wikileaks.org releases classified US military video depicting killing of civilians

[NuclearFart]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Its an unmarked vehicle. As far as the pilot is concerned its an insurgent operated vehicle.

I'm betting that the standard ROE is that anyone that comes into contact with suspected insurgents or attempts to aid them is considered to be enemy combatants.

Yeah I see that, but the clear intent of that van is to help an injured human, not engage the flying gun ships.

[ResAlien]

Originally Posted by NuclearFart

Yeah I see that, but the clear intent of that van is to help an injured human, not engage the flying gun ships.

"The clear intent" says the internet. Live? The intent may have been to round up more arms and engage the gunship. Dammit, again I say none of us know what happens in the line of fire, save for CC and a few others. There is no clear intent in war, only the perception of the situation. Unfortunately for these folks, that perception led to getting swiss cheesed by gunfire.

Sure, that sounds callous, but it is the way it is. It is a war over there right now, if you're in that gunship are you letting potential enemies run off with weapons to shoot you down? No, you're not.

[Berger_4_]

Nevermind, Res said it much more better-er.

[NuclearFart]

Originally Posted by Azure

Usually ambulances are identified by the 'cross' symbol.

The cross symbol is a luxury of a 1st world army. The absence of it doesn't change the intent.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Berger_4_

Now, I'm not an member of the armed forces, nor will I ever be, but I think when you go to work and it's kill or be killed, it's a shoot-first, ask questions after sort of thing.

Yeah, but this looks like a "shoot first, don't ask questions later" sort of a thing. They've (apparently) been hiding this footage for three years. If it was all on the up-and-up, there ain't no reason to keep it in the vault.

I do think it was an honest mistake going by just what they were saying on the radio. I doubt they'd be so cavalier about if they knew they'd just killed a bunch of innocent people and shot up a van with children in it.

But an honest mistake is still a mistake. There were a bunch of dead, unarmed people on that street. Maybe we can forgive the guy who shot them all, but the locals probably don't feel the same way.

[pylon]

This is not true "Combat" though. Nobody was fired upon, and no threat had truly been identified. It is not uncommon for people in that region to walk around with machine guns... hell they take them to weddings. Take a dozen of those helicopters back in time, and you would could win WWI with them. This is 2 guys, in a 100 million dollar helicopter with a cannon on it that will rip a man in two vs. 8 - 12 guys that may or may not have an RPG. And a couple AK 47s. I tend to know a little about weapons, and I have never seen an RPG launcher that looks like a white Canon long zoom lens. This was absolute overkill.

I understand that war = death, and there is always gonna be an imbalance of power. But shooting a crawling maimed dying man? Begging for him to grab for a weapon (his canon rebel) so you can blow him to pieces and get off on it?

Some people say these are "stone cold super pilots" I beg to differ, their monologue kinda makes them sound like juvenille sadistic killers. Real heroes there.... real heroes. But no American will ever look at it from a neutral perspective, and will defend these guys to the grave, even though what they did was horribly wrong, even if it was an honest mistake.

Make sure you kill them all! They don't believe in our way of life and they have lotsa oil.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by PIMking

The generation that fought in ww1 and 2 are completely different than the Vietnam generation. I have family that fought in Nam and the boys just were not into it.

Sure, but that was the end result of a lot of factors. Whole books have been written on how not to fight a war based around America's Vietnam experience.

[ResAlien]

nm.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by pylon

This is not true "Combat" though. Nobody was fired upon, and no threat had truly been identified. It is not uncommon for people in that region to walk around with machine guns... hell they take them to weddings. Take a dozen of those helicopters back in time, and you would could win WWI with them. This is 2 guys, in a 100 million dollar helicopter with a cannon on it that will rip a man in two vs. 8 - 12 guys that may or may not have an RPG. And a couple AK 47s. I tend to know a little about weapons, and I have never seen an RPG launcher that looks like a white Canon long zoom lens. This was absolute overkill.

I understand that war = death, and there is always gonna be an imbalance of power. But shooting a crawling maimed dying man? Begging for him to grab for a weapon (his canon rebel) so you can blow him to pieces and get off on it?

Some people say these are "stone cold super pilots" I beg to differ, their monologue kinda makes them sound like juvenille sadistic killers. Real heroes there.... real heroes. But no American will ever look at it from a neutral perspective, and will defend these guys to the grave, even though what they did was horribly wrong, even if it was an honest mistake.

Make sure you kill them all! They don't believe in our way of life and they have lotsa oil.

This wasn't a patrol. The pilots were on a mission to kill insurgents. Thats why they send out gunships. They saw men carrying weapons including suspected heavy weapons (RPG-7) and saw it as a target of opportunity.

I've mentioned before, with the identification of suspected weapons and the type of warfare thats being experienced there, I'm not so sure that this was as much a mistake as it was an unfortunate and tragic result.

The kids in the van was a terrible thing. However it was an unmarked van and the guy got out to aid suspected insurgents, that made the van a target.

for all we know the van doors could have popped open to reveal a guy with an RPG or a anti-air missile.

[pylon]

Originally Posted by PIMking

That just furthers my point. No real possible way of telling 100% if those were weapons. No way in hell will they lay low and come down on top of them to be 100%.

It's funny how people expect them to know from 2600 feet away (estimate) that's almost a half mile to be 100% of weapons.

So an AK47 can take down an Apache half a mile away? Where's the threat there? You'd be lucky to hit a tree 50 feet away with one of those. They aren't exactly revered for their incredible accuracy. And someone produce an example of an RPG launcher that looks remotely like a Canon Lens.

[PIMking]

Doesn't matter if it's "true combat" or not. People are dead that's combat. Hell Vietnam wasn't a "war" but people died. Congress never declared war on vietnam....

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by pylon

So an AK47 can take down an Apache half a mile away? Where's the threat there? You'd be lucky to hit a tree 50 feet away with one of those. They aren't exactly revered for their incredible accuracy. And someone produce an example of an RPG launcher that looks remotely like a Canon Lens.

You're missing a key point respectfully. Those helicopters aren't necessarily on a defensive mission or stance. Their job is to kill the enemy. They identified weapons. They started circling. They saw what looked like an RPG-7 and they had a suspected shot. At that point it didn't matter if an AK-47 could hurt an apache or not. They were identified as enemy combatants under the rules of engagement, and probably based around the parameter of their patrol briefing.

[PIMking]

The terrorist didn't care that there were kids on those airplanes on 9/11 they didn't care there were kids in the Towers either.

They killed INNOCENT people with that stunt. But did we have to hear an apology from any of them? NO!

It's terrible but it happens.

[pylon]

Originally Posted by ResAlien

No offence (yeah, every mean response has that ahead of it) but you're an idiot. Those men did what they were trained to do, they did their jobs dammit. I was left wing until about 6 hours ago when I started reading this garbage. These are men doing their goddam jobs! Your "No american will look at it from a neutral viewpoint" argument is crap, I'm a Canadian living here and I still defend what they did.

Nice ninja edit BTW.

I am not inferring that war doesn't have casualties, and sometimes innocent ones. I am not questioning "the gold ole boys" defending our freedom. They signed up to do this, and even if they don't like it, they have to do it.

However, the point I am trying to make, is this particular incident is indefensible. I will give you up until the van showing up, that was a tragic error. But blowing away the guys coming to the aid of a maimed man, who are clearly not collecting weapons, just his body, is where it went off the rails, and turned into a murder.

You can call me an idiot all you want, but they did not do their job. It is not their job to kill innocent people........dammit.

[jammies]

The events portrayed weren't censored because they involve soldiers who may or may not have overreacted to events, targeted innocents and thus are open to prosecution under war crime laws - they were censored because they make plain the illusion of "moral" war for the people back home. That people don't understand the conditions of combat and the mindset of soldiers is precisely why there is outrage; it is difficult to sustain belief in an evangelical mission bringing democracy in Iraq when it involves shredding children with gunfire, regardless of the military reasoning behind it.

The American military is a victim of its own success; the only viable strategy against an enemy that has complete air and ground supremacy, and the ability to deliver sufficient targeted strikes to destroy any concentration of force is camouflage; their enemies aren't hiding among the populace because they are cowards, it comes of lack of any other choice. Does this mean that civilian casualties and incidents of this sort are inevitable? Yes, but inevitable is not the same thing as just.

The original Iraq war was necessary, but the second one was certainly not, and therefore "inevitable" actions are tainted by the unnecessary decision to engage in war in the first place; that decision makes unjust all of the following deaths, unavoidable or not, which are borne of its initial impetus.

It is right to be disturbed by the images in this video. THIS is but a random sample of what comes of war - so it is best to be certain that war is better than peace, even if that peace is with a dictator who kills his own people.

[pylon]

Originally Posted by PIMking

The terrorist didn't care that there were kids on those airplanes on 9/11 they didn't care there were kids in the Towers either.

They killed INNOCENT people with that stunt. But did we have to hear an apology from any of them? NO!

It's terrible but it happens.

9/11 was horrible, yes. And the US has more than made up for it with the civilian body count in the middle east.

However, you cannot blame an entire nation for the work of a group of religious extremists, that weren't even Iraqi citizens.

[PIMking]

Originally Posted by pylon

9/11 was horrible, yes. And the US has more than made up for it with the civilian body count in the middle east.

However, you cannot blame an entire nation for the work of a group of religious extremists, that weren't even Iraqi citizens.

How in the Hell do you know that these are Iraqi Citizens? You do know Terrorists are coming from all over the world to fight and just have the chance to kill an American or Canadian or Brit?

So your assumption of them being Iraqi doesn't add up. For all we know they could be Syrian or Saud.

[Berger_4_]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Yeah, but this looks like a "shoot first, don't ask questions later" sort of a thing. They've (apparently) been hiding this footage for three years. If it was all on the up-and-up, there ain't no reason to keep it in the vault.

I do think it was an honest mistake going by just what they were saying on the radio. I doubt they'd be so cavalier about if they knew they'd just killed a bunch of innocent people and shot up a van with children in it.

But an honest mistake is still a mistake. There were a bunch of dead, unarmed people on that street. Maybe we can forgive the guy who shot them all, but the locals probably don't feel the same way.

Do you really think the army would have wanted that footage getting out when there was all that talk of getting out of Iraq? That just would have added more fuel to the fire.

Like CC said, I don't think they're really being cavalier about their actions, it's just that's how guys deal with doing that kind of job. I don't think you can allow yourself to feel bad, because that could potentially get you killed.

To be fair, the group wasn't unarmed. They had AK-47's which most definitely are not American-issued weapons. Who's to say they didn't have an RPG with them? When the gunner identifies what he thinks to be an RPG, the guy on the ground certainly is acting in a suspicious way...from their vantage point, I wouldn't doubt if it looks as though the photographer is taking cover and getting ready to fire at them.

[Berger_4_]

Originally Posted by pylon

However, the point I am trying to make, is this particular incident is indefensible. I will give you up until the van showing up, that was a tragic error. But blowing away the guys coming to the aid of a maimed man, who are clearly not collecting weapons, just his body, is where it went off the rails, and turned into a murder.

The van is in no way marked to look like an ambulance. The gunship's job was to kill insurgents. They engage that first group thinking they are the enemy. When that van pulls up to grab that body, how do they know that there isn't a crew of insurgents sitting in there?

[pylon]

Originally Posted by PIMking

How in the Hell do you know that these are Iraqi Citizens? You do know Terrorists are coming from all over the world to fight and just have the chance to kill an American or Canadian or Brit?

So your assumption of them being Iraqi doesn't add up. For all we know they could be Syrian or Saud.

Yes they deserved to die, you are right. So did the children. It is obvious by the events depicted in that video they were a threat, especially the 2 photographers.

I can see how a trained super cool ice cold mega pilot could mistake this:



for this:



C'mon, anyone with brown skin walking the streets of Iraq deserve to die. They are all responsible, each and every one, for the events of 9/11, because they live there, and are brown, and are defending their country from an invading force that never proved just cause to invade their country ***wmdscoughwmds***. I have been converted and see the light. Go Palin! Heck, Go Limbaugh!

/sarcasm

I am done with this argument. It is too polarizing. I respect many of the posters I disagree with too much to continue an argument that will never be won. Both sides have valid points, but I will not defend the actions of those men, nor pat them on the back for what they did.