U.S. Snipers Accused of 'Baiting' Iraqis

[Wiglaf]

If somone picks up an explosive device in Iraq and walk away with it, why not challenge and detain him? And only shoot if he runs? I think that would be preferable, but this seems acceptable to me too.

[germanos]

Alternatively, you can die of cholera

The incompetence of the US is really starting to take on monumental proportions. These few snipers are like piss in the ocean.

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

there's always a small chance that the person picking up the bait is really innocent and stupid

That to me is what makes this horrible. There are always dumb, curious people, who'll see something and look down and examine it. I'm not sure shooting that person without more is something that should be done.

First we should note that stupid people always get hurt in such places.

A stupid person can refuse to stop at a checkpoint (for no reason), and thus will legitimately become a target for military fire. A stupid person can touch ammunition forgettin in field and accidentally kill himself. A stupid person can be convinced by a smart handlers to perform a suicide mission without realizing what he's doing.

Sadly, in a war ridden environment there is no room for 'fool proofing'.

That is the difference between war and police action.
In police action you have a relatively safe environment, where you can put lots of barriers on the use of force, because the violence is minimal and contained.

In an actual resistance war, the violence is not contained at all and the number of combatants surpasses the threshold that allows lots of safe-guards usually employed.
Also, guerilla combatants will try to take cover as civilians, and will always do attempt generate doubt regarding their identity.

So there is always a limit to how much safe-guards you can put in an actual war.


My second point is - we don't know what the exact procedure is.

Let's assume that beyond examining it, one has to pick it up and try to get away with it.

In an assymetrical warfare low intensity conflict environment, this is the closest you can get to incriminating someone, without having him shoot you.

Since combatants usually actively try to assimilate as civilians - the only thing that seperates them is whether they use weapons or not.

So you examine their behavior when you think they safe, and you see how they behave next to a stash of weapons / explosives. Something that should be very scary and off-putting for a regular civilian, but very tempting for a would-be combatant.

[Sirotnikov]

and attempted to leave with the item

so there is actually a good sensible clause for "incriminating" a person as a combatant / contributor.

[Sirotnikov]

The sad thing is that, given the state of Iraq, things like weapons are really useful and probably worth a lot of money on the black market. Given the context, most people are going to stop to take a look.

Ah yes.
All those poor, innocent innocent weapons dealers

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Wiglaf


If somone picks up an explosive device in Iraq and walk away with it, why not challenge and detain him? And only shoot if he runs? I think that would be preferable, but this seems acceptable to me too.

They're not really likely to do that with American forces ten feet away.

If you observe some ******* picking up items several hundred meters away, how do you propose to get enough forces on the spot to detain said ******* before he runs and disappears among civilians (or just disappears), without exposing your reaction force to potential (and guaranteed, once your tactics are known) ambush?

[MarkG]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
If they're that damn dumb, then wave adios to them.
Here we are in war-torn Iraq. What might this be?

kill innocents who did a stupid thing. what a great way to build confidence into people that you are really there to help them....

[Tingkai]

They build confidence by shooting the bad Iraqis, and the only ones who get killed are bad Iraqis.

[Aeson]

like bullets, plastic explosives and bomb detonation cords

Bullets... hmmm... I think if I saw some bullets laying around my neighborhood I'd pick them up to dispose of, turn in to authorities (if there are any about), or maybe just save to barter later. Don't want the kids playing around with them, right?

Plastic explosives... I probably wouldn't know what it was unless it had some sort of markings/packaging to identify it. If I did know what it was, I'd go get the police of course, which probably isn't an option for most Iraqis. If you don't know what it is... Playdoh for some kids? I wonder if it transfers images from newspaper like silly putty? Seriously, how many Iraqi civilians are going to know what this stuff is on sight?

Detonation cord? Hell yah I'd pick that up. It's wires. The economy is shot to hell. You can use it as a belt, to replace a hinge on the door that some military types broke down when they went by last, to hang yourself because of the hellish living conditions... though in that case the snipers are helping you out... but the point is that this is stuff you'd pick up if you were financially depressed.

Maybe there's more to it than what they're saying, something to make it obviously only useful to insurgency applications... but the explanations of what it is so far have been rather lame and unjustified IMO.

[Proteus_MST]

I absolutely agree with Aeson.

To the best you kill a terorist, to the worst you kill an innocent person, maybe even one who would have helped the authorities by just collecting this suspicious items to turn it in.

And, assuming that these terrorists have information channels that spread informations around it might even be that the chance of sniping innocent persons rises the longer the US troops use these baiting tactics (as terrorists might get better informed about the dangers of collecting arms and other things suspiciously lying around than ordinary people and therefore leave them untouched or give other iraqis money to pick these things up when they see them lying around.

Edited: Just had duplicates of some things within the text

[Berzerker]

Yes, sneaking up to a bunch of explosives, examining them and then trying to sneak away with them is not evidence of intent to use them at all...

Normal people do that all the time.

Just yesterday I saw a huge RPG laying around, so I looked at it, and took it to myself. Perfectly normal thing to do.

In a related news story, The US budget of $40 million to pay Iraqis for gathering up and handing in weapons will increase commensurate with the number of Iraqis killed gathering weapons to keep up with supply and demand.

[SlowwHand]

Originally posted by MarkG
kill innocents who did a stupid thing. what a great way to build confidence into people that you are really there to help them....

Mark, tell me how one recognizes the innocents?
They observe absolutely no rules of war. None.

[East Street Trader]

Guilt or innocence generally gets determined in a court of law. Based on evidence.

This appalling piece of rubbish does not rest on evidence but on an inference - that someone who picks up a thing which would be of interest to a terrorist is one.

One of the US' problems in Iraq is that it is said that you are there trying to suppress violence so that the country can find a way to return to self government.

But you are also stuck with Mr Bush's ridiculous war on terror.

Which involves you in initiating violence.

Both ideas are bad. Together they produce absurdity.

[SlowwHand]

You need to talk apples and apples. You bring up all this civilian crap, with no one knowing WHO IS A CIVILIAN.

[Shrapnel12]

Imran and Slowhand are both right. We ourselves have not ever lived under the conditions of war like the Iraqis, so if I personally saw a bomb or a RPG or something similar, I might get curious and want to check it out (being in the Air Force, I'd definitely keep my distance from the bomb however). Someone in Iraq or Bosnia who is way too familiar with the horrors of war however, might see these things and run for the hills. Different parts of Iraq have had different levels of suffering. Perhaps some areas the populace are very gun shy, but in others they may not be so much.

One thing I don't like about this strategy, if true, is they war is supposed to be over. We're just maintaining the peace (ya right). If that's the attitude of our leaders, why are we killing people in cold blood for approaching a weapon? We should be arresting them. Police don't kill crime suspects in peace time. If it's a combat situation where fire is being exchanged, then yes shoot to kill, but if no violence is happening and the situation can be controlled, the suspicious person should be detained.