Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Rouge Drone
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 02:25:00 -
[91]
Some of those gentlemen were carrying assault rifles. Perhaps the journalists shouldn't have chosen such a disreputable group of associates if they had an aversion to being shot.
One must also call into question why children were being brought into a war zone to help dispose of corpses. It's clear that bad parenting was to blame for their injuries, not the military.
All in all I feel that my freedom has been thoroughly protected and I'd like to thank the hard working men and women of our armed forces for their dedication and service.
|
AdmiralJohn
The Unknown Bar and Pub Elysium Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 02:36:00 -
[92]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus Bad example followed by "Amuricans can do whatever they want!"
Do you even listen to what you're saying?
Okay, here's this: Some foreign nation invades your nation on some questionable grounds. You don't have running water, electricity, etc. When you go outside your house to get some water, said invaders shoot you up. You want to step outside with some friends? BLAMMO! You stop on the corner of a street holding a camera? BLAMMO!
These people don't choose to live in war zones, and they certainly don't stick around because they like bullets to the face. These people don't plan on fights erupting around them, it just happens. It's not "Oh look it's 11 A.M. time to go play in the battle in the street!"
Your example of your friend is a poor one, because your friend chooses to be at the bar, it's not like he lives there and doesn't have a choice otherwise. Also, the cops don't shoot him before asking questions.
|
Wendat Huron
Stellar Solutions
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 02:54:00 -
[93]
Originally by: Rouge Drone Some of those gentlemen were carrying assault rifles. Perhaps the journalists shouldn't have chosen such a disreputable group of associates if they had an aversion to being shot.
One must also call into question why children were being brought into a war zone to help dispose of corpses. It's clear that bad parenting was to blame for their injuries, not the military.
All in all I feel that my freedom has been thoroughly protected and I'd like to thank the hard working men and women of our armed forces for their dedication and service.
Perhaps those were the news teams guards? Preventing random criminals from robbing or kidnapping them, you know the other bad that can happen.
Yes I think that van was an ambulance and they were driving around looking for shot up people to collect, those were random bypassers you nitwit, they just happened to have the kids there. If they thought they were going to get shot you can bet your sweet ass they would be parading the kids outside for show.
Delenda est achura. |
Rebal 88
Minmatar The Exploited. Black Star Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 03:25:00 -
[94]
Originally by: Gneeznow Kill the innocent, promote freedom, feels good man
That's what makes America great. |
Jin Nib
Resplendent Knives
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 03:30:00 -
[95]
There were clearly two people with rifles there at least, and it's impossible to tell those are cameras the news agents are carrying without knowing what they are before hand. That said, they didn't appear at all hostile in their actions even after being shot at or in their mixing with clearly unarmed civilians. There was absolutely no call to shoot at the vehicle however, which simply appeared to be bystanders helping the wounded. The people from the vehicle had no apparent weapons and collecting bodies or wounded is certainly not a hostile act. It seems to me that the ROE was largely at fault here, not merely the pilots mis-judgments.
Regarding the thread title and website; when you hit the thing you actually intend to hit, it's not referred to as collateral. -Jin Nib Trading on behalf of Opera Noir since: 2009.03.02 03:53:00
|
James Tritanius
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 03:39:00 -
[96]
Edited by: James Tritanius on 07/04/2010 03:44:15
Originally by: Rouge Drone Some of those gentlemen were carrying assault rifles. Perhaps the journalists shouldn't have chosen such a disreputable group of associates if they had an aversion to being shot.
One must also call into question why children were being brought into a war zone to help dispose of corpses. It's clear that bad parenting was to blame for their injuries, not the military.
All in all I feel that my freedom has been thoroughly protected and I'd like to thank the hard working men and women of our armed forces for their dedication and service.
Blaming the victim always works.
How dare you stand around people with video equipment? How dare you come out of your van and try to save some seriously injured guy on the side of the street?
Quote: One must also call into question why children were being brought into a war zone to help dispose of corpses. It's clear that bad parenting was to blame for their injuries, not the military.
That's ****ing laughable. Did you even watch the video?
Quote: There were clearly two people with rifles there at least
Please post a screenshot of where you have clearly seen two guys with rifles.
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 03:44:00 -
[97]
Originally by: AdmiralJohn
Originally by: Bellum Eternus Bad example followed by "Amuricans can do whatever they want!"
Do you even listen to what you're saying?
Okay, here's this: Some foreign nation invades your nation on some questionable grounds. You don't have running water, electricity, etc. When you go outside your house to get some water, said invaders shoot you up. You want to step outside with some friends? BLAMMO! You stop on the corner of a street holding a camera? BLAMMO!
These people don't choose to live in war zones, and they certainly don't stick around because they like bullets to the face. These people don't plan on fights erupting around them, it just happens. It's not "Oh look it's 11 A.M. time to go play in the battle in the street!"
Your example of your friend is a poor one, because your friend chooses to be at the bar, it's not like he lives there and doesn't have a choice otherwise. Also, the cops don't shoot him before asking questions.
Can you even read?
My example is a perfect example. Those people should have ran the other direction,not towards a hot American AO.
And as for invading for questionable reasons, the UK, well, all of Europe, all of Eastern Europe, all of Asia, all of the Middle East, South America, Africa etc. are all guilty of the same. The US is simply top of the hill right now, otherwise it would be some other nation. America isn't any worse than any other nation in this respect. -
Originally by: Bellum Eternus That is the beauty of Eve, it's a crucible in which great minds are formed and the rest are ground to dust.
Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. |
Jin Nib
Resplendent Knives
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 04:02:00 -
[98]
Originally by: James Tritanius
Quote: There were clearly two people with rifles there at least
Please post a screenshot of where you have clearly seen two guys with rifles.
In the first video from 3:40 to about 4:00 the camera centers on two people who appear to be holding rifles. At least that's the call I would make in that situation. Given their general deportment and that of the people around them however I would assume that they were merely guards for all the unarmed people around them. You might also take into account that the cameras also look a lot like weapons.
But by all means please continue, your myopic assessment of the situation seems to right on the mark. -Jin Nib Trading on behalf of Opera Noir since: 2009.03.02 03:53:00
|
Barakkus
Caelestis Iudicium
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 04:10:00 -
[99]
Originally by: Jin Nib
Originally by: James Tritanius
Quote: There were clearly two people with rifles there at least
Please post a screenshot of where you have clearly seen two guys with rifles.
In the first video from 3:40 to about 4:00 the camera centers on two people who appear to be holding rifles. At least that's the call I would make in that situation. Given their general deportment and that of the people around them however I would assume that they were merely guards for all the unarmed people around them. You might also take into account that the cameras also look a lot like weapons.
But by all means please continue, your myopic assessment of the situation seems to right on the mark.
My wife and I watched this tonight, we both agree the first scene was something that could have been seen as some armed insurgents that may have been involved in the engagement the apache was called in as support for.
The second scene of shooting missiles into a building while obvious civilians are walking past though, another story.
Originally by: CCP Dropbear
rofl
edit: ah crap, dev account. Oh well, official rofl at you sir.
|
Jin Nib
Resplendent Knives
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 04:31:00 -
[100]
Originally by: Barakkus
My wife and I watched this tonight, we both agree the first scene was something that could have been seen as some armed insurgents that may have been involved in the engagement the apache was called in as support for.
The second scene of shooting missiles into a building while obvious civilians are walking past though, another story.
The first scene was questionable in my opinion, they certainly didn't appear to be hostile to me but who knows what conditions and ROE the choppers were operating under. Firring on the van seemed to be completely unjustified but with their blood going and the ROE they were operating under who knows what was going going through their heads. If the was a van with a red-cross or crescent on it I bet they wouldn't have fired. But it was unmarked and so they got shot for helping people, which may have been justifiable under the ROE they were operating under, who knows?
The second one you are talking about is the .gif? To me it looked like there was an operator and observer and that the civilian walked on to the scene after the all clear was given and perhaps even the missile fired. It's hard to tell but he sure seems to come out of no where when I watch it. The important part of it is edited out; when exactly does that man appear on frame (you'll notice the vid cuts in and he appears from behind the far left pole)? And who could see him when were the orders given (the text at the bottom could easily have been before or after or made up it's impossible to know)? When was the missile fired (was it already in the air when they saw the man or did the see the man and fire anyways)? None of the pertinent information is there really to make a reasonable call on what happened. That's the one to which I would apply the term collateral damage to though, given the information that is available. Very unfortunate. -Jin Nib Trading on behalf of Opera Noir since: 2009.03.02 03:53:00
|
|
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 07:24:00 -
[101]
Originally by: Rouge Drone Some of those gentlemen were carrying assault rifles. Perhaps the journalists shouldn't have chosen such a disreputable group of associates if they had an aversion to being shot.
Show the weapons pls?
Originally by: Rouge Drone
One must also call into question why children were being brought into a war zone to help dispose of corpses. It's clear that bad parenting was to blame for their injuries, not the military.
Warzone? It's a city, there's bound to be some people around.
Originally by: Rouge Drone
All in all I feel that my freedom has been thoroughly protected and I'd like to thank the hard working men and women of our armed forces for their dedication and service.
troll
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Iraq is exactly the same way.
Don't want to die? Don't walk around in groups of people and then stack up at the corner of a building like you're going to engage a target (which is exactly what the people did in the video).
Land of the free, home of the brave? And the last bit is open for interpretation.
Many of you also assume that the people on the ground knew the Apache was there and that it had its sights trained on them. Judging by the distance (1km or more) they probably couldn't even hear the damn thing because they were, well, in a major ****ing city. They could see it, but I'm under the impression that seeing helicopters over Baghdad has been happening somewhat frequently in the past years. So..should Iraqis just not gather in groups of two or more and not carry any baquettes home from the bakery just because they have to be afraid of being torn apart by two kiddies with HE round cannon?
something is ****ed up
CSM Iceland meeting minutes - READ THEM :D |
Ghostmane
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 10:49:00 -
[102]
I honestly cbf arguing with morons here so i'll just point out some things people should think about when watching this.
Firstly, this is iraq. Everyone has guns. War reporters always have personal security. A group of 10+ men with 2 ak's is not a group of insurgents. Its called personal escort. If you havnt noticed shia militia and sunni militia attack each other so everyone has to be able to defend themselves.
On the View of weapons. There is only 2 ak's in the entire clip .. THAT IS ALL. The men holding those AK's are holding them in a relaxed manner, not searching for targets AND walking behind the ground. There is no way a trained and sound of mind apache pilot would mistake a camera for an RPG.
The apache pilot opens fire for the first time on a group of 10+ men. At which point a weapon is not visible AT ALL. To defend this action is to defend the principle of suicide bombings and collateral murder. You are infact defending the bombing of the world trade center. COLLATERAL MURDER IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. You do not shoot 8 unarmed civilians to hit two SUSPECTED targets and you do not fly planes into buildings because the people who work there look like your enemy.
The Gunner, while waiting for permission to fire on the Rescue van sounds to be in a bloodlust. He is anxious like a child on christmas waiting to be told he can tear into his presents. The people who get out of the van clearly have no weapons. They are older men in general attire that would be clearly incapable of being serious insurgents. The pilot even states that they are "picking up people and weapons" when there is clearly no weapon in the immediate area of the critically wounded man.
To anyone who says "how do they know they are not insurgets". I remind you of something very important. INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY. Also, for anyone who thinks they felt bad for the children. They do not. When they find out one of the pilots is heard saying "Thats what they get for bringing kids to a fight" and the other replies "Thats right".
Lastly on the topic of the GIF. I've seen the full video of that as well, and they do infact engage knowing full well a civ is appoaching. They are just more concerned with hitting their target. As well after they are finished (the gif is the first hellfire, they fire two more) they are more concerned with how cool it looked then anything else.
|
Something Random
Gallente The Barrow Boys
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 10:55:00 -
[103]
I remember gun cam footage from the 1st Iraq war (Bush Snr) where a small surrendering Iraqi group had dropped weapons and were signalling clearly that they were surrendering but a gunship pilot simply pot shotted them from afar. They walked back and fore as each of them were picked off 1 by 1 by a crowing pilot/gunner.
Very little difference here. I understand the main group perhaps being mistaken for a unit up to no good but the attack on the minivan is as rediculous and undefendable as the other incident i describe was.
Originally by: CCP Fallout :facepalm:
|
ChaeDoc I
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 11:09:00 -
[104]
Originally by: Kitimortoa I'm sorry, but the military's assesment of the situation is probably right on. It's a shame it happened but it appears that the people manning that apache were engaging what they thought to be insurgents. It does look like they were carying weapons on the footage. Knowing what we know before watching the footage would make one see it differently, but if you were in that apache and saw what they saw on that video, you would have probably made the same assesment. It's unfortunate, but it does appear that their actions were within reason.
Those people were not commiting any crimes, where they? How could they be identified as the enemy just because they were carrying small arms?
You can't "think" they're insurgents and engage, you have to know that they are the enemy.
And where was the danger to the US military when someone tried to help the wounded reporter? Where were their weapons?
'Collateral Murder' is a good description of what happened.
|
TheLordofAllandNothing
Caldari United Systems Navy Zenith Affinity
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 11:22:00 -
[105]
Edited by: TheLordofAllandNothing on 07/04/2010 11:23:25
Originally by: Rouge Drone Some of those gentlemen were carrying assault rifles. Perhaps the journalists shouldn't have chosen such a disreputable group of associates if they had an aversion to being shot.
One must also call into question why children were being brought into a war zone to help dispose of corpses. It's clear that bad parenting was to blame for their injuries, not the military.
All in all I feel that my freedom has been thoroughly protected and I'd like to thank the hard working men and women of our armed forces for their dedication and service.
"Bahgawd those people wont threaten my freedoms, BAHGAWD"
Your freedom has nothing to do with this, afghanistan maybe. They wre trying to get the wounded man out instead of leaving him dieing on the street.
I can only hope you are a troll. Also NONE OF THEM were carrying assault rifles of any sort, the things you are seeing are camera tripods, no weapons were recovered from the site. What is yoru answer to them firing missiles into innocent civilians at the end of the tape?
_______________________ Fix rockets in '09 =( |
TheLordofAllandNothing
Caldari United Systems Navy Zenith Affinity
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 11:28:00 -
[106]
Edited by: TheLordofAllandNothing on 07/04/2010 11:28:39
Originally by: Jin Nib
Originally by: Barakkus
My wife and I watched this tonight, we both agree the first scene was something that could have been seen as some armed insurgents that may have been involved in the engagement the apache was called in as support for.
The second scene of shooting missiles into a building while obvious civilians are walking past though, another story.
The first scene was questionable in my opinion, they certainly didn't appear to be hostile to me but who knows what conditions and ROE the choppers were operating under. Firring on the van seemed to be completely unjustified but with their blood going and the ROE they were operating under who knows what was going going through their heads. If the was a van with a red-cross or crescent on it I bet they wouldn't have fired. But it was unmarked and so they got shot for helping people, which may have been justifiable under the ROE they were operating under, who knows?
The second one you are talking about is the .gif? To me it looked like there was an operator and observer and that the civilian walked on to the scene after the all clear was given and perhaps even the missile fired. It's hard to tell but he sure seems to come out of no where when I watch it. The important part of it is edited out; when exactly does that man appear on frame (you'll notice the vid cuts in and he appears from behind the far left pole)? And who could see him when were the orders given (the text at the bottom could easily have been before or after or made up it's impossible to know)? When was the missile fired (was it already in the air when they saw the man or did the see the man and fire anyways)? None of the pertinent information is there really to make a reasonable call on what happened. That's the one to which I would apply the term collateral damage to though, given the information that is available. Very unfortunate.
Keep watching that scene, civilians start approaching the blast site after and they fire again...and again. Also the missile was not fired at the poitn the civilian walks into view, he walked into view as he was starting to give the all clear which the .gif doesnt portray clearly. He fired a few seconds later.
Basicly they disregarded the rules of engagement and commited a war crime. It is a right in iraq to carry an AK, them gunning down people they didnt positively ID is bad, gunning down unarmed innocent civilians(and children) who were just trying to help a wounded (innocent) man is horrific. Then they start firing missiles into civilians at the end.
_______________________ Fix rockets in '09 =( |
DeBingJos
Minmatar Between the lines Terrebellum
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 11:34:00 -
[107]
Stuff like this makes me sick.
Even if they really thought maybe 4 of the 10 persons were carrying weapons, should they kill the whole group just to get those 4 'insurgents'? This is simply murder.
Then it gets even worse. There is no way anyone can justify shooting at the van.
As for the remark 'They should't bring their children to a warzone', they probably didn't know an attack hellicopter was aiming at them. They just stopped to help a wounded person.
If someone did that **** to my family I would blow up some buildings too. (and worse)
|
TheLordofAllandNothing
Caldari United Systems Navy Zenith Affinity
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 11:38:00 -
[108]
Edited by: TheLordofAllandNothing on 07/04/2010 11:42:24
Originally by: DeBingJos
If someone did that **** to my family I would blow up some buildings too. (and worse)
This is why we fight :jihad:
(That was sarcasm, dont break down my door CIA tia)
But yeah, doing this isn't going to help win them support in the surrounding communities, it will just garner them more enemies. Those kids are going to grow up realising the big mean west minced their father and friends with a 30mm chaingun.
_______________________ Fix rockets in '09 =( |
Natasja Podinski
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 11:53:00 -
[109]
this thread now has a themesong Please resize your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels with a maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Adida the best internetbride for sexy katalog send 1KK ISK |
Tallaran Kouros
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 11:55:00 -
[110]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
The Iraquis do the same thing when given half a chance. And the Chinese, and the Russians, and the UK, and and and... It's not restricted to Americans.
Can you provide evidence for that allegation?
I'd like to see where China, Russia or the UK has acted in such a manner.
|
|
Collateral Murder
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 12:09:00 -
[111]
americans sure know how to make friends
these kids will grow up. maybe they'll want revenge on america. congrats you dumb****s, you just created more and more sympathiser for groups like al-qaida. family/friends of the slaughtered. everyone could be the next to fly a plane in your precious buildings, and then you go crying and ask yourself why those people do such bad things
fail
|
Kitimortoa
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 12:41:00 -
[112]
Edited by: Kitimortoa on 07/04/2010 12:46:22
Originally by: Tallaran Kouros
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
The Iraquis do the same thing when given half a chance. And the Chinese, and the Russians, and the UK, and and and... It's not restricted to Americans.
Can you provide evidence for that allegation?
I'd like to see where China, Russia or the UK has acted in such a manner.
Please tell me you're not serious. China and Russia are well known for their brutality.
China: Tiananmen Square protests of 1989. Nepal, Mongolia, the list can go on and on.
Russia: O, I don't know killing 12 million Jews durring and after WWII, Afghanistan, Georgia, Ukraine, Poland, East Germany, and numerous other conflicts.
I don't know about the UK, but it's not like people don't kill innocent people in war, it's war, it's not nice.
|
Saxton Hale
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 12:49:00 -
[113]
Originally by: Kitimortoa I don't know about the UK, but it's not like people don't kill innocent people in war, it's war, it's not nice.
Bloody Sunday.
|
Kitimortoa
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 12:51:00 -
[114]
Originally by: Saxton Hale
Originally by: Kitimortoa I don't know about the UK, but it's not like people don't kill innocent people in war, it's war, it's not nice.
Bloody Sunday.
Oh, yeah I completely forgot about Brits and Ireland for the last god knows how many years.
|
Abraham Azadian
Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 13:22:00 -
[115]
Originally by: Kitimortoa
Russia: O, I don't know killing 12 million Jews durring and after WWII
You fail at history in a scary way.
- British officer : "You French fight for money, while we British fight for honour." Surcouf : "A man fights for what he lacks the most!"
|
Kitimortoa
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 13:26:00 -
[116]
Originally by: Abraham Azadian
Originally by: Kitimortoa
Russia: O, I don't know killing 12 million Jews durring and after WWII
You fail at history in a scary way.
-
No, you must, because they did kill way more Jews than ****** ever did.
|
Abraham Azadian
Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 13:38:00 -
[117]
History of jews in Russia
The jewish population in Russia hit an all time high in 1941 at 5.4 million ... stalin was so evil he managed to kill more jews than there were around at the time.
And as a reminder the holocaust.
British officer : "You French fight for money, while we British fight for honour." Surcouf : "A man fights for what he lacks the most!"
|
Herzog Wolfhammer
Gallente Aliastra
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 13:45:00 -
[118]
So much for the Laws of Armed Conflict. Even the military worshippers/bootlickers have to accept that they shot wounded "enemies" - so even if they were enemy combatants, shooting them as they crawl away is still a violation. Shooting a vehicle in the role of aiding the wounded is also a violation.
Anyone notice the immediate failure of the main gun when the crosshairs were on the children?
yes, that's God, working AGAINST the US military which is no longer under any grace, or operating under any concept of "just war". I suppose this sort of thing happened to German guns some time ago. Most of the warmongering in the US is done by christians, but they are too busy cheering while watching the video to notice this.
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 14:29:00 -
[119]
Originally by: Kitimortoa Edited by: Kitimortoa on 07/04/2010 13:30:45
Originally by: Abraham Azadian
Originally by: Kitimortoa
Russia: O, I don't know killing 12 million Jews durring and after WWII
You fail at history in a scary way.
-
No, you must, because they did kill way more Jews than ****** ever did.
Russia and Germany were allies for the first part of the war until ****** decided it was a good idea to turn on them and invade.
No one really knows the full extent of Stalin's massacre, but it's estimated between 10-12 million Jews.
This is the biggest fail of this thread. Even your initial apologist posts pale in comparison. ...
|
Tallaran Kouros
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 14:41:00 -
[120]
Originally by: Abraham Azadian
The jewish population in Russia hit an all time high in 1941 at 5.4 million ... stalin was so evil he managed to kill more jews than there were around at the time.
I really, really want to make a Chuck Norris joke here, but that would be really inappropriate :(
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |