More positive press for the war...

[Bailey Guns]

Let me get something outta the way first. If, in fact, these were simply innocent journalists and other civilians that were killed by the US military, that's tragic. Unfortunately, incidents like this happen in a war zone...especially in an area that is known for harboring illegal combatants who frequently engage our forces under cover of civilian personnel.

So, color me skeptical that this video provides irrefutable evidence of "cold blooded murder" (thanks, Jack Murtha) being carried out by a couple of US Apache gunship crews. Despite the claims from the douchebag, Julian Assange, that US forces routinely target innocent civilians I don't see any evidence of that. In fact, what I see in this war is exactly the opposite.

In the overwhelming amount of cases where innocents were harmed I think our forces exercised restraint to the point of endangering themselves before taking action. Our military has gone to unprecedented lengths to minimize civilian casualties in this war and in Afghanistan.

Julian Assange is a hard-core leftist (probably communist) instigator who's made it his life's mission to discredit US military operations around the world. He's also a computer hacker who was convicted by the Australian government for hacking into US DoD computer systems.

I think this video is meant to incite, not to inform. And with Assange's computer and technical background I don't think it's beyond the realm of the possible that the video, while possibly real, wasn't perhaps altered with voice-overs from another (or mulitple) incident. After all, the guy admits on camera he had to break through encryption codea to get the video.

Basically, Julian Assange can kiss my ass. The little douchebag has never had the stones to go into harms way as far as I can tell to do good for the world. Though it does appear he doesn't mind stepping on the bodies of others who have in order to advance his own leftist agenda. He's also a frequent flyer on al-Jazeera. Fuck him.

[HBARleatherneck]

so, Army help pilots are called into help Marines who are being fired upon by evil people, who would in a minute cut off a body part and parade it through the street. so the Army pilot doesnt get emotional about killing them, so what. We are a professional military, we try not to get emotional. If you want emotional, join a foreign military. Alot of them are not professional, they desert thier posts, they rape, and pillage, because it is what they do. They take thier emotions into it. You can see this when ever foreign militaries kill (without trials) all the enemy, weather they surrended, were armed or not.

on a sidenote.

pull out of the warzones. close our borders completely. kill anyone who would violate or territorial soverignity. And if we or out interests are attacked anywhere, we shoud respond DISPRAPORTIONATELY. So, they get the picture that they shouldnt fuck with the US.

oh and fuck muslim terrorists.

[Hoosier]

Here is some interesting commentary from current/former .mil people on the video:

-----------

I'm military and been right over that neighborhood at a different time; the video may be disturbing but doesn't strike me as unjustifiable. The coverup is what we should save our real vitriol for. I know some of you will immediately dismiss this as you view everyone in the military as inherently evil. I find that silly. (There are also people who think I can do no wrong because I AM and I find that dangerous). Give it a read anyway. War is an ugly, atrocious action. Bad things happen every day; good things only rarely. It's a waste of money, time, potential, and especially lives. What's in this video is distasteful to say the least, but it's also intentionally inflammatory (presumably so WL gets more clicks, and we all obliged them). This video is from a period of increasing, and increasingly violent, action by insurgents. Mortar and rocket attacks, IEDs/EFPs, executions in the most grotesque manner, were all becoming the norm.
The men you hear are reacting to stress from a variety of sources: lack of sleep because of indirect fire attacks, stress from friends being WIA/KIA, stress from feeling little support from the Iraqis at that time, from being away from home and family. In all that stress, they still behaved according to the rules of engagement. They positively identified small arms (which are a threat) and misidentified an RPG. Had I not known, I would also have called out RPG. It unfortunately looks like it, and that was amplified by the pose he took. WL added in captions to let you know there were cameras to amplify outrage, but having flown around Baghdad in helos everything looks like a threat after they shoot at you.
Shooting the van was also justifiable because the "insurgents" were going to collect their wounded and weapons. Clearly the aircrew were wrong, but not unjustifiably and probably only in hindsight. They followed the ROEs, received approval to fire, and did so efficiently. Further, the initial statements that said they were engaged with a violent group also does not strike me as "cover up." If you've ever been involved with an emergency situation you know the first reports out are usually wrong. The later reports, however, I find repugnant. Events like this make me want to stay in the military because I don't want the bastards trying to cover up what was a horrific mistake thinking I won't be right over their shoulder next time.
I have found virtually all the military members I was with in Iraq serious, professional (at least on duty!), and genuinely concerned for civilians. You saw the soldiers running out with the kids. Genuine concern there, from fathers, older brothers, cousins that know kids like that back home. The amount of work we did to keep civilians out of harms way was breathtaking sometimes because it put us in much more vulnerable situations. I'm good with that. I signed up, they didn't. As for the attitude and demeanor of the aircrew, yep, it's stomach-turning. I did see this on occasion, and it's not something I've seen many redditors say they teach you in training. It's a defense mechanism to deal with the privations and violence you see. Dehumanizing the enemy makes it easier to deal with it. If you've never read or seen a synopsis of On Killing you absolutely should. That's why running over a body was seemingly funny. I'm ashamed to say I've had similar gut reactions of really terrible things, and like those guys I feel awful about it when I reflect.
This post isn't to justify the killings, but hopefully to tone down some of the hyperbole. It's a terrible tragedy; it's a waste; I'd love to see us out of Iraq as soon as feasible. It's not a war crime. It's not 18-year-old kids just wanting to kill people for the fun of it. Now, let's all be pissed together that it took this long to get the real story out. OK, too long of a ramble but I needed to get it off my chest. Ask away if you have questions; I'll tell you what I can.


-----------


Former Blackhawk pilot, Iraq veteran here. I understood engaging the first group of people. Anything resembling an RPG is going to be interpreted as a first order threat by any aircrew. And if you have any experience with that sort of threat, you know it doesn't really work like the movies. There's no.... 'RPG, five o' clock, break left...' from your crew chief. That shit doesn't work in the real world. RPG's, despite their reputation, move faster than any ordinary human can react to. By the time any crew member is done telling you about it, it's already past you. So you have to identify and engage it before it's fired. Which is what the Apache crew was trying to do. I have no problem with this.. right or wrong, they saw a potential threat and acted appropriately. Firing on the van, however, is in my opinion as a former Army Aviator, a complete departure from any ROE I've ever been subject to. Bottom line is, no weapons or hostile intent were evident. I can't think of any reason why they should have fired on the van. 'Enemy combatants' are fair game, but there's nothing in the video to suggest that the occupants of the van were doing anything but removing a wounded person from the battle. In war, horrible things happen and this is one of those things. After spending more than a year of my life in Iraq, I can't rationally defend the actions of these particular pilots but I can't stress enough that they are NOT an example of business as usual in Iraq. In all of my time in that theater of operations, I never witnessed such an example of disregard for ROE. The vast majority of soldiers over there are exercising restraint and good judgment to a point where it puts their very lives in great danger. This was a horrible, horrible thing that happened. But don't ever think it's 'just the way things are' in Iraq. It isn't.

[Jer]

America! Fuck yeah!!

[DOC]

I'm calling BS on this.
For Journalist get no love from me for saying there were kids there. If there were kids in the truck that got shot up they wouldn't be wounded they would be dead. So I'm calling BS for them throwing the part about kids in there. And next time camera men want to go walking around in a war zone they need to identify themselves as non combatants or they run the risk of being fired on.

[theGinsue]

welcome to a war zone.
mistakes happen, the media being overzealous to condemn our own troops bothers me more.
their lack of knowledge knowing the difference between a tank and a HUMVEE is more disturbing.
they expect troops to know exactly who the good guys and bad guys are in their job and are quick to call them murderers and child killers but they can't spend 10 seconds to google the difference between a tank and a HUMVEE? fuck them.

agreed. I think one of the major issues here is that staff members of Reuters ("the press") were killed. If those members of the press want to take the risk of entering an unsecured war zone and refuse to wear anything that will aid in rapid identification, then our troops can't be held accountable for their lives.

ETA:

I'm calling BS on this.

And next time camera men want to go walking around in a war zone they need to identify themselves as non combatants or they run the risk of being fired on.

I’m at work and I’ve been working on making this post for the last hour+; I get it posted and see all of the responses that have been posted in the last hour. It seems like we share a very similar viewpoint.

ETA2: Hoosier: Thank you for sharing that with us!

[Irving]

After all, the guy admits on camera he had to break through encryption codea to get the video.

Basically, Julian Assange can kiss my ass. The little douchebag has never had the stones to go into harms way as far as I can tell to do good for the world. Though it does appear he doesn't mind stepping on the bodies of others who have in order to advance his own leftist agenda. He's also a frequent flyer on al-Jazeera. Fuck him.

Can you link me to him admitting to this? I'd like to look into it.

[Bailey Guns]

It was in one of those videos, Stu.

[Irving]

Yeah, I watched it again and it is right when they introduce him in the first one. He says he got the video from a government whistle blower and just that it was encrypted. That doesn't really mean anything. We send encrypted email.

[Ryan_Th3_K1d]

America! Fuck yeah!!