[IRAQ] US Forces with an example of "Collateral Damage"

This is just flat out sad.

DD

 

It's funny...the Western nations have run up two wars in "vengeance". I sometimes feel like we're in a dream world here. Even accounting for the fact that most North Americans would consider Arab causalities on a much lower scale then soldier causalities...one has to wonder if we think that "collateral" civilians in these circumstances don't suffer from emotionality?

I guarantee you that if someone killed my father, I would seek revenge. Rapidly. This is a staple of the Western mindset. An eye for an eye. Christ, our entire judicial system is based on this.

What makes us think that people we kill as "collateral" are worth less to the ones who love them? Maybe they don't have the means to exact revenge right now. But if they ever do, mercy for all of us who stood by and considered a wailing child as nothing more then a good frame to introduce a story about our latest war hi-jinks.

Like the Western powers who ever wondered how vile Fascism could spread from a gutted Germany, we stand again wondering about radical Islam.

I'll put it out there. How does radical Islam or any extremist ideology spread? Empty stomachs. Dead relatives. Wanton destruction.

As I see it, terrorists represent the world's greatest rising commodity. Desperate young men and (increasingly) women who have nothing to lose. It's fine if you want to stand by and defend "war in the name of rights" and "economic justice for those who have worked for it->notice how even socialist ideals are ridiculed for people in our own nation...nevermind the world at large!" But be aware of the consequences. And do not be so surprised that so many people despise this system and will do anything to destroy it.

 

I think the US military never really fully comprehended the importance of civilian casualty in Iraq till recently.

Its like the police, there can be a thousand good officers, it just takes one corrupt one to make the people distrust the law.

In Iraq you can kill thousands of terrorists, all it takes is one civilian casualty to make the people hate you.

 

Video is blocked - I presume this is the video the state department tried to hide and then attempted to intimidate wikileaks about?

Insane.

More insane? That nothing will come of this.

 

Can't really blame the soldiers. Its war and after you been shot at enough times what would you do.

 

Not shoot first and ask questions later?

There was no obvious threat from this group. I couldn't even see the RPG the guy was referring to. And AKs, well, I saw a few, but who the hell wouldn't carry AKs around a running war zone? I mean we have patriots here gunning to have themselves some lead in schools, parks etc.

This is a serious problem. The "shoot first, ask later" attitude prevalent among certain American military operations has seriously f***** up things before and I mean on a MASSIVE scale.

Best example I can think of...

This was a direct factor in the ensuing Battle of Mogadishu (a battle that did not need to happen) and is a large reason why Somalia is a total s***hole responsible now for both a) terrorism and b) pirating.

These incidents not only kill innocent civilians, they undo American strategic goals.

Now, yes, it is war. But that is no excuse for a military with the strategic and technological prowess of the United States and one with such a significant advantage against its' enemies in conventional warfare. Greater caution HAS to be exercised before unleashing a torrent of apocalypse.

 

I am very against the war, but this is a judgement call and it was an incorrect call. If you are behind the lens, and you see this with no knowledge of reporters in the immediate area, what do you do?

If you let it go, and they do have AK47s and RPGs, then you have effectively led to the death of other ground forces.

It's difficult and this video does not do the decision any justice.

 

Respectfully, I don't think you understand the military. Maybe that is the problem with the politicians as well. If you have an attack dog and you let it off the leash, it has been trained since it was a puppy to attack, and it is going to bite someone at the least provocation. If that is a problem, you probably should use another tool.

 

Caveats:

1) They clearly shoot the wounded.
2) I am less upset about the "kill em all" attitude of the soldiers as I am the glaringly obvious desire of the military brass and government to hide the atrocity from the public. At a minimum, some investigation/training should result from this, but instead it's swept under the rug. "Nothing to see, citizen, move along."

 

This is a problem.

I am not accusing the individuals on this particular mission. It is the system that has to go.

The fact that this is an illegal war with very dubious reasoning behind it in the first place compounds things and makes it worse. However, what I would like to see, especially of the American military, is a more judicious application of military rules of engagement. I would especially like it if the military took on Chapter 7 UN Rules of Engagement and treated them seriously.

Yes, I am aware Chapter 7 is only relevant to UN Peacekeeping operations, but in a case such as Iraq where "hostile forces" have nominally been defeated and the primary objective is to maintain stability, I think they have a lot to offer.

If you look through that, there are several flagrant violations. First, the rules of challenging were not respected at all. The helicopter was not in danger. None of the group had fired upon it directly. None of those steps were respected!

There was NONE of the hostile acts described in this ROE from the group on the ground.

When they opened fire, it was blatantly clear that this was a case of overkill and if there had been any civilians in the area, they would've been killed or hurt as well.

Now, ideally, the US military would not be stuck in wars where ROE such as these are needed in the first place but I don't think anyone of us thinks that will happen. However, is it so unreasonable to ask that training and reprimands be implemented so that incidents like this are not repeated? It's not that hard either. In this case as in others, there were alternatives. Respecting these ROE for example would've probably yielded better results.

 

Eliminate the military. Fine. A noble goal. Good luck. People have been trying that for quite a while. The rules of the prisoner's dilemma, unfortunately, apply.

All of this is irrelevant to the conduct of the military. They aren't police officers. They aren't "peacekeepers". They are the country's hired killers. They do the best they can in the fog of war. They make mistakes. They are taught to err on the side of killing the enemy, as opposed to erring on the side of being killed by the enemy.

Heck, every war even has its own versions of My Lai. Even when you take a really loose set of rules, these are 20 year old kids who've been taught to ignore every moral restraint they've been taught since they were able to speak. When you crash through that wall, you can guarantee that some people will eventually snap. It would be nice if they were all war robots with perfect judgment, but such a thing doesn't exist.

If you don't want any mistakes, if you don't want over-zealousness, don't unleash the people you trained to be killers. They are a very blunt tool. There has never been a war in the history of the universe where a whole lot of innocent people didn't get killed. You are banging your head against the wall against human nature if you think you can change that. You might as well be complaining you don't like the fact that it gets cold in winter. Intrinsic to turning someone into a combat solder, you turn them into killers.

Clearly you have a fundamental problem with the war. Fine. Take that up with the politicians. But don't expect the soldiers to be anything but soldiers. They don't get to sit around and say, "well, we don't like this war, so we'll half-ass it and get soldiers killed so as to not offend our sensibilities about what qualifies as a just war."

 

can't see the video, don't even know what you guys are talking about, but they are talking about this on MSNBC right now as breaking news

 

Hmm...your insistence that human nature and warfare cannot change is ironic because within the last one hundred years human nature and warfare have fundamentally changed for the worse. While there has never been a war where no innocent people have died, proportionally speaking, the most civilian casualties number-wise and percentage-wise have taken place in the 20th-21st century, ever since the concept of "total war" has evolved thanks to the our relentless technological drive to develop killer tools.

I am merely saying we take this new reality and rein it in, which is perfectly reasonable. I'm not saying eliminate the military; military hegemony and squabbles over petty nothingness have always existed. However, total war and collateral damage are fairly new concepts that evolved from what I believe is akin to a child who gets new toys and is not quite sure what to do with them. This can be changed. Rules of engagement can be redefined. Military tools can be developed to kill less people rather then to kill more.

The recent evolution for example of Chapter 6, Chapter 6 1/2 and Chapter 7 Rules of Engagement from the UN and the training of soldiers under these rules for example are an effort to rein in over-zealousness that while not 100% effective, at least represent a step in the right direction.

We owe it to innocence. Hell, we owe it to own strategic interests to pursue these things. Think Israel antagonizing Palestine is dangerous to American strategic interests as our generals have suggested? What about wholesale slaughtering innocent civilians?

I guarantee more American soldiers will die if these incidents continue.

 

Wrong tool for the job.

Wrong response to the work.

Lots of wrong things.

 

Really? Nobody fought that kind of war until the 20th Century? Are you sure?

In any case, if you get the insurgents to line up in a field in uniform and in formation, I'm sure the US Army would be glad to oblige opposite them. They really hate having to employ COIN, and would absolutely prefer good old fashioned maneuver warfare. Unfortunately, it takes two to tango.

 

Nobody fought the kind of war before the 20th century that had machine guns that could rip through 500 civilians in around 2 seconds, thus why I said there was an "evolution" of total war and why we have to be careful with the new toys we have created...though it is telling that you have to look through Attila the Hun and Genghis Khan as comparisons for the American military. I hope we never have a hegemonic country with such a dark heart as those two villains.

You're being disingenuous with the insurgents. "oh, why can't they employ conventional military tactics?"

The United States should never have to use the actions of lawless thugs to justify itself breaking the law. A country of such ideals and abilities should never stoop that low, especially in a war that it essentially created for itself.

Even in conventional warfare as well, one would hope that a more lenient set of rules of engagement would be implemented and that swift punishment would be exacted against any who defy these codes. I expect nothing less from the most powerful military in the world.

 

This video is just amazingly horrible.....just a break down in the chain of command.....why shoot them? They had cameras and were walking around, I mean it can only increase our enemies.

When are we leaving Iraq? And can we reduce the danged military, we need the money to pay down our debt.

DD

 

Everyone should have a fundamental problem with all wars, for the reason you just gave -- a whole lot of innocent people will inevitably be killed. War is a horrific evil, and that is precisely why you exhaust all other options before engaging in it.

That being said, we should not just take it for granted that in this particular instance shooting was necessary. Accurate threat assessment is part of their job, and this was clearly a big screw up from a moral and tactical standpoint.

 

I can understand that reasoning. But by the same logic, you have to accept that more terrorist will be created just as the case in My Lai. Those two kids and other family members aren't going to be fans of the U.S. The cycle continues.