Especially the lies and cover up. It's a terrible mistake, but that is what pisses me off the most.

http://collateralmurder.com/

Grogan

"from 2003- 2009, 139 journalists were killed while doing their work."
Now I know why there is very little news comming out of that place. I often wonder why they show very little news from the Iraq war. It could be because of Vietnam, where they showed everything on the news, it caused people to revolt against the war. The movie "The Hurt Locker" is the most I have seen anywhere about that war. Anyway you slice it war sucks. Makes you wonder how much that goes on we never hear about.

"Makes you wonder how much that goes on we never hear about."

I believe there's much more that goes on that we don't hear
than what we DO hear about. It's our own fault, really...we're sheep-people...all of us...too busy with our own lives...too ignorant to understand what's going on...or too scared (myself included) to make waves. We watch what happens to anyone who complains or heaven-forbid,
challenges what's going on, and we slink back into our holes like the cowards we are. Nothing is going to change as long as we allow our leaders to get away with what they do...Republicans and Democrats. They're all alike. And WE are all alike. Makes me want to puke...

DavyWavy -

Welcome to the world of War.

Ed W.

"IN GOD WE still TRUST - ALL OTHERS, WE used to MONITOR"

Like Sherman said "War is Hell" there have been atrocities by all countries that have fought in wars, name the war and atrocities were committed by all involved. It is hard to judge and you should not judge the Warriors if you have never experienced the horrors of war and it's effects on the soul and what one must do, to stay alive, For those that have never fought you have no concept of what you would do to survive so you could come home. This is all I have to say on this matter

Quote:

It is hard to judge and you should not judge the Warriors if you have never experienced the horrors of war

I have: 22 months of heavy weapons Infantry combat and I don't "judge", just reflect on my experiences: The gunner in the aircraft took way too much time collecting heads (kills).

Quote:

and it's effects on the soul and what one must do, to stay alive,

The gunner was threatened? The enemy had him pinned down?
I'd convict him at his Courts Martial.

Quote:

For those that have never fought

I have and find no reason to gloat over the dead and dying caught like rats in a trap.

Quote:

you have no concept of what you would do to survive so you could come home.

Ah man, not every moment spent in conbat is 100% hoppeless as you paint it.
If every moment in combat was anywhere like the mud-slide combat in "Hamburger Hill" I would have likely cut-a-chogey the second time out.
Huge proportions of men in some Infantry outfits (as many as 30%) failed to fire their weapons at all in combat while many others fired in the air and others merely shut-down.
We'll never know how many were paralyzed into inaction from drugs and fear.
*I've often wondered how many of the 58,000+ lives lost in SE Asia were lost because of willfully malfunctioning GIs and their combat inaction?
Have you?

  

I often wondered if the Military had truly been allowed to fight the War in Nam and had policy like WWII where troops were in in it for the duration whether we would have won or not, fighting to win may have cost us less casualties in the long run.

That's pretty horrible for them to have such a cavalier attitude while gunning people down. No justification. But I'm curious why you say "patriot" like it's a dirty word. To me a patriot is someone who loves their country. They don't have to condone everything that is done by their country or in the name of their country.

MSU

I said that to rattle those who always justify everything and anything their military does and say things to the effect that it's none of the public's business. Indeed, I deliberately posted this story in a confrontational manner.

As for the cavalier attitudes, I said they were "interesting" (not a euphemism, or sarcasm of any kind). I can easily forgive (most of) that, because those men don't ever expect anyone else to hear that talk. I'm sure they talked like that in the noble WWII also, there just wasn't anything recording it. I'm not a pacifist, I'm not adverse to violence and I'd probably be laughing too, to see my enemies ripped to shreds. These people aren't in the armed forces because they abhor killing and they hate heavy weaponry. They are trained to be killers. Mission accomplished.

What makes this absolutely not funny to me is the indiscriminate slaying here, with a helicopter gunship AND the attempted coverup of the mistake.

Grogan

I agreed on all points there Grogan.

MSU

I agree on all points as well with a but we train these people to kill and put them under immense pressure every day and then we act surprised when they act like killers.I don't know what the solution is(if there is one) or what action should be taken or in what form.It is just a sad situation.

The first group certainly looked like they had RPG's and AK47's. They didn't appear to be acting threateningly though. However it was in an area the had had several helicopters shot down and it was in a month that saw over 400 US deaths. Did the helicopter crew do the right thing? Eh, probably under the circumstances. And if your a reporter going into a war zone, well you should know the risks. Should it have been covered up? No. As for the black van trying to rescue the wounded, there was no justification for that at all.

MSU

In war you learn to hate your enemy. There is a term for those who do not learn this lesson, "Casualties". It is hard for life long civilians to understand such behavior whether it is justified or not, but as long as we send men into combat, these attitudes will exist. War is not a gentlemanly sport, it is between soldiers who are trying to stay alive, and only too happy to reduce the number of opponents who will be just as happy to kill them. Those who we ask to wage wars are not trained to be philosophical, or reticent.

This is not to condone mistakes, and wars are a series of mistakes won by the side that makes the least, not the side that is the most humane.

Shelly

Johnny


Obama: “On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this can be solved, but it’s important for him to give me space,”
Obama: “This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility."

I was here and outraged.

Like most of your ilk you try to use completely different situations to justify atrocities. It seems that I was perfectly correct to phrase my title like I did. You took the bait.

It doesn't matter what they did to Daniel Pearl, or who planted explosives to blow up whom. The issue is what happened here. Innocent people died because someone didn't check their targets carefully enough and your military tried to cover it up.

Yes, I watched the video you posted but it didn't say anything to me so I didn't comment. Planting explosives is nothing new, nor is it any more heinous than the carpet bombing techniques that the US used. A wasteful, indiscriminate "shock and awe" tactic that put your country in the red.

P.S. The video you posted was interesting to watch. Not so much because of the explosion, but watching how the crew handled things afterwards.

Grogan

Johnny


Obama: “On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this can be solved, but it’s important for him to give me space,”
Obama: “This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility."

Who are you to dictate who people are to associate with? Go draw lines in your own sand, not someone else's. The people you call "enemy" aren't necessarily everyone's enemy and that doesn't make citizens terrorists even by America's myopic view of the World.

What exactly have you won? 9 years and the region is still a powder keg and Iraq is still way worse off than when Hussein was in power. (Be careful how you define "better off". Make sure it represents the people of that country rather than your own agendas)

Your puppet government in Iraq won't last one day if not propped up by good old American might. The very people you think you are helping will tear it down. You do not bring stability, because too many people don't want things your way! You are not seen as liberators, but as an occupying force in that country. (by enough people that it's significant)

100 years from now the descendants of the people you killed are still going to remember these events that you so easily justify and brush off as insignificant, long after America has gone back to rewrite their history books. They will still be seething with hatred and rage and they'll be thinking that "innocent" people don't empower their governments to commit murder.

I think some people need a dose of reality instead of "Reality TV" for a change.

Grogan

To be expected from you who still hides behind his mother skirt.

Ed W.

"IN GOD WE still TRUST - ALL OTHERS, WE used to MONITOR"

Grogan

Keep them drugs a going down, you are the real piece in here.

Ed W.

"IN GOD WE still TRUST - ALL OTHERS, WE used to MONITOR"

Are you sure about that? Last time I checked your government is the one that prosecuted its own soldiers over frivolous things and refused to allow other countries to decorate snipers for saving troops' lives because your government looks at it as decorating them for murder.
Sounds to me like you're very indoctrinated by your government.

--------------
History teaches us that history has taught us nothing.

http://www.riflebarrels.com/articles/50calibre/50sniping.htm
http://www.snipersparadise.com/articles/2430kill.htm

I want you to follow up on this. Keep on digging until you find names then research the names. I know it's possible because I did it before.
You will find that persecution and prosecution was the end result.

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5ijMMMXnFEzQvBtB7AXOw8Zeaq2ag
They don't go into details but on the surface prosecuting a soldier for accidental fire in a war zone is out of place.
I found some details and it seems like the two were playing around. It was not a murder situation.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1050355611685_45764811/
Here is Canada wanting US pilots prosecuted for an accident.

I can't find it but I thought it was a Canadian soldier who was harassed over taking a picture with a dead Afghan that was left by the road. The claim was he was taking war trophies.
On the surface yes that could be bad actions. But as the story went deeper it seems the real issue was personal issues with someone higher up.
But I can't find the story so I can't be sure which country the soldier was from.

--------------
History teaches us that history has taught us nothing.

Manslaughter, criminal negligence causing death, negligent performance of duty -- hardly frivolous things as you represented them. And these charges were to be prosecuted by court martial within the forces and not by our wishy-washy, leftist, military-hating civilian authority as you implied.

As for the rest of your stuff, how is it relevant?

But I must admit your tactic, though old and obvious (change the subject by tossing shit into the wind), is still quite effective.

Military is government. You're the one that did the implying.
All of that is relevant because it all shows how your government is willing to assume a soldier's guilt.
Snipers doing their job is not manslaughter. Although as the articles point out, your government likes to treat it as such.

I would commend your country if they were prosecuting to the fullest extent if the instances were things like My Lai or the rape that happened in the Serbian war.
But you prosecute and persecute good soldiers for doing good and getting recognition from the soldiers around them and rather than simply drum someone out, when someone higher up has an issue with a soldier you find a reason to prosecute.

This whole attitude is your government's and it is the same attitude Grogan is displaying, so yes he has been indoctrinated to think like he's been told to think. He's no more immune from it than anyone else.

The frivolous thing was the guy getting his picture taken with a dead body, but I backed off that since I couldn't find a link to a story to back it up, but I'm pretty sure it was a Canadian soldier.

--------------
History teaches us that history has taught us nothing.

You police your military your way and we'll police ours our way. Our military is a pretty tough outfit and the people serving in it don't expect to get away with frivolities like manslaughter.

We're not in the habit of waiting for wholesale massacres of civilians to occur and for someone outside the loop to have pictures before we think about maybe pulling the plug.

And you Americans have got nothing on us when it comes to fair treatment of those who serve and have served.

I'll put any ten of our people in a room with any ten of yours and let them trade stories about how their country treats and has treated them. I assure you, you wouldn't like the results of the comparison.

--------------
History teaches us that history has taught us nothing.

Reality check: "Last time I checked your government is the one that prosecuted its own soldiers over frivolous things..."

-- Myk, Wednesday, April 7, 10:05 AM, PCQ&A Off Topic forum.

The emphasis is mine.

I think getting your picture taken with a dead body is frivolous. At worst that deserves a talking to about proper conduct.

--------------
History teaches us that history has taught us nothing.

You say po-tat-to, I say po-tae-to,

You say to-mat-to, I say to-mae-to,

Po-tat-to, po-tae-to

To-mat-to, to-mae-to...

Let's call the whole thing off.

And, oh, you can have the last word if you want it.

I gotta go watch some paint dry.

I was very much against the persecution of those pilots for the mistake that was made. (I have commented on it in this forum).

There was no coverup as in the incident in this thread. It was a tragic accident.

Canadians were WRONG to want to see those men punished. There should not have been criminal charges there. You'll note in this thread that I do not advocate that helicopter crew be punished either. I only expect people to admit to, and learn from their honest mistakes. (and especially not such arrogance as "nobody is innocent if they associate with our enemy")

Playing with war machines is very dangerous. Accidents can happen.

I'm also very much against the way your country generally hangs their people out to dry, to try to save face. Even with the situation at Abu Ghraib... you can't tell me that behaviour wasn't being endorsed by their superiors right up until the shit hit the fan. No, it's not acceptable behaviour, but I think they punished the wrong people far too severely.

Grogan

I can somewhat understand a reason for a coverup. If you spend all your time saying you're sorry for shooting up some kids you end up creating a Taliban like Carter did. It only took one instance of killing kids for him to give the Taliban power.
There was absolutely no reason for them to take kids into an area that just got shot up with the shooter still flying around. I imagine they were trying to create martyrs.

Between us and Canada, they're roughly the same cultures so a sorry will more likely work.

As far as the reporters go. I'd simply tell them, "If you hang out with the enemy when they're carrying big guns expect to get shot, especially if you look like the enemy."
I wouldn't have bothered covering that up at all. "Yeah some idiot reporter of Middle Eastern descent was with a group of insurgents carrying guns and was caught in the crossfire. Use your heads people or you'll go from writing the story to being the story. Welcome to war."

--------------
History teaches us that history has taught us nothing.

Grogan

That's what I thought.
They both were playing quick draw Mgraw. The guy who died had a hand in his own death. They obviously too immature to be there, kick the survivor out. 4 years was extreme.

--------------
History teaches us that history has taught us nothing.

Hussein knew how to rule that country. It's the only type of control that will work in that part of the world. What I have trouble understanding is what they expect to achieve with a car bomb killing Innocent bystanders. They terrorize but what is the end to the means? What is the point of doing anything like that? It seems more like a high school kid slashing tires just for the fun of it. What can any car bomb killing Innocent bystanders do for their cause? How can it be justified?

Grogan

Johnny


Obama: “On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this can be solved, but it’s important for him to give me space,”
Obama: “This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility."

Are you really that obtuse?

I wouldn't have brought that up, because it was a long time ago and people have learned a thing or two since, but if you want to boast about your country's military committing the worst act of terrorism in all of history, I'll indulge you. Yes, that's right. The worst terrorist act in all of history, where you killed thousands and thousands of civilians with your new toy. You can bet that there are people who haven't forgotten that either.

The people involved in that were not as arrogant as you. They knew they did wrong.

You're not dealing with the Japanese in the middle east.

Grogan

Ed W.

"IN GOD WE still TRUST - ALL OTHERS, WE used to MONITOR"

Johnny


Obama: “On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this can be solved, but it’s important for him to give me space,”
Obama: “This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility."

Johnny do not confuse your detractors with facts?

Not to mention depleted uranium!

I was thinking about posting the same link. We aren't "winning hearts & minds" with this type of warfare, just helping recruite more soldiers for the jihad or whatever. This is just as bad as IEDs. Not to say our people did anything wrong, but those in command need to rethink what our reasons to stay might be.

Yes, that too. Unfortunately crap like this is what loses wars.

I do say that the people in the helicopter did something wrong, though. (Note that I don't mean that they should be brought up on charges). They are the ones who pressed for permission to fire, citing small arms fire and RPGs. They pressed hard for permission to riddle that black van picking up wounded, too.

Grogan

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6651875753271580795#docid=7686660283165498063

Johnny


Obama: “On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this can be solved, but it’s important for him to give me space,”
Obama: “This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility."

I'm sure that Bush and Cheney don't give a shit!!!!!!

Mike, based on their attitude I wouldn't be surprised if they're hyped up on some standard issue drug similar to speed.

Called Adrenaline and very addictive.

--------------
History teaches us that history has taught us nothing.

They only give stimulants to fighter pilots who have absolutely no choice but to stay awake and alert for very long periods of time (or die, and cause other people to die). It's small doses and unlikely to cause any serious imbalance. The lack of sleep is more damaging than the drugs.

(Don't think about the "meth crazed addicts" here. Amphetamines do have their uses)

Grogan

Agreed!!!! I forgot about the details on how only fighter pilots were given the high doses. Their zeal for wanting to pull the trigger was somewhat disturbing. I'm not defending these guys but you have to wonder if this useless war is driving them nuts to a degree.

Whatever the case I'm sure that Rumsfeld and the boys are still profiting from the production of arms.

Well, as I said I don't really fault them for their zeal to kill the enemy but unfortunately those weren't. The zeal to kill the enemy shouldn't preempt being sure of your target in such a situation.

Here's something disturbing. When they were first asking for permission to engage, the answer was "You are clear to engage. None of our people are in the area" Now, that is either a disregard for the lives of other people, or just them giving their men the power of discretion. I hope it is that, but they did not exercise it correctly.

It was, however, a mistake. People died because of it but I hope that those men learned something from it. (punishment isn't always necessary for someone to learn from a mistake either)

Grogan

I'm sure that nobody can justify this tragic incident however I'm also sure that things like this happen and have happened in all wars, war brutalises people. What can't be justified are the lies and the cover-ups later (at least in civilian minds) even so I imagine that the military will find reasons for them.

This three years old story is blowing up around the planet. Having looked at the video several times, I have some questions:

Why were the dudes with the AK-47 and RPG (which could have reached the helicopter or ground vehicles) crouched and hiding as if ready to attack? Because they likely were going to attack. In my opinion, the call to engage these people was correct.

Based upon statements from the military, the rules of engagement were clear and all of those associated with a group carrying weapons were okay to target. This makes covering both sides of a war very dangerous for journalists and politically unpopular as nearby civilians can be wounded/killed.

Reuters seemed to want everyone to know that two of their photojournalists were killed. This has been very heavily pushed at their website for several days. Now that the video has gone viral, I find it interesting that the story appears to have been minimized.

Does anyone have the feeling that Rupert Murdoch is playing both sides of the fence?

I saw the AK47s (being carried safely as if they were for protection, not being wielded) but there was no RPG. It was a camera... the telephoto lens was the protruding object. I have watched this scene over and over, I have squinted, I have stared at it and I don't see an RPG.

That helicopter crew didn't check their targets very well and no amount of bullshit from anyone changes that. I don't say "they broke the laws of engagement", but they killed the wrong people.

Those people were just casually walking along. They weren't concerned about the chopper at all until it started firing on them. The "Fuckin Pricks" didn't look hostile. (looks can be deceiving, I understand though but those people were not preparing for combat)

Look at the thing (arrow is mine) You can see the base of the camera.

Grogan

Attachment #1, (jpg file)
Attachment #2, (jpg file)

Visit the Basement

Well, you're right, it isn't "collateral murder" (I didn't really mean to say it was "murder" other than from the perspective of others, if you do read my position on this throughout the thread). I have no doubt that they thought they were engaging enemies, but I do think they were too quick to see what they wanted to see.

Grogan

That is the best resolution image I've seen. Unfortunately, the helicopter crew did not see the same. It does indeed, here, look like a camera lens with camera.

Saeed (and I believe his associate) were carrying Canons with the trademark white lenses. This could be a Nikon. So who is this "journalist"? Were there three and not two? Why have we not heard about this third person?

I'm showing the video clip at the actual size it's been formatted for. (I saved the .flv) You're always seeing it scaled larger when watching it online. Mine looks more clear because there's less bogus data. You can't make a bigger picture from data that just isn't there. Also, of course, I picked those frames because they gave the clearest picture of the object.

Grogan

I can't tell squat from looking at the video. I imagine it's not any better when you're flying around jacked up on adrenaline.

--------------
History teaches us that history has taught us nothing.