It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Fair enough, reading the responses from people who've been on the ground, that the responses of the individuals involved do not necessarily indict them of anything legally (or even morally) wrong; it's what they were trained to do in the situation, and they were following standard protocol. I'm sure if they had firm, verifiable information that the men on the ground were Reuters staff and were non-hostile, they wouldn't have opened fire.
It's still a good thing that the video is out there, because it's things like this which allow the public a better, clearer picture of what's happening on the ground. The war is still on the news, but to many it's just abstract numbers and figures and detached storylines about who's been killed and how many and so on.
This is what war means, and it's what the public should be told, in case they should ever feel that war is in any way a good thing.
Still, as Clausewitz wrote, war is never just about the people or about the politics.
War. War never changes.
avatar
akwater: Sorry.... Not trying to offend anyone......
But really? How exactly would you behave in their position? You would not be able to answer that unless you actually were in their position. Being an isolationist country allowed ww2 to escalate to the point millions of people were killed with gas, experimented on, shot, hung, burned, and worked to death.
We see how well ignoring Pol Pot worked for those people......................

But Saddam's gone. Why stay when innocents are getting killed in the crossfire between freedom fighters and American troops?
avatar
stonebro: They should be home on the farm rather than being allowed access to futuristic military equipment.

No offense against any armed servicemen but i agree. I live in a country town and a very large number of my classmates ended up joining. They were all on the footbal team and although they where great guys they were not too bright. I dont think they should be the people deciding the fate of others. But they could all make it in.
Edit-wow my repeated attempts to do a double quote kinda of make me regret the not to bright comment.
Post edited April 06, 2010 by Salsa_Shark
While this is an unfortunate outcome, the pilots made the best decision based on how the situation appeared. Notice that the pilots don't become overly anxious about opening fire until they spot what appears to be a man readying an RPG while hiding around a corner. Automatic weapons alone are cause for alarm--which is what they radioed in about in the first place--but a single RPG rocket can take a chopper out of the air in seconds. Soldiers don't have the luxury of carefully analysing a situation when facing imminent death.
The situation with the van was similar; they had no way of knowing what weapons were stashed in the van, or whether an insurgent from the van might recover the RPG in the confusion and use it against them; this was also why they kept an eye on the man who was still moving (they weren't going to shoot him unless he actually grabbed a weapon).
Accidents like this happen in every war, it's just that they don't always become public knowledge.
avatar
Shure: The pilots firstly convince themselves that the weapons are suddenly AK-47's ... Can you be *that* sure of what they were?

AK-47s are a common weapon in this conflict, so reporting an automatic weapon form factor as an AK-47 is a reasonably accurate assumption; either way, if someone is planning on shooting at you the specific model is of secondary importance to what type of weapon it is.
Post edited April 06, 2010 by Arkose
avatar
Salsa_Shark: But Saddam's gone. Why stay when innocents are getting killed in the crossfire between freedom fighters and American troops?

And Russia left Afganistan back in the 80s then we followed suit........ then this nice little group called the Taliban took charge of the chaos we left behind. From hundreds of millions of Aid to Afganistan to less then 5 mill as soon as Russia GTFO. These guys in Afgan took out the Soviet Army.....yes both sides took heavy casualities however it is a huge moral boost to say WE DEFEATED A SUPERPOWER!
After the events in Somilia which we lost a black hawk (im sure people saw the movie) we left, Now.... Pirates, famine, terrorism, genocide,
If we left today,
Turkey would attack the Kurds claiming the northern region,
(Turkey already brought tanks across the border killing 300 Kurds while we WERE here what makes anyone belive they wouldn't do it again after we leave?)
Iran would wheel and deal to get friendly,
(Iran had 27 people on the ballot in the last Iraqi election....... there were death threats given to Iraqi personal, and a few even were killed...)
Syria would take sections of Iraq as well,
(Syria is already talking with the new leaders of Iraq basicly making playing lets make a deal after us troops leave we wont attack you if you ..............................................laundry list of demands......)
Generally speaking you cant go into another country without long term problems,
Also.... I do not classify someone who uses a NEW BORN BABY as a freedom fighter. I mean, really? Freeedom fighter? A freedom fighter to me is a person who is fighting for their freedom, not someone willing to use kids to harm their supposed enemy.
Half of the insurgants, are NOT EVEN from Iraq. They are from places we already left, IE Somilia, Chad, Iran, Syria, Lebanon,
I could go on about leaders of the world we allowed to stay in power, sure we should have acted against Saddam back when he used chemical weapons against his people.
Sure we should have gone after Hitler sooner,
Sure we should have gone after a great deal of leaders sooner, however the fact is and will remain we tend to not act untill something really bad happens al la Pearl Harbor, 9/11,
Iraqs leader has not asked us to leave this very second they set a deadline, we are following that deadline....
Oh and those freedom fighters also kill civvies. So we are not alone in that sense,
http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2005/10/03/iraq11804.htm
"A 2005 Human Rights Watch report analyzes the insurgency in Iraq and highlights "the groups that are most responsible for the abuse, namely al-Qaeda in Iraq, Ansar al-Sunna and the Islamic Army in Iraq, which have all targeted civilians for abductions and executions. The first two groups have repeatedly boasted about massive car bombs and suicide bombs in mosques, markets, bus stations and other civilian areas"
Did the Taliban back down after the Soviet threat had been dealt with? Nope they continued to push their agenda, women were no longer able to attend school, have jobs.
It is not a pretty scenario, we leave they win, they get stronger, and attack us on our own ground. We withdrawl, again they win, take over, and do their own thing. How many pirates did Somilia have when US forces were there? Now how many do they have?
Sure no one says the army is the brightest bunch of people, which is why we have a chain of command. Which is also why, im guessing your school mates are prolly not flying helo's... I mean... they might... but... I doubt it.. (based on your comment)
There are some smart people in the military.....not a lot mind you, but, it is an all volunteer military, so we work with what we have.
avatar
Arkose: AK-47s are a very common weapon in this conflict, so reporting an automatic weapon form factor as an AK-47 is a reasonably accurate assumption, especially since it was impossible to discern the exact model from that distance anyway.

With respect, you've missed my point entirely, the pilot/gunner of the helicopter warns his superiors/troops on the ground that the men were carrying weapons, which by judging from some angles on the footage you can easily make out objects that could very easily be interpreted as weaponry, fair enough.
He then very, very quickly asserts that the weapon in question is the AK-47 rifle, he is adamant, and reports as much to others over the radio that he can clearly see and AK-47 rifle. In my opinion, over this relatively grainy footage anyways, you definitely cannot make out for certain that the weapon in question is infact an AK-47 rifle.
The pilot/gunner is therefore strengthening his argument to his superiors/commanders/troops on the ground that the insurgents are *definitely* carrying weaponry, he can even identify what type which means it would almost certainly give him the all clear to open fire upon the journalists and the armed escort/insurgents.
The gunner was more than ready to open fire on these men, he was either deliberately lying so as he could open fire, something I don't for one second beliveve would be true, or he is convincing himself to the point where he is filling in the blanks with assumptions which has had some tragic consequences.
avatar
Salsa_Shark: But Saddam's gone. Why stay when innocents are getting killed in the crossfire between freedom fighters and American troops?
avatar
akwater: And Russia left Afganistan back in the 80s then we followed suit........ then this nice little group called the Taliban took charge of the chaos we left behind. From hundreds of millions of Aid to Afganistan to less then 5 mill as soon as Russia GTFO. These guys in Afgan took out the Soviet Army.....yes both sides took heavy casualities however it is a huge moral boost to say WE DEFEATED A SUPERPOWER!
After the events in Somilia which we lost a black hawk (im sure people saw the movie) we left, Now.... Pirates, famine, terrorism, genocide,
If we left today,
Turkey would attack the Kurds claiming the northern region,
(Turkey already brought tanks across the border killing 300 Kurds while we WERE here what makes anyone belive they wouldn't do it again after we leave?)
Iran would wheel and deal to get friendly,
(Iran had 27 people on the ballot in the last Iraqi election....... there were death threats given to Iraqi personal, and a few even were killed...)
Syria would take sections of Iraq as well,
(Syria is already talking with the new leaders of Iraq basicly making playing lets make a deal after us troops leave we wont attack you if you ..............................................laundry list of demands......)
Generally speaking you cant go into another country without long term problems,
Also.... I do not classify someone who uses a NEW BORN BABY as a freedom fighter. I mean, really? Freeedom fighter? A freedom fighter to me is a person who is fighting for their freedom, not someone willing to use kids to harm their supposed enemy.
Half of the insurgants, are NOT EVEN from Iraq. They are from places we already left, IE Somilia, Chad, Iran, Syria, Lebanon,
I could go on about leaders of the world we allowed to stay in power, sure we should have acted against Saddam back when he used chemical weapons against his people.
Sure we should have gone after Hitler sooner,
Sure we should have gone after a great deal of leaders sooner, however the fact is and will remain we tend to not act untill something really bad happens al la Pearl Harbor, 9/11,
Iraqs leader has not asked us to leave this very second they set a deadline, we are following that deadline....
Oh and those freedom fighters also kill civvies. So we are not alone in that sense,
http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2005/10/03/iraq11804.htm
"A 2005 Human Rights Watch report analyzes the insurgency in Iraq and highlights "the groups that are most responsible for the abuse, namely al-Qaeda in Iraq, Ansar al-Sunna and the Islamic Army in Iraq, which have all targeted civilians for abductions and executions. The first two groups have repeatedly boasted about massive car bombs and suicide bombs in mosques, markets, bus stations and other civilian areas"
Did the Taliban back down after the Soviet threat had been dealt with? Nope they continued to push their agenda, women were no longer able to attend school, have jobs.
It is not a pretty scenario, we leave they win, they get stronger, and attack us on our own ground. We withdrawl, again they win, take over, and do their own thing. How many pirates did Somilia have when US forces were there? Now how many do they have?
Sure no one says the army is the brightest bunch of people, which is why we have a chain of command. Which is also why, im guessing your school mates are prolly not flying helo's... I mean... they might... but... I doubt it.. (based on your comment)
There are some smart people in the military.....not a lot mind you, but, it is an all volunteer military, so we work with what we have.

Wow i was grossly misinformed about the situation.
avatar
Shure: He then very, very quickly asserts that the weapon in question is the AK-47 rifle, he is adamant, and reports as much to others over the radio that he can clearly see and AK-47 rifle. In my opinion, over this relatively grainy footage anyways, you definitely cannot make out for certain that the weapon in question is in fact an AK-47 rifle.

When you'll have the training those pilots receive and when you're in a warzone for that long you'll recognize weapons and their make and model faster and from a greater distance than a person who has only seen them in video games and movies.
No, it was an assumption that the weapon was an AK-47.
The fact that he's a trained pilot and I'm not is irrelevant when it comes to identifying the most recognisable assault rifle on the planet. It features heavily in movies, literature, art and even features on Mozambique's flag.
I've already mentioned that, unless the film wasn't as grainy for the gunner and pilot then the guy is clearly assuming, and he was making that assumption so as he would be given authorization to open fire.
Post edited April 06, 2010 by Shure
avatar
Salsa_Shark: Wow i was grossly misinformed about the situation.

Not sure if you were being sarcastic or not,
but the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) is in effect, which lets the Iraqi Goverment charge U.S. contractors working for U.S. forces will be subject to Iraqi criminal law, ala Blackwater/Z Halliburton, kbr, Flour, Dynacorp, USAID (me), and every other contractor.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S.%E2%80%93Iraq_Status_of_Forces_Agreement
It also establishes that U.S. combat forces will withdraw from Iraqi cities by June 30, 2009 (which we have), and all U.S. forces will be completely out of Iraq by December 31, 2011, subject to possible further negotiations which could delay withdrawal and a referendum scheduled for mid-2009 in Iraq which may require U.S. forces to completely leave by the middle of 2010. (which they have not made up their minds about)
There are loopholes, if the Iraq Goverment asks us to commit say 10k people after said date it would be ok......... Robert Gates already has had talks about it.
There is also loopholes for diplomatic people State Department kind of like immunity you would get if your an ambasador.
Iraqi theologian Muqtada al-Sadr called for 3 days of peaceful protests after the passing of the agreement, he was not alone, a lot of people were against it however ALMOST all of the protests were peaceful... There was that shoe :) lol incident where Bush got hit... Which well... :) Sorry but it is a huge insult in this culture :) Yeah... it was funny... but still they were not bombing innocent civilians because they didnt like the occupation they formed protests. Granted violence would beget more violence, which those guys who protested understood...
Back to the issue at hand, the film these guys see, as well as UAV, Ballons with 360 Degree Camera that can tell you what size shoe you are wearing. The RTOCs have all kinds of video feed they could have gotten confirmation from another source without telling the chopper that.
avatar
Salsa_Shark: Wow i was grossly misinformed about the situation.
avatar
akwater: Not sure if you were being sarcastic or not,
but the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) is in effect, which lets the Iraqi Goverment charge U.S. contractors working for U.S. forces will be subject to Iraqi criminal law, ala Blackwater/Z Halliburton, kbr, Flour, Dynacorp, USAID (me), and every other contractor.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S.%E2%80%93Iraq_Status_of_Forces_Agreement
It also establishes that U.S. combat forces will withdraw from Iraqi cities by June 30, 2009 (which we have), and all U.S. forces will be completely out of Iraq by December 31, 2011, subject to possible further negotiations which could delay withdrawal and a referendum scheduled for mid-2009 in Iraq which may require U.S. forces to completely leave by the middle of 2010. (which they have not made up their minds about)
There are loopholes, if the Iraq Goverment asks us to commit say 10k people after said date it would be ok......... Robert Gates already has had talks about it.
There is also loopholes for diplomatic people State Department kind of like immunity you would get if your an ambasador.
Iraqi theologian Muqtada al-Sadr called for 3 days of peaceful protests after the passing of the agreement, he was not alone, a lot of people were against it however ALMOST all of the protests were peaceful... There was that shoe :) lol incident where Bush got hit... Which well... :) Sorry but it is a huge insult in this culture :) Yeah... it was funny... but still they were not bombing innocent civilians because they didnt like the occupation they formed protests. Granted violence would beget more violence, which those guys who protested understood...
Back to the issue at hand, the film these guys see, as well as UAV, Ballons with 360 Degree Camera that can tell you what size shoe you are wearing. The RTOCs have all kinds of video feed they could have gotten confirmation from another source without telling the chopper that.

Nope i was sincere. I had no idea how complex the situation was and my opinions where ill formed but i was asking a question because i knew so little about it not as a sarcastic comment or anything.
.... Interesting posts.
What i don't understand...
AKs are common weapon. Don't bodyguards, civilians carry them? Attacking them because they MIGHT be a threat is just weird.
Especially since it looked like those guys were relaxing. Just chillin not paying any attention to that Yankee chopper hovering in the air. I mean, if they were bad guys they wouldn't walk through open street when an American war machine flies in they sky.
I am not judging. Just saying that attacking first and asking question later is just weird way to make peace in a country.
There's no RPG in that video, it's a camera.
avatar
lukaszthegreat: .... Interesting posts.
What i don't understand...
AKs are common weapon. Don't bodyguards, civilians carry them? Attacking them because they MIGHT be a threat is just weird.
Especially since it looked like those guys were relaxing. Just chillin not paying any attention to that Yankee chopper hovering in the air. I mean, if they were bad guys they wouldn't walk through open street when an American war machine flies in they sky.
I am not judging. Just saying that attacking first and asking question later is just weird way to make peace in a country.

One of the problems is that RPG's were sighted by the gunners AND the ground forces. Insurgents love to use them to ambush armor, and a Bradley could be disabled by a single RPG. Plus, RPG's aren't carried by everyone in Iraq AFAIK, it's a rather specific item.
Thats why the AH-64 was used, to enable a surprise attack so they wouldn't put the soldiers on the ground in harms way against a potential ambush force if they had time to set up.
Also, look up other videos of AH-64 or AC-130 attacks. Almost all of them are from a distance where nobody even knows they are coming until rounds start pouring down.
They are also used to watch random couples having sex on cars as well.
avatar
BrowncoatGR: There's no RPG in that video, it's a camera.

Not unless that camera is almost as large as the person carrying it. Take a look at the pics I posted an look at the really long black item someone is holding.
Post edited April 06, 2010 by Wraith
avatar
lukaszthegreat: .... Interesting posts.
What i don't understand...
AKs are common weapon. Don't bodyguards, civilians carry them? Attacking them because they MIGHT be a threat is just weird.
Especially since it looked like those guys were relaxing. Just chillin not paying any attention to that Yankee chopper hovering in the air. I mean, if they were bad guys they wouldn't walk through open street when an American war machine flies in they sky.
I am not judging. Just saying that attacking first and asking question later is just weird way to make peace in a country.

Which leads to a big problem that the troops on the ground are facing right now: When to engage/Rules of Engagement. Do you wait until someone raises their weapon? Do you wait until they start firing? Do you wait until the guy next to you takes a bullet?
avatar
Wraith: Not unless that camera is almost as large as the person carrying it. Take a look at the pics I posted an look at the really long black item someone is holding.

but we know that those guys were innocent right? or am I missing something?
So even if they had rpg they had a good reason for it. morally good reason.
or maybe it was a shovel.
For me, a common civilian who never participated in war the situation looks like this:
Bodyguard1: Man. Hurry up Bob with those pictures. i want to go back home.
Reporter1: Yeah. Almost done.
Bodyguard2: Hey! A shovel. I just put it here so somebody can find it.
BOOM! RATATATA! BZZZZZ!!
Reporter2: HOLY SHIT!
and then they all died
and is RPG that a big threat for a chopper? it ain't guided right? and you say they shoot from long distance. So we have a group of defenseless people being gunned down.
If it was during the war. One side bad, one side good. then death of civilians wouldn't be that upsetting. Unfortunately/fortunately the war is over and NATO supposed to keep peace. That's why I find it strange. Shooting unconfirmed suspects because they MIGHT be dangerous.
just stating my opinion. Not military expert.