Thread: Should they be prosecuted???

The whole drug dealer and returning the money is very different from this. They are surveying out country over there and the represent the USA so I feel yes they should be prosecuted.
Just my $.02

No mixed feelings at all, they stole it, they get prosecuted. "WHO" it was stolen from is not for them to decide and makes no difference anyway. They are representatives of the United States and should be above reproach. Hope they enjoy their trip to Kansas. (Ft. Levenworth)

I cannot believe some referred to it as a " bonus"

A theif is a theif...........No matter what clothes he's wearing.....

I am not saying that I agree that they took the money... I am wondering whats the differance in taking money that (at this point) belongs to no-one and them taking gold plated faucets and etc. Is there still such a thing as "spoils of war"?

Originally posted by urso8up
The whole drug dealer and returning the money is very different from this.

Not so.

Moneys found, both belonging to bad or illegal elements would put this in a very simular boat. Just because of the amount of money is greater doesnt make it any more right or wrong...

Originally posted by Tboy
I am not saying that I agree that they took the money... I am wondering whats the differance in taking money that (at this point) belongs to no-one and them taking gold plated faucets and etc. Is there still such a thing as "spoils of war"?

WOAH! Back the truck up! The "spoils of war" is something ENTIRELY different and does NOT apply to the common soldier, sailor, airman or marine. The spoils of war is a generic term applied to the advantages the victorious government takes over the defeated. In the case of the U.S., we do NOT recognize those advantages and, instead, seek to rebuild the counties we defeat in war and strive to make them our allies.

P.S. To say the money doesn't "belong" to someone is a tad short-sighted, don't you think? How about the Iraqi people?

Originally posted by ALBOB
How about the Iraqi people?

Thats kinda what I was thinking too. We went sent there to liberate the people, not to steel money that could go towards rebuilding thier country.

They should get spanked but jail, NO

Just too much to handle

GREED, ah shit just make um walk home

Originally posted by tidalwaverus
They should get spanked but jail, NO

How do you figure that? If I was to steel $4mil of you money under any circumstances you`d want my ass in jail right?

I agree...they stole it, they get prosecuted. Is that one of the cases where if no one claims it ...then the finder gets it?

When I first read the question about keeping it or not if I found money...I said yes. But when I thought about it...I would be to scared of getting caught. I have no money now and if I started spending money, someone would get suspicious. And if I didn't spend it then whats the use in stealing it?

There are already enough people in this world who do not like Americans and what they are doing in Iraq. This episode is just going to make matters worse. They need to be dealt with harshly.

Let's see. They stole the money in Iraq?
What is the punishment for stealing in Iraq?

just call them stumpy!

P.S. To say the money doesn't "belong" to someone is a tad short-sighted, don't you think? How about the Iraqi people?

This was the reason for my post. For something to be stolen, it first has to belong to someone. Who's money is it? If it was saddam's, I agree it is the Iraqi peoples money. If it was not for him or the Iraqi people then would it be stealing?

This are the kinds of questions that will come up in court if these guys are prosecuted.

I am kinda playing the devils advocate on this one. I strongly believe in allways doing the "right thing" IE not stealing...

not trying to start an arguement, just a debate.

Originally posted by CaptainDeadlift

Let's see. They stole the money in Iraq?
What is the punishment for stealing in Iraq?

When in Rome.......

I will say that though many may think they should be prosecuted under Iraqi law I have no problems with them being sent home to be delt with, though this will no doubt be blown to huge proportions if it is not truely delt with.

Originally posted by Tboy
This was the reason for my post. For something to be stolen, it first has to belong to someone. Who's money is it? If it was saddam's, I agree it is the Iraqi peoples money. If it was not for him or the Iraqi people then would it be stealing?

I think it is just as important to ask was it THEIR money? If the answer is no, then it does not matter whose it was, its still stolen.................the fact they hid the money in trees, eskys, glove boxes etc kinda points to the fact they knew they went doing the right thing.

Originally posted by Tboy
This was the reason for my post. For something to be stolen, it first has to belong to someone. Who's money is it? If it was saddam's, I agree it is the Iraqi peoples money. If it was not for him or the Iraqi people then would it be stealing?

OK, now I see where you're coming from. My bottom line is that it belongs to the Iraqi people. No, I have absolutely no proof to back that up but I can definitely back up the statement that it's not the soldier's money. They stole it. From who doesn't matter, the fact is that they stole it. Prosecute them.

Originally posted by kuso
I think it is just as important to ask was it THEIR money? If the answer is no, then it does not matter whose it was, its still stolen.................the fact they hid the money in trees, eskys, glove boxes etc kinda points to the fact they knew they went doing the right thing.

I agree, no doubt they knew they were doing something they were not supposed to... Why else would they hide it?

Again, to play the devils advocate. Shouldn't all the gold doubloons found in the gulf and other areas go back to Spain for the spainyard people? The differance of time and place the money is found shouldnt matter, right?

All I'm saying is they are going to have a hard time prosecuting these guys if they can't prove that it actually belonged to someone in the first place.

Now what would completely change the story is, if the money was found, put under lock and key, and then they took it from whomever was guarding it.

Originally posted by Tboy Now what would completely change the story is, if the money was found, put under lock and key, and then they took it from whomever was guarding it.

In that case, story changed. The soldiers who stole it were SUPPOSED to be putting it under lock and key and guarding it. In other words, if you let the fox guard the henhouse and find out the fox is eating the hens, what do you do to the fox?

Originally posted by ALBOB
you let the fox guard the henhouse and find out the fox is eating the hens, what do you do to the fox?

You shoot it, stuff it and put it on the wall.

It's just sad, way too much money in cash. I think it's just
( gold fever) greed got the best of them. alittle is one thing but that's way too much temptation.

Originally posted by tidalwaverus alittle is one thing but that's way too much temptation.

Not that anybody's in danger of thinking I'm a little angel but, how it could be smuggled out without detection was the very first thing that went through my mind when I saw the report about it being found.

Originally posted by ALBOB
Not that anybody's in danger of thinking I'm a little angel but, how it could be smuggled out without detection was the very first thing that went through my mind when I saw the report about it being found.

For that much money, you could leave it burried and come back later as a tourist to pick it up, put it in a swiss account, retire to Jamaca and live like a king

Or something like that.

Originally posted by Tboy retire to Jamaca and live like a king

I think that's where these guys fucked up, they got greedy. They tried to take more than they could handle safely.










Nice stream of consciousness, eh? One minute we're condemning them for being thiefs and the next we're analyzing how we could have done it better.

Originally posted by ALBOB
Nice stream of consciousness, eh? One minute we're condemning them for being thiefs and the next we're analyzing how we could have done it better.

You started it. I was simply humoring your illegal thoughts on the matter.

Thief.

Originally posted by Tboy I was simply humoring your illegal thoughts on the matter.

Guilt by association.

My first thought was this..............they did not steal in the USA. So how can they prosecute them here??(war crimes?) Try them under Iraqi law!!

If a U.S. serviceman committs a crime outside of a military installation he is normally governed by the local laws. If the crime is committed ON a military installation or if there are extenuating circumstances about the crime that was committed off the installation he is governed by the Uniform Code of Military Justice. (UCMJ)(Signed into law by Harry S. Truman) In this case the extenuating circumstance would be what the American judicial system would define as "cruel and unusual punishment", they'd get their hands chopped off. For that reason these idiots are going to be brought back to the U.S. and face a military trial better know as a Courts Martial.