out of the forces? I'll say no, others of course say yes.

Now a "leader" is someone who will take on-duty action that is perfectly contrary to the clearly understood directions and expectations of the Canadian Forces (also the Canadian public & LoAC for that matter), and then quietly hopes the matter goes unnoticed?  It is those sorts of "leaders" and "team players" that, if allowed to flourish, will bring us into another Somalia incident.

Like our Generals who are having affairs while deployed and sent home, shuffled around and keep their ridiculous pay and rank?  Semrau's actions while more severe were based off compassion and honour, what are our generals basing theirs off of?  :

 

[the 48th regulator]

Speaking generally,

If your father/mother/son/daughter was on their death bed dying, in pain, suffering their last minutes of life and you in your heart (with a dose of common sense) knew they weren't going to make it and they asked you to end their pain and suffering, would you?

Or if they couldn't speak but you knew they had minutes to live in pain and you had a chance to unplug them and let them go quickly you would still insist on keeping them going to suffer those last minutes while help might come so they could most likely die en route to the hospital?

Semrau is guilty of compassion and not letting the chain of command know what he did. Is that worthy of kicking him out of the forces? I'll say no, others of course say yes.


Like our Generals who are having affairs while deployed and sent home, shuffled around and keep their ridiculous pay and rank?  Semrau's actions while more severe were based off compassion and honour, what are our generals basing theirs off of?  :

So what are your thoughts on the former Master Corporal Matchee's leadership decision to dispatch an intruder, of the camp he was stationed in?  He was a leader in a very difficult assignment, had troops look up to him (to the point where they did the deed with him) yet we vilified Matchee for his deeds....

We, as citizens of a Canada, are bound by laws period.  Yet as a leader, Semrau felt he was the law.  We judge the fellow based on what the media has told us. 

Maybe Semrau never intended it to be a "mercy" double tap.  Maybe he intended it to be a hearts and mind campaign.....One to the heart, and one to the mind....

I think this war has thrown our military thinking askew....too many people are sitting on their pedestals and figuring because they have served this mission, that they are much more righteous than every one else..

Stop sanctifying Semrau.  He Phucked up; Period.  Just because our mission allows soldier to end the life of the enemy, does not allow us to pick and choose the word of the law of the land we defend, to suit us.

dileas

tess

 

[ArmyRick]

Don't compare the actions of Clayton Matchee and 2Lt Semrau. End story. Completely different scenarios and situations. Not to mention very different personalities.

 

[the 48th regulator]

Don't compare the actions of Clayton Matchee and 2Lt Semrau. End story. Completely different scenarios and situations. Not to mention very different personalities.

Are they?  Based on what? As I said to you, privately, shall we also exonerate Russel Williams deeds based on his exemplary military leadership?

Semrau has never testified, or spoken in his own words, of his action that day.  We Judge this man based on media excerpts, yet he is such a saintly example of leadership.

As I said in that post, be wary of sanctifying this man.  His duty was to follow the law of Canada, and he didn't.  In my opinion, there is no room for people like him, otherwise I would say that Russel Williams deeds should be canceled by his exemplary leadership.

dileas

tess

 

[ArmyRick]

48th,
you are not reading me loud and clear
1. 2Lt Semrau SHOULD and most definately be charged and convicted for actions. They were unlawfull.
2. As far as most of us can tell, he acted on moral grounds for the dying enemy (Have you ever had to put down a dying pet or have you seen Crimson tide when the sub deputy commander is forced to kill 2 people to save his submarine?) Sometimes acting morally is just plain old damn tough to do (and not always legal)
3. Clayton Matchee tortured and beat a prisoner to death. That is far different than what Semrau did
4. As I have said in previous thread. he chose to act morally (when it conflicted with ROE/LOAC) and he is being punished.

 

[Good2Golf]

All, please, let's keep the discussion as objective as possible, relating the generally understood proceeding of events and the outcome of 2Lt Semrau's court martial and sentencing.  It's understood that there will be differences in perspective amongst members here, but discussion, while emotionally impacted, should remain professional and not become a personalized opinion/counter-opinion devolution. 

Another thread has been created (link here), wherein those who wish to do so can discuss the wider issues of legal/moral divergence as it relates to CF/military operations in contemporary operating environments.

Thanks for your cooperation.

Milnet.ca Staff

 

[armyvern]

Like our Generals who are having affairs while deployed and sent home, shuffled around and keep their ridiculous pay and rank?  Semrau's actions while more severe were based off compassion and honour, what are our generals basing theirs off of?  :

Didn't 2Lt Semrau also get to keep his pay and rank (probably while being shuffled around/not performing his regular duties) until his Court Martial and sentencing occured?

As far as I know, the General's CM has not even begun yet. Shouldn't the General have the benefit of keeping his pay and rank like Semrau did too until his own CM and possible sentencing occurs??

I don't understand your comparison or why you suggest that a general should be treated worse (differently) than a Captain ... especially before that General has been tried or convicted of the alleged offense. Both the former-Captain and the General broke military law ... they are both being treated the same.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Didn't 2Lt Semrau also get to keep his pay and rank (probably while being shuffled around/not performing his regular duties) until his Court Martial and sentencing occured?

As far as I know, the General's CM has not even begun yet. Shouldn't the General have the benefit of keeping his pay and rank like Semrau did too until his own CM and possible sentencing occurs??

I don't understand your comparison or why you suggest that a general should be treated worse (differently) than a Captain ... especially before that General has been tried or convicted of the alleged offense. Both the former-Captain and the General broke military law ... they are both being treated the same.

You're totally right!  I was arguing more about the "leadership" angle but I'll save further explination for Good2Golf's tangent thread when I get a chance.

 

[KevinB]

I still want to know the Name and Rank of the CF "Leader" that told Capt Semrau to abandon the Taliban without care.

  I mean if we are kicking now 2Lt. Semrau out, should be at least not follow the chain of command to the heart of potentially unlawful and immoral orders.

 

[Jarnhamar]

I still want to know the Name and Rank of the CF "Leader" that told Capt Semrau to abandon the Taliban without care.

  I mean if we are kicking now 2Lt. Semrau out, should be at least not follow the chain of command to the heart of potentially unlawful and immoral orders.

He was given an order to leave the Taliban as is?

 

[the 48th regulator]

48th,
you are not reading me loud and clear

Oh you are loud, however not clear Rick.  Let me explain why.

1. 2Lt Semrau SHOULD and most definately be charged and convicted for actions. They were unlawfull.

Bingo

2. As far as most of us can tell, he acted on moral grounds for the dying enemy (Have you ever had to put down a dying pet or have you seen Crimson tide when the sub deputy commander is forced to kill 2 people to save his submarine?) Sometimes acting morally is just plain old damn tough to do (and not always legal)

As far as most of us can tell  Should actually read as far as most of us really really hope it was that way.  You want to believe in your heart that Semrau acted in a just and noble manner.  We want to believe that the great leader Semrau, was in the right, and everyone else was wrong for forcing him to kill a hurt man.  The truth is, we do not know what actually took place.  Semrau has never spoken, and when he does, truthfully we will never know what went through his mind.  Was it out of mercy?  Was it out of Anger, frustration, Joy?  We will never know, however, there is a law in place where we should not have to second guess.  He broke that law.

3. Clayton Matchee tortured and beat a prisoner to death. That is far different than what Semrau did

Why?  He thought he was doing the right thing, by teaching the kid a lesson, and sending a message to all others that they must never infiltrate the camp.  This would aid in defending him and his buddies.

You see how things can be sent askew, with regards to feelings?  That is why there are laws in place.  Thou shall not kill.  And just because our Government sends you to war, does not give you the card Blanche to kill people based on what you feel is right.

4. As I have said in previous thread. he chose to act morally (when it conflicted with ROE/LOAC) and he is being punished.

And as I said in this post, and in past you wish and hope he acted morally.  And even if he did, that still breaks the law of the land.  As a great leader, he should have put that above all else, in trying times .

I shall say no more in this thread, and carry on the morale debate either via PM or the other thread that was created.

dileas

tess

 

[Good2Golf]

Posts related to overall legal/ethical issues moved to the new ethical/legal thread.

Milnet.ca Staff

 

[PuckChaser]

Didn't see this already posted, but here's the PDF of the sentencing report.

http://www.jmc-cmj.forces.gc.ca/dec/2010/doc/2010cm4010-eng.pdf

One interesting thing I found is that the judge used American Military court martial results as part of his rationale behind the sentencing.... shouldn't he only be looking at Canadian cases and precedent?

 

[Edward Campbell]

Didn't see this already posted, but here's the PDF of the sentencing report.

http://www.jmc-cmj.forces.gc.ca/dec/2010/doc/2010cm4010-eng.pdf

One interesting thing I found is that the judge used American Military court martial results as part of his rationale behind the sentencing.... shouldn't he only be looking at Canadian cases and precedent?

Thank you for that. I fully understand LCol Pdrron's reasoning; his opinions are clear and cogent and, obviously, well and fairly grounded in fact and law.

 

[vonGarvin]

One interesting thing I found is that the judge used American Military court martial results as part of his rationale behind the sentencing.... shouldn't he only be looking at Canadian cases and precedent?

No.  As I understand things, any similar laws and sets of laws can be used as precedent.