WARNING: This video contains graphic footage and language.
This is the video that is in the middle of all this...
http://www.collateralmurder.com/
And this is the FoxNews article...
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/...s-context/
The website that the video is on says that this video cleary shows the U.S. engaging and killing multiple civilians, including two Reuters journalists.
I have no idea how the come to that conclusion, seeing as how you can clearly see at least two AK-47's and one RPG. This isn't "murder", as they call it, they were clearly enemy combatants. Some may think that the language the pilots use is a bit to much but it's part of war. Every Soldier, Marine and Airman uses language similar to that when in a combat theater, most of the time it's worse.
Thoughts?
Murder. One of the guys killed had a camera, not a gun.
lol it's not murder, that was the ROE, even if only one guy had a weapon, the other had an RPG which was a direct threat to the Apache.
Reuters needs to train its reporters better before sending them into a war zone. If you hang out with insurgents in the presence of AK-47s and RPGs with Apache helicopters flying overhead (or drones), then you are subject to getting shot along with the other bad guys. Reuters might as well give their reporters weapons and teach them to shoot because they turn every war story into anti-American or anti-Israeli propaganda.
That is murder. No doubt about it to me. The Apache engaged them in every since of the word. I didn't see a RPG, but what I did see was a camera with a long telephoto lens. I have been fairly supportive of the war and I consider my self as more conservative than anything, but there is no excuse for that.
The part with the van is even worse. Unarmed civilians attempting to save a life. Give me a break.
Disco Stu Wrote:That is murder. No doubt about it to me. The Apache engaged them in every since of the word. I didn't see a RPG, but what I did see was a camera with a long telephoto lens. I have been fairly supportive of the war and I consider my self as more conservative than anything, but there is no excuse for that.
The part with the van is even worse. Unarmed civilians attempting to save a life. Give me a break.
Those "unarmed civilians" were grabbing weapons along with the wounded. That was not an ambulance that they were driving. The Apache would not have fired if they had not armed themselves.
http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/201889.php
For those of you who cannot resist jumping to the conclusion that our soldiers are MURDERERS, check out the above link...read it carefully...you at least owe our brave soldiers that much! Hoot is 'on target' (the pun is intended), if journalists hang out with armed terrorists who are our enemy, be prepared to accept the consequences! Vundy's point about 'bad' language, remember the video captures Pilot to Co-Pilot Gunner audio as well, not necessarily what is being broadcast out but their conversation inside the cockpit. These pilots probably had in the backs of their minds 'Blackhawk Down' and, let me tell you, it is either them or us! As you will see in the link - CASE CLOSED!
Your a reporter hanging around abunch of guys with AK-47's and a RPG in a war zone and don't expect to get shot at? Pst. I'd stay the h*** away.
And if your a solider, your fighting for your life and country everyday, you can't take any chances. They had permission to fire and did what they had to do.
Aslan Wrote:Your a reporter hanging around abunch of guys with AK-47's and a RPG in a war zone and don't expect to get shot at? Pst. I'd stay the h*** away.
And if your a solider, your fighting for your life and country everyday, you can't take any chances. They had permission to fire and did what they had to do.
How were those soldiers fighting for their
lives or their country? All they had to do was fly away. And that attack in no way made America safer. Give me a break.
You can't honestly tell me those guys in the van were posing a threat at all. It looked to me like they couldn't have cared less about a helicopter flying around checking them out. The attack was 100% unprovoked.
Disco Stu Wrote:How were those soldiers fighting for their lives or their country? All they had to do was fly away. And that attack in no way made America safer. Give me a break.
You can't honestly tell me those guys in the van were posing a threat at all. It looked to me like they couldn't have cared less about a helicopter flying around checking them out. The attack was 100% unprovoked.
Man, you need to read about our Rules of Engagement in a combat zone or just a war period before you say it was unprovoked.
First of all, anyone, and I mean anyone, man, woman, or child, who is armed with a weapon without coalition authorization is destroyed. You should know that, most people do.
Secondly, who in the **** said that specific attack made America safer? The reason they were killed is because any non-friendlies walking around with a weapon is a direct danger to U.S. Forces. In other words, it made the troops on the ground safer.
Third, if you knew anything about the enemy forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, you would know that the guys in the fan were not peaceful "civilians". It is common for insurgents to come back after we have killed enemy to collect the bodies, or pieces of bodies, and weapons. You can clearly see in the video that a male from the van grabbed a weapon. That's when the bird engaged.
Numero quattro, no civilians EVER come up minutes after a firefight or an airstrike to pick up bodies or "help" anyone. Think about it for a second...that van showed up 2 1/2 min after the attack. Civilians don't do that.
And finally, about how you said "the attack was 100% provoked", Iraq is a combat zone, we do not have to be "provoked". Like I said earlier, any non-coalition persons carrying a weapon are considered enemy and are immediately engaged.
Everything I have said above is the truth, it's not up for debate, it is the Rules of Engagement. Now, ROE varies with every different unit, Area of Operations, ect. ****, is could be different from one city block to another.
BUT, this is the general ROE in every combat zone. If someone has a weapon that is not authorized to have a weapon, they get detained or they die. Most of the time it's the latter...
Simple as that.
And for the people that think this was murder...
If you notice in the "short version", the website points out where the two cameramen are but he doesn't point out the guys with AK's and RPG's. Not that you can miss them, but still, they neglected to point out why we engaged.
Now, if you would like to see the mysterious RPG that you say isn't there, You can clearly see it on the short video between times 4:06 to 4:18 and on the long video between times 2:32 and 2:44.
Still don't see it?
Not gonna feel bad for 2 journalists running around with armed insurgents taking pictures of them engaging American troops.
Only a dumb*** would run around with armed insurgents in Iraq.
It amazes me how many idiots we have on here speaking of war when they have no idea what they are talking about. Its a war zone. On my last deployment ROE enabled me to engaged if you had a shovle in the road, a cell phone, or a camera. You know nothing of war so please keep you mouth shut. Especailly when you are judging the ones keeping you safe. You sit here safe while they are making the tough choices. They are the ones risking their lives while you sit here and complain. They are the ones that may never see their families again. To those who think they can just fly off. You do realize these hellicopter pilots help us by keeping less patrols on the streets.
Iraq is a war zone. They was carrying weapons as u could see and the camera man was just in the wrong place at the wrong time. These soldiers risk there life everyday so we can set on our *** and speak our free minds. The Rules of Engagement state anyone with a weapon is a threat. And they took no chances of these guys firing at them first. Which i know i wouldn't have. These soldiers live day to day to survive and to protect our country. Not to make us look civilized and that we do everything right.
Matman Wrote:It amazes me how many idiots we have on here speaking of war when they have no idea what they are talking about. Its a war zone. On my last deployment ROE enabled me to engaged if you had a shovle in the road, a cell phone, or a camera. You know nothing of war so please keep you mouth shut. Especailly when you are judging the ones keeping you safe. You sit here safe while they are making the tough choices. They are the ones risking their lives while you sit here and complain. They are the ones that may never see their families again. To those who think they can just fly off. You do realize these hellicopter pilots help us by keeping less patrols on the streets.
Exactly. :Thumbs:
"god" doesn't care about ROE. It's murder.
TheRealVille Wrote:"god" doesn't care about ROE. It's murder.
lol...OK. I think it's called war though...
TheRealVille Wrote:"god" doesn't care about ROE. It's murder.
If you are not going to capitalize God out of respect for religion, then at least capitalize the word as the first word of the sentence.
TheRealVille Wrote:"god" doesn't care about ROE. It's murder.
Im glad you know how he thinks and feels. How about sharing some more insight?
TheRealVille Wrote:"god" doesn't care about ROE. It's murder.
So they should have waited to be fired upon?
I see nothing wrong with this at all, if they do not engage first then by God they opposing side will. The mfers flew a dam plane through three of our buildings, i didnt see anyone complaining when we nuked Japan that was a million times worse than this. Lets beat the ****ing Iraqis down and bring our fin troops home, win at any cost possible, that is the warriors code. They want to fight Guriella war fair well just gun you down from the air. As for the journalist, when studying media/communications we have training on such instances as this and just like many have said the ideology is get the story and get the **** out.
I didn't watch the videos on the links above, but I just saw people calling them murderers and not talking about a rebuttal, so here it goes:
The first video of that that I saw made it look like murder and slaughter, but they left out a bunch of parts that make what the copter did make sense.
The video on the link below shows it-
I didn't watch the videos on the links above, but I just saw people calling them murderers and not talking about a rebuttal, so here it goes:
The first video of that that I saw made it look like murder and slaughter, but they left out a bunch of parts that make what the copter did make sense.
The video on the link below shows it-
I didn't watch the videos on the links above, but I just saw people calling them murderers and not talking about a rebuttal, so here it goes:
The first video of that that I saw made it look like murder and slaughter, but they left out a bunch of parts that make what the copter did make sense.
The video on the link below shows it-
[ame="http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=c1b_1270800204"]LiveLeak.com - WIKI DECEPTION: Iraq "Collateral Murder" Video Rebuttal: Scenes WikiLeaks Edited Out!![/ame]
15thRegionSlamaBamma Wrote:I see nothing wrong with this at all, if they do not engage first then by God they opposing side will. The mfers flew a dam plane through three of our buildings, i didnt see anyone complaining when we nuked Japan that was a million times worse than this. Lets beat the ****ing Iraqis down and bring our fin troops home, win at any cost possible, that is the warriors code. They want to fight Guriella war fair well just gun you down from the air. As for the journalist, when studying media/communications we have training on such instances as this and just like many have said the ideology is get the story and get the **** out.
:thatsfunn
You do the crime you'll do the time.
TheRealVille Wrote:"god" doesn't care about ROE. It's murder.
If it was up to the weak such as yourself we would not even have a country. Like it or not our country was made with blood and tears. So when did God apoint you to judge. If that is the case I have "murdered" many. If thats the case then God will judge me, not you. Until then why don't you do us all a favor and shut your mouth.
Legally, the charge of murder requires two things: actus reus (the act) and mens rea (corresponding mental state). To that, in this instance, has to be added the "hot zone" rules of engagement. In an environement where "the bomb in the baby carriage was wired to the radio," soldiers have to make split second decisions about friend or foe. It's hard for me to see in this instance that they were purposely targeting non-combatants. They may have been mistaken, but that's not murder... that's a war zone that's a freakin' nightmare.
thecavemaster Wrote:Legally, the charge of murder requires two things: actus reus (the act) and mens rea (corresponding mental state). To that, in this instance, has to be added the "hot zone" rules of engagement. In an environement where "the bomb in the baby carriage was wired to the radio," soldiers have to make split second decisions about friend or foe. It's hard for me to see in this instance that they were purposely targeting non-combatants. They may have been mistaken, but that's not murder... that's a war zone that's a freakin' nightmare.
You may not be as far out there as I thought
hh: . But really thanks for at least understanding there are different circumstances in the world. We don't all live in this civilized world. Your right though, it is a nightmare.
thecavemaster Wrote:Legally, the charge of murder requires two things: actus reus (the act) and mens rea (corresponding mental state). To that, in this instance, has to be added the "hot zone" rules of engagement. In an environement where "the bomb in the baby carriage was wired to the radio," soldiers have to make split second decisions about friend or foe. It's hard for me to see in this instance that they were purposely targeting non-combatants. They may have been mistaken, but that's not murder... that's a war zone that's a freakin' nightmare.
Im shocked. I agree with you, lol..good post CM
thecavemaster Wrote:Legally, the charge of murder requires two things: actus reus (the act) and mens rea (corresponding mental state). To that, in this instance, has to be added the "hot zone" rules of engagement. In an environement where "the bomb in the baby carriage was wired to the radio," soldiers have to make split second decisions about friend or foe. It's hard for me to see in this instance that they were purposely targeting non-combatants. They may have been mistaken, but that's not murder... that's a war zone that's a freakin' nightmare.
:Thumbs: