Classified U.S. Military video depicting slaying of Iraqis

[degenerate423]

Originally Posted by pikeDT

hahaha this video is great, awesome to see our troops doing what they have to do. unless you have spoken to troops first hand or have been to iraq dont go claiming you know more than the guy who watches the news. not to say everyone has to support everything this country does but if you truly hate it so much, and have so many issues why do you choose to live here? would you prefer to live in the middle east?

i don't hate this country, i hate what a certain president got this country into, that's why...

 

[tacc4]

Originally Posted by finnns2003

Originally Posted by The Natural Mystic

Disgusting! Is the video released to the media?

It's up on WikiLeaks, media won't cover it though. It's all one big joke.

Not sure what "media" you consume on a daily basis but its been on CNN all day so I'd consider it pretty serious at this point. You seem 100% confident that everyone in the media and government are out to fool you, so I doubt that you could ever witness controversial events during a war without a great degree of skepticism or antagonism towards American soldiers.

finnns2003 wrote:

---

I knew well before this that these wars are a fraud. Profits, resources, and control are and always have been the true reason for these wars. The war economy requires it.

Please don't try to make this argument. It makes you seem foolish and destroys your credibility. It is true that wars boost economies, but only temporarily and only during a war. And if this war is about profits, resources and control, how would you explain our expanding deficit, all-time highs in oil prices and our loss of allies? Please please please tell me that ExxonMobile's profits are related to this war. I'd LOOOOOVE to hear you piece that together.

WallyHopp wrote:

---

camera bags look like weapons and RPGs? thats crazy.. a basic van pulls up and they begin shooting... any sign of a group meeting is protocol to shoot? im so confused by this.


then these dudes come back from war and are in everyday normal living conditions and still messed up in the head. they are almost a danger to society. then again we've grown up with that in our lives from the very first WWI. we all had that "crazy uncle".

I think you presented a question and answered it yourself. Insurgents don't use Hummers, they use 1987 Datsuns, so nobody in the military has any reason to feel safe about an "ordinary van." I haven't been to war myself, but I've talked to dozens who have, and its impossible to put yourself in their shoes. Call it a "crazy uncle" or call it confusing, but the fact of the matter is that this is unconventional warfare and if your best friend gets killed by some kids in a van, every van you see is going to put you on edge.

ToLiveandDieinNJ wrote:

---

If youre in a helicopter circling and dude were really insurgents, I'm fairly certain they would scatter

Probably an accurate assumption but based on how long it takes the helicopter to come back around to where they can see the guys on the ground, I would assume that the helicopter is pretty far away, which would obviously change an "insurgent's" reaction.

kash55 wrote:

---

The main controversy about this is that the CIA and Pentagon have calmed for years that they were engaged first and that they were insurgents, and so with that have tried to keep the video from leaking. 

But as you can see they were not engaged, they were Iraqi citizens at a public square with no weapons. The RPG in question is the reporter's camera. The van that comes by is a citizen trying to help the wounded with several children in the car and the American soldiers continually are asking to open fire and they do kill all in the van and in that area. 

Here is a little info about Wiki Leaks (it has nothing to do with wikipedia)

"Wikileaks (officially WikiLeaks) is a website that publishes anonymous submissions and leaks of sensitive governmental, corporate, organizational, or religious documents, while attempting to preserve the anonymity and untraceability of its contributors. Within one year of its December 2006 launch, its database had grown to more than 1.2 million documents.[2]"


They've had many notiable leaks about Scientology, Guantánamo Bay, and many other government sensitive information.

You addressed the actual issue that I believe is at the heart of the controversy. Valuable information on all fronts, thank you.

smoke ya later wrote:

---

apparently OP has been to war and knows all about classified/secret "leaked" info.

smoke ya later wrote:

---

the people down below actually didn't know there was an apache above them though.

I agree.

The Natural Mystic wrote:

---

That video shows who the real terrorist are. "Protecting our freedom" my *++. This is disgusting. Is there a way we can pressure CNN and all the other news channels to report this?

I disagree w/you SOOOOOOOOOOOO much that its not worth anyone's time to even try to argue w/you. But at least you've gotten your wish in regards to CNN.
... I can't let that "real terrorist" statement go. If you want to rag on Bush, Obama, Cheney, our military leaders or anyone or any administrative group, be my guest. But please don't refer to these men as terrorists. You obviously have never been to war and presumably have never spoken to anyone about any war, let alone the current war in Iraq. I talked to a soldier who did two tours in Iraq and he hates the country with a passion. He said he loves the kids and got his family to help Americans donate thousands of pairs of new and used shoes but he has no desire to return to Iraq. He got 4 hours of sleep during his first 10 days in Iraq, and he took 1 shower in his first month on the ground. A woman driving a car pulled up to a checkpoint and blew his friends brains all over his face - literally. If you think that you can go over to Iraq and make a difference, please do, because we all know we need it. But don't throw out these kinds of comments when you have no frame of reference. Are they protecting our freedom? Probably not. Is it disgusting? Yes. But American soldiers are not the real terrorists. They're ordinary individuals - often from poor socioeconomic backgrounds - tasked with an impossible mission.

OptimusPrimeAPhiA wrote:

---

...wow...no regard for human life...just to know that if you pull that trigger someone DIES...

I'm not even sure what point you're trying to make. Are we supposed to check IDs before we kill people? In a war? When the "enemy" doesn't wear uniforms and uses women, children, hospitals and schools to aid in their attacks? I'm pretty sure that these guys do value human life - their own.

outbackbob24 wrote:

---

I remember seeing a video posted here a while back of a chopper opening fire on their own men with out realizing it until after they destroyed everything on the ground. I believe they were Americans 

Exactly. The argument that everyone seems to be making here is that American soldiers are evil people who are eager to kill anyone who remotely resembles an Iraqi. The fact of the matter is that we have experienced numerous incidents of friendly fire during the Iraq War, which serves as evidence that the soldiers involved in this particular video made an honest mistake. You can't tell me that our soldiers are so hell-bent on killing people that they would intentionally kill other Americans, just to get their jollies.

moneymike88 wrote:

---

daemacho wrote:

---

 

 When the bullets started raining down. God bless America 

 

i bet you're a D student


Nah, probably a Gentleman's C... http://www.americanpoliti...ushgeorgewtranscript.jpg

WallyHopp wrote:

---

tough one sided look on on the troops speaking and talking and hearing commands. for all we know, 90% of what they see is bloodsheed and true terrorist acts coming their way. Separating instances is not easy. There is no valid excuse for this.. Can they bring in more qualified guys to fight and truly THINK before they shoot. all you ever seem to hear is blood thirsty red neck hooligans making smart remarks after killing multiple people. they are so out of touch with reality its scary. 

I wouldn't call them hooligans but the rest of what you said is pretty much on point. I have only met a couple of red neck veterans myself, but that doesn't really matter. I would disagree with the notion that there is no valid excuse for this, though. I've already said it in different terms in my post so I'll spare you another explanation. I honestly don't think they can bring in more qualified soldiers, and I don't know that it would matter, given the circumstances. As you said, these guys are out of touch with reality but, to be fair, its not like they live in anything resembling reality. All that being said, if anyone feels they are more qualified, I'm sure your local recruitment office is accepting application.

VINTAGE SOLE 737 wrote:

when it all comes down to it, everyone has a choice to support the BS or rid yourself from it.  

Please elaborate.

ajwill307 wrote:

---

Wow that gunner needs to be charged with murder and the ones who authorized the shooting. Yes this will get those insurgenants fired up, but the gunner should have never fired on them. We need to pull out never should have went in!

Chill with all of this. The only thing I agree with you on is the fact that we should have never invaded Iraq. You want to charge this guy with murder? I can see where you're coming from in reference to the children but outside of that I would say that the guy's behavior was somewhat rational, given the circumstances (ie war). If a)there was no audio or b)he was being told to shoot and initially refused to follow orders, would that change your opinion about charging him with murder? Because murder is about killing, not being excited to kill... You honestly want to pull out? You can't seriously believe that is the best course of action. Iraq lacks a legitimate police force (military and civilian) and its government has a LONG way to go before it is accepted as legitimate and self-sufficient. If we leave now the world will have two Afghanistans, except that Iraq would be different because it has natural resources and a small semblance of an infrastructure.

mikykr20 wrote:

---

libs are blind and will believe and say what ever in order to make the military look as bad as they possibly can... a non lib can see that this is an obvious attempt to spew out propaganda and hate rhetoric towards the US military

I wonder what I am, because I think this is a real video that has upset a lot of people (albeit for the wrong reasons) and the media is tasked with delivering the "news" to us in a way that allows them to remain profitable. It is an attempt to spew hate towards the military, but for most of the people spewing hate, this video is the source of the hate. I will agree that there are people who are constantly seeking videos and stories like this to use as propaganda, but I don't think that we can label everything that portrays soldiers negatively as propaganda.

VINTAGE SOLE 737 wrote:

the current US military is being used by corporations to destroy and rebuild foreign countries.  They destroy the old infrastructure/political landscapes and construction corps. rebuild from the ground up making them lots of money, while placing political power in those regions.  and the oil seems to be a commodity worth mentioning.

Name ONE war where the United States has fought on behalf of corporations who profit from "rebuilding foreign countries." Just one war, please. Boy, we mad a TON of money over there in Vietnam. And that little thing in Korea? Jackpot! I can't stand when people spew this nonsense and cannot provide any legitimate evidence. Let me guess, you have "Oil, Smoke and Mirrors" on your Netflix queue. And 911truth.org is your home page. Where is Jim Calhoun when I need him?  You should come out to Berkeley, we have "No Blood for Oil" bumper stickers in every color combo you could ever want.

Mo Matik wrote:

---

I'm surprised at how much opposition this thread has received. I was hoping a break in reporting like this would bring out a more unanimous public opinion.

But you can't use empirical evidence to combat irrationality.

Seems like a fairly balanced discussion, to me. If anything, you should be grateful for how many people here share your irrationality. Has it ever occurred to you that the people who don't hate all of our soldiers might actually know someone in Iraq? Has it ever occurred to you to ask a veteran what it is like to be in a war? I'm not saying you should ask every soldier you see because they might not be comfortable discussing their experiences, but you can at least take the time to get familiar with the circumstances before you start going off on people whose circumstances you cannot even remotely relate to. And, no, I'm not some right wing redneck blow hard, I just happen to believe that there is more to war than grainy videos and "blood for oil." But, by all means, continue your day-to-day routine and don't stop to think about the fact that nobody has tried to kill you in the past 24 hours.

Dirtylicious wrote:

---

How would we feel if they had shoot down the apache?

these dudes are so far away they can't make out objects that the people are carrying. 
I don't think these dudes in the helicopter where in any immediate danger.
Fair point, but their main task is protecting soldiers on the ground. I would compare their role to that of a sniper, who is rarely fired on directly but is constantly surveying the battlefield and engaging enemy targets. If everyone waited until they, as individuals, were in danger we would have a lot more mothers burying their children. (Yes, I realize the irony given that this kid killed children)

wawaweewa wrote:

---

There's no excuse for something like this but it needs to be seen in the correct context. 
War causes people to operate under extreme stress for prolonged periods of time and the human psyche is very fickle as it is. Events like these are the reason that War should be the last resort. This is commonplace in war. That's not an excuse. It's a mere reflection of what war is. That's why "nation building" through war is irrational. 

I am not sure if we're trying to build a nation or a state, or both simultaneously (I mean that seriously, not in some rhetorical sense) but history has shown that war does a fairly good job of eliminating weak nations/states. I disagree with the idea of proactive nation building, and agree with everything else you said but I just thought I'd throw out that tidbit.

jgalan713 wrote:

---

(not going to quote each of your posts)

Agreed. Its sad, and I wish it weren't the case. But I agree nonetheless.

Dirtylicious wrote:

---

I google'd it...the range of an RPG is 500 Meters (~550 yards or 1640 feet)
the distance that Apache looks well out of reach.

what about all those suicide bomber who don't even have regard for their own people.

irrelevant... we're talking about US Military actions here....what purpose does bringing that in serve other than deflect?
Agreed. And agreed.

Xtapolapacetl wrote:

rationale for entering the war, which was full of lies... bogus "preemptive" actions and lame excuses just to kill some people.

I wish my brain could make everything so simple. Must be nice to live in a black and white world.

SunDOOBIE wrote:

Iansmk wrote:

Both of these members are making accurate, intelligent and valid points, in my opinion.

CallHimAR wrote:

before we invaded this type of thing NEVER EVEN HAPPENED in Iraq? We created this mess. We are responsible for every dead Iraqi, whether it be at the hands of our military or the insurgents our campaign allowed to run wild through the country.

I don't care to get between you and the other guy, but this is an overlooked (albeit slightly misguided) point. Removing Saddam Hussein's regime was one of the biggest mistakes we made in this entire chain of events. I realize that is not your exact argument but it got my wheels turning anyhow. I thought we learned after World War II that you have to leave the incumbent government in place while a country is in transition - no matter how much you may be ideologically, or even militarily, opposed to them. I guess the only thing I can say about this is that Germany has made a strong comeback over the past half-century and I can only wish the same for Iraq and its people.

Mo Matik wrote:

---

Is this not enough to prove that there is a serious issue here?  I swear I feel like I'm hitting my head against a wall.

There are serious issues here, but they are the trillions of dollars WE are spending on fighting a war, one we should never have begun and one that we will not "win" in the near future. 

Mo Matik wrote:

---

Think about this for a second. The pentagon report has proven to be bias. This can be agreed upon, no?

So, if we know the report is bias, let's say the report concludes that there were zero weapons at the site. What happens? Well it's no longer covering up the actions of the apache pilots now is it? The actions by the pilots are entirely wrong with that one statement. They killed civilians, plain and simple.

If they DO find weapons however, then their actions are justified. They killed "the insurgency."

You're right, this IS tiresome. I see why you're beating your head against the wall, but its not our fault. We all agree that innocent civilians were killed. We all agree that children were unnecessarily killed. We all agree that war is horrible. But you're insinuating that these soldiers intentionally killed people that they knew were innocent, and that is where most of us disagree with you. Aside from what appears to be a heat-of-the-moment overreaction (shooting the children; and I'm not trying to temper the atrocity, I just don't have a better word than "overreaction") the soldier's actions are fairly reasonable, given the circumstances.

CrunkJuicedUp wrote:

---

id have no problem defending my country but this really was a slaughter of innocent people.

Then log off and enlist. Big talk, little #!#+. Everyone loves to pretend that they are perfect while they sit behind a computer screen.

gambit215 wrote:

---

790 Billions dollars pumped into your morons, state of the art technology, and these "hired assassins" still get the benefit of the doubt. It boggle my mind how certain people get over in life, even when they are clearly in the wrong,not to mention, WE ARE IN IRAQ FOR WMDS THAT WERE NEVER FOUND, so if you are in a country for the wrong reasons and this has been verified, arent we the terrorists? At this point we just invaded a country on false info and we continue to kill civilians, thats straight MURDER people......................and I love when people like to say, hey were killing these guys so our children can have a safe life, not realizing that Iraqis have CHILDREN TOO?!?!? We are just screwing over the next generation with predisposed hate towards each other for nothing more than money..........................God must be SO dissapointed.

1)This video has nothing to do with our justification for being in Iraq.
2)We can't leave Iraq now, we've passed the point of no return - brush up on your history.

3)You said we spent $790 billion and then claim we are there for money... Do you use your brain? Or do you just repeat everything you hear from Michael Moore?

4)I think God would intervene if he were so disappointed, but we shouldn't even begin to go down that road.

dmbrhs wrote:

---

Probably the best analysis of the situation:

Agreed on all fronts. That was a great analysis.
For everyone who wants to attack the government, our military and the media, please take a moment to think about the fact that we could blow Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, North Korea, China, Venezuela and Somalia off the map in one day. If "we" genuinely did not care about these countries that we are occupying (yes, we are occupying land that does not belong to us) we would not be taking the sort of collateral damage that we are; we would rain down nuclear weapons on these countries and wipe the slate clean. If its really all about oil, why didn't Bush or Obama just kill everyone in Iraq? Who cares what other countries think about us?They hate us now, we might as well get a nice chuck of the remaining crude oil reserves while we're collecting all of this hate. No reason to leave any Iraqis alive, they just add to the paperwork and overhead costs. If you want to claim we are there for oil/money/resources/control, wouldn't a nuclear attack make more sense than risking our soldiers lives in urban combat? How are we gonna take over Iran and China if all of our soldiers die in Iraq? 

No, we should not be in Iraq, and we never should have been (aside from Desert Storm) but it bothers me that so many of you feel comfortable judging everyone in our military on the basis of one video that has not been put in its proper context, and probably cannot be put in context by anyone who has not been to Iraq since the war began. The veterans who are speaking about the video make some very sound arguments as to why the soldiers acted the way they did and they almost unanimously defend their actions. That is enough for me. If I'm burying my head in the sand, so be it. But I find it to be completely rational to trust the explanations that I have read here and on other sites, as well as those from veterans of the Iraq War.

P.S. Please don't quote all of this and don't try to convince me that Bush is Bin Laden's cousin.

 

[gameover2]

Originally Posted by 23MCpizzle23

its war man people get killed...

Word.

 

[dubstyledj]

 

[mister friendly]

^^^^Wel said TacC4

 

[sundoobie]

Glad to see a more objective discussion in here.

Here's a transcript from David Finkel who was there on the ground on that day.

http://www.washingtonpost.../06/DI2010040600750.html

What's helpful to understand is that, contrary to some interpretations that this was an attack on some people walking down the street on a nice day, the day was anything but that. It happened in the midst of a large operation to clear an area where US soldiers had been getting shot at, injured, and killed with increasing frequency. What the Reuters guys walked into was the very worst part, where the morning had been a series of RPG attacks and running gun battles.

If you were to see the full video, you would see a person carrying an RPG launcher as he walkeddown the street as part of the group. Another was armed as well, as I recall. Also, if you had the unfortunate luck to be on site afterwards, you would have seen that one of the dead in the group was lying on top of a launcher. Because of that and some other things, EOD -- the Hurt Locker guys, I guess -- had to come in and secure the site.

I was there because I was writing a book about the experiences of an Army infantry battalion in the surge. That battalion happened to be the one involved in the 2-16 incident. They were in Baghdad for 14 months; I was with them for eight months. They had a tough area and a tough time -- June, for instance, was four KIAs, one who lost a hand, one who lost an arm, one who lost an eye, one who was shot in the head, one who was shot in the throat, eight who were injured by shrapnel. Many, if not most, of those injuries occurred in the area that on July 12 they were attenmpting to bring under control.

There's an assumption here I'm concerned about -- that Reuters embedded its staff with "an enemy unit." I know of no basis for that. What I was told that day, and subsequently, is that the two heard of something going on and went to check it out. That's just journalists being journalists.


TacC4... nice post my man!

 

[dirtylicious]

It is by no means obvious, without those labels, that the giant cylindrical object that Namir Noor-Eldeen is peeking out from behind the wall with is not an RPG, especially for an Apache gunner whose mind is immediately directed to the US troops down the street he believes this man is probably preparing to fire at. Saeed Chmagh had the misfortune of being on his cellular phone on top of all of these other circumstantial misfortunes, and the cell phone detonation is a classic element of a complex attack involving small arms, RPGs and radio-controlled IEDs.


if they couldn't clearly make out the weapons and fully confirm that they were indeed weapons...Why engage?



And also...for those who watched the unedited clip....What about them firing a missile into a building while a random dude was walking right in front of it(last 10 min of the vid)? They couldn't wait for the bystander to clear?

 

[vintage sole 737]

For everyone who wants to attack the government, our military and the media, please take a moment to think about the fact that we could blow Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, North Korea, China, Venezuela and Somalia off the map in one day. If "we" genuinely did not care about these countries that we are occupying (yes, we are occupying land that does not belong to us) we would not be taking the sort of collateral damage that we are; we would rain down nuclear weapons on these countries and wipe the slate clean. If its really all about oil, why didn't Bush or Obama just kill everyone in Iraq? Who cares what other countries think about us?They hate us now, we might as well get a nice chuck of the remaining crude oil reserves while we're collecting all of this hate. No reason to leave any Iraqis alive, they just add to the paperwork and overhead costs. If you want to claim we are there for oil/money/resources/control, wouldn't a nuclear attack make more sense than risking our soldiers lives in urban combat? How are we gonna take over Iran and China if all of our soldiers die in Iraq? 

No, we should not be in Iraq, and we never should have been (aside from Desert Storm) but it bothers me that so many of you feel comfortable judging everyone in our military on the basis of one video that has not been put in its proper context, and probably cannot be put in context by anyone who has not been to Iraq since the war began. The veterans who are speaking about the video make some very sound arguments as to why the soldiers acted the way they did and they almost unanimously defend their actions. That is enough for me. If I'm burying my head in the sand, so be it. But I find it to be completely rational to trust the explanations that I have read here and on other sites, as well as those from veterans of the Iraq War.

P.S. Please don't quote all of this and don't try to convince me that Bush is Bin Laden's cousin.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_profiteering  not just about the oil.  you speak from a very defensive and egocentric point of view.  good luck with that.

 

[vintage sole 737]

 

[discombobulated jack]

Originally Posted by Dirtylicious

It is by no means obvious, without those labels, that the giant cylindrical object that Namir Noor-Eldeen is peeking out from behind the wall with is not an RPG, especially for an Apache gunner whose mind is immediately directed to the US troops down the street he believes this man is probably preparing to fire at. Saeed Chmagh had the misfortune of being on his cellular phone on top of all of these other circumstantial misfortunes, and the cell phone detonation is a classic element of a complex attack involving small arms, RPGs and radio-controlled IEDs.

if they couldn't clearly make out the weapons and fully confirm that they were indeed weapons...Why engage?



And also...for those who watched the unedited clip....What about them firing a missile into a building while a random dude was walking right in front of it(last 10 min of the vid)? They couldn't wait for the bystander to clear?
its better to be safe than sorry man. at least thats how i see it.

 

[putting in work]

Damn!

Got a cousin who was in Iraq and Afghanistan... yo the stories he told me that soldiers were doing is disgusting.

A lot of those crazy dudes that came up on farms in the midwest and that are in the Army he said was doing some crazy stuff.

But...

He said just a lot of them in general were messed up in the head.

On story he told me was they were raping some girls and he walked in... yo the 3 girls Dad had to watch while it went down

One dude he said was having intercourse with dead bodies.

I don't know if to believe him or if he's telling the truth.

It's true though... they brainwash you like crazy.

But...

To what I just seen.

 

[mike diamond]

1. The Military will always be for the poor and weak minded.

2. This stuff happens everyday. Since you saw this, now it hurt your feelings. If it really bothered you, you would take action (but you won't).

3. Have a nice day.

 

[sundoobie]

Originally Posted by Dirtylicious

It is by no means obvious, without those labels, that the giant cylindrical object that Namir Noor-Eldeen is peeking out from behind the wall with is not an RPG, especially for an Apache gunner whose mind is immediately directed to the US troops down the street he believes this man is probably preparing to fire at. Saeed Chmagh had the misfortune of being on his cellular phone on top of all of these other circumstantial misfortunes, and the cell phone detonation is a classic element of a complex attack involving small arms, RPGs and radio-controlled IEDs.

if they couldn't clearly make out the weapons and fully confirm that they were indeed weapons...Why engage?




 Based on the investigation report...

There were US army ground troops less than 100 meters away.  They had no information that there were noncombatants in the area.  Requested permission to engage and took action on ARMED insurgents. Here are the pictures recovered from that camera.  Remember this guy was veering from a corner pointing something which he was holding over his shoulder.

Now if you were just an innocent bystander why are you there with dudes carrying weapons and RPGs?  There were no regular folks on that street.  Those insurgents were ready to get it on with thoseUS troops but before it could escalate to a battle, the Apache took em out.  Simple as that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_profiteering  not just about the oil.  you speak from a very defensive and egocentric point of view.  good luck with that.

Did this guy just post a Wiki link to get his point across? What are we in middle school? 

 

[vintage sole 737]

Originally Posted by SunDOOBIE

Originally Posted by Dirtylicious

It is by no means obvious, without those labels, that the giant cylindrical object that Namir Noor-Eldeen is peeking out from behind the wall with is not an RPG, especially for an Apache gunner whose mind is immediately directed to the US troops down the street he believes this man is probably preparing to fire at. Saeed Chmagh had the misfortune of being on his cellular phone on top of all of these other circumstantial misfortunes, and the cell phone detonation is a classic element of a complex attack involving small arms, RPGs and radio-controlled IEDs.

if they couldn't clearly make out the weapons and fully confirm that they were indeed weapons...Why engage?

 Based on the investigation report...

There were US army ground troops less than 100 meters away.  They had no information that there were noncombatants in the area.  Requested permission to engage and took action on ARMED insurgents. Here are the pictures recovered from that camera.  Remember this guy was veering from a corner pointing something which he was holding over his shoulder.

Now if you were just an innocent bystander why are you there with dudes carrying weapons and RPGs?  There were no regular folks on that street.  Those insurgents were ready to get it on with thoseUS troops but before it could escalate to a battle, the Apache took em out.  Simple as that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_profiteering  not just about the oil.  you speak from a very defensive and egocentric point of view.  good luck with that.

Did this guy just post a Wiki link to get his point across? What are we in middle school? 



as far as human progression goes... i would say we are pre-schoolers still sucking on moms breasts.

i posted a wiki link because that's all the guy i was responding too deserves.  he thinks just because of this video alone people are starting to realize how $!@%%* up war is.  it's years in the making.

and to respond to what you just posted.  the journalists/innocent bystanders were there because that is their job.  they were willing to risk their lives to capture footage.  and to be honest, you have to admit that to the "powers that be" a camera is a tremendously more POWERFUL weapon than any assault rifle could ever be.  this happened 3 years ago and it's just being introduced into the public arena, thats power.  the people that live in these areas usually carry and own weapons for self-defense, just how people carry weapons in the states, europe, etc..  they also have children/family that they need to protect against extremists/terrorists.  IMO, the issue in the video is not "us vs. them", it is there to show how silly the nature of war really is.  if i was put in the position of the US soldiers, i would probably do worse,  i would probably be in a constant state of paranoia, i can see myself shooting animals, the wind, whatever makes a sound... war will make you nonfunctional in a civilized society.  this video is only the tip of the iceberg to the horrors that occur in wars.  as someone mentioned above, rape is also a product of war that should be brought to light in a graphic way.  my stance is against war in general.

 

[sundoobie]

and to respond to what you just posted.  the journalists/innocent bystanders were there because that is their job.  they were willing to risk their lives to capture footage.  and to be honest, you have to admit that to the "powers that be" a camera is a tremendously more POWERFUL weapon than any assault rifle could ever be.  this happened 3 years ago and it's just being introduced into the public arena, thats power.  the people that live in these areas usually carry and own weapons for self-defense, just how people carry weapons in the states, europe, etc..  they also have children/family that they need to protect against extremists/terrorists.  IMO, the issue in the video is not "us vs. them", it is there to show how silly the nature of war really is.  if i was put in the position of the US soldiers, i would probably do worse,  i would probably be in a constant state of paranoia, i can see myself shooting animals, the wind, whatever makes a sound... war will make you nonfunctional in a civilized society.  this video is only the tip of the iceberg to the horrors that occur in wars.  as someone mentioned above, rape is also a product of war that should be brought to light in a graphic way.  my stance is against war in general.
Well if the reporters were doing their job correctly, then the correct PROTOCOL would have been to alert the US/Iraqi military of there whereabouts and distinguish yourself as journalist by wearing press issued body armor like the rest of the journalists in Iraq.   Did they do that? 

 

[danikerhino]

Some of you guys act like the American military is just bad as a whole. I disagree with this notion. I just believe that there are some individuals that use the military as an outlet for there insanity. Don't blame it in the way they train our soldiers. It's just sometimes the train the wrong people and unfortunately give them weapons along the way.
But back to the topic:

It looks like there were weapons in their hands but the military looked like they went trigger happy. Whether they were enemies or not, their actions seemed a little too impulsive. 

 

[ducky quack]

Originally Posted by Dirtylicious

It is by no means obvious, without those labels, that the giant cylindrical object that Namir Noor-Eldeen is peeking out from behind the wall with is not an RPG, especially for an Apache gunner whose mind is immediately directed to the US troops down the street he believes this man is probably preparing to fire at. Saeed Chmagh had the misfortune of being on his cellular phone on top of all of these other circumstantial misfortunes, and the cell phone detonation is a classic element of a complex attack involving small arms, RPGs and radio-controlled IEDs.

if they couldn't clearly make out the weapons and fully confirm that they were indeed weapons...Why engage?



And also...for those who watched the unedited clip....What about them firing a missile into a building while a random dude was walking right in front of it(last 10 min of the vid)? They couldn't wait for the bystander to clear?

Could you provide the link to that clip

 

[dubstyledj]

it's better to be proactive than reactive....how could you say the mlitary is for the poor and weakminded? that's not true...just an ignorant statement....
it all depends on your chain of command and sop(standard operating procedures) we cleared houses one time in a village out here in afghanistan...you know how we did it? we had to have a terp with us and ask the people if we could enter their home....some people do get carried away with what they do i'm not denying that but most of the infantry folllows the roe(rules of engagement) to the T....especially if you're in a good high speed unit that take spride in what we do....

back to my better to be proactive than reactive remark....for a few weeks straight they would attack passing convoys from the same general area...by the time we would fire back they would be long gone...so when we knew convoys were en route we would pre fire on the target area...so if we smoked civilians one time would we be wrong for protecting our own? sure it would not be good to kill non combatants...but then you have to think about it....why would they be in that area? most of these people her ein afghanistan have seen war their whole lives...alot of the times when we are in contact they don't even move...they just continue doing thei normal everyday activities....

 

[teamjordan79]

Originally Posted by VINTAGE SOLE 737

Originally Posted by SunDOOBIE

Originally Posted by Dirtylicious

It is by no means obvious, without those labels, that the giant cylindrical object that Namir Noor-Eldeen is peeking out from behind the wall with is not an RPG, especially for an Apache gunner whose mind is immediately directed to the US troops down the street he believes this man is probably preparing to fire at. Saeed Chmagh had the misfortune of being on his cellular phone on top of all of these other circumstantial misfortunes, and the cell phone detonation is a classic element of a complex attack involving small arms, RPGs and radio-controlled IEDs.

if they couldn't clearly make out the weapons and fully confirm that they were indeed weapons...Why engage?

 Based on the investigation report...

There were US army ground troops less than 100 meters away.  They had no information that there were noncombatants in the area.  Requested permission to engage and took action on ARMED insurgents. Here are the pictures recovered from that camera.  Remember this guy was veering from a corner pointing something which he was holding over his shoulder.

Now if you were just an innocent bystander why are you there with dudes carrying weapons and RPGs?  There were no regular folks on that street.  Those insurgents were ready to get it on with thoseUS troops but before it could escalate to a battle, the Apache took em out.  Simple as that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_profiteering  not just about the oil.  you speak from a very defensive and egocentric point of view.  good luck with that.

Did this guy just post a Wiki link to get his point across? What are we in middle school? 



as far as human progression goes... i would say we are pre-schoolers still sucking on moms breasts.



id say we're an aborted fetus 

 

[noskey]

Originally Posted by Mike Diamond

1. The Military will always be for the poor and weak minded.

Wrong.

 

[vintage sole 737]

Originally Posted by TeamJordan79

Originally Posted by VINTAGE SOLE 737

Originally Posted by SunDOOBIE

Originally Posted by Dirtylicious

It is by no means obvious, without those labels, that the giant cylindrical object that Namir Noor-Eldeen is peeking out from behind the wall with is not an RPG, especially for an Apache gunner whose mind is immediately directed to the US troops down the street he believes this man is probably preparing to fire at. Saeed Chmagh had the misfortune of being on his cellular phone on top of all of these other circumstantial misfortunes, and the cell phone detonation is a classic element of a complex attack involving small arms, RPGs and radio-controlled IEDs.

if they couldn't clearly make out the weapons and fully confirm that they were indeed weapons...Why engage?

 Based on the investigation report...

There were US army ground troops less than 100 meters away.  They had no information that there were noncombatants in the area.  Requested permission to engage and took action on ARMED insurgents. Here are the pictures recovered from that camera.  Remember this guy was veering from a corner pointing something which he was holding over his shoulder.

Now if you were just an innocent bystander why are you there with dudes carrying weapons and RPGs?  There were no regular folks on that street.  Those insurgents were ready to get it on with thoseUS troops but before it could escalate to a battle, the Apache took em out.  Simple as that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_profiteering  not just about the oil.  you speak from a very defensive and egocentric point of view.  good luck with that.

Did this guy just post a Wiki link to get his point across? What are we in middle school? 

as far as human progression goes... i would say we are pre-schoolers still sucking on moms breasts.



id say we're an aborted fetus 
hahaha... that's so sad but true.

sunDOOBIE:  i agree with you on the "making themselves distinguishable", but i would think that they have to remain inconspicuous for several reasons.  the US military or the (especially)taliban/terrorists don't like negative publicity and that will cost you your life and your loved ones.  thinking about this... wow, the journalists are out of their mind but i guess they have mouths to feed.
[h1]
[/h1]

 

[iansmk]

i love how the more and more evidence that comes up that support the apache's action, the more and more generalizations and weak arguments backed up on assumptions with no real evidence or facts to back up any points

"ITS BEEN TERRIBLE FOR YEARS!"

"MY COUSEN RAPED A DEAD BODY!!!"

"THEY HAVE TO HIDE WHO THEY ARE CUS THE US ARMY WILL BE MEAN TO THEM IF THEY KNEW THEY WERE JOURNALISTS!!"

"EVERYONE HAS TO CARRY GUNS AROUND TO PROTECT THEIR FAMILY!!"

 

[xtapolapacetl]

There is no evidence that supports the apache's action, and most definitely no evidence that supports that second attack. Not to mention how they were laughing in satisfaction after those people were killed. Savages, nothing but savages. The terrorists are savages too, but at least they're not hypocrites. They don't claim to be spreading democracy and human values. The U.S. army is such a hypocritical murderous organization, plenty of those people who are in the army get an erection whenever they can slaughter people and get to live out their fantasies of killing people, which they don't do in the streets of U.S. because it's illegal and they would go to prison or death row, but here it's legal and they can laugh about it.

 

[hazeleyed honey]

Are some people justifying the men in the apache blowing up the innocent civilians? Wow.

But, this is not surprising. However, crimes against humanity and atrocities committed by allied troops have been happening on a daily basis in Iraq since the beginning of the war. Abu Gharib and other detention centers, the massacres at Fallujah (where the U.S. army dropped white phosphorus bombs on civilians), daily raids of houses of innocent civilians and dropping bombs in their backyards, random shootings of bystanders and civilians, this whole war itself, etc. are war crimes.

The U.S. army and allied troops are the foreign occupiers and invaders, plain and simple. In what way are the occupying powers protecting the fundamental human rights of the population under its control through this war?Their policy is shoot first and ask questions later. Downright vile, disgusting and abominable by all means.

 

[je ne sais quoi]

Originally Posted by Xtapolapacetl

Not to mention how they were laughing in satisfaction after those people were killed. Savages, nothing but savages. 

From a page back:

As far as the language of the pilots, the emotional status of theguys pulling the trigger... more than anything else, the outragesurrounding that is what I find the most absurd. Who are you to tellmen at war how to react to being in a position that demands they takehuman life? Do civilians truly believe that Soldiers would be capableof performing their duties in any capacity if they were forced toconfront the sheer wretched magnitude of their most prolific duty inthe very instances that people are depending on them to perform it? Isthe romanticized image of the reluctant warrior really so ingrained inthe psyche of the general public that they honestly think that shockand melodrama is the only way remorse can manifest itself? Just hearingthe pilot towards the end try and justify (to himself, more thananyone) why the children he had no idea were present were present ismore heartbreaking than all the "Oh God, no's" in the world to me.

There is no script for how one is supposed to react tosystematically killing another person. Many laugh, many make macabrejokes during and after the fact and, in general, line troops revel inthe death an destruction of their enemy. It's how they deal with theenormity of what they're doing. And if you or any of your readersassume for even a moment that things like that mean that they or theother hundreds of thousands of Soldiers who embrace dark humor andexcess to cope with what they're doing are somehow depraved, then youneed to be re-introduced to the reality.