Not Easy 2 Watch - Journalists Shot from Airships

Discussion in 'West Mall' started by orangeblack&gold, Apr 6, 2010.

  1. orangeblack&gold

    orangeblack&gold 500+ Posts

  2. kgp

    kgp 1,000+ Posts

    Hard to watch. Thank you for the link.
     
  3. notreally

    notreally 1,000+ Posts

    reason number 3548 why we shouldn't have ever gone there.
     
  4. allweatherHorn

    allweatherHorn 1,000+ Posts

    I've never been in combat, so I don't pretend to know what it is like, but I am always amazed to see some soldiers taking killing so lightly, even laughing at times. It seems like killing someone, even someone you believed to be an enemy, would be a more solemn occassion. Maybe it's a coping mechanism.
     
  5. Horn89

    Horn89 1,000+ Posts


     
  6. HornBud

    HornBud 2,500+ Posts

    What's more disturbing, the shooting or the cover up?

    And if you know anything about wikileaks.org, you'll know that they went to great lengths to keep this under wraps very recently.
     
  7. msdw24

    msdw24 1,000+ Posts

    It sucks that Journalists were killed, but you're in a WAR ZONE. It's not like walking down congress to take a picture of the capital. It might not be a good idea to be around anyone with an AK-47. It sounds like the pilot thought the people had an RPG.

    I'm sorry, but if I'm flying in a war zone and supposed to be protecting my troops on the ground and from AFAR I see someone with what looks like an RPG, I'm gonna blow you away too.
     
  8. kgp

    kgp 1,000+ Posts

    When the van with kids shows up and tries to evacuate the one surviving, wounded (unarmed) journalist, remind me again what the threat was to our troops. I love our forces and deeply appreciate the sacrifice they make, but this video and the cover-up it apparently represents are appalling. By the way, the "war zone" is those kids' home country, one on which we have not declared war.
     
  9. msdw24

    msdw24 1,000+ Posts


     
  10. YoLaDu

    YoLaDu Guest


     
  11. kgp

    kgp 1,000+ Posts

    I did not see a fight going on until we opened fire. I saw no fight going on when the van arrived. I saw what was clearly an attempt to retrieve wounded and/or dead by what looked for all the world like civilians to me. As it happened, I was thinking, "Oh no! Do our guys kill these poor people, too?" Sure enough, we did. If we can not allow even our enemies to evacuate their wounded, we need to quit "fighting wars." That would be the mark of a truly evil empire, something I don't think we are.

    We did not declare war. It is those people's country. We presumed guilt. We killed people. Mistakes will happen, but the van massacre is, from what I have seen, indefensible. I can see why it was covered up.
     
  12. Sugarpunk

    Sugarpunk 500+ Posts

    This type of ******** is what you get when ******** like Dick Cheney talk about "working the dark side", evil warmongers like Rumsfeld blithely dismiss dead civilians as "collateral damage" and lying scumbags like Bush make statements like "bring it on" as well as linking Iraqis to 9-11, which adds a revenge motive. The rules of engagement at the outset of the war were ridiculously permissive, willingly trading Iraqi civilian lives in the name of "force protection" in order to minimize casualties and manage the domestic politics related to the war. Unfortunately, the resultant mindset pervaded the whole endeavor and what results is evident in the video. The callous disregard for human life definitely came from the top down - no question about it.
     
  13. msdw24

    msdw24 1,000+ Posts


     
  14. allwhetherHorn

    allwhetherHorn 250+ Posts

    the other side of the story:

    The Link
    FWIW
     
  15. Horn6721

    Horn6721 10,000+ Posts

    msdw
    You ask good questions
    here is a link with the vid broken down more and some background information on this.
    It is interesting that Reuters WAS shown this video in 2007.The Link


    No matter what it is a teribble situation.
     
  16. MaduroUTMB

    MaduroUTMB 2,500+ Posts

    I find it hard to place blame on either side. On the one hand, you have a group of people with completely legitimate motives performing a valuable service that requires them to willingly put themselves in harm's way. On the other side, you have the same. It happened that the two groups crossed paths in a way that ended in a tragedy on this occasion. The photographers were not unduly careless and the pilots were not unduly bloodthirsty.

    The outrage is the part that I don't understand. If those pilots don't engage the group (including their friends in the van), and those individuals subsequently blow up the same number of innocent civilians, is that better? I don't put much stock in sweeping judgments rendered on professionals whose action and inaction are both likely to result in death and dismemberment of innocent people. It seems as though they should've more carefully identified their targets, just as it seems that the British journalists shoudl've done more to advertise their status as noncombatants in an area overrun with combatants. However, the thoughts that this event seems to be provoking are more along the lines of calls for the extermination of sharks in response to shark attacks on people.
     
  17. Seattle Husker

    Seattle Husker 10,000+ Posts

    War is hell. I wholeheartedly agree that we should never have gone in there but since we are the military has a duty to protect themselves. It seems there were some checks in process to complete before firing. Those checks were completed even if they are fallible.

    The gloating you hear from the Apache operators has more to do with the distance they are from the fight. War is not quite as real when you are firing from thousands of yards away. I don't think the infantry would be so ready to gloat. I can only imagine how much the Predator drone operators sitting in Nevada celebrate after making a kill in Afghanistan. The distance from the fight desensitizes people from the killing.
     
  18. Sooner in Korea

    Sooner in Korea 250+ Posts

    Didn’t watch the video and as a ground guy I don’t know how they do it. At least when my guys fire it’s imminent threat and positive ID. That being said I’d be careful to judge anyone based on the pod view. You saw nothing but the pod while he monitors that along with his controls, 6 radios, friendly tracking screen and a HUD (heads up display).

    They may have been after a HVT and the ground controller had type 1 control with visibility and provided “cleared hot” to the gunner. The ground commander might have cleared the CDE (collateral damage estimate) and told the controller to go due to the importance. In this case it’s not the AH-64s job to really determine threat by actions seen through a pod. If they used their gun instead of hellfires then they already limited CDE as much as possible. The flip side would be denying the ground commander support and then he later he loses ten Soldiers and blames the aviator. Aviators can also get very motivated when they think they’re helping the ground guy.

    But then again….I didn’t watch the video. After seven years, 100K Soldiers per year with missions 365 I bet you could find a lot videos you’d find disturbing. Just don’t lose your perspective. I believe most of us are programmed not to kill our own species except only when to save our own lives. Then there is always 1 that doesn’t have this quality and you’re always trying to find that 1 to ensure he isn’t a gunner.

    Also, tactical and operational decisions like this are not in the span of control of Cheney/Bush. They make strategic decisions only. But then again…if it helps your political side then someone will always use it as ammo.
     
  19. GreenDragonSix

    GreenDragonSix 100+ Posts

    War is the suck. This was a ****** situation but the pilots did follow their ROE. Great shooting though!

    Here's a link to the DOD investigation documents from the Jawa Report.

    The Link
     
  20. mcbrett

    mcbrett 2,500+ Posts


     
  21. HornsInTheHouse

    HornsInTheHouse 500+ Posts

    Shooting up the van was particularly despicable. Those were good Samaritans trying to help a wounded man to the hospital. What does the Apache do? Try to kill them all.

    Before people claim "fog of war", I suggest they watch the video and listen to the dialogue. The crew were trigger-happy and eager to kill as many as they could. How do they justify shooting wounded people who are obviously no threat? How do they justify shooting up a van full of people who are compassionate enough to stop and care for the wounded? Then the pilots blame them for bringing kids to a battle? The van might have been fleeing the city for all we know and then made an unplanned stop to take someone to a hospital.

    Sooner in Korea, please watch the video. I agree that with 100,000+ young men red hot with war fever these terrible things are inevitable, but the reaction of the commanders should be to admit a mistake and admonish the crew to show this isn't how the US army operates. We might even consider paying compensation to the dead journalists' family and whoever is the surviving family from the van.
     
  22. kgp

    kgp 1,000+ Posts

    Well said, House. Again, I am pro-US forces. I just want us to hold ourselves up to the highest standards of our republic and our military.
     
  23. Namewithheld

    Namewithheld 2,500+ Posts


     
  24. Sooner in Korea

    Sooner in Korea 250+ Posts


     
  25. Bobcat94

    Bobcat94 < 25 Posts

    I wonder how many critics of this event have actually served in the military in a combat situation? The high and mighty attitude of those registering comment on this thread, who have not served in combat, is appalling. These men should be judge by a jury of their peers (those who have served in combat) and not from people who have no sense of what war is like. If they've done something wrong according to the military code of conduct, then a military tribunal will take care of their punishment. Don't pretend you know the "Rules of Engagement" if you haven't been in combat. If you have not served in combat then you have no place arguing this point. Leave it to those that have been there to judge these soldiers and don't feed the forces that undermine our military (ie. liberals)! It makes me sick to see our military scrutinized by a bunch of arm chair QBs. If your young enough, then put your money where your mouth is and join up if you think you can change things!

    Do any of you know the enemies tactics? Have you seen their carnage up close? Have you seen your brothers and sisters in harms way fall to the enemy day in & day out? How dare you judge these soldiers?

    Semper Fi
     
  26. msdw24

    msdw24 1,000+ Posts


     
  27. HornsInTheHouse

    HornsInTheHouse 500+ Posts

    Bobcat94, you seem willing to accept whatever the military says without a shred of skepticism. If you love the military you should fight to uphold its honor. This means questioning its actions when they stray from its values. Unconditional trust allows any organization to decay over time. The Catholic Church thought covering up and hiding its perverted priests would protect the institution but it's doing more harm in the long-run. The Catholic Church had apologists just like you denouncing anyone who raised questions as anti-Catholic bigots, just like Rev. Raniero Cantalamessa did last weekend.

    As I said earlier, terrible things like we see in the video are inevitable in this context but I think people are willing to forgive the US military if they see the military taking decisive action to punish those responsible. Protecting and covering up the guilty is ultimately more damaging to our military than the crime itself.
     
  28. Austin Orange

    Austin Orange 250+ Posts

    "Who among mortal men are you, good friend? Since never before have I seen you in the fighting where men win glory, yet now you have come striding far out in front of all others in your great heart...."
     
  29. buckhorn

    buckhorn 1,000+ Posts

    Shooting up the van seems beyond the pale, but the friend of my enemy is my enemy. It's ugly and, per the basic MO of the Bush/Cheney cabal, the info was chloroformed, but I don't see anything obviously improper.

    These kids are trained to kill people and live under extended pressures and engagements that have to inform their perceptions in ways we can hardly imagine. I would not be surprised by the existence of a group of US fighters that had more than one person who had fallen into mouthing stuff that helps to create the cover of proper engagement while knowingly killing people who don't really seem like combatants. Probably happens with a certain regularity. Is this such a case, or in some other way a demo of bad faith and blood lust unusual to warfare? I don't know.

    We should never have gone into that war. True enough. Once there, though, as noted by others, you have to fight. There is no ultimately clean way to do that. Similarly, we, as citizens, have every right, even an obligation, to expend some energy on oversight, on letting it be known that many core values of the non-combatant world are not to be trampled in the bald name of war. We have every right to criticize the leadership and even proven grunts whose moral base goes AWOL. It is just not clear here that these air guys are out of bounds.
     
  30. HornsInTheHouse

    HornsInTheHouse 500+ Posts


     

Share This Page