On April 07 2010 09:36 dNo_O wrote: oh no some journalists died. that's a risk they chose to take going to iraq. over 20,000 people starve to death everyday. it's not a tragedy that 8 died prematurely from being somewhere they knew it was risky to be.
THIS IS UNWARRANTED OUTRAGE! SOMEONE NEEDS TO PUT A STOP TO OUTRAGING OVER THINGS THAT AREN'T OUTRAGEOUS!
This is the kind of post that makes me disgusted. Some people here in US dont care about peoples lives that arent american! Just 8 innocent people died in this incident OH NO! Big deal what if some of those 8 people were your family members would you make a big deal? .
If I had 8 family members that were in an area that was actively engaging US forces, were carrying things that might potentially look like weapons, and were obviously pretty fucking close to real insurgents and then were moving around said hostile city suspiciously around US air support I wouldn't be the least bit surprised.
I don't agree with the Iraq war, but to be fair most of the Iraqi deaths are Iraqi vs Iraqi violence. It is like blaming police for inter-city gang violence because they killed an innocent guy once. Also to be fair, news hasn't regularly reported casualties in years lol.
On April 07 2010 09:36 dNo_O wrote: oh no some journalists died. that's a risk they chose to take going to iraq. over 20,000 people starve to death everyday. it's not a tragedy that 8 died prematurely from being somewhere they knew it was risky to be.
THIS IS UNWARRANTED OUTRAGE! SOMEONE NEEDS TO PUT A STOP TO OUTRAGING OVER THINGS THAT AREN'T OUTRAGEOUS!
This is the kind of post that makes me disgusted. Some people here in US dont care about peoples lives that arent american! Just 8 innocent people died in this incident OH NO! Big deal what if some of those 8 people were your family members would you make a big deal? .
If I had 8 family members that were in an area that was actively engaging US forces, were carrying things that might potentially look like weapons, and were obviously pretty fucking close to real insurgents and then were moving around said hostile city suspiciously around US air support I wouldn't be the least bit surprised.
Did you watch how those 8 people from the beginning? It was in broad daylight, in an very big open courtyard... walking slowly and talking on cell phones with cameras that looked like weapons... if i was an insurgent and had an IQ of a 6 year old i would know not to gather in open court yards and taking my time as if i was enjoying a nice conversation with the locals. at no times were they setting up for combat when the helicopter shot them they were gathered and talking on cell phones and had no idea where they were hit from. If they were insurgents wouldnt they know to discuss things inside a house or something...
On April 07 2010 09:12 DreamShake wrote: First off, watch the full, unedited one, without the political editorializing:
A little background is given in this one that is absent from the edited one. First off, the Apache's mission was to support that infantry platoon. A few minutes before the video starts, that platoon takes RPG and small arms fire in that vicinity, so the Apache is called up to find the guys doing it. Source: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hsNUgILqRcy2oq1uFmVilJ1iQeAAD9ET6UK01 the 12th paragraph.
Our video starts. They see a large group of people, all adult males, several of whom are armed. You can see 2 AK's and at least one actual RPG around 3:30-3:45 . Next, they see a man peeking around the corner and pointing what looks like an RPG at the infantryman about four blocks away. Here is the third to last picture that the photographer took on his camera, believed to have been taken when he peeked around the corner and was identified by the Apache.: Ya guys see why the pilots were so nervous? Armed men? Check. Immediate threat to American lives? Check. They get permission to fire, and as soon as they have a shot, they take it. (For what it's worth, the actions of this group of people are very suspicious looking, especially in a combat zone mere minutes after US forces have been fired on. Including having the RPG firer simply poke around the corner and fire while everyone else hangs back to avoid backblast. See here for a slightly humorous example: . Obviously one example does not a trend make, but I'm just bringing it to your attention) Secondly, I have yet to see anyone say that the group of guys with the reporters were NOT insurgents. For extra emphasis, at 30:45 there is more small arms fire. At 31:10 you see guys with AK's and body armor running away from the area. There was DEFINITELY a battle going on in this area, something that Wikileaks biased editing job carefully omits. It wouldn't be the first time that Reuters stringers were hanging out with insurgents for some good pictures. For instance, this picture: was taken by none other than Namir Noor-Eldeen, one of the photographers killed in this attack. Wonder how he got that? How about THIS one: http://blogs.reuters.com/blog/2007/07/18/losses-in-the-family/
Here, Namir is obviously standing about 10 feet away from insurgents as they commit an act of violence. I'm not passing judgement on him, I actually think it's good to have reporters as close as possible to the conflict, but I'm merely pointing out that hanging out with insurgents is something that Noor-Eldeen had been doing for a few years prior to his death. Anyways, back to the video. At 19:20, someone reports finding an RPG round. At 32:54, someone asks if it's been defused yet, and is told "no, it's still live" Even if everyone in Iraq has an AK, only the bad guys have RPG rounds. The discovery of an RPG round among the bodies makes me believe that Namir Noor-Eldeen was yet again hanging out with an insurgent group looking for great shots. He and the other photographer were almost certainly innocent of actual wrongdoing, but the armed men they were with were in all likelihood some of the ACTUAL insurgents who fired on US troops before the video started. As for the van that was attacked, I'll admit that it's slightly sketchier, but I'll clarify that by pointing out that the SAME VAN is seen AT the engagement site at 00:40 of the full video.
The pilots notice it and mention it as a possible target. And then somehow, by some coincidence, the group of adult men in that van magically appear shortly after the airstrike to give aid to insurgents? That's absolutely suspicious enough to make a case for engaging it. I don't know that I personally would have engaged that van, but I find in totally understandable that they did. Although, the video leaves out a lot of context. Yes, this video is disturbing simply for the sheer violence and immediate destruction. But think about it before mindlessly jumping to conclusions regarding what actually happened that day.
On April 07 2010 10:04 Romantic wrote: I don't agree with the Iraq war, but to be fair most of the Iraqi deaths are Iraqi vs Iraqi violence. It is like blaming police for inter-city gang violence because they killed an innocent guy once. Also to be fair, news hasn't regularly reported casualties in years lol.
Yes not all iraqi deaths can be directly attributed to american troops but a majority and the others are certainly indirectly correlated. The americans are supporting one group over the other because they are more pro "democracy" and pro American which leads to those internal conflicts. And its not a war, its an invasion/occupation. It was war for the first week, after those first few weeks/months it became occupation versus resistance from local iraqis.
On April 07 2010 09:36 dNo_O wrote: oh no some journalists died. that's a risk they chose to take going to iraq. over 20,000 people starve to death everyday. it's not a tragedy that 8 died prematurely from being somewhere they knew it was risky to be.
THIS IS UNWARRANTED OUTRAGE! SOMEONE NEEDS TO PUT A STOP TO OUTRAGING OVER THINGS THAT AREN'T OUTRAGEOUS!
This is the kind of post that makes me disgusted. Some people here in US dont care about peoples lives that arent american! Just 8 innocent people died in this incident OH NO! Big deal what if some of those 8 people were your family members would you make a big deal? .
If I had 8 family members that were in an area that was actively engaging US forces, were carrying things that might potentially look like weapons, and were obviously pretty fucking close to real insurgents and then were moving around said hostile city suspiciously around US air support I wouldn't be the least bit surprised.
Did you watch how those 8 people from the beginning? It was in broad daylight, in an very big open courtyard... walking slowly and talking on cell phones with cameras that looked like weapons... if i was an insurgent and had an IQ of a 6 year old i would know not to gather in open court yards and taking my time as if i was enjoying a nice conversation with the locals. at no times were they setting up for combat when the helicopter shot them they were gathered and talking on cell phones and had no idea where they were hit from. If they were insurgents wouldnt they know to discuss things inside a house or something...
They WERE insurgents. Otherwise, why did they have an AK-47 and RPG's? No, I'm not talking about the cameras that looked like weapons. I'm talking about the ACTUAL weapons they found with the bodies.
And, no, it's not as if they were just loitering. They were in an area where American troops had been taking small arms fire all day, where there were no noncombatants to the best of anyone's knowledge. And, on top of that, one of these individuals was aiming what ANYONE could mistake for an RPG at a Humvee less than 100 meters down the road.
On April 07 2010 09:36 dNo_O wrote: oh no some journalists died. that's a risk they chose to take going to iraq. over 20,000 people starve to death everyday. it's not a tragedy that 8 died prematurely from being somewhere they knew it was risky to be.
THIS IS UNWARRANTED OUTRAGE! SOMEONE NEEDS TO PUT A STOP TO OUTRAGING OVER THINGS THAT AREN'T OUTRAGEOUS!
This is the kind of post that makes me disgusted. Some people here in US dont care about peoples lives that arent american! Just 8 innocent people died in this incident OH NO! Big deal what if some of those 8 people were your family members would you make a big deal? .
If I had 8 family members that were in an area that was actively engaging US forces, were carrying things that might potentially look like weapons, and were obviously pretty fucking close to real insurgents and then were moving around said hostile city suspiciously around US air support I wouldn't be the least bit surprised.
Did you watch how those 8 people from the beginning? It was in broad daylight, in an very big open courtyard... walking slowly and talking on cell phones with cameras that looked like weapons... if i was an insurgent and had an IQ of a 6 year old i would know not to gather in open court yards and taking my time as if i was enjoying a nice conversation with the locals. at no times were they setting up for combat when the helicopter shot them they were gathered and talking on cell phones and had no idea where they were hit from. If they were insurgents wouldnt they know to discuss things inside a house or something...
Considering in the area insurgents had been actively engaging in combat with US forces and insurgents had been firing RPG's as the Apache previously that day. And stop acting like the pilots should have been like "WAAIIIT, THESE MEN ARE TALKING ON CELL PHONES. TERRORISTS ARE TOO STUPID TO TALK ON PHONES IN PUBLIC WITH THEIR GUNS, SO WE SHOULD OBVIOUSLY NOT SHOOT."
On April 07 2010 09:36 dNo_O wrote: oh no some journalists died. that's a risk they chose to take going to iraq. over 20,000 people starve to death everyday. it's not a tragedy that 8 died prematurely from being somewhere they knew it was risky to be.
THIS IS UNWARRANTED OUTRAGE! SOMEONE NEEDS TO PUT A STOP TO OUTRAGING OVER THINGS THAT AREN'T OUTRAGEOUS!
This is the kind of post that makes me disgusted. Some people here in US dont care about peoples lives that arent american! Just 8 innocent people died in this incident OH NO! Big deal what if some of those 8 people were your family members would you make a big deal? What if other people say the same to you when your family members died in an incident? American lives worth more? on what scale are you measuring? By the way over 1 million iraqis have died since the beginning of the invasion how many US soldiers died? a couple thousands... this is the kind of things they dont usually report! These kinds of incidents need to be brought into daylight! The new media in the US make such a fuss about couple US soldiers being killed every so often but they dont even report the millions of iraqis that have died... and people are crying propaganda and brainwashing without knowing that they themselves are bring brainwashed.
stupid is as stupid dies. a couple thousands? and here we have a grand total of 129 journalists. so what are you crying about? if my family died in a nononcoms zone and this was video of it i'd be sad, but i'd also feel like they were kinda asking for it. i don't care what nationality these lives were either. do you not see what i said about over 20,000 people starving to death everyday? the fact that 8 reporters died is not an outrage. especially when they died the way they did: doing something they knew was life-threatening.
uhh... that the iraqi death toll has been over a million and that the us death toll is nearing 4.5k is the ONLY THING THE NEWS REPORTS. do you actually watch, or read the news? it's looks like a footnote on A8 or on the cnn ticker. they've been reporting that for over a year. 'these kinds of incidents'? really? because 1 reporter has died for every 45 americans?
if you want to talk value of life, in the world it'd be impossible for you to win that argument too. the cost of life in most of the world is cheap. it's a lot pricier in america to raise a child and put it through school than any other country. the chances that an american citizen has a much better education than anyone who isn't from a western european country is a pretty safe bet as well. what scale are you measuring?
On April 07 2010 09:36 dNo_O wrote: oh no some journalists died. that's a risk they chose to take going to iraq. over 20,000 people starve to death everyday. it's not a tragedy that 8 died prematurely from being somewhere they knew it was risky to be.
THIS IS UNWARRANTED OUTRAGE! SOMEONE NEEDS TO PUT A STOP TO OUTRAGING OVER THINGS THAT AREN'T OUTRAGEOUS!
This is the kind of post that makes me disgusted. Some people here in US dont care about peoples lives that arent american! Just 8 innocent people died in this incident OH NO! Big deal what if some of those 8 people were your family members would you make a big deal? .
If I had 8 family members that were in an area that was actively engaging US forces, were carrying things that might potentially look like weapons, and were obviously pretty fucking close to real insurgents and then were moving around said hostile city suspiciously around US air support I wouldn't be the least bit surprised.
Did you watch how those 8 people from the beginning? It was in broad daylight, in an very big open courtyard... walking slowly and talking on cell phones with cameras that looked like weapons... if i was an insurgent and had an IQ of a 6 year old i would know not to gather in open court yards and taking my time as if i was enjoying a nice conversation with the locals. at no times were they setting up for combat when the helicopter shot them they were gathered and talking on cell phones and had no idea where they were hit from. If they were insurgents wouldnt they know to discuss things inside a house or something...
have you watched other apache gun footage? it looks really similar. confusingly similar some might say...
On April 07 2010 10:33 Pellucidity wrote: So it would appear innocent people die in wars.. who knew?
Ya, lol. I just watched the video and the soldiers clearly did nothing wrong. I didnt read the thread, but I have trouble believing people are outraged about this.
A little background is given in this one that is absent from the edited one. First off, the Apache's mission was to support that infantry platoon. A few minutes before the video starts, that platoon takes RPG and small arms fire in that vicinity, so the Apache is called up to find the guys doing it. Source: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hsNUgILqRcy2oq1uFmVilJ1iQeAAD9ET6UK01 the 12th paragraph.
Our video starts. They see a large group of people, all adult males, several of whom are armed. You can see 2 AK's and at least one actual RPG around 3:30-3:45 . Next, they see a man peeking around the corner and pointing what looks like an RPG at the infantryman about four blocks away. Here is the third to last picture that the photographer took on his camera, believed to have been taken when he peeked around the corner and was identified by the Apache.: Ya guys see why the pilots were so nervous? Armed men? Check. Immediate threat to American lives? Check. They get permission to fire, and as soon as they have a shot, they take it. (For what it's worth, the actions of this group of people are very suspicious looking, especially in a combat zone mere minutes after US forces have been fired on. Including having the RPG firer simply poke around the corner and fire while everyone else hangs back to avoid backblast. See here for a slightly humorous example: . Obviously one example does not a trend make, but I'm just bringing it to your attention) Secondly, I have yet to see anyone say that the group of guys with the reporters were NOT insurgents. For extra emphasis, at 30:45 there is more small arms fire. At 31:10 you see guys with AK's and body armor running away from the area. There was DEFINITELY a battle going on in this area, something that Wikileaks biased editing job carefully omits. It wouldn't be the first time that Reuters stringers were hanging out with insurgents for some good pictures. For instance, this picture: was taken by none other than Namir Noor-Eldeen, one of the photographers killed in this attack. Wonder how he got that? How about THIS one: http://blogs.reuters.com/blog/2007/07/18/losses-in-the-family/
Here, Namir is obviously standing about 10 feet away from insurgents as they commit an act of violence. I'm not passing judgement on him, I actually think it's good to have reporters as close as possible to the conflict, but I'm merely pointing out that hanging out with insurgents is something that Noor-Eldeen had been doing for a few years prior to his death. Anyways, back to the video. At 19:20, someone reports finding an RPG round. At 32:54, someone asks if it's been defused yet, and is told "no, it's still live" Even if everyone in Iraq has an AK, only the bad guys have RPG rounds. The discovery of an RPG round among the bodies makes me believe that Namir Noor-Eldeen was yet again hanging out with an insurgent group looking for great shots. He and the other photographer were almost certainly innocent of actual wrongdoing, but the armed men they were with were in all likelihood some of the ACTUAL insurgents who fired on US troops before the video started. As for the van that was attacked, I'll admit that it's slightly sketchier, but I'll clarify that by pointing out that the SAME VAN is seen AT the engagement site at 00:40 of the full video.
The pilots notice it and mention it as a possible target. And then somehow, by some coincidence, the group of adult men in that van magically appear shortly after the airstrike to give aid to insurgents? That's absolutely suspicious enough to make a case for engaging it. I don't know that I personally would have engaged that van, but I find in totally understandable that they did. Although, the video leaves out a lot of context. Yes, this video is disturbing simply for the sheer violence and immediate destruction. But think about it before mindlessly jumping to conclusions regarding what actually happened that day.
Should be put into the OP so people don't waste time reading through this thread of judgments on biased journalism.
I second this. I've been following through this thread but I would have loved to read all this from the start. Absolutely amazing post, thank you much for the information that was severely lacking about the situation.
if you want to talk value of life, in the world it'd be impossible for you to win that argument too. the cost of life in most of the world is cheap. it's a lot pricier in america to raise a child and put it through school than any other country. the chances that an american citizen has a much better education than anyone who isn't from a western european country is a pretty safe bet as well. what scale are you measuring?
if thats how you see the value of life... there is no hope in arguing with you. a life is priceless and an american life is not worth more than any other human being on this planet. This is the kind of thoughts these soldiers have as well. In the video, after they said identified the 11 iraqi with innocents within them. the soldiers said " oh dam, oh well! they shouldnt have brought their children to combat" thats your mentality as well. The soldiers did not have respect of the iraqis life they just terminated. Thats where most of the outrage comes from. Not from misidentification of cameras and weapons. The attitude and the conversation they had on the transmission were disgusting. Towards the end of the video when they shot 3 hellfire missles into that building. You can clearly see when the first missile struck there were civilians walking by that house. They were definetely dead after the blast. They didnt fire the second missile for a long time (about 10 mins) which is when other civilians and passerbyes where going into the building to check for victims and wounded which is exactly when they fired the third and fourth missile with people trying to help whoever was inside...
On April 06 2010 01:31 Hawk wrote: Unless I'm missing something I really don't see what the outrage is.
The first part of the attack is debatable. While i for myself cannot see the camera mistaken as a weapon, i can imagine that under battle conditions it is very possible.
However, the shooting on the van is violating us military roe and the geneva convention:
-) Both people coming out of the van were unarmed -) Both of them did nothing to threaten the heli or other allied forces -) Near the van there were no signs of additional arms -) They did act to help a wounded person
I figure that at least the 4th point is in direct contradiction to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_convention "The Geneva Conventions comprise rules that apply in times of armed conflict and seek to protect people who are not or are no longer taking part in hostilities, for example: wounded or sick fighters"
Even if he were an insurgent, they would not be allowed to identify him as target since he didn't reach for anything looking like a weapon and was obviously in need of and receiving medical help.
Your inability to see what is wrong with the action shown on the footage is one of the main reasons americans have a very bad reputation outside your home country. Yes even us euros know that war is ugly. But even we figure that if you are a developed nation and are taking part in an armed conflict, your solders have to abide to certain rules. Also the outrage is mostly about the video not being release earlier DESPITE Reuters having filed a claim under the freedom of information act in late 2007 and still have got no material from the pentagon.
I am sorry that you cannot see that 2 things went very wrong here and i hope that you represent a minority in your country.
One of the best posts arguing against the soldiers' actions so far in my opinion. No wonder no one defending the American soldiers has replied to this after two pages. Simply because there is no defense to the facts proven by this post.
My main issue isn't in the fact that the firing mission was conducted as I can see why it was conducted in terms of safety etc; but rather, the attitude of the people conducting it. They seem completely desensitized. To be quite frank, they seem itching just to shoot something and their general attitiude to the whole situation is just...urgh. It makes me kinda depressed thinking these guys were so unprofessional.
Say what you want about the soldiers behaviour, but these people are trained to kill, if they don't have a trigger happy mindset they're probably not going to be of much use in a war and will more than likely be a danger to their own unit.
I don't really see any wrongdoings, the cameras might have been just that cameras, but considering the ongoings in the vicinity and the fact that there was ground troops close by you simply don't take chances. These photographers were just at the wrong place at the wrong time.
The first part of the attack is debatable. While i for myself cannot see the camera mistaken as a weapon, i can imagine that under battle conditions it is very possible.
However, the shooting on the van is violating us military roe and the geneva convention:
-) Both people coming out of the van were unarmed -) Both of them did nothing to threaten the heli or other allied forces -) Near the van there were no signs of additional arms -) They did act to help a wounded person
I figure that at least the 4th point is in direct contradiction to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_convention "The Geneva Conventions comprise rules that apply in times of armed conflict and seek to protect people who are not or are no longer taking part in hostilities, for example: wounded or sick fighters"
Even if he were an insurgent, they would not be allowed to identify him as target since he didn't reach for anything looking like a weapon and was obviously in need of and receiving medical help.
Your inability to see what is wrong with the action shown on the footage is one of the main reasons americans have a very bad reputation outside your home country. Yes even us euros know that war is ugly. But even we figure that if you are a developed nation and are taking part in an armed conflict, your solders have to abide to certain rules. Also the outrage is mostly about the video not being release earlier DESPITE Reuters having filed a claim under the freedom of information act in late 2007 and still have got no material from the pentagon.
I am sorry that you cannot see that 2 things went very wrong here and i hope that you represent a minority in your country.
i agree with this 100 percent .. how can congress declare war .. and then not treat the combatants by the said rules .. How can anyone in their right mind not see that firing on that van is a clear violation of Geneva code ( originally treaty of Versailles ? think it was adopted earlier but revised in Geneva, if i remember correctly maybe even earlier than Versailles; the concept of wounded given protection and people removing them is very old , alittle afer the turn of the 20th century ? )...they were unarmed and removing wounded from the field how can this be justified ???? even if they were combatants ( which they clearly weren't),, I really want to understand how you fools are missing what is right in front of your face... You can talk all you want about cameras looking like weapons , or weapons found on the scene , or earlier engagements( wouldn't surprise me if they were planted knowing the way this was all handled by the military) however none of this is RELEVANT to nonviolent personal attempting to remove wounded .. so is this a WAR sanctioned by congress or not ? or are we just acting as hit squads that can do whatever we want with no regard to international law ?( which ironically enough is the supposed reason we are there in the first place ..cough cough oil oil , by the way not all of us Americans are so callus , obtuse , and blind to reality ,, but unfortunately i am beginning to think most are ( and sadly he represents the majority imo ,,, after 2 pages no response .. don't hold your breath typically people will compartmentalize a losing argument and focus on things they can defend .. there is no rational defense here so it will be ignored
Mastermind Canada. April 07 2010 11:12. Posts 4330 PM Profile Blog Quote On April 07 2010 10:33 Pellucidity wrote: So it would appear innocent people die in wars.. who knew?
Ya, lol. I just watched the video and the soldiers clearly did nothing wrong. I didnt read the thread, but I have trouble believing people are outraged about this.
clearly did nothing wrong firing on unarmed poeple removing wounded .. posing absolutely no threat ... what planet do you come from ?????? im glad you think this is something funny get your good lols in
stupid is as stupid dies. a couple thousands? and here we have a grand total of 129 journalists. so what are you crying about? if my family died in a nononcoms zone and this was video of it i'd be sad, but i'd also feel like they were kinda asking for it. i don't care what nationality these lives were either. do you not see what i said about over 20,000 people starving to death everyday? the fact that 8 reporters died is not an outrage. especially when they died the way they did: doing something they knew was life-threatening.
uhh... that the iraqi death toll has been over a million and that the us death toll is nearing 4.5k is the ONLY THING THE NEWS REPORTS. do you actually watch, or read the news? it's looks like a footnote on A8 or on the cnn ticker. they've been reporting that for over a year. 'these kinds of incidents'? really? because 1 reporter has died for every 45 americans?
if you want to talk value of life, in the world it'd be impossible for you to win that argument too. the cost of life in most of the world is cheap. it's a lot pricier in america to raise a child and put it through school than any other country. the chances that an american citizen has a much better education than anyone who isn't from a western european country is a pretty safe bet as well. what scale are you measuring?
if you want to talk $ value of a life: according to syracuse, american children cost about $300,000 each.http://www.syracuse.com/today/index.ssf/2009/08/raising_a_child_in_the_united.html
Let me get this str8 .. you are actually arguing American life is worth more based on monetary reasoning and cost of living statistics ???? i dont even know where to start with you ,, you are in serious need of therapy, please stop embarrassing us Americans with more than half a brain and some semblance of even relative morality
On April 06 2010 01:31 Hawk wrote: Unless I'm missing something I really don't see what the outrage is.
The first part of the attack is debatable. While i for myself cannot see the camera mistaken as a weapon, i can imagine that under battle conditions it is very possible.
However, the shooting on the van is violating us military roe and the geneva convention:
-) Both people coming out of the van were unarmed -) Both of them did nothing to threaten the heli or other allied forces -) Near the van there were no signs of additional arms -) They did act to help a wounded person
I figure that at least the 4th point is in direct contradiction to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_convention "The Geneva Conventions comprise rules that apply in times of armed conflict and seek to protect people who are not or are no longer taking part in hostilities, for example: wounded or sick fighters"
Even if he were an insurgent, they would not be allowed to identify him as target since he didn't reach for anything looking like a weapon and was obviously in need of and receiving medical help.
Your inability to see what is wrong with the action shown on the footage is one of the main reasons americans have a very bad reputation outside your home country. Yes even us euros know that war is ugly. But even we figure that if you are a developed nation and are taking part in an armed conflict, your solders have to abide to certain rules. Also the outrage is mostly about the video not being release earlier DESPITE Reuters having filed a claim under the freedom of information act in late 2007 and still have got no material from the pentagon.
I am sorry that you cannot see that 2 things went very wrong here and i hope that you represent a minority in your country.
Your bullets are based entirely on hindsight. The fact that an unmarked van approached the site to help people (which is also conjecture, btw. You still don't know who they are or what they're doing, you're just assuming they're good samaritans, which the end of Dreamshake's post contradicts) is a far more rare occurrence than an unmarked van approaching a hot zone as means of an attack. The entire reason the helicopter was there in the first place was because of an engagement, which means that there were additional arms nearby.
What is your definition of unarmed? This is the reason why applying the Geneva Convention is totally bogus to this and any other modern war. It's a product of an old era, shaped only by the winners, that is completely obsolete in nearly every capacity. Bayoneting someone is considered a war crime? I'll keep that in mind when I set off an explosive by making a cell phone call. What about a person standing on a rooftop with a mirror, or even a phone, spotting for a nearby sniper? Are they off limits? The reason we use insurgent is because we cannot describe people as soldiers anymore.
Point 1 is untrue, point 2 is unsubstantiated, point 3 is untrue and point 4 is unsubstantiated.
EPT
