|
On April 06 2010 03:22 KissBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2010 03:21 starfries wrote:On April 06 2010 03:18 KissBlade wrote:On April 06 2010 03:18 Southlight wrote:On April 06 2010 03:14 KissBlade wrote:
The two posts do not counter each other. If you want a paraphrase: Samachking: omg these soldiers are killing people and not showing any remorse, fuck Americans! Hawk: they're soldiers, what are you expecting. Maybe you should read his post instead of making up his post in your head on what you thought you read. no, it was a pretty good paraphrase, and even if it wasn't it's still a valid point. Actually it wasn't. Reread Samachking's post. If anything, it's more or less saying the same thing Hawk was except he expressed more sympathy on the matter.
No, he said it was a crime and genocide. Forget the rest of the war and how the US got into it (idiots are still bringing it up when it's irrelevant...) there isn't any crime or genocide in the video. For christ's sake, he compares it to 'especially in positions of power(see My Lai,Nanking massacare,The Holocaust,Rwandian Genocide)' Holy shit.
That's all that's needed for them to get clearance to shoot. An unmarked van picking up people with troops in route is fair game too...
|
On April 06 2010 03:19 Subversive wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2010 01:56 Liquid`NonY wrote:
I don't see reason for outrage here. I don't know whether you saw the video or not, because I see alot of reason for outrage. I'm surprised anyone defends this. I'm not american and I know the States comes under alot of fire for it's actions overseas. However, if Australian armed forces massacred a group of civilians in another country I'd be pretty horrified. To those saying that it was hard to tell from that distance what the journalists were holding, I'd say this: all you see from the video is that they have straps over their shoulders. If that's enough to open fire on a bunch of people calmly and slowly walking around in broad daylight then how are you safe carrying a bag or anything with a shoulder strap? Also, if you can't tell if your firing at a bunch of insurgents carrying weapons or civilians walking around - then that might be a good time not to engage. If you're going to pretend that you try to minimise civilian casualties like Major Brent Cummings does in his press statement then this video is a shocking indictment. It clearly shows the soldiers were lacking in judgement and negligent in their duty. If 8 western civilians were gunned down in this matter it'd be a major controversy. Lastly when they open fire on the van - it's a van. And they falsely report that the people exiting the van are picking up "wounded and guns" when moments before they are busily searching for weapons themselves and haven't identified anyone yet reaching or holding a weapon. Terrible.
people are very good at seeing what they want to see. This goes for the soldiers maybe but also you. Read my previous post. People don't respond to people in this forum, just post and go away lol.
They are on a scouting mission. They have certain rules of engagement and if they encounter a large group of people, which seem to be carrying weapons and possible means to blow up their helicopter, they request to engage. They get the ok and engage. Everyone makes the assumption they are flying around in a fucking attack helicopter for no reason. They see some people and decide hey they have some weapons and we love to kill lets just blow them up.
This is not what happened. They saw weapons, and when i watch the video it looks like there are 4 people with possible ak's and 2 people def have them. They engage. End of story.
They didn't false report anything. They said they might be looking for wounded and guns. Never did he say they are looking for guns. Changing one word like that changes what happens completely. I watched this again to make sure.
|
On April 06 2010 03:22 reit wrote:
Couldn't those guys be an escort to the journalists? I mean, these guys have security needs too. Is every armed Iraqi a terrorist? How many people do you honestly think could actually be involved with terrorism in Iraq? What the fuck is the idea of shooting anyone holding a gun? They never shot at the chopper or seemed to be a threat...
Guess they're preparing the cannonfodder for when it's time to march on their own country.
Shoot first, cover-up the mess after.
And lol at KwarK ... I'm sorry that you can't accept to face reality. The invasion was based on forgery, lies and propaganda. If you don't agree with that, it's not a question of opinion, it's simply denial of facts.
I pointed out that:
- The governing class in America (as in the majority of Western countries) controls education.
- The media looped stories about Iraq acquiring nuclear weapons, which we now know to be a lie, based on fake documents (google Nigerian Yellow Cake).
- The media also managed to link Iraq with terrorism and 9/11, another total lie, which the public bought (that kool-aid tasted great!)
- There is a critical mass of "idiots" in the army, grunts that don't think about what they do, they just do it.
- Most of these grunts have never experienced the world, or even stepped out of the US before, their views of the world are based on sub-par elementary and high school education (and let's be honest, most of the American youth has much more knowledge and interest for the latest MTV reality show than to learn about the world we live in)
- Not being the president doesn't mean you don't hold responsability, America claims to be the spearhead of freedom and democracy, well then if the government is run by the people, for the people, the people are RESPONSIBLE for the death of each and every Iraqi civilian.
- They could coldly murder kids and women and have a giggle about it (if you haven't seen the vids, you've dug your head in the sand, Iraq is a fucking genocide at this point).
Where is the "cut off from reality part?". If you can't argue but don't want to agree, just ignore my posts like you ignore the truth.
Of course, genocide is called nation building when America does it.
I'd love to see the outrage if China was bombing a US "terrorist camp" and accidentally killed a half dozen civilians. You'd have people tearing their shirts on the public place screaming at the injustice of this. I'd like to say you'd have people blowing themselves up on chinese troops but I don't think the average American has any balls, I mean they won't even rise against tyranny taking over their country...
But it's ok in Iraq, it's lowly sandniggers, right?
Er dude, can we stick to the actual video rather than try and make it a debate about whether there were WMD's in Iraq? Trying to engage Kwark or anyone in a broad debate like that just makes it seem like your venting. Not really helpful to debate. Just saying, let's keep it on topic.
|
I apologize for lumping samachking into the others; I'd gotten annoyed at all the people bitching about immoral soldiers (by the gods, what a paradox!) and lumped you into them. When I shouldn't have.
Let's change the name then:
On April 06 2010 01:47 Puosu wrote:
What the fuck.. how do such mentally ill fuckers get that kind of power to just go shoot around in a god damn helicopter?
We can use Puosu.
On April 06 2010 01:56 majohanimo wrote:
What I find the most inreresting, are the incredible comments by the soldiers. I understand, that you have to get into a state, where you can emotionally distance yourself from your actions, but enjoying them like this makes me fucking angry. And FFS, if you can't tell those are cameras, you can't tell those are weapons too...
And why the hell are they even shooting the van?
We can use Majohanimo, and ofc we'll ignore his genius comment about "soldiers should risk their lives to get closer to a van that may or may not blow up in their face to make sure those aren't guns that'll shoot them the moment they show themselves to make sure they're not killing civilians that wandered into the aftermath of a firefight like moth to a fire."
On April 06 2010 01:59 Mystlord wrote:
I think the trigger happiness is a problem. We can't have troops in war situations wanting to kill.
We can use Mystlord.
On April 06 2010 02:18 Gumbo wrote:
From what I saw, 2 guys were holding "weapons" (which were apparently cameras) and I didnt see anything that looked like a RPG. But what disgusts me even more is how they seemed to have fun shooting those people. AND THEN SHOOTING AGAIN TO MAKE SURE THEY WERE ALL DEAD.
Gumbo, too. Which is all the more amusing because he admitted he thought they were weapons, too.
|
On April 06 2010 03:25 Hawk wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2010 03:22 KissBlade wrote:On April 06 2010 03:21 starfries wrote:On April 06 2010 03:18 KissBlade wrote:On April 06 2010 03:18 Southlight wrote:On April 06 2010 03:14 KissBlade wrote:
The two posts do not counter each other. If you want a paraphrase: Samachking: omg these soldiers are killing people and not showing any remorse, fuck Americans! Hawk: they're soldiers, what are you expecting. Maybe you should read his post instead of making up his post in your head on what you thought you read. no, it was a pretty good paraphrase, and even if it wasn't it's still a valid point. Actually it wasn't. Reread Samachking's post. If anything, it's more or less saying the same thing Hawk was except he expressed more sympathy on the matter. No, he said it was a crime and genocide. Forget the rest of the war and how the US got into it (idiots are still bringing it up when it's irrelevant...) there isn't any crime or genocide in the video. For christ's sake, he compares it to 'especially in positions of power(see My Lai, Nanking massacare, The Holocaust, Rwandian Genocide)' Holy shit.
Once again, you are either trying to be purposefully illiterate or you're just not able to read. This is why you don't quote shit out of context. He even states, there are FAR WORSE situations such as the ones he listed. Holy shit indeed.
|
On April 06 2010 03:14 KissBlade wrote:They really don't look like AK's to me. They look so indistinct I'm not sure how you could identify them as anything. Also the size of the item in proportion to the people makes it unlikely to be an AK-47. In fact, at 3:43, it DEFINITELY doesn't look big enough to be an AK. But I suppose if you're in a hostile environment where the natives are anything but friendly to you for your "war of liberation and democracy", it's better to err on the side of caution. Kwark also has a point. The system doesn't draft normal people for grunts. Show nested quote +On April 06 2010 03:12 Southlight wrote:On April 06 2010 03:07 samachking wrote:
Listening to their dialogue and how little they cared about human life was simply disturbing.
On April 06 2010 02:19 Hawk wrote:
Having to deal with killing people all day isn't gonna exactly make you a ball of sunshine or something... should our soldiers be weeping like menstrating women every time they discharge a round? Jesus.
I don't understand how people can be applying morals and ethics to soldiers in a war zone filled with suicide bombings and shit. Edit: Sorry I was quoting Hawk as a response to samachking. The two posts do not counter each other.
Really? It looks a whole lot like an AK to me. Doesn't look too small to me, especially considering that from the handle of an AK to the end of the barrel is probably like 2 feet.
Here's a pic from the wiki of it and it doesn't extend too far from the guy's body
![[image loading]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/85/Afghan_AKS-47.jpg/800px-Afghan_AKS-47.jpg)
|
On April 06 2010 03:27 lightrise wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2010 03:19 Subversive wrote:On April 06 2010 01:56 Liquid`NonY wrote:
I don't see reason for outrage here. I don't know whether you saw the video or not, because I see alot of reason for outrage. I'm surprised anyone defends this. I'm not american and I know the States comes under alot of fire for it's actions overseas. However, if Australian armed forces massacred a group of civilians in another country I'd be pretty horrified. To those saying that it was hard to tell from that distance what the journalists were holding, I'd say this: all you see from the video is that they have straps over their shoulders. If that's enough to open fire on a bunch of people calmly and slowly walking around in broad daylight then how are you safe carrying a bag or anything with a shoulder strap? Also, if you can't tell if your firing at a bunch of insurgents carrying weapons or civilians walking around - then that might be a good time not to engage. If you're going to pretend that you try to minimise civilian casualties like Major Brent Cummings does in his press statement then this video is a shocking indictment. It clearly shows the soldiers were lacking in judgement and negligent in their duty. If 8 western civilians were gunned down in this matter it'd be a major controversy. Lastly when they open fire on the van - it's a van. And they falsely report that the people exiting the van are picking up "wounded and guns" when moments before they are busily searching for weapons themselves and haven't identified anyone yet reaching or holding a weapon. Terrible. people are very good at seeing what they want to see. This goes for the soldiers maybe but also you. Read my previous post. People don't respond to people in this forum, just post and go away lol. They are on a scouting mission. They have certain rules of engagement and if they encounter a large group of people, which seem to be carrying weapons and possible means to blow up their helicopter, they request to engage. They get the ok and engage. Everyone makes the assumption they are flying around in a fucking attack helicopter for no reason. They see some people and decide hey they have some weapons and we love to kill lets just blow them up. This is not what happened. They saw weapons, and when i watch the video it looks like there are 4 people with possible ak's and 2 people def have them. They engage. End of story. They didn't false report anything. They said they might be looking for wounded and guns. Never did he say they are looking for guns. Changing one word like that changes what happens completely. I watched this again to make sure.
Yeah I did actually read your comment. I didn't see a need to reply to it because I wasn't replying to it. I was stating me opinion, not trying to refute yours. Anyway, you saw what you saw and I saw something different. I don't think we're going to agree on this so you feel it's justified and I don't. Let's just leave it there.
|
On April 06 2010 03:29 KissBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2010 03:25 Hawk wrote:On April 06 2010 03:22 KissBlade wrote:On April 06 2010 03:21 starfries wrote:On April 06 2010 03:18 KissBlade wrote:On April 06 2010 03:18 Southlight wrote:On April 06 2010 03:14 KissBlade wrote:
The two posts do not counter each other. If you want a paraphrase: Samachking: omg these soldiers are killing people and not showing any remorse, fuck Americans! Hawk: they're soldiers, what are you expecting. Maybe you should read his post instead of making up his post in your head on what you thought you read. no, it was a pretty good paraphrase, and even if it wasn't it's still a valid point. Actually it wasn't. Reread Samachking's post. If anything, it's more or less saying the same thing Hawk was except he expressed more sympathy on the matter. No, he said it was a crime and genocide. Forget the rest of the war and how the US got into it (idiots are still bringing it up when it's irrelevant...) there isn't any crime or genocide in the video. For christ's sake, he compares it to 'especially in positions of power(see My Lai, Nanking massacare, The Holocaust, Rwandian Genocide)' Holy shit. Once again, you are either trying to be purposefully illiterate or you're just not able to read. This is why you don't quote shit out of context. He even states, there are FAR WORSE situations such as the ones he listed. Holy shit indeed.
On April 06 2010 03:24 samachking wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2010 03:18 Southlight wrote:On April 06 2010 03:14 KissBlade wrote:
The two posts do not counter each other. If you want a paraphrase: Samachking: omg these soldiers are killing people and not showing any remorse, fuck Americans! Hawk: they're soldiers, what are you expecting. I only said this is completely disturbing. Most people in war do this, especially in positions of power(see My Lai, Nanking massacare, The Holocaust, Rwandian Genocide), and many genocides that were done before were much worse, and many worse are going on in Africa right now which no media company actually puts up.
His full quote suggests this American attack is indeed a genocide, just on a lesser scale than the ones he mentioned. Maybe you should a little less condescending!
|
On April 06 2010 03:25 Hawk wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2010 03:22 KissBlade wrote:On April 06 2010 03:21 starfries wrote:On April 06 2010 03:18 KissBlade wrote:On April 06 2010 03:18 Southlight wrote:On April 06 2010 03:14 KissBlade wrote:
The two posts do not counter each other. If you want a paraphrase: Samachking: omg these soldiers are killing people and not showing any remorse, fuck Americans! Hawk: they're soldiers, what are you expecting. Maybe you should read his post instead of making up his post in your head on what you thought you read. no, it was a pretty good paraphrase, and even if it wasn't it's still a valid point. Actually it wasn't. Reread Samachking's post. If anything, it's more or less saying the same thing Hawk was except he expressed more sympathy on the matter. No, he said it was a crime and genocide. Forget the rest of the war and how the US got into it (idiots are still bringing it up when it's irrelevant...) there isn't any crime or genocide in the video. For christ's sake, he compares it to 'especially in positions of power(see My Lai, Nanking massacare, The Holocaust, Rwandian Genocide)' Holy shit. That's all that's needed for them to get clearance to shoot. An unmarked van picking up people with troops in root is fair game too...
Thanks hawk. Maybe we should chat lol. People seem to distract themselves form the point of the video. We are not discussing why we are in this situation or american politics, but whether this is genocide.
This is not genocide. They did their jobs. They open fired and eliminated the target. In the aftermath there was some collateral damage but why would you be in a war zone area escorted with ak' 47s. These people are not dumb and know americans are scouting and patroling the area. They know they are in great danger to be around large groups of people with ak 47's.
|
We seriously just need to get out of there.
|
They only followed standard protocol, you guys woulve shoot too if someone said they had an rpg.
But then again you cant really defent the u.s army because in the first place they shouldnt be there.
|
On April 06 2010 03:36 monolith94 wrote:
We seriously just need to get out of there.
Why? We need more 18-30 year old unemployed citizens with a chip on their shoulder to join our unemployment force? Get real. Moral reasons aside, we need this war.
|
Ok, let's keep the factors that got us here out of the discussion (I think it's retarded to ignore how we got there but for the sake of the argument I will).
Here's my point: Should American troops be firing on all non-coalition individuals who carry weapons? What about private security contractors? As I said earlier, couldn't these guys simply be the security staff for the journalists? Who shoots a van trying to rescue people? Is it moral to shoot civilians simply because they're armed, even though they did not attack first or seem to pose a threat? Shit, brb, getting my US Army uniform on so I'm given carte blanche to shoot every armed being that moves (And the people who'd try to rescue them after).
Man, the SS weren't so bad after all. When's Nuremburg coming for all the American murderers?
|
United States43352 Posts
On April 06 2010 03:22 reit wrote:
Couldn't those guys be an escort to the journalists? I mean, these guys have security needs too. Is every armed Iraqi a terrorist? How many people do you honestly think could actually be involved with terrorism in Iraq? What the fuck is the idea of shooting anyone holding a gun? They never shot at the chopper or seemed to be a threat...
Guess they're preparing the cannonfodder for when it's time to march on their own country.
Shoot first, cover-up the mess after.
And lol at KwarK ... I'm sorry that you can't accept to face reality. The invasion was based on forgery, lies and propaganda. If you don't agree with that, it's not a question of opinion, it's simply denial of facts.
I pointed out that:
- The governing class in America (as in the majority of Western countries) controls education.
- The media looped stories about Iraq acquiring nuclear weapons, which we now know to be a lie, based on fake documents (google Nigerian Yellow Cake).
- The media also managed to link Iraq with terrorism and 9/11, another total lie, which the public bought (that kool-aid tasted great!)
- There is a critical mass of "idiots" in the army, grunts that don't think about what they do, they just do it.
- Most of these grunts have never experienced the world, or even stepped out of the US before, their views of the world are based on sub-par elementary and high school education (and let's be honest, most of the American youth has much more knowledge and interest for the latest MTV reality show than to learn about the world we live in)
- Not being the president doesn't mean you don't hold responsability, America claims to be the spearhead of freedom and democracy, well then if the government is run by the people, for the people, the people are RESPONSIBLE for the death of each and every Iraqi civilian.
- They could coldly murder kids and women and have a giggle about it (if you haven't seen the vids, you've dug your head in the sand, Iraq is a fucking genocide at this point).
Where is the "cut off from reality part?". If you can't argue but don't want to agree, just ignore my posts like you ignore the truth.
Of course, genocide is called nation building when America does it.
I'd love to see the outrage if China was bombing a US "terrorist camp" and accidentally killed a half dozen civilians. You'd have people tearing their shirts on the public place screaming at the injustice of this. I'd like to say you'd have people blowing themselves up on chinese troops but I don't think the average American has any balls, I mean they won't even rise against tyranny taking over their country...
But it's ok in Iraq, it's lowly sandniggers, right?
Governing class? What governing class? Top level politicians in Britain and I suspect most western countries are drawn from all classes. There is a very strong working class element in the Government of Britain.
Control education? Not directly and with no clear agenda. While education is a responsibility of a socialist nation that does not make education the tool of the Government. You can't simply go "state education exists therefore children are brainwashed by the Government".
I'm not going to defend the media but nor is it one big monolithic blob. Choose your media, choose your viewpoint. If you don't like any of the big American ones watch BBC Worldwide. If you find that too Western then watch Al Jazeera. The point being that the media just sells a product to a consumer, blame the people buying the 'truth' they had to sell.
I never thought Iraq and 9/11 were linked and nor did anyone intelligent I ever spoke to. Stupid people think stupid things. Either teach them the truth or stop whining about it.
The army is hierarchical. That's kind of how it works. It's purposefully designed so that the guys at the bottom don't question what they're told, even when it's really stupid. That's not making a point, that's just stating that the organisation which encourages people to wear uniforms that other people shoot at doesn't have many high IQ volunteers.
It's not genocide because genocide is the deliberate destruction of a cultural, racial or ethnic group. The United States is not doing that. If I destroyed a few miles of rainforest that wiped out a unique Amazonian tribe that'd be genocide. If I killed 10,000,000 Iraqis in a brutal civil war that hit people across the political, ethnic and ideological spectrum that wouldn't be.
You shouldn't use words you don't understand.
And it's not because they're sandniggers to use your particularly vile phrase. It's because they're far away and who cares about what happens in a place they couldn't find on a map.
|
I was wrong to relate it directly to genocide and citing massacres as examples. However, I was merely defending the same point of the soldiers being human and this happening all over the world. People are messed up and afraid in these situations, and I would probably never understand, do I think it's immoral? Yes I do.
I suppose you can justify their actions. But something disturbs me when I see people from heavily armed vehicles killing barely armed foot soldiers or civillians. I know they are defending themselves and I probably have done the same thing in the same situation(kill them before they kill me), and I am probably being biased, but it does disturb me.
|
On April 06 2010 03:38 KissBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2010 03:36 monolith94 wrote:
We seriously just need to get out of there. Why? We need more 18-30 year old unemployed citizens with a chip on their shoulder to join our unemployment force? Get real. Moral reasons aside, we need this war.
You're fucking mad. You are the perfect example of what's insanely sick and discusting about this world.
GET REAL, WHO GIVES A FUCK ABOUT KILLING INNOCENTS AND THEIR WHOLE FAMILIES, WE NEED OUR JOBS
If I wasn't so curious about life and the future, I'd blow myself up (edit: In a place full of American civilians ofc) to get back for some of the people who's murder you support and encourage.
|
This is war, this is why its impossiable to purpretrate an urban war.You cant just a little bit of war in the right places as nony says this is not outrageous at all this is war.
Although sad and unfair as it is you cant have individual soliders accountable when follow standing orders in war or your forces will be paralised while they check every action against there own moral sense.
If you go to war in the modern world im sorry but you have to know that horriable things will happen the answer is to give the u.n some teeth and support and use sanctions or the natural end to modern war is rwander and no one wants that.
|
On April 06 2010 03:43 reit wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2010 03:38 KissBlade wrote:On April 06 2010 03:36 monolith94 wrote:
We seriously just need to get out of there. Why? We need more 18-30 year old unemployed citizens with a chip on their shoulder to join our unemployment force? Get real. Moral reasons aside, we need this war. You're fucking mad. You are the perfect example of what's insanely sick and discusting about this world. GET REAL, WHO GIVES A FUCK ABOUT KILLING INNOCENTS AND THEIR WHOLE FAMILIES, WE NEED OUR JOBS If I wasn't so curious about life and the future, I'd blow myself up to get back for some of the people who's murder you support and encourage.
Calm down there tiger. As much as you wish the world was one big happy idealistic place, it's NOT. Do I think it's a good thing? No, of course not. But I was simply responding to the idea that people in the US somehow think this war isn't benefiting them.
|
United States43352 Posts
On April 06 2010 03:40 reit wrote:
Ok, let's keep the factors that got us here out of the discussion (I think it's retarded to ignore how we got there but for the sake of the argument I will).
Here's my point: Should American troops be firing on all non-coalition individuals who carry weapons? What about private security contractors? As I said earlier, couldn't these guys simply be the security staff for the journalists? Who shoots a van trying to rescue people? Is it moral to shoot civilians simply because they're armed, even though they did not attack first or seem to pose a threat? Shit, brb, getting my US Army uniform on so I'm given carte blanche to shoot every armed being that moves (And the people who'd try to rescue them after).
Man, the SS weren't so bad after all. When's Nuremburg coming for all the American murderers?
Do you understand the concept of Rules of Engagement? Before leaving the base every morning the soldiers will be told what their Rules of Engagement are. In a country where civilians casually carry firearms in the streets the majority of prep time is avoiding exactly this kind of situation. Obviously you've got no experience with the military or you'd know this stuff.
Your point is that collatoral damage is bad. Well done for that contribution but I think the army are actually ahead of you here. They already take extensive steps to avoid it. Evidently it's not perfect but the idea that the soldiers are riding down the streets taking pot shots at anyone armed is ludicrous. You speak of something you have no comprehsion of.
|
On April 06 2010 03:43 maxor wrote:
This is war, this is why its impossiable to purpretrate an urban war.You cant just a little bit of war in the right places as nony says this is not outrageous at all this is war.
Although sad and unfair as it is you cant have individual soliders accountable when follow standing orders in war or your forces will be paralised while they check every action against there own moral sense.
If you go to war in the modern world im sorry but you have to know that horriable things will happen the answer is to give the u.n some teeth and support and use sanctions or the natural end to modern war is rwander and no one wants that.
By that logic, SS soldiers and officers are not responsible for the deaths of 6+ million jews?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i44.tinypic.com/2vj756p.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i39.tinypic.com/aph1kz.jpg)
