"that" apache video

[Die Hard]

Our soldiers are supposed to be better than the terrorists. The terrorists hide behind suicide bombers and kill civilians. As we can see in that video, our soldiers hide behind technology and kill civilians indiscriminately from the safety of distance.

[Slash27]

Could it be possible those that were armed were guards for the journalists.

 

[Die Hard]

Iraqi civilians are not prohibited from carrying arms... much like what it should be like over here, but I digress. It is very common for the Iraqis to form armed neighborhood watches to protect their homes from violent crime and terrorists. Two armed civilians, who have made no aggressive moves, does not justify killing them... and certainly not the indiscriminate killing of all civilians in the immediate area. To say nothing of the indiscriminate killing of other civilians who come to the aid of the wounded. Even if that van had been a uniformed enemy military ambulance its destruction and the killing of its crew would have been a war crime. I'm disgusted.

[gyrene81]

Our soldiers are supposed to be better than the terrorists. The terrorists hide behind suicide bombers and kill civilians. As we can see in that video, our soldiers hide behind technology and kill civilians indiscriminately from the safety of distance.

And I suppose the terrorists are very discriminating in who they kill and how...you're reaction tells me you have never been shot at, never seen a friend killed in the line of duty, never had to think about watching some woman blow herself up in the middle of a crowded market full of children and their mothers, never had to look at the remains of anything more than occasional roadkill near your home. They hide among innocent people because they know they can get away with it...they kill those same people without remorse and call it justifiable...at least the soldiers are out in the open and do what they can to avoid collateral damage...maybe they shouldn't.

It's amazing how people with no experience can hold people to different standards...I don't see as much outrage when a street gang, or lone punk kills someone in a U.S. city...or is that just expected behavior and not as bad as a soldier killing someone carrying a weapon in a combat zone?

[Die Hard]

And I suppose the terrorists are very discriminating in who they kill and how...

Your reaction tells me that you think our troops shouldn't be better than the terrorists. Let's all be like the terrorists!

I DO hold OUR troops to a different standard than the terrorists, and I'm shocked that you don't.

[rabbidrabbit]

Iraqi civilians are not prohibited from carrying arms... Two armed civilians, who have made no aggressive moves, does not justify killing them...  I'm disgusted.

There were multiple ak-47's present and a RPG.  Iraqi law allows for possession of a AK per family on their own property for self defense.  If you walk around an active battle with one, you might expect to receive fire by someone else not wanting to die. 

 

[Die Hard]

There were multiple ak-47's present and a RPG.  

No there wasn't. There were two AK's or other rifles. No RPG. When the Apache gunner called out "RPG!" he was looking at one of the journalists carrying a camera with a long lens.

What active battle? The US ground units said themselves they had no units east of their location and it took them eight minutes to get to the scene after the killing.

[gyrene81]

Your reaction tells me that you think our troops shouldn't be better than the terrorists. Let's all be like the terrorists!

Vietnam, Beriut, Mogadishu, etc...etc...etc...all proved that to be the correct way to proceed...when the enemy has no one to be accountable to for who they kill and how, there is only one way to beat them, and it isn't by being polite.

[rabbidrabbit]

No there wasn't. There were two AK's or other rifles. No RPG. When the Apache gunner called out "RPG!" he was looking at one of the journalists carrying a camera with a long lens.

What active battle? The US ground units said themselves they had no units east of their location and it took them eight minutes to get to the scene after the killing.

Perhaps you missed the part with the ground unit calling out incoming fire?  They were in contact off and on all day.  Hence the gunships.


 <---  not a camera.

[Die Hard]

Vietnam, Beriut, Mogadishu, etc...etc...etc...all proved that to be the correct way to proceed...when the enemy has no one to be accountable to for who they kill and how, there is only one way to beat them, and it isn't by being polite.

No wonder the terrorists are winning this war.

[Die Hard]

Perhaps you missed the part with the ground unit calling out incoming fire?  They were in off and contact all day.


(Image removed from quote.)  <---  not a camera.

That's two rifles.

[Wolfala]

Its very easy to pass judgment when you don't have the full context of the event. Seeing as Wikileaks edited 21 minutes of the video prior to posting, while horrible, I see an agenda.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/06/world/middleeast/06baghdad.html?hp

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/collateral-murder-baghdad-anything

Secondly: if you view the Rules of Engagement - and compare it with the content of the video (The entire unedited version), do you see any violations? I don't - and I did C4I for a living.  http://file.wikileaks.org/file/rules_of_engagement.pdf

[Dr_Death8]

He got it right, the gentleman in the solid colored shirt (on the right) has an RPG. You can see it better in a previous post on page 1.

As a Desert Shield/Storm vet, I applaud what are troops are doing and agree that there will be bloodloss to innocents in a conflict. Most "smart" people will avoid people and areas where insurgents are walking around with guns/RPGs.... Hello, McFly! Anyone home?

[rabbidrabbit]

Apparently, you don't know what a RPG looks like.

Even if you are right, They put themselves in an obviously exceedingly risky situation and paid a high price for it.  How could you be hanging out a hundred yards from soldiers who have been shooting it out with insurgents with some of your group holding aks and rpgs and not expect to call interest?   They had to know the Apache was there and they are leaning around the corner taking pics?  How are the soldiers to know the intent?  Why would they think anything other than a bunch of insurgents messing around endangering the troops?   They made bad choices and paid for it.  The Apache crew could have used greater restraint but I'm not going to second guess them. 

[Die Hard]

Secondly: if you view the Rules of Engagement - and compare it with the content of the video (The entire unedited version), do you see any violations? I don't - and I did C4I for a living.  http://file.wikileaks.org/file/rules_of_engagement.pdf

If the rules of engagement says you can slaughter civilians does that make it right?