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

NOT killing innocent and unarmed people who are helping the dead and injured <> "half-assing it"

 

Exactly. I would hate the Americans too if they kill innocent people that I know or love one. Imagine US military or any other nationality military flying into your country and cities and accidentally killing innocents people. This reason we don't understand their anger because we're not in their shoes. I'll be a terrorist myself if another country invaded my country or cities and start a war and killing innocents people that have nothing to do with the stupid conflicts.

All they are doing is creating more terrorists each days with every single innocents people that they've badly injured or kill and with their lies to cover it all up and treating the dead like just a piece of meat.

 

This is what happens when you give unemployable people guns

 

you're a moron...


sad video...unfortunately those types of things happen in war, even with the most technological military in the world engaged.

Hopefully these wars will end soon but until they do

And those soldiers are going to have to live with this the rest of their lives.

Something similar happened to my wifes uncle in vietnam, and this affects not just the victims but the grunts and commanders from our side as well

 

After watching the video, why'd you have to use the word engaged?

 

Why is he a moron?

I am guessing the military is not exactly recruiting people with a high level of education.

 

Agreed. I agree with worzel gummidge.

 

because I have a buzz

 

I agree that there is a large amount of uneducated and poor soldiers making up our military.

but unfortunatly **** happens in war. otherwise there wouldn't be friendly fire incidents

 

I can understand making wrong decisions during the heat of a battle.. but the guys here already decided from the beginning that they were going to kill those unarmed civilians from the get go

 

This is a perfect example of the "fog of war." When you are trained to look for weapons, a large strap over someone's shoulders looks a lot like the strap for a gun. The soldiers are executing their orders and attempting to complete their mission.

Soldiers are the blunt instrument that should only be used when all other options have been utterly exhausted. We needed to have a scalpel and should have concentrated on using it in Afghanistan, where we could have had a major impact if we had dedicated the time and manpower needed to build a working country there.

This video is sad, tragic, and will ultimately be repeated many more times before we are out of Iraq. The true enemy is war itself, because when we are engaged in war, we allow the worst of the human spirit to be unleashed.

 

The intelligence of military recruits is actually above the national average by a significant amount. But if you want to say Americans are just generally stupid, that's could be true.

Maybe you could show me the point in the video (in minutes and seconds) where they consipred to kill unarmed people? I missed that.

 

Why waste money on Afghanistan? Why will the results be any better than IRAQ?

We need to stop being the world police and try to stop fighting the war against the bogey man aka terrorists.

 

let's not get Ronny excited...

I'm thinking he's being a might overzealous.. possibly mostly upset about the shooter's apparent eagerness after his initial attack on the civilians,"Come on, let us shoot!" Just as the van/suv showed up to "pick up weapons and wounded."

 

did they even try to follow the rules of engagement?

edit:

9:03 We have a van that's approaching and picking up the bodies
9:15 We have individuals going to the scene, looks like possibly picking up bodies and weapons
9:21 Let me engage
9:25 Can I shoot?
(two men clearly carrying only a dead body)
9:39 Come on, let us shoot!
10:10 Engage. Clear. Come on!

 

they seemed more concerned with interpreting strapped on/mounted equipment as Ak-47's and RPGs...

 

Well, why don't you let us know what the rules of engagement are if you are sure they violated them. I don't have the specifics avaliable to me, but since they asked for and received authorization to fire each time they did, and there were instances where they clearly wanted to fire but didn't because the actions of the people they were shooting at wouldn't allow it, I would imagine so.

I used to work at a hospital. When I first started working there, the first day I got the paperwork of someone who died. I remember reading it and reading it again and I was sure I was going to remember this unfortunate guy forever out of respect. Six months later I was cracking jokes with everybody else in the hospital about the recently deceased.

When your job is death, you become that way. Things that might seem like a monumentally solemn moment to you become trivial when repeated ad infinitum.

Again, these guys job is to kill people. It is what they are paid to do. If that offends you, then you generally have a problem with the military in all respects, and your concerns are much more broad than this video.

 

Imagine if that had taken place in the US, and that was another country pulling the trigger.

 

I'm pretty sure unarmed and unhostile persons carrying a dead body does not justify being open fired on

 

The vehicle did not have a red cross/red crescent, which is required by international law to identify an ambulance. They are therefore combat support personal. If a soldier drops his rifle and runs out on the battlefield, do you really think people won't shoot at him?

The US report has indicated that they followed the rules of engagement. Clearly they made a mistake in identification, but I don't see the slightest indication that that was anything other than a genuine mistake, despite much obtuse innuendo to the contrary here. Maybe you could start with a motive for why they would engage in a conspiracy to intentionally misidentify some random journalists that they'd never met as combatants?