Wikileaks, the US Government, and the slaughter of civilians

[Asher]

Wiggy, your source is a tool. I can see why you didn't link to the text on his page, because he accuses Reuters of producing propaganda for insurgents.

Here's another screencap you neglected to produce:

Isn't it funny how it's clearly a ****ing telephoto lens? From a photojournalist?

"RPG?" my ass...


Look at that RPG.

[Asher]

Here is the higher res image of the deciding moment: the second the pilot proclaimed an RPG was present and got clearance to kill everyone.

[Asher]

The men then gathered around the man from the prior still, to review the photograph he had taken:

[Wiglaf]

You need to pull yourself together

What is swinging around at 3:44? A camera? Crap on that, it's a gun. Seriously, are you going to tell me that is a telephoto lens too?

[Hauldren Collider]

From the second pic there, Asher, it's totally plausible that he's carrying an RPG.

[Asher]

From the second pic there, Asher, it's totally plausible that he's carrying an RPG.

No one holds an RPG like that.

Then after the "RPG" they saw, the crowd forms around the man to stare at the 'RPG'?

Obviously the people calling the shots here don't have a brain at all. Even IF you thought that was an RPG from that angle, by the time they circled around it is readily apparent it was no such thing.

[Kuciwalker]

The language the soldiers use sounds pretty trigger-happy, but I think their attitude is pretty understandable. Their actual actions seem reasonable - in Asher's picture and in a couple other points in the video, multiple people appear to be carrying long semi-cylindrical objects. Given the limited time and resolution the soldiers had to view it, believing they were weapons was reasonable.

There is something deeply disturbing about watching the video, though - when the soldiers open up on the group, you realize real people actually died right then. I found the feeling disquieting.

When you are talking about people's lives, you just need to be a bit more careful. Nothing in that video posed an immediate threat to American soldiers. They thought they saw RPGs and AK-47s, and apparently that's all that's needed to issue a death sentence for everyone in the area.

Dude, it's a war zone where our forces are primarily engaged against ununiformed combatants, that's a pretty logical rule of engagement.

[Asher]

You need to pull yourself together

What is swinging around at 3:44? A camera? Crap on that, it's a gun. Seriously, are you going to tell me that is a telephoto lens too?

That very well may be a gun. Is that all it takes to kill 15 people? One guy carrying an AK-47 in a country that is essentially in a state of anarchy?

[Kuciwalker]

Asher, you can't use a still image for something like that. The soldiers in the gunship didn't have the opportunity to dissect what they were seeing leisurely.

[Asher]

Dude, it's a war zone where our forces are primarily engaged against ununiformed combatants, that's a pretty logical rule of engagement.

"Shoot first, ask questions later" is not a logical rule of engagement.

You're talking about a country that's been "in a state of war for 8 years". People are simply living their lives there. This isn't your typical WW2 battlefield. You don't know who is enemy and who is friendly by looking at a couple dozen pixels from a distance.

It's completely unacceptable rules of engagement to kill someone and the dozen people who happen to be around them because you think they have an AK-47 when you're standing far out of range of any danger.

[giblets]

Shoot first ask questions later

edit: crosspost, kind of

[Wiglaf]

There is a gun ban in Iraq for this reason. It is not like you are legally allowed to have an assault rifle out. If you see an assault rifle, you disassociate from that group, not show them photos and embed with their unit.

Why do people have such a bad view of KBR and other contractors and mercenaries in warzones, but not embedded journalists?

[Whoha]

"Shoot first, ask questions later" is not a logical rule of engagement.

You're talking about a country that's been "in a state of war for 8 years". People are simply living their lives there. This isn't your typical WW2 battlefield. You don't know who is enemy and who is friendly by looking at a couple dozen pixels from a distance.

It's completely unacceptable rules of engagement to kill someone and the dozen people who happen to be around them because you think they have an AK-47 when you're standing far out of range of any danger.

They were killed for having what appeared to be an RPG, which would pose a danger to the helicopter.

[Drake Tungsten]

They weren't killed because an RPG would be a threat to the helicopter; I doubt they even knew the helicopter was there. They were killed because an RPG would be a threat to a Bradley that was moving toward the area.

[Asher]

They weren't killed because an RPG would be a threat to the helicopter; I doubt they even knew the helicopter was there. They were killed because an RPG would be a threat to a Bradley that was moving toward the area.

The Bradley was summoned to the area to clean up after the hit...