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

Since you, wacko and the likes are too slow to figure it out ...

If innocent civilians got shot up and this is the kind of attitude the US shows, why should they risk their lives to help the US?

They will behave exactly like they have, the US will do the same and more Iraqis and more US soldiers will die.

Blame anyone you want, but the end result is the same.

 

Wut. Just, wut. Not to Godwin, but we killed a hell of a lot more innocents 70 years ago, so you haven't agreed with that war?

How in God's name are the soldiers supposed to know that? You see an unmarked van in a battle go out and help insurgents, you'll assume it's an insurgent. In military training, it's actually taught that not every shot you take should be a kill shot - as you can cause an enemy to be wounded, the other enemy soldiers will run to help, and now bang, you've killed two enemies instead of one. If you want to help, you have to have some identification, such as the Red Crescent. Otherwise, you charge unidentified on the battefield, one will naturally assume the enemy, and you shouldn't just let the insurgents get away so they can kill more people.

Given that the job of a soldier is well, to kill people, I'm not sure what's the problem. And I detailed the reason for their bitterness towards the populace - they wouldn't have to be there if the civilians gave a **** and actually helped in wiping out the insurgent.

 

This is a very surreal situation here. I know that if my sister was shot and I had her son in the car, she would NOT want me to save her if it meant risking his life.

With all that being said, people are frustrated with this war... we have been for years (this video is 3 years old). The people on the ground appeared to be a danger to the helicopter who were giving cover for a ground patrol. The helicopter eliminated the apparent threat. The guy doing the shooting said some things that would sicken most people (But you could use the same argument that you don't know the entire situation here. Maybe his best friend was killed by an RPG).

People are getting selectively angry at the military and ignoring the fact that these people put themselves in danger... even the journalists.

 

If you believe that we there to supposedly in Iraq to help the people, then not having compassion for the community makes no sense. Doesn't matter what the people think of you, I feel you have to treat it like the same way wardens treat a prison. They are over there to protect and uphold the laws and create safety and stability throughout the area while sifting out the real threats. And using the word insurgent makes me shake my head considering the people in the vehicle helping the wounded man didn't appear to have any weapons. It almost appears that you use the word "insurgent" to justify killing.

 

Ofcourse it is a surreal situation for us, since we are lucky to live in a country who is not being invaded. But for the people there it is a real situation. One they have to deal with every day.

A person who has that much joy in killing shouldn't be in that situation.

Ofcourse the people in the van put themselves in danger (altough you can argue that this situation was caused by an unjust war). But that does not excuse the soldiers who shot innocent people.

ofcourse accidents happen and innocent people get hurt (that is why you do not start a war unless it is in self defense there really is no other way). But this video showed that they didn't really try to find out if those people on the ground were dangerous or not. They just started shooting.

 

AC-130 Destroying Terrorists

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/j0M1m05rpq8&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/j0M1m05rpq8&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

 

cool story bro!

 

Have you ever watched one of those "real life" ER programs? In those programs, have you ever seen how totally apathetic and disinterested the ER doctors are when they declare time of death? When they are presented with such a profound moment, they call the time and then just forget it and move on like nothing happened. Five minutes later they're telling jokes. You wouldn't do that, right? They sure must be bad people if they can just completely gloss over and forget about what would be a really deep and moving moment for someone like me and you. Someone should revoke their medical licenses.

 

apples to oranges

 

Taking a life and trying to save a life is different and cannot be compared fairly.

 

The relevant point - that dealing with death every day as part of your vocation desensitizes you to any solemn emotion that someone who doesn't touch it daily feels - is absolutely an entirely fair comparison. Mostly because its true.

 

it's not about being insensitive but the extreme eagerness to KILL and celebration for KILLING afterwards

 

That is their job. That is what you are paying them to do. That is what they do every day. If you did the job, you'd be the same way.

If you would refuse to do the job and despise it, then you have a problem with the job, not the people doing it.

 

killing terrorists <> killing civilians

 

Now you're retreating. So we are agreed that it is natural to be exuberant when you've succeeded in doing your job killing terrorists so long as you aren't killing civilians?

They proceeded with a reasonable belief they were killing terrorists. Show me they knew they were killing civilians and were trying to kill civilians, as I've begged and pleaded you to do in the past to no avail, and you might have a point.

 

retreating? I didn't know we were in a battlefield..

the guys in a van who picked up an injured body, did they pose a threat?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter-insurgency

 

Show me a reason why they decided to shoot people that didn't have weapons and were only carrying a wounded man. It seems that they didn't need to shoot them, cause shouldn't the ground forces intercept the men with the vehicle.

 

People retreat from stupid illogical arguments in the D&D every day. Nobody has required it to be a battlefield in the past.

They had identified themselves, in the views of the soldiers, as being aligned with insurgents. If you are an insurgent who is providing support today in preparation to killing soldiers tomorrow, are you not a combatant? The idea is to kill anybody who is an insurgent. If you are providing field support to the guys with guns, you are an insurgent.

 

is a suppoter of an insurgent a combatant?

 

Absolutely.

Tell me, if a US soldier walked out on a battlefield to retrieve wounded comrades completely unarmed and they were not clearly identified medical personnel, even if they didn't have guns in hand would they be fair game to be shot at? Would they be shot at?