open All Channels
seplocked Out of Pod Experience
blankseplocked Collateral Murder
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 : last (10)

Author Topic

Toshiro GreyHawk
Posted - 2010.04.10 16:10:00 - [241]
 

Originally by: CCP Shadow
Trolling and off-topic comments removed. The thread can keep going, but please keep your discussion on the incident rather than just focusing on the politics which led up to this. Thank you.


Since I have said what I had to say, lack the ability to make an un-political comment about what has gone on - and since arguing with moderators is a waste of time - I will refrain from making any more posts in this thread.

You have a nice day Shadow.


Tigra LeMorte
Gallente
Clarity Incorporated
Zephyris Alliance
Posted - 2010.04.10 21:41:00 - [242]
 

Gosh, it's a sad video to watch. Seen a few of those from recent conflicts. Personally I always find I feel for both the people who've lost their lives and their loved ones but also for the pilots involved.

My feelings: It's war, and war sucks. War is tragic. And as much as we try to put some kind of humane framework within them (RoEs, OFOF, etc) I think at the end of the day it's impossible. As some posters have said; this kind of tragedy has happened many times over the course of history and will happen again.

What's hard for us observers is to fully appreciate all the factors involved. And there's a heck of a lot of them. Perhaps it was gung-ho callousness that brought about the tragedy? Or perhaps simple circumstance effecting human beings. Those pilots are in the middle of a war. Soldiers aren't police, and they're not trained for the role, they are a fighting and killing force, as much as we try to make it 'civil' with 'rules of war' (which imo is kinda an absurd/idealistic concept to begin with - war sucks and by it's very nature it's brutal and it's tragic, for all sides).

Imagine for a moment you're one of those pilots. Imagine then you've been in theatre for months. Every night you try to sleep but your barracks is mortared and you're constantly fearing for your life. Just the day before some of your friends in another Corp. were killed by an IED, and last week two of your fellow pilots died when their helicopter was shot down. Imagine you're also carrying some guilt from that, because when your comrades were shot down you wonder whether you could have acted faster to save them. Now you're depressed, and you've got another 3 months before you head home, your commanders have issued you Red OFOF (order for opening fire) because of how hostile recent local events have been and the resulting threat to coalition forces in that area, so you need little justification to open fire other than believing you are under threat.

What state of mind are you going to be in when you see those people on the ground that day, people who (while innocent) just so happen to look almost exactly like the very real groups of insurgents you've battled many times already.

You're trained to kill. Kill the enemy. This is your job, period. But in these modern conflicts the enemy is faceless, uniformless. All the things you're trained to recognise and filter.

So many factors, it's impossible for us armchair observers to make a judgement call on such a thing. But feeling angry and emotional when seeing such things is completely normal, and we always need a solid and simple reason for such tragedy. Sadly, there rarely is in life, and almost never in war. Neutral

Disregard the war-ish bravado of those pilots in the radio chatter, you hear 'smack talk' like that just here in a pixelated war 'game', of course you're gonna see it in real war - that day will live to haunt them for the rest of their lives, I have no doubt about that, and they too will always question their actions and wonder if they did the right thing on that day. They're not monsters, they're as human as their innocent victims. In one respect those pilots are now as much a victim of war as the people who lost their lives.

Anywho, tl;dr is me. Just my opinion/insight. I'm 32, Australian, and have been enlisted in the Army Reserve for over 10 years, although I've never seen active duty in a warzone. I'm certainly not complaining. ugh

Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2010.04.10 23:06:00 - [243]
 

Originally by: Larkonis Trassler
Originally by: Sokratesz
Originally by: adfadfadfawe
Edited by: adfadfadfawe on 10/04/2010 02:06:39
Whoopsie:

http://gawker.com/5513068/the-full-version-of-the-wikileaks-video-is-missing-30-minutes-of-footage


I don't know how that changes anything besides making the crew look like less of warmongers and more like actual people. The statements made by them are what I would expect in combat, but that doesn't change anything about the video.



You're spinning you wheels sok.


You're gonna have to explain that.

Desudes
Posted - 2010.04.10 23:31:00 - [244]
 

Originally by: Irida Mershkov
Originally by: Desudes
Edited by: Desudes on 10/04/2010 13:11:59
Wonder what the thread would look like if a US humvee filled with soldiers was lit up by a RPG while an Apache circled around with eyes on the trigger man, eyes on what looked to them like a group of men with AKs and they didn't shoot because they wanted to make sure the men weren't just striding around in a war zone with long lense cameras not in distinguishable clothing.

Just curious.

Well that has nothing to do with this discussion so it's point is entirely irrelevant.


What I said is the other side of the coin. You're looking at half a dozen dead GI's vs what you believe to be enemy soldiers- no **** you're gonna open up.

Machanara
Caldari
State War Academy
Posted - 2010.04.11 01:35:00 - [245]
 

Edited by: Machanara on 11/04/2010 01:40:22
Edited by: Machanara on 11/04/2010 01:39:21
Edited by: Machanara on 11/04/2010 01:35:59
Edited by: Machanara on 11/04/2010 01:35:24
Edited by: Machanara on 11/04/2010 01:35:02
Well.....it basically boils down to one thing. Whether you like the war or hate the war doesn't matter in the least.

What matters is that IT IS WAR. And 99% of the people in this thread don't know a flying f*ck about what war really is and what its costs are because they have NEVER been a part of it.

In war....people die. good people. Bad people. Innocent people. Guilty people. Men. Women. Children. Dog. Cats. Gorillas. You name it.....it all ****ing dies in war.

And in those wars BAD calls are made.

But one thing is for sure. If you were NOT THERE then you need to shut your pie hole and keep your criticisms to yourself. You don't even TRY to armchair quarterback a ****ing war!! Or a battle. or a skirmish....unless you were involved in it and just happened to live though it to see the f**ked up nature of how human beings really are. ALL OF THEM!!

So I reiterate... If you were not there and don't know what the **** was going on at that very moment...you need to SHUT THE F*CK UP!!

Oh....and where is the outrage about the genocide from wars down in Africa and in the post- soviet republics? I don't hear any of you whiny *****es crying about the 100's of thousands murdered in THOSE WARS.... where are you screaming about all those dead people...all those MURDERED people?

......yea...thats what I thoughtRolling Eyes Since America isn't involved with those...they don't count. Its a non-starter...Rolling EyesRolling Eyes

sp3cial forc3s
Sileo In Pacis
Posted - 2010.04.11 08:05:00 - [246]
 

The killing of unarmed men in war is strictly a violation of the Geneva Protocol, so there can be no defence for what you seen in this video. It was pretty obvious that if those 12-15 men were insurgents then they would all be carrying ak-47's not just 2-3 of them.

I lol'd at some views in here saying that the dozen men could be setting up an ambush for US ground troops....with there 2 ak's and 2 x cameras and the rest throwing stones and there shoes, people in here defending what they just seen.....GET A GRIP!!!

And yes i have served in the forces.


Tigra LeMorte
Gallente
Clarity Incorporated
Zephyris Alliance
Posted - 2010.04.11 12:49:00 - [247]
 

Originally by: sp3cial forc3s
The killing of unarmed men in war is strictly a violation of the Geneva Protocol, so there can be no defence for what you seen in this video. It was pretty obvious that if those 12-15 men were insurgents then they would all be carrying ak-47's not just 2-3 of them.

If it was that obvious, and the situation that simple, then what we have just seen in this video would never have taken place.

But in reference to the Geneva Convention it would be a crime to wilfully and/or indiscriminantly kill, harm or treat inhumanely unarmed civilians. Did they? To establish that you'd need a trial. That's where the Geneva Convention comes in. If we could prove all that simply from watching a video we'd not even need the convention.

sp3cial forc3s
Sileo In Pacis
Posted - 2010.04.11 14:23:00 - [248]
 

Originally by: Tigra LeMorte
Originally by: sp3cial forc3s
The killing of unarmed men in war is strictly a violation of the Geneva Protocol, so there can be no defence for what you seen in this video. It was pretty obvious that if those 12-15 men were insurgents then they would all be carrying ak-47's not just 2-3 of them.

If it was that obvious, and the situation that simple, then what we have just seen in this video would never have taken place.

But in reference to the Geneva Convention it would be a crime to wilfully and/or indiscriminantly kill, harm or treat inhumanely unarmed civilians. Did they? To establish that you'd need a trial. That's where the Geneva Convention comes in. If we could prove all that simply from watching a video we'd not even need the convention.


Thats the thing though, this video should never of taken place. Lets forget that those unfortunate dozen were actually CIVILIANS. even if they were insurgents the geneva protocol states that if they are unarmed they can not be shot, these are the rules of engagement for the Americans as they are for the British and so on, they suck i know but that is the case. I understand that this is war and civilians are killed but this was ridiculous, insurgents walking around the streets with cameramen and mostly unarmed, don't be so ****ing daft.

End of the day those pilots should of known better, there is no excuse for what occured in that video, rules are laid in place so that events like this dont happen, unfortunately they do. This is what we have come to expect from the US military, shoot first ask questions later, you don't see this behaviour from the British Army.

That is all.



That is all.

feiht'd'ero
Posted - 2010.04.11 15:00:00 - [249]
 

I am afraid The release of this video will cost more lifeís of soldiers, how many gunners will now second guess just in case its not an RPG that takes out 20 buddies, just to appease the Joe public that war is not actually about killing people but about hanging flowers over the enemies heads in the hope they donít blow you up.

Tigra LeMorte
Gallente
Clarity Incorporated
Zephyris Alliance
Posted - 2010.04.11 15:05:00 - [250]
 

Originally by: sp3cial forc3s
This is what we have come to expect from the US military, shoot first ask questions later, you don't see this behaviour from the British Army.

I was almost with you until I got to this silly bit. Wink

But in all seriousness, when you think about it this kind of thing isn't limited at all to war. You often hear about innocent bystanders being hurt in operations by civilian authorities (police pursuits that go bad), children with toy guns being mistaken for real ones and tragically shot as a result, and other such stuff. We don't immediately condemn or vilify the people involved when that happens (well some folks do I guess) as we appreciate there's generally a lot more involved than the video we're shown on the news can convey.

I believe you're just focusing on the fact civilians were shot, kinda 'period'. So it's instant guilty verdict-by-youtube, and despite all the surrounding circumstance (that we can't possibly appreciate) we should immdediately condemn the pilots involved. If that's your view then that's your right ^^ but is also why thankfully fair hearings are made up of juries.

dr doooo
Posted - 2010.04.11 15:11:00 - [251]
 


The most disturbing part for me is the desperation in the gunners voice when he is waiting for the 'go' to shoot the van. That is obviously likely to be a random passer by - someone from the more worthy end of the spectrum of the human race trying to help a person in pain and need. If the gunner is not brain dead he must know this, and yet there is almost panic in his voice that he might miss his chance to kill the 'good Samaritan'. What does that make him?


Tallaran Kouros
Cryptonym Sleepers
Posted - 2010.04.11 15:37:00 - [252]
 

Originally by: Machanara


Oh....and where is the outrage about the genocide from wars down in Africa and in the post- soviet republics? I don't hear any of you whiny *****es crying about the 100's of thousands murdered in THOSE WARS.... where are you screaming about all those dead people...all those MURDERED people?


I can talk about plenty of outrages, be it Rwanda or Kosovo but none of them are topical right now - this is.

Quote:
......yea...thats what I thoughtRolling Eyes Since America isn't involved with those...they don't count. Its a non-starter...Rolling EyesRolling Eyes


They count, but this isn't anything to do with the US per se - it's about pilots making incorrect calls and then the subsequent coverup.

dr doooo
Posted - 2010.04.11 20:35:00 - [253]
 

Originally by: Machanara
Edited by: Machanara on 11/04/2010 01:40:22
Edited by: Machanara on 11/04/2010 01:39:21
Edited by: Machanara on 11/04/2010 01:35:59
Edited by: Machanara on 11/04/2010 01:35:24
Edited by: Machanara on 11/04/2010 01:35:02
Well.....it basically boils down to one thing. Whether you like the war or hate the war doesn't matter in the least.

What matters is that IT IS WAR. And 99% of the people in this thread don't know a flying f*ck about what war really is and what its costs are because they have NEVER been a part of it.

In war....people die. good people. Bad people. Innocent people. Guilty people. Men. Women. Children. Dog. Cats. Gorillas. You name it.....it all ****ing dies in war.

And in those wars BAD calls are made.

But one thing is for sure. If you were NOT THERE then you need to shut your pie hole and keep your criticisms to yourself. You don't even TRY to armchair quarterback a ****ing war!! Or a battle. or a skirmish....unless you were involved in it and just happened to live though it to see the f**ked up nature of how human beings really are. ALL OF THEM!!

So I reiterate... If you were not there and don't know what the **** was going on at that very moment...you need to SHUT THE F*CK UP!!

Oh....and where is the outrage about the genocide from wars down in Africa and in the post- soviet republics? I don't hear any of you whiny *****es crying about the 100's of thousands murdered in THOSE WARS.... where are you screaming about all those dead people...all those MURDERED people?

......yea...thats what I thoughtRolling Eyes Since America isn't involved with those...they don't count. Its a non-starter...Rolling EyesRolling Eyes


I realise that from the number of your edits you are probably drunk at least, but.. You believe that young soldiers should not be questioned about, or answerable for, their actions? How do you define war? What distinguishes illegal occupation from terrorism apart from numbers and ideology? The UN was set up with very noble intentions, it's a shame those intentions aren't shared by all nations.


Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2010.04.12 00:23:00 - [254]
 

Originally by: Machanara
Edited by: Machanara on 11/04/2010 01:40:22
Edited by: Machanara on 11/04/2010 01:39:21
Edited by: Machanara on 11/04/2010 01:35:59
Edited by: Machanara on 11/04/2010 01:35:24
Edited by: Machanara on 11/04/2010 01:35:02
Well.....it basically boils down to one thing. Whether you like the war or hate the war doesn't matter in the least.

What matters is that IT IS WAR. And 99% of the people in this thread don't know a flying f*ck about what war really is and what its costs are because they have NEVER been a part of it.

In war....people die. good people. Bad people. Innocent people. Guilty people. Men. Women. Children. Dog. Cats. Gorillas. You name it.....it all ****ing dies in war.

And in those wars BAD calls are made.

But one thing is for sure. If you were NOT THERE then you need to shut your pie hole and keep your criticisms to yourself. You don't even TRY to armchair quarterback a ****ing war!! Or a battle. or a skirmish....unless you were involved in it and just happened to live though it to see the f**ked up nature of how human beings really are. ALL OF THEM!!

So I reiterate... If you were not there and don't know what the **** was going on at that very moment...you need to SHUT THE F*CK UP!!

Oh....and where is the outrage about the genocide from wars down in Africa and in the post- soviet republics? I don't hear any of you whiny *****es crying about the 100's of thousands murdered in THOSE WARS.... where are you screaming about all those dead people...all those MURDERED people?

......yea...thats what I thoughtRolling Eyes Since America isn't involved with those...they don't count. Its a non-starter...Rolling EyesRolling Eyes


hurpaderp?

Ademaro Imre
Caldari
Posted - 2010.04.12 03:26:00 - [255]
 

This is a good lesson.

When non-combatants and Reuters journalists want to hang out with Muqtada al Sadr's Medhi Army militia, Richard Marcinko's quote "Doom on you" applies.

Ademaro Imre
Caldari
Posted - 2010.04.12 05:20:00 - [256]
 

Edited by: Ademaro Imre on 12/04/2010 05:52:45

Originally by: Irida Mershkov


For clarity: These people were photographers being escorted by armed guards, these weapons were legal, and could be carried freely throughout the location, just because they were armed does not automatically make them insurgents, as as part of the Rules of Engagement by the US, does not make them valid targets unless they open fire. The photographers, as mentioned, were photographers, and the van was a father taking his children to school.

The Apache was in the area responding to small-arms fire from that area of the city, a city, full of civilians remember now, and the Apache gunners decision was to light up the very first armed person he saw after obtaining permission to fire, note that throughout the gif, the pilot has been stressing that these are people are armed with intent to harm others, this was not shown in any circumstance.


You need to get a grip with some reality and actually view footage, not poorly constructed animated .gifs. These pilots were assigned to protect ground forces that had been, and currently were under sporadic attack for hours. If they had guns and were protecting anyone, they would be protecting them as they escorted them AWAY from the area.

Clarity, the photographers had armed guards? You made that out in the canon footage? What in the footage, or your animated gifs, suggested that these men were guarding the photographers as opposed to the typical practice of the insurgents to have their own members photograph their attacks for recruitment purposes? And, how were you even able to make out the cameras? And while you were doing that - did you see the press badges or photogrpaher vests that are typically worn by photographers to indicate they are non-combatants?

For your clarity purposes, the gun cameras did not show that coalition forces were 100 meters from these armed insurgents. And in fact, in eyesight of these armed men, as - the cameras had photos of the coalition forces on them.

A father taking his children to school? You discerned that from your gifs as well? You would keep your children in your vehicle while you visit a site already in gunsights, and coincidentally, have other men following your van on its way to school and exiting buildings to assist you whenever you stop? That would be an odd practice, taking your kids to school practicing the same procedures as insurgents do - have vans, drivers and crews ready to escape pre-planned locations.

Is also clear that the rules for engagement for that battle were, any vehicles supporting insurgents were to be disabled. The pilots reported that a van was picking up bodies and wanted the confirmation to shoot, and that is all they needed. When it was confirmed that a van was doing it - permission to engage was given. There are three parties involved, two Apache crews and whoever was coordinating, either an air or ground officer, knowing full well and entire company of soldiers would be there to take pictures of their excellent handywork. So - you are trying to implicate over 7 pilots low in the chain of command, and then, an entire company of soldiers who then went about to recover the bodies, who were then under fire at the same location by insurgents. You really think someone went to all kinds of work involving hundreds of men, instead of just simply forwarding a request to court marshal 7 men? It was all legal, and - it was nice shooting. One doesn't get to see such gun camera footage very often.

There is a reason Reuters has been spiking and or downplaying this story; their reporters went rogue on them.

Irida Mershkov
Gallente
The Reformed
Chaos Theory Alliance
Posted - 2010.04.12 08:58:00 - [257]
 

Edited by: Irida Mershkov on 12/04/2010 08:59:24
^^^^ I'll get back to your post when I get back from work.

Originally by: Machanara
Edited by: Machanara on 11/04/2010 01:40:22
Edited by: Machanara on 11/04/2010 01:39:21
Edited by: Machanara on 11/04/2010 01:35:59
Edited by: Machanara on 11/04/2010 01:35:24
Edited by: Machanara on 11/04/2010 01:35:02
Well.....it basically boils down to one thing. Whether you like the war or hate the war doesn't matter in the least.

What matters is that IT IS WAR. And 99% of the people in this thread don't know a flying f*ck about what war really is and what its costs are because they have NEVER been a part of it.

In war....people die. good people. Bad people. Innocent people. Guilty people. Men. Women. Children. Dog. Cats. Gorillas. You name it.....it all ****ing dies in war.

And in those wars BAD calls are made.

But one thing is for sure. If you were NOT THERE then you need to shut your pie hole and keep your criticisms to yourself. You don't even TRY to armchair quarterback a ****ing war!! Or a battle. or a skirmish....unless you were involved in it and just happened to live though it to see the f**ked up nature of how human beings really are. ALL OF THEM!!

So I reiterate... If you were not there and don't know what the **** was going on at that very moment...you need to SHUT THE F*CK UP!!

Oh....and where is the outrage about the genocide from wars down in Africa and in the post- soviet republics? I don't hear any of you whiny *****es crying about the 100's of thousands murdered in THOSE WARS.... where are you screaming about all those dead people...all those MURDERED people?

......yea...thats what I thoughtRolling Eyes Since America isn't involved with those...they don't count. Its a non-starter...Rolling EyesRolling Eyes

Clearly this isn't an issue because those people weren't willing to accept the flying metal of liberal democracy, and thus paid the price.

Flap jak
Posted - 2010.04.12 09:04:00 - [258]
 

Originally by: Machanara
Edited by: Machanara on 11/04/2010 01:40:22
Edited by: Machanara on 11/04/2010 01:39:21
Edited by: Machanara on 11/04/2010 01:35:59
Edited by: Machanara on 11/04/2010 01:35:24
Edited by: Machanara on 11/04/2010 01:35:02
Well.....it basically boils down to one thing. Whether you like the war or hate the war doesn't matter in the least.

What matters is that IT IS WAR. And 99% of the people in this thread don't know a flying f*ck about what war really is and what its costs are because they have NEVER been a part of it.

In war....people die. good people. Bad people. Innocent people. Guilty people. Men. Women. Children. Dog. Cats. Gorillas. You name it.....it all ****ing dies in war.

And in those wars BAD calls are made.

But one thing is for sure. If you were NOT THERE then you need to shut your pie hole and keep your criticisms to yourself. You don't even TRY to armchair quarterback a ****ing war!! Or a battle. or a skirmish....unless you were involved in it and just happened to live though it to see the f**ked up nature of how human beings really are. ALL OF THEM!!

So I reiterate... If you were not there and don't know what the **** was going on at that very moment...you need to SHUT THE F*CK UP!!

Oh....and where is the outrage about the genocide from wars down in Africa and in the post- soviet republics? I don't hear any of you whiny *****es crying about the 100's of thousands murdered in THOSE WARS.... where are you screaming about all those dead people...all those MURDERED people?

......yea...thats what I thoughtRolling Eyes Since America isn't involved with those...they don't count. Its a non-starter...Rolling EyesRolling Eyes


I like this post. Pretty much what I am thinking. well maybe less F bombs. Laughing

Gariuys
Evil Strangers Inc.
Posted - 2010.04.12 12:08:00 - [259]
 

Originally by: Flap jak
Originally by: Machanara
-SNIP-


I like this post. Pretty much what I am thinking. well maybe less F bombs. Laughing


Yeah, too much rage, but pretty decent otherwise.

And fully agree with the "selective" outrage part. So much **** going on in the world. But 10 innocents dying in a war under slightly questionable circumstances causes a uproar... why is that? Why do you think this is so especially bad? Compaired to lets say the mass raping, genocide, child soldiers etc. of your average african war? Closer too home? Feel more related to the involved parties? More media coverage?

Not saying the video isn't horrible, especially with the way they set you up for it. If you don't atleast get a tear in the eye... maybe you're the one with issues. And that's good about this video... it shows a small piece of what war is like.

Warhead K
Caldari
Posted - 2010.04.12 19:33:00 - [260]
 

I have a little selection of quotes to sum up some of the issues in this thread.

"When war is declared, truth is the first to die."
- Arthur Ponsonby

"The death of one man is a tragedy. A million deaths is just a statistic."
- attributed to Joseph Stalin

'nuff said.

Irida Mershkov
Gallente
The Reformed
Chaos Theory Alliance
Posted - 2010.04.12 21:58:00 - [261]
 

Edited by: Irida Mershkov on 12/04/2010 22:23:19
Originally by: Ademaro Imre
Originally by: Irida Mershkov
Snip
Pilots assigned stuff.

The mentioned US troops were under small-arms fire throughout the day, from various locations inside a city, with an approximate population of:
Quote:
Population (2004)[1][2]
- Total 6,554,126


Quote:
Clarity, the photographers had armed guards?

Yes, I did see the cameras from the canon footage, and I suppose I figured out whom the photographer was after his god damn funeral, prior to which his body was identified and grieved for by his son.
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
This being the now deceased photographer. Namir Noor-Eldeen, 22, considered to be one of the best war photographers in Iraq.
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
This being Saeed Chmagh, 40, pictured with Namir, was a driver and assistant.
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
This being his (Saeed) grieving son.

Quote:
A father taking his children to school? You discerned that from your gifs as well? You would keep your children in your vehicle while you visit a site already in gunsights, and coincidentally, have other men following your van on its way to school and exiting buildings to assist you whenever you stop? That would be an odd practice, taking your kids to school practicing the same procedures as insurgents do - have vans, drivers and crews ready to escape pre-planned locations.

Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
This is the mentioned van. With children clearly visible inside.
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
This is Saleh Matasher Tomal, born 1964. A married father of four, whom made his family income by hiring out his van.
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Apparently suspected insurgent, 5 year old Doaha at the hospital after the attack.
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Suspect insurgent number two, 10 year old Sayad also at the hospital.
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Originally by: Ademaro Imre
it was nice shooting

Yeah it sure was you piece of ****.

Quote:
Is also clear that the rules for engagement for that battle were, any vehicles supporting insurgents were to be disabled. The pilots reported that a van was picking up bodies and wanted the confirmation to shoot, and that is all they needed.

Heh, yeah maybe they wanted the kids to give them some kiddie glue to put those AKs together!

Quote:
When it was confirmed that a van was doing it - permission to engage was given.

Yeah God help the poor Saleh for stopping to try to help the wounded, if there were even any at that stage.

Quote:
So - you are trying to implicate over 7

No you ignorant prat, I am trying to inform you that the Gunner mentioned opened fire on an unconfirmed civilian target in a population of a city of six million, according to you, this is perfectly alright to pick a target on the fly in a densely populated city, regardless of the consequences, I'm not sure whether to laugh or cry.
Quote:
There is a reason Reuters has been spiking and or downplaying this story; their reporters went rogue on them.


Grow up.
Quote:
forwarding a request to court marshal 7 men? It was all legal

I expect them to be court-marshalled for a direct violation of the rules of engagement: They never clearly identified their targets before opening fire.

Irida Mershkov
Gallente
The Reformed
Chaos Theory Alliance
Posted - 2010.04.12 22:21:00 - [262]
 


Wendat Huron
Stellar Solutions
Posted - 2010.04.13 00:48:00 - [263]
 

Originally by: Ademaro Imre
This is a good lesson.

When non-combatants and Reuters journalists want to hang out with Muqtada al Sadr's Medhi Army militia, Richard Marcinko's quote "Doom on you" applies.


So only journalists embedded with US troops are safe? Oh wait, this must apply to the enemy too, kill all journalists and civilians for they are in proximity to the enemy, got it.

As for more military dying while they assess the situation, that is an inherit danger of being a soldier, blasting everything that moves might keep you alive, it just make you less of a human being.

Also there is somewhat remarkable disparity in the deathtoll, more US troops could use a little dying for war to still be hell and not just some FPS you roll out on after the BBQ...

Larkonis Trassler
Doctrine.
Posted - 2010.04.13 01:25:00 - [264]
 

Originally by: Irida Mershkov

Sentimental nonsense



Nobody is denying that this was a tragedy. However, most people, yourself included, are unable to remain objective and are happy to accept the propaganda spat forth by wikileaks and failing to look at other sources and actually view the events and thought processes leading up to this incident and how it happened in context. I would spell it out for you like it has been done half a dozen times in this thread but I'm going to bed.

Ademaro Imre
Caldari
Posted - 2010.04.13 02:13:00 - [265]
 

Originally by: Irida Mershkov
...more nonsense


This is the post where you jumped the bridge into patheticness. You are only able to determine its a camera after the fact. Are you really going to state that whenever you see footage like this - you can stake your life on being able to determine whether or not a shadow is a gun or a camera? What if it was a bong and you were a DEA agent? It doesn't matter who grieved for whom or when.

You saw for less than a second, pixels lighter than other pixels, and were able to determine that those pixels are humans, and their ages? Are you using a bong?

And damn right it was good shooting.

You saw other civilians in that footage? Where? In followup footage, you see many other civilians? You see about 5, and the pilots identified them. The confirmed target was assisting targets that had already been determined to be armed combatants and then introduced a vehicle. You want to know whether to laugh or cry? Laugh.

You don't know what the rules of engagement were. I explained the rules of engagement to you, and it was clear.

Kirex
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2010.04.13 03:41:00 - [266]
 

Edited by: Kirex on 13/04/2010 03:41:34
Irida, that's a pretty big post for something that doesn't help your argument one bit.

edit: Do you even have an argument?

Kirex
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2010.04.13 05:59:00 - [267]
 

Edited by: Kirex on 13/04/2010 16:18:41
Tonight, Colbert absolutely murdered the wikileaks co-founder on his show.

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/260785/april-12-2010/exclusives---julian-assange-unedited-interview

Desudes
Posted - 2010.04.13 08:58:00 - [268]
 

Edited by: Desudes on 13/04/2010 08:58:56
Originally by: Wendat Huron
Originally by: Ademaro Imre
This is a good lesson.

When non-combatants and Reuters journalists want to hang out with Muqtada al Sadr's Medhi Army militia, Richard Marcinko's quote "Doom on you" applies.


So only journalists embedded with US troops are safe? Oh wait, this must apply to the enemy too, kill all journalists and civilians for they are in proximity to the enemy, got it.

As for more military dying while they assess the situation, that is an inherit danger of being a soldier, blasting everything that moves might keep you alive, it just make you less of a human being.

Also there is somewhat remarkable disparity in the deathtoll, more US troops could use a little dying for war to still be hell and not just some FPS you roll out on after the BBQ...


ITT: We can't understand why people who walk around in war zone with armed men dressed like enemies get shot. Then we can't understand why it's a problem to stop and help wounded men while the helicopters that did the wounding continue to circle around all the while making no motions to make it look as if you are a neutral party. Rolling Eyes

Tragic event? Yes. All loss of life is tragic to an extent; but don't ask me to get upset when a guy dresses up like a deer and gets shot by a hunter.


Colbert is so subtly awesome in that interview its amazing.

Irida Mershkov
Gallente
The Reformed
Chaos Theory Alliance
Posted - 2010.04.13 09:40:00 - [269]
 

Originally by: Ademaro Imre
Originally by: Irida Mershkov
...more nonsense


This is the post where you jumped the bridge into patheticness. You are only able to determine its a camera after the fact. Are you really going to state that whenever you see footage like this - you can stake your life on being able to determine whether or not a shadow is a gun or a camera? What if it was a bong and you were a DEA agent? It doesn't matter who grieved for whom or when.

You saw for less than a second, pixels lighter than other pixels, and were able to determine that those pixels are humans, and their ages? Are you using a bong?

And damn right it was good shooting.

You saw other civilians in that footage? Where? In followup footage, you see many other civilians? You see about 5, and the pilots identified them. The confirmed target was assisting targets that had already been determined to be armed combatants and then introduced a vehicle. You want to know whether to laugh or cry? Laugh.

You don't know what the rules of engagement were. I explained the rules of engagement to you, and it was clear.

As for the children, it's pretty clear they're not full-sized adults whilst in the can, and the injuries sure do show that. I guess they must've been dwarf-insurgents?

I probably used my eyes, the point of my post was that the actions by the gunner were inappropriate for the conflict. He was down right horrifically requesting to shoot on unconfirmed targets, in a populated city. Which was (at the time, as these have changed so many times during US conflicts) against the US rules of engagement.

Not to mention automatically owning a gun when being dark skinned doesn't make you an insurgent, rifles and sidearms are legal to own in Iraq and numerous in the extreme after the Iraq-Iran conflict.

Originally by: Larkonis Trassler
Originally by: Irida Mershkov

Sentimental nonsense



Nobody is denying that this was a tragedy. However, most people, yourself included, are unable to remain objective and are happy to accept the propaganda spat forth by wikileaks and failing to look at other sources and actually view the events and thought processes leading up to this incident and how it happened in context. I would spell it out for you like it has been done half a dozen times in this thread but I'm going to bed.


Several people seem to be justifying it which is bad enough. Next time provide a bit of a backup because I'm not reading through 9 pages of content before I go back to work, the point is largely that these weapons weren't identified properly, the individuals shown showed no harmful intent in the video and suffered as a result of it.

Originally by: Kirex
Edited by: Kirex on 13/04/2010 03:41:34
Irida, that's a pretty big post for something that doesn't help your argument one bit.

edit: Do you even have an argument?

Quote:
the point of my post was that the actions by the gunner were inappropriate for the conflict. He was down right horrifically requesting to shoot on unconfirmed targets, in a populated city. Which was (at the time, as these have changed so many times during US conflicts) against the US rules of engagement.

It was a reckless way of engaging in hostiles in a city that had a population count in the millions, the US has before used such ham-fisted methods in wars and my point is that it should be stopped and their stance to this altered. A good example of this are the drone attacks in Pakistan which have killed a fraction of insurgents compared to the civilian casualties.

Tallaran Kouros
Cryptonym Sleepers
Posted - 2010.04.13 10:12:00 - [270]
 

Originally by: Irida Mershkov
to this altered. A good example of this are the drone attacks in Pakistan which have killed a fraction of insurgents compared to the civilian casualties.


Haven't they taking out a good number of high-level terrorist commanders though?

Don't forget that we only ever hear of operations that go wrong, not ones that get the target and fly back out without any civilian casualties.


Pages: first : previous : ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 : last (10)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only