This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
US Military Releases Official Investigation Results Relating To Wikileaks Iraq Massacre Video
The US Military issues its official retort to the Wikileaks video. Here are the official US Army recommendations based on that episode:
I ratify the appointment of the investigating officer, MAJ [Blanked out]
The recommendation that:
-(10a) Members of the press be encouraged or required to wear identifying vests or distinctive body armor within the MND-B AOR is (approved) (disapproved) (remanded to the BCT Cdr).
-(10b) Coalition Forces be notified when members of the press are operating in their AORs is (approved) (disapproved) (remanded to the BCT Cdr).
-(10c) Condolence payments be made to families of the two children wounded in this engagement is (approved) (disapproved) (remanded to the BCT Cdr).
I remand the matter to the 2/2ID Cdr for appropriate action.
Full report attached. The actual narrative begins on page 11 of 43.
»
- 9058 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Buy shares in black marker pen manufacturers!!!
+1
Love yer nick!
classic
The excuse which is best illustrated in point 6. is, at best; irrelevant. As for the rest; well it's US Military so no need to read the official propaganda pamphlet about the dogma of US Army infallibility and the same old narrative about how it is a "bringer of freedom and democracy". This changes nothing. Crimes were committed, and no one was held responsible.
EDIT: And can someone provide me with the age definition of "military aged men" or is it just made up as one goes along. I mean in some parts of the world you become "military aged man" as soon as you are able to walk till you're not.
Definition of military age is 'as soon as your family are mown down in front of their houses by inhumane SOB's in cold blood, or your country is invaded for it's oil, you are ready to fight.'
Cheeky Bastard,
As one who is a retired military officer, might I point out a few things.....
#1 there are evil men every where, yes even in the US military.
#2 the nature of war is such that ROE [rules of engagement] and the "fog of war" [which has both tactical elements as well as moral/human elements] create situations where those who a) have no military experience IN A COMBAT UNIT and b) were not present at the event in question OR the events leading up to the event in question should be gravely aware of their conclusions and comments.
#3 in the history of the world only Jesus Christ and the U.S. military combat soldier have ever, ever, dedicated their lives, to their death, to OBEDIENCE to someone above them and to the life and freedom of other humans.
Your words, and immature icon, reveal yourself to be of low moral character and self-absorbed immaturity.
And that you know nothing of which you speak.
AMDG
HCSKnight
1) There is no god
2) Clearly the criticisms were directed towards management not labor, so unless there is a retired Joint Chief posting in these comments, not really applicable. Also, although Cheeky sure is a son of a bitch, he's our son of a bitch, much like all the fuck-heads we cracked deals with over the last century.
3) The history of combat is not one of altruism.
You can not be serious. But OK, i get it, the bullshit about freedom that you were fed most of your life and how you are doing someone a favor by killing people who did nothing to you 20 000 km away from home rotted your brain.
And you know who is obedient; dogs, dogs are obedient. Not human beings, well not those human beings who have a functioning brain which allows them to question the nature of their actions.
Cheeky!!!
Once a certain level of brainwashing has been reached (a tipping point so to speak) there are no further application needed for either maintenance or subsistence. The effect becomes self sustaining and infectious.
One can not kill another with deliberate intention without some type of dissociation from the person killed. Any military (not just the USA) must break down the individual man (ego) and then put it back together in a manner that allows them to kill while maintaining discipline and continuity. The ego is replaced by the chain of command, the almighty God of the military, and most insidious, the need to protect their buddies, so they are killing for a good cause. There is just enough leeway allowed for the soldier to say they aren't "that" way while still being "that" way.
You should pull up some officer training manuals sometime. The mind games they play with themselves and others is frightening. It's no accident that the first applications for the brain washing research taken from the Nazi doctors were in the military and then the CIA. Nationalism is a very powerful drug when used in conjunction with mind control. We see this in the comment section of the Wiki-leaks video yesterday.
The term Rules Of Engagement is a wonderful way of cleansing murder. Hey, I followed the rules. The bastard shouldn't have.........fill in the blank. I busted down the door while screaming who I was. The bastard started to move so I shot him. He shouldn't have moved. I followed the rules so I'm clean.
The need to have rules to justify killing is insane. We live in an insane world and to expect people to act sane in an insane world is.......wait for it.......insane.
The need to have rules to justify killing is insane.
Of course, we should probably have no rules in this area.
Oh right, we shouldn't have killing either because we now know that the default setting for human beings is peace, love and kindness. So if we all just dropped the aggressive posturing, harmony would reign.
Cheer up boys, you're unicorn riding president just today took nuclear deterance off the table beacuse it's mean and makes other countries feel uncomfortable.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article70885...
No borders, free welfare, weak military and no money...shouldn't be long now!
I can hardly wait for the utopia of a USA-free world. The brochures are simply wonderful.
"Cheer up boys, you're unicorn riding president just today took nuclear deterance off the table beacuse it's mean and makes other countries feel uncomfortable."
Wait, how exactly to you take nuclear "deterrence" off the table? In case you haven't heard, the USA already detonated one. Some anthropological scientists even go so far as to suggest we might have the capability to do it again, and that anything done to forcibly remove said capability therein might likely add propensity to deterrence. The most you can argue then, by virtue of disembottled genie thesis, is that the USA now can only insure the nuclear deterrence status, not revoke it.
And one more question, do I have to support all the troops?
Well, if you bothered to read the story I linked to or follow the news at all you would know.
The reason why it has been unwise for a state actor to attack the US or openly make war on it (since WW II) is that there was a non-zero chance that the US would retaliate with overwhelming (nuclear) force and turn that state into a parking lot.
Would we (the US) or wouldn't we actually do that and under what conditions exactly? That was left purposely vague. This is called strategic ambiguity and aside from foreign wars that we've started or inserted ourselves into it's hard to argue that it hasn't been an effective policy regarding other hostile or semi-hostile states. A deterrent. Strategic ambiguity is also our policy regarding the defense of Taiwan.
President Obama just officially took that option off the table - nuclear as well as some non-nuclear capabilities we plans to sign away in Prague. It's not every day that you hear a head of state, let alone the president of The United States explicitly declare that he will not use every available means to defend his country and it's people in the event of a war. I am arguing that this is a bad thing. I would further argue that this an even more signifigant foreign policy development than the release of a two year old video depicting a small firefight -however horrible that depicted event may be- where some of the surrounding details are unclear.
Aaah, so by signing a document in Prague we can fully predict the actions of a nuclear savvy USA following exceptional adverse circumstances. I didn't realize this was a binding agreement.
It's good informed people like you are on top of these things.
(Note to our international readership; please realize that not every US citizen walks around with their dick swinging in the wind.)
There's nothing savvy about what Obama is doing here.
I think it's all political posturing (by savvy I was referencing technical knowhow) and not meriting praise or scorn. My original comment was aimed at pointing out that it matters not what we say, or what treaties we sign, or even if we ship all our nukes to N Korea; our society has developed the nuclear card capability, putting it back in the deck isn't really an option. I suppose we could misplace it for awhile, but if real war breaks out in NYC or something, it's not like we're going to honor treaties and accords. When push comes to shove we will do, as always, anything we can.
BTW, apologies for my rude comment and tone; one thing this country doesn't need is more divisiveness.
They did something to us. They had the audacity to place their country right on top of our oil. And on top of that, as he tried to explain, they don't think Jesus is the messiah.
"Not human beings, well not those human beings who have a functioning brain which allows them to question the nature of their actions."
@ Cheeky,
Yes, like the thinking that goes into the strapping onto one's self explosives meant to kill innocent men, women and children.
No brainwashing going on there. No sirree. Worse yet, why not just take the retarded members of your society and remote-detonate shrapnel filled ordnance strapped to them instead. No brainwashing needed.
You really don't get it, do you?
There is no god dude.
If so, then prove it. The burden of proof doesnt lay on me, its on the people who make ridiculous claims that there is an invisible person that is all powerful, but needs money every sunday from mortals to subsidize his franchises.
"If you believe absurdities, you'll comit attrocities" I dont think there is a better example of that than you and the live youve lived. I dont give a shit about your military background either. Youre part of the problem, sir.
If God is dead, then anything is permissable. -Sartre
Without a standard, your strong feelings regarding this situation are mere wasted emotions, and your words are editorials. I can't spit and sputter either for or against this without a moral reference point. What's yours, and what makes it valid?
you're right, it is absolutely impossible for human beings to develop moral standards without first inventing an abstract entity that created the known universe
That's way to subtle for most to find amusing.
I know that was meant as sarcasm, but the premise is actually quite true, though the rest is false. What's the moral standard for taking the life of another human being? A few dozen forum members can't even agree on it.
jurors make that decision every day
That is a bit out of context. Sartre (and anyone with more than a junior high education) knows that morality is not absolute. It requires individuals to be able to think on their own and make responsible decisions within multiple frames of reference and integrate it into their judgement, according to their values. It isn't easy, but neither is being an adult. Most people act and then 'reason' their actions were just, post hoc.
As an aside, Sartre died before he could (meaningfully) reconcile his belief in freewill with his atheism and dependence on reason.
Were the soldiers' actions wrong, and if so, by what standard? Did they not "think on their own and make responsible decisions within multiple frames of reference and integrate it into their judgement, according to their values?" I can thus both exonerate them and condemn them, depending on what any given person means by "responsible" and "judgement" and "values". Would it be just to punish them, or would justice be served by giving them medals, or would justice be served by doing nothing?
When I saw clear evidence of the RPG in the group I came to the conclusion that (some of) the violence was justified.
Fortunately, the criminal justice system doesn't depend on belief in God, your moral code, or even Freewill...
That being said, it seemed too easy for the Apache crew and their chain of command to be judge, jury, and executioner.
OMFG, are you for real, HCSKnight ? I'm even more scared of the hideousnous that lurks in the hearts and minds of the Pentagon when I read your #3.
Were you one of the ones who planted the Termate in WTC 1, 2 & 7?
Well, there's at least two spoonfulls of bullshit that you've apparently swallowed. At least Jesus had a hell of a career, but the US military combat soldiers are sadly dying to help someone else's.
I'll bet suicide bombers say something like "in the history of the world only Mohammed and us strong brave suicide bombers have ever, ever dedicated our lives, to the death, to the OBEDIENCE to someone above them... blah blah." At least they get to screw 40 nubiles when it's all over.
"At least they get to screw 40 nubiles when it's all over."
As an interesting sidenote. In some translations that is 40 pure and white raisins (or nuts, can't fully remember and don't have this reference).
Do US military combat soldiers believe they are Christlike?
Suffer the little children.
I find your reply to Cheeky truly disgusting.
Pun intended, but GOD I love Zerohedge.
"And that you know nothing of which you speak."
Silly ass-clowns on the internet seldom do, but are attention seekers in drag none the less.
Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Your obedience is a corruption. Oh and fuck jesus christ while your at it. I heard an old woman gave him her last penny and he knew she was going to die from it but he took it anyway. A deciever needs a believer. Do something smaller next time that doesn't involve wasting a bunch of resources and treating people like they are nothing. Learn and move on. Stay out of church, stay out of gangs and stop defending them.
A little bit of self absorption could do you some good if the only thing you want to create in the world is dead people and a lame attempt to get people to stop standing up to you. Or would it bother you if me and cheeky bastard ganged up on you and killed you because the 2 of us create something bigger and higher and more powerful than just the one of us.
I have not a lot but a few family in military or formerly in miltary. The military is not a damn thing but a different sense of self. It's got nothing to do with other senses of self. You don't have to defend it any more than you have to defend any other dynamic of self. A mother who hits her kid when they are totally out of control shouldn't be jailed for child abuse if it's the only means of gaining control she can find.
And there's the saturn thing again. Everybody who doesn't do what you do is a bedwetter or immature or a child. Well grampa if you're so fucking mature then why do you fucking fail massively at protecting anything but the interests of rich controlling manipulating jackasses. I mean you keep fucking serving and the world keeps getting worse and worse. How much longer can you continue being a maturity fuckup before you believe your lying eyes. And if your so goddamn protective why am I hearing stories about soldiers telling women that they have no idea what is coming. And why is half of america ready to shoot if they see one any troops coming.
Enjoy your kingdom of IMF fucks and bankers and killers cause trying to co-create with this kind of stupidity just isn't working out for about 6 billion of us. I don't speak for everyone but I'm prepared to give you a fuck off and stay fucked off that will last forever. And quit taking credit for the comforts of america. They happend not because of you fucks but DESPITE you fucks.
Sir,
Thank you for your service.
I suggest that anyone critical of the way the US military handled this situation display their righteousness in the following manner:
1. gather up a bunch of guys with small arms
2. get a camera with an 18" long lens
3. point camera at some other country's military when they are engaged in hostile activities.
4. let your survivors do an FOIA request
Leonidas and his 300 Spartans were from Sparta, Georgia? I did not know this.
I'm trying to figure out if you are this dumb because you are ex-military, a God person, or merely another of the millions of miseducated, ignorant Americans.
You answered your own question. Military age is arbitrary. In some cases it is merely the downward pressure on age limits to accommodate all the older men who are wiped out. Sadly, in other places, toddlers are explosives mules, sent into warzones with the intent to give enemy soldiers insanity over killing a child or having them wipe out a unit of men.
Well, I can't get it open. Either there is high traffic or they've made it very difficult to get to the FOIA page. Which is amazing in itself that you would have a page specifically for FOIA information. I love the military but this action reminds me of Vietnam from the aspect of top brass losing control and just plain careless in everything they do. The war has drag on for to long without the clear objective of winning ( by the way is the same as Vietnam). We should have won that war and this war in as little as 6 months to a year from boots on the ground. But as usual politics gets involved and we end up losing men, moral, and money through stupidity (that includes both administratons).
The only really important thing to remember here is that the Arab world hates America because of her freedom........
.... and strong fiscal and monetary policy and it's many many choice of TV channels and soft drinks ..... uh .... and McDonalds .... yeah ... McDonalds and CNBC and fake tits ..
CB
Your tits are fake? :>)
Say it ain't so Cheeky, say it ain't so.
My tits are real !!!!1
Signed
-LA Bimbo
Nope, neither. Just a man who conducted (and still conducts) some serious self reflection in order to save myself.
Nothing focuses the mind and clears the bullshit quite like the certain knowledge that an agonizing death is just around the corner if major life changes aren't made immediately and permanently. Suddenly so many things in life that were previously viewed as extremely important no longer were or are. I received the most important gift anyone could receive, the gift of desperation. I keep that gift close at hand even today, 20 years later.
Anybody and thus anything can change. I know this because I did and the odds were a million to one I would not. All it took was a change in my state of mind. Poof, change that and everything else changes. It really is that simple but we complicate life in order to remain the same and go with the flow. We are basically lazy in dealing with the gift of our life because we fail to see the value in our existence. We are as cavalier with our life as we are with others, though everybody will immediately argue that point.
"I want to live" they all say. Really? Then why do we live in polluted cities eating chemically infested food, drinking toxic water based drinks and using and wearing carcinogenic filled products while killing each other with guns and war machines? Because we are surrounded by the insanity, since it's our lives, it's normal and thus natural. Besides, we can't change.
But I did. And if I did, anyone and anything can. Thus my message.
Sorry for the dissertation to your simple question, but I assumed you wanted to know a little more about CD. I keep things close to the vest here on ZH, but I thought maybe it was time to show a peek.
I'm going to step into the deep end here Andy and say that I think NYC is undergoing (has been for at least 10 years) a group psychological operation of the most secret kind. I won't get into the how or even why but the powers that be have methods at their disposal that are not public.
"...have methods at their disposal that are not public."
The rest of the US is figuring out that NY is a state sponsor of financial terrorism. They have spent all of everyone else's money (past, present, and future) and are bankrupting a republic's treasury with (continued) fraud and fear.
If I was responsible for what is ahead of us I would feel bad too...
I was recently made aware of the large increases of college grads heading into the military as the job opportunities are dismal. 6 years of service on average.
"Take me out to the watershed..." ;~>
don't worry, we's a resilient bunch of mofos. whatever doesn't kill you makes you stronger, no?
ever been to L.A.?
i'm glad ya made it man...its clear that your experience informs your views, n we're all the better for you sharing them with us
Thank you Steak.
Have you noticed that people basically react to me one of two different ways. Either they are extremely turned off and even angry with me or they are quite receptive. It's clear from this reception that I'm tapping into something. As long as I can hear an occasional welcome I'll keep coming back. But I must admit the hate does wear on me at times.
Thanks again. I can't tell you how much a smile means to me sometimes. I'm not really that brave a soul.
an individual is either on the path to more and more self awareness or they're not. imho
often though it takes a huge crisis/suffering to see the path. many on this site are are on that path.
birds of a feather flock together.
best thing you've written
Cheeky bastards and sarcastic fellow travelers take note...
Muslim Mickey Mouse: "We said before that becoming masters of the world requires..."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dTa99N_5aPc
The entire non-Muslim world is the "House of War", enough said.
They hate for a lot more than that
Exactly! Our freedom and our laws (that prevent the atrocities that occur over there.)
Not that atrocities don't occur over here, they do. After almost 20 yrs in medicine, part of it in inner cities, I know about atrocities. But what happens there is well beyond the pale. Go look. You'll find videos of it online if you're brave enought to stomach what you see.
Young girls killed (buried alive) for daring to even *talk* to a boy. Women beaten, stoned or buried alive for "allowing themselves to be raped," walking down the street with an unrelated man, or defying a so-called husband who beat, burned or tortured her. Honor killings. How about that? That sit well with you? We jail our rapists. They punish or even kill their victims of rape, male or female.
Go look up Shariah. Your grandkids, great grandkids and so on will be living it in the future. I wrote it before. The REAL war is a quiet one. All other religions are being out-populated. Fastest growing religion? Sure, it is. By being the fastest in breeding. Everywhere, including here.
The evil in all this is the IGNORANCE. I work with intelligent physicians of all religions. We all get along great. We socialize, work, talk, share together HERE. We are all FREE to practice our religions within the laws of the US.
It's not just our "American" way of life they hate.
It's our freedom from their barbaric, machiavellian, misogynistic and specious behavior.
I think you're confusing the process a bit. They bury them up to their necks and then stone them to death, so technically they don't bury them alive. I don't support the war in Iraq, or Afghanistan, since no matter how long we're there, or how much we spend we will never change their minds. Islam is going through a renaissance at the moment. You can see videos from Iran of mothers who do not wear the hijab, or burka, but their young daughters do. This cultural war is just starting.
The cultural war is centuries old.Strict sharia life codifies an existence as it was at the time of the prophet, with the state and religious observance inseparable from one another.This was successful for a long time.In the modern age, it is easy to label some of the practices as barbaric and savage.And to do so also requires cultural insensitivity which is criminal in it's shallowness.Modern dress of western women is anathema to that culture..it is out of the norm, bizarre, depraved.They hate the depravity of the west.
That is exactly one thing they cannot stand.There are many,many more.
In Iraq, the existence of the Kurds, the Shites(and their Holy sites), and the Sunni groups would have given any sane person serious reservations about going in there and removing the existing power structure.But we did, with predictable results.The fact that other forces helped to increase the animus between these groups is no surprise either.
Our ally, Turkey, so completely despised the remote possibility of a Kurdish state that they massed troops on the border to invade if one was declared.
The fact that we waltzed into such a hornets nest is simply unforgivable, barring some actual real proof of dire existential threat to us.
And there was not one.
And we sent our troops anyway.
Just idiotic arrogance on our leaders part.Their advisers studied that region not at all apparently.
That horrible outcomes should proceed to occur is zero surprise.
Comments referencing how much "they" hate us are unhelpful...to say the least.We are in their land.They should not be expected to play by our rules, any more than people in the US should live like the Chinese, or North Koreans.That's just jingoism, and it is frankly damn ugly.And I would remind our readers that some Americans think we are better than that.I do not fear sharia being implemented here...ACLU I rest my case.
The US is off the reservation in regards to the value of human life.And everyone on the planet knows it....except for, ironically enough, Americans.
When in our lands they don't play by our rules. Muslim immigrants to European nations don't obey the cultural norms. They realize that ugliness that you so strongly disaprove of is actually cultural strength, and they have it. Wait till an intifada breaks out in the first European country, and it isn't far now, then we'll see what tune you sing. The truth is that Salafist Muslims understand the language spoken by the military much more clearly than they understand the jiberish you speak. Here is a question for all you Wheaton fans. In a fight between astronauts and cavemen who wins? The cavemen always win.
Historically, over a certain percentage of population the Muslims are problematic.Given a high enough percentage, they take over as well.
I guess you know what that means, logically speaking.We have to kill them all, before it is too late.
Please excuse me from that project however.I have no attraction to emulating Adolph Hitler.
Good job comparing them to cavemen btw...subtle and refined.You are a credit to the master race.
FAIL
Also, on further reflection I would direct you to read more of this site to discern where the clear and present danger to our way of life resides.
People like Timothy Geithner, Hank Paulson,Ben Bernake and Lord Blankfien et al are far more dangerous right here and right now than some cockamamie islamofascist threat as presented by the propaganda mill.They are ruining your life, and your future.And you are worried about Islam?Really?
You don't dispute my conclusions. You are just dismayed at the consequences. I don't personally care that much, since I'm in the U.S.. The first European nation that becomes the newest Lebanon will be the wake up call that the rest of the western world needs. Our policies are suicidal. You state that Islam isn't a big threat, and that is and isn't true. Islam isn't a threat to communist China, or the USSR, because they would just kill them all and be done with it. Islam is a threat to us because all their strengths line up so very neatly with all our weaknesses.
Good job comparing them to cavemen btw...subtle and refined.You are a credit to the master race.
This statement encapsulates the problem. They have a culture/religion that dictates death for homosexuals, adultery, and the list goes on and on, but you can't bring yourself to say that their culture is from the stone age, even though it's true. How will you convince them that their ways are wrong, and the ways of the west are right, when you can't bring yourself to make an argument that western culture is superior. Europe is lost.
Actually, I did.You are just being obtuse.
Let me be plain...you are a hate filled maniac who would embrace genocide.
I called you a Nazi, read between the lines.
I am also of the opinion that you are merely an agent of disinformation....and if you are not,that is even scarier.
You say Europe is lost?Take a look at the concentration camps of ww2.The results of allied bombing....that is what a lost Europe looks like.Unlike you, I prefer not to repeat the atrocities of the past.
Do you understand that?
I don't embrace genocide. I think the door for assimilation in Europe is still open, although it's closing very quickly.
You say Europe is lost?Take a look at the concentration camps of ww2.The results of allied bombing....that is what a lost Europe looks like.Unlike you, I prefer not to repeat the atrocities of the past.
-Cistercian
You don't see that in your desire to avoid the past you are breeding the next genocide, and there will be one. If not by the Europeans against the Muslims, then it will be the Muslims force converting or killing the Europeans. It's a foregone conclusion in the end, the Europeans locked in your moral and cultural relativism won't take any actions to avoid it, and the muslims fueled by their theology are eager for it. The best that can be hoped for is the rest of the western world sees the fall of Europe as a wake up call.
You are clueless to a criminal degree.Watch the video again.Then again.
Then ask, if the evil Muslims are a serious threat, do you think the Trident submarine command is sufficient to kill them all?One component of the triad...more than overkill.
You apparently delight in calling them cavemen too, and assert the cavemen would beat the astronauts.Watch the video you dolt.Cavemen do not win, they get slaughtered.The "engagement" is a joke...they just die, without even seeing their killers.You think being vicious on their part will enable them to win?What a dishonest position to take!UCAV's with hellfires kill them easily, with exactly zero risk to our personnel.I suspect you are only too aware of the new remote/AI weapons platforms.A war with them will always be lopsided...with them dying in large numbers.
Your hype as them being an existential threat can only mean one of two things...either you are a dolt, or a .gov shill for murder on an epic scale.
There is no need for me to respond further...you are objectively sowing the seeds of hate to further the cause of war, a war which is by definition genocidal.
The future will reveal the truth....and there is no way for you to escape it.It will not be kind to you.I strongly suggest you reflect on what your actions entail, and who open war really serves.
I will give you a hint:war ill serves everyone.If you believe otherwise, you need to grow out of it, repent of it, or you will be visited by it.
Please don't bloviate about how inhuman or primitive or evil our "enemy" is.It is not only pointless and inane, but makes you completely indistinguishable from them.
And one other thing to ponder in the late watches of the night.Do you think their blood calls out for to God for justice?
You are on the wrong side, turn back before it is too late.
Count yourself lucky to be warned so explicitly, it is a mercy.
It's doesn't matter how big your gun, or bomb is if you can't bring yourself to use it, and that is why the cavemen always win. They aren't weighted down by self doubt they know in their hearts they are right. If you were half as smart as you thought you were then you would realize that i don't hate them. I'm envious.
Just watch the video. http://collateralmurder.com/ You really don't need to read the official explanation when you can see the crime in HD.
+11
+1
You can see weapons in this video.
There was a Reuters cameraman who was killed during conflicat as well. His shoulder mounted camera was perceived as an RPG by coalition forces.
First rule of life is to come home at the end of the day alive.
Life is tough , even tougher if you're stupid. The Iraqi's and the news crew knew or should have known better, than to hold fire arms while the Helicopter was over head. Traggic but that's life.
What's really tragic is that they are in their own country following the rules set by someone else with a punishment being a death sentence without any trial. That's what tragic. Nothing changes. Vae victis.
+100
Agreed. But that's not the situation we have is it?
Point is the Iraqis New the US forces were sweeping the area. They acted stupid in a war zone.
How stupid of them for standing around in their country. Don't they know it's been declared a war zone by foreigners in helicopters?
you've clearly never lived in a city with a bad neighborhood. there are parts of DC with big ass MS13 tags letting you know it is not a place you want to be standing around. when there have been gun battles in your neighborhood all day (foreign troops, narco terrorists, gang bangers...does it really matter who is shooting?), the smart move is to take a pass on hanging out with your buddies on the street and stay indoors.
How many years should they stay indoors? What right do you have to treat someone elses country like a prison for 10 years?
If foreigners showed up in your city, didn't speak your language, and drove around in armored cars and helicopters looking like aliens, what would you do? Would you expect to be shot down for going outside?
there is no question...if someone invaded my city i'd go wolverines on their asses in a heartbeat. but as we saw in Red Dawn and the Soviet-Afghan war, attack heli > any mass of infantry.
so if i was engaged in a gurrilea struggle to liberate Atlanta, GA and my enemy had total air dominance, hopefully i'd not be dumb enough to hang out in a giant open courtyard while a 30mm gun hovers above me.
i'm not dismissing your point, i'd expect a foreign army to be brutal and i'd want to kill them. but as a result, i WOULD expect to be shot down for going outside and it would suck mightily.
knew (sic). We are expected to believe that the reuters employees were imbedded with insurgants and that the government lawyer saw two rpgs and ARKs (I didn't see the weapons on the tape, did you?)
Ok, maybe I just don't know how not to act stupidly in the war zone, never been there and wouldn't make a judgement. And if picking up seriously wounded also counts as stupid behaviour in the war zone, then I don't know if I want to act smart.
Yes, nothing changes.
It's just like before (under Saddam) but back then there was little discussion about the tragedy you describe.
What I was referring to has been long before Saddam (you could apply it to Saddam, but only if he successfully conquered Kuwait):
That's rather symbolic:
Check your sources. They're not very adept at translating.
I'd also like to see a source that "Vae victus" was worn "during deployment in Iraq".
Couldn't find it, so I take it back, wiki doesn't count.
Wiki was all I could find too. I've seen the Brennus claim before in print so I know that is out there.
The Wiki isn't really sourced either. Answers.com is trusting Wiki.
That's where it came from:
http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/etcbin/browse-mixed-new?id=Liv1His&tag=pub...
Dude, that chopper was nearly a mile away. They definitely could not see or hear it. You have no idea how scary long range weapons platforms are. And they did NOT hear the 50 cal firing before they were hit (supersonic rounds). You're standing around and all of sudden your body explodes or your friend's head disapears in a mist of blood/flesh/hair.
+100000000000000
Hmm. did you watch the film. The guy with the RPG ? I don't believe they didn't see or know they were living in a war zone armed.
Did you watch the film? I didn't see the RPG. The picture of the RPG in the report was redacted (Not that I'd trust 'their' pictures after the massacre anyway.)
Was it an RPG? You decide.
http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/201889.php
Thanks for the link merchant. That does look like an RPG.
...and those people killed by unmanned drones 10k meteres up should have known better than to be born there. Their fault for existing. One could call it life, I would call it death.
Proof please. You're imaginary killing would have nothing to do with this incident , other than a political agenda. I never said the war was right only that the Iraqi's showed ignorance of the obvious.
We shoot missiles into houses, cars, compounds in Pakistan. Lots of people die for eating, sleeping, standing, or just being in the wrong place. Death from above, aren't you proud of it? Are you surprised they hate us? Spreading democracy with hellfire missiles, oh yes.
No I'm not surprised they hate us. But I am surprised they immigrate and bleed the west dry every chance they get. They call America and the west evil but never just go away. Tell you what i'd like to see: the west pull out everywhere. Leave the third worlders to fend for themselves literally for the first time in history without western anything. You want reality youll see reality ... Blood bath. Hell these people have no understanding of free speech and liberals just can't stop speaking for them.
Perhaps they immigrate because America has reduced their homelands to one big pile of rubble? Rest assured with the sorry state of the US economy nobody is interested in immigrating to the US anymore.
I think the whole world will welcome that with open arms. I imagine that by "the west" you mean the US. Well, it is the US that will be left to fend for itself once the world refuses to accept the pieces of paper it prints as "money" (which in turn funds its wars). And many of those countries you call the "third world" were MADE SO by robbing and pillaging US THUGS like the IMF.
Careful GG,
You're rapidly deflating the great American Myth of making the world better by it's very existence. We're saving the world by destroying it, one village at a time.
Another Liberal mouth piece. Show me when the third world wasn't rubble? No.. sorry but it was America and Europeans who built and put most of the present world under the nation Constitutional era of independence. Before America the world was basically a world of empires. Dictators religion or not.
The problem is usury . The system of interest charges has been a dark shadow on humanity for age upon age. But how to take the human out of the human?
http://www.mapsofwar.com/images/EMPIRE17.swf
"Before America the world was basically a world of empires"
yes and now it's our empire..and the third world ingrates are still pissed!
True.. but our glorious leadership has failed at empire builders. To weak and liberal minded to control the ingrates, to stupid to realize Empires are the dislocation of power not a means of centralization.
I agree with you, but you and I are in the minority. These folks have hated us long before now. The more ignorant ones look for a return to the 16th Century. Do they want Equality? No. Free speech? No. Freedom and equality for women? No.
I'm not for the Iraq war. I agree with you. We should leave immediately. They are free to slaughter each other by whatever means suits them. I wrote above (and of course was immediately junked) that I work daily with *intelligent* people of all religions. They are fully against the way life is lived there: Unjust, often barbaric treatment of women, senseless killing of mere children for perceived transgressions, the mutilation of young girls (female circumcision) so "they won't be distracted by sexual desires," and Shariah laws.
They are determined that they will overtake the world. I wrote earlier. They are winning the quiet war. They are outpopulating *everyone* as best they can. It will only take another maybe 2 or 3 hundred years.
I do agree we need to get out of there. Let these folks have the world they want.
"They are outpopulating *everyone* as best they can. It will only take another maybe 2 to 3 hundred years." ... and then they will fall like christianity in the next 2 to 3 hundred years, because there are way too many people inside asking questions and pointing out things. When a major part of the people of this planet become a part of a religion, they usually rip it apart from the inside by looking at it from different angles.Also there will be more and more of groups who will break it apart. One cannot go butchering people all the time around the globe to "stop this blasphemy" with out an uprising or two. This happened with catholic church and christianity when they tried to "rule the world".
I think the same will happen with Islam. We could speed this up by all together changing to Islam. Then the whole world would be a house of peace and then when all of us learned about Sharia, Koran etc. texts and laws we could begin the dissemble of Islam law etc. Ofcourse those parts that we like we could keep and those that we don't we could arque to be bad and useless.
I hope that I'm being as clear that I would like to be.
but...without usury, there wouldn't be any money for all the generals' toys!
you can't have one without the other. your choice.
http://rawstory.com/2010/03/aclu-forced-sue-obtain-legal-basis-predator-...
http://www.aclu.org/national-security/aclu-seeks-information-predator-dr...
If you're waiting for the DoD press release, you and I both know not to hold our breath.
Please keep moving folks, there's nothing to see here.
Briliant idea to have reporters wear special garb. Then everyone will wear it and it won't work.
hehe... so true. I hadn't thought of that. Those dang haji's just don't play by the rules!
General Cornwallace had the same complaints.
Journalists are just humans. If they're in a warzone and they're trying to get a scoop with insurgents then they share the same risk that mistresses share when shacking up with made men on La Cosa Nostra. You might get caught up in a debt collection.
So is the involved armies, but insurgents have a free pass as they are not "regular" forces.
In the photos on page 38, are we just supposed to trust that the gray box is an RPG? Also, can Iraqis legally own guns? It seems to me that merely possessing a gun does not make a person a terrorist. In fact, owning a gun in Iraq seems like a wise safety decision... until you get shot down by a 30mm gun from 3000 yards.
Yeh, everyone seems to be missing all the main points. We shouldn't be there to begin with, they should be able to own guns in their own effing country, and everyone is automatically classifying these guys as the enemy. Shoot first and ask questions later.
"In the photos on page 38, are we just supposed to trust that the gray box is an RPG?"
NO.
In a monetary system, everything gets boiled down to money. What is a life worth?
This is why in our civil court system, monetary judgements are made. I'm not advocating an eye for an eye system but the fact that everything can be boiled down to money (with foreign dark skinned humans worth less than domestic white skinned humans and CEO skin is worth more than your skin) really should to make us stop and pause.
Just because it works that way doesn't mean it should nor should it continue. This is what I talk about when I say that after the hive members have been part of the hive (mentality) for a few generations, anything other than the hive way is incomprehensible to the hive members. And this is why the hive members will fight so hard to defend the hive, even if they hate the hive.
"There was no information to lead anyone to believe or even suspect that there were noncombatants in the area."
Are you catching on, Citizen? No one is a noncombatant.
brilliant post
Roger that.
Have been waiting for Apache to shoot me while I am eating breakfast.
COTD COTD
We are in training, receiving our cognitive implants through psychological warfare. You don't think Edward Bernays was just teaching Madison avenue how to sell cloths and toothpaste, do you? He also had a few classes for the military and other ....er....interested parties.
Ever wonder about the impact of the psychological message everyone received when they heard "they" water boarded someone 183 times?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Bernays
Everyone forget about our own Goebbels
Guilty until proven innocent (or dead).
++
I like the fact that if the insurgents are taking a wounded man away, that is "escaping". If one of the US soldiers is taken off a battlefield, that would be considered medical evaculation. A nice double-standard, ethically. The only reason I could imagine being given for this would be "but they'd do it to us!", which is probably true. That makes us no better than they are, though, yes? Our terrorists versus their terrorists. Wonderful.
The defenders of the military's actions are so brainwashed that I doubt any sense will ever come to them but here is one more attempt.
1.Destroying a makeshift ambulance promotes terrorism in all it's forms. This does not make us safer.
2.Destroying a makeshift ambulance does not make oil cheaper. The brainwashed set here seem to still cling to the idea that we are in Iraq for "cheap oil" which is the LEAST believable reason for the war. Bush and Cheney came into their presidency making many public statement about the horrors of "cheap oil'. Saudi Arabia(the close US ally and islamo fundamentalist redicalizing agent) repeatedly threaten Sadam because he was producing "too much" oil. Bush-Cheney texas buddies were particularly hard hit by $15,$20 and $30 oil because they were marginal supplier int he world market at those low prices!
3.Destroying a makeshift ambulance is not gonna spread "democracy".
Thus, all the official reasons for us wasting our resources in the middle east are BS. If you do not acknowledge that then you are in fact not "supporting the troops"....you are helping send kids to their death for BS reasons.
I see some chickenshit has flagged this as junk...why not reply to the points made? Which BS excuse are you pushing for these wars? you know these wars were waged with the help of lies. It hurts your psyche to admit you were a sheeple.
+10000, although I think looting the Iraqi oil was a primary objective - but most definitely NOT to give cheap oil to the sucker US taxpayers. It's pretty pathetic how some Americans think its OK to pillage Iraq as long as they get cheap oil - it's only fitting that not only are they NOT getting cheap oil but are also getting reamed every which way by their own government.
I have never heard this perspective, but it makes more sense than placing an army there to protect oil. Do you have any links or other info to support this?
When the Bush-Cheney oil axis wins, how many bottles of vodka are consumed in Moscow?
Every creditor has to repay its debts. Too bad Moscow destroyed language, food, and religion. They could have kept those colonies for another hundred years.
What happened to the first discussion thread. Did some 3 letter agency make it come down?
Watch this, I'll hit every blacklist in one go: CIA, DIA, NSA, FBI, ONI, ATF, DHS, NRO. Did I miss any?
Mossad, which has unencumbered access to the US. This isn't antisemitic, just a fact. The CIA and Mossad have...er...how do you say it...ummmmm....mutual assistance agreements. Yeah, that's the ticket, mutual assistance agreements, like the Coast Guard and your local coastal city fire department. Nothing more than that.
<sarcasm off>
LOVE IT, very true, but if we began the list of foreign intelligence services we'd be here for hours...
LOL. I found the thread it popped way back into the wood pile when it got unstickied. That thread is AMAZING. The military is a complete control freak. They will not allow you to reach a conclusion on your own. They will attack whatever perception you have that they don't like the same way they attack whatever force will not allow them to be right and have righteousness. Gotta keep the good shepard myth and the good protector myth alive to keep the protection and force racket going.
Great, if it is so clear then why did the Military Lie about it?
"Why did the military lie?"..You might as well ask "why did the bear shit in the woods?"
I assume this is not a serious question but I fear that it might be.
What I take away from this is that Iraqi's and really the whole Muslim world, despite their bellicosity and great experience in war, aren't very good at it in practice or just don't realize its seriousness to Westerners.
Chatting on cellphones, mixing business ( Reuters) with combat ( Mookie's jihad) , having the kids in the van while driving into a combat zone, its amateur even by militia standards with predictable results.
But they are good at mutilating young women - even if it might kill them: http://www.rferl.org/content/article/1057007.html
And in their religion it's okay to bury your child alive - for talking to boys: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/feb/04/girl-buried-alive-turkey
And what? Rape women who are executed "so they don't get to go to heaven" : http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2009/07/iranians-rape-virgin-girls-befo...
But we are the barbarians? Tell me, life is precious to WHO? Life is cheap and meaningless to ALL barbarians. and they are the worst of them.
Who the hell is they? You keep saying, they this, they that. There are good people and bad people everywhere no matter the race, religion or background. By separating one group from another, you automatically create friction. They (whoever they are) are good and bad, same as we (whoever we are) are good and bad.
Us and them is the mentality bred by the arms of propoganda, and makes people easier to control.
Again, the Wikileaks is nothing but cheap anti-American propaganda. Here are the simple facts:
Wikileaks, the website devoted to publishing classified documents on the Internet, made a splash today with a video claiming to show that the U.S. military "murdered" a Reuters cameraman and other Iraqi "civilians" in Baghdad on July 12, 2007. But a careful watching of the video shows that the U.S. helicopter gun crews that attacked a group of armed men in the then Mahdi Army stronghold of New Baghdad was anything but "Collateral Murder," as Wikileaks describes the incident.
There are a couple of things to note in the video. First, Wikileaks characterizes the attack as the U.S. military casually gunning down Iraqis who were innocently gathering on the streets of New Baghdad. But the video begins somewhat abruptly, with a UAV starting to track a group of Iraqi males gathering on the streets. The voice of a U.S. officer is captured in mid-sentence. It would be nice to know what happened before Wikileaks decided to begin the video. The U.S. military claimed the Iraqis were killed after a gunbattle with U.S. and Iraqi security forces. It is unclear if any of that was captured on the strike footage. Here is what the U.S. military had to say about the engagement in a July 2007 press release:
There is nothing in that video that is inconsitent with the military's report. What you see is the air weapons team engaging armed men.
Second, note how empty the streets are in the video. The only people visible on the streets are the armed men and the accompanying Reuters cameramen. This is a very good indicator that there was a battle going on in the vicinity. Civilians smartly clear the streets during a gunfight.
Third, several of the men are clearly armed with assault rifles; one appears to have an RPG. Wikileaks purposely chooses not to identify them, but instead focuses on the Reuters cameraman. Why?
document.write('<script language="JavaScript" src="http://ad.doubleclick.net/adj/cdg.ws/blog;pos=2;section=;tile=2;sz=300x2...' + ord + '?" type="text/javascript"><\/script>');
Fourth, there is no indication that the U.S. military weapons crew that fired on this group of armed men violated the military's Rules of Engagement. Ironically, Wikileaks published the military's Rules of Engagement from 2007, which you can read here. What you do see in the video is troops working to identify targets and confirm they were armed before engaging. Once the engagement began, the U.S. troops ruthlessly hunted their prey.
Fifth, critics will undoubtedly be up in arms over the attack on that black van you see that moves in to evacuate the wounded; but it is not a marked ambulance, nor is such a vehicle on the "Protected Collateral Objects" listed in the Rules of Engagement. The van, which was coming to the aid of the fighters, was fair game, even if the men who exited the van weren't armed.
Sixth, Wikileaks' claim that the U.S. military's decision to pass the two children inside the van to the Iraqi police for treatment at an Iraqi hospital threatened their lives is unsubstantiated. We do not know the medical assessment of the two Iraqi children wounded in the airstrike. We don't even know if the children were killed in the attack (although you can be sure that if they were Wikileaks would have touted this. And who drives their kids into the middle of a war zone anyway?) Having been at attacks where Iraqis have ben killed and wounded, I can say I understand a little about the process that is used to determine if wounded Iraqis are transported to a U.S. hospital. The person has to be considered to have a life-threatening situation or in danger of losing a vital function (eyesight, etc.). Yet, even though the threshold to transfer Iraqis to U.S. military hospitals is high, I have repeatedly seen U.S. personnel err on the side of caution and transport wounded who probably should not have been sent to a U.S. hospital.
Baghdad in July 2007 was a very violent place, and the neighborhoods of Sadr City and New Baghdad were breeding grounds for the Mahdi Army and associated Iranian-backed Shia terror groups. The city was a war zone. To describe the attack you see in the video as "murder" is a sensationalist gimmick that succeeded in driving tons of media attention and traffic to their website.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/collateral-murder-baghdad-anything?page=2
Good analysis, Judge. Thanks for the opposing view.
Good job agreement facilitator. I'm sure your agreement will go a long way towards reaching unamimous consent.
Copying and pasting a single article from some website nobody has heard of doesn't constitute "facts". And, BTW, the only "terrorist" in Iraq is the US Government.
Who be doing all that suicide bombing over there since the elections then Gordo baby, Obama militants?
You're not very observant are you?
There was a suicide bomber on the Xmas day plane that was ushered through Amsterdam with clearance only a three letter agency could have. They have body scanners at that airport too. That was definitely "Obama" militants. And as for Al-C.I.A.DUH, yes, "Obama" militants. As far as the Mujaheddin, yes, "Obama" militants. Personally, "Obama" militants is a little personal for the man named Barry, as we should call them "Brzezinski" militants, but "Obama" militants will do, considering he has been under the tutelage of Zbigniew since he first entered college. Then of course Barry was handed off to Kissinger Associates, and we should give Hank some credit too. Not only does he deserve it, he wants it.
Order out of Chaos, after all.
Must be those darn Israelis. Hmmmm wait a second... Funny thing. In all this time I have never ever even *once* heard of an Israeli suicide bomber. Guess it's just not in their training. /sarcasm.
Nice. Thanks for the background. I still don't like to see people killed (even terrorists), nor hear men chuckle after the killing, but I feel better about knowing the situation at the time. I can now safely classify this released video as the Anti-American propaganda and web site marketing material that I suspected it was.
This posting here on ZH has certainly brought out the best and worst of its readers, for sure. I'm not sure what this has to do with financial markets, but it was eye-opening to see the emotional reactions nonetheless.
".....but I feel better about knowing the situation at the time. I can now safely classify this released video as the Anti-American propaganda and web site marketing material that I suspected it was."
Bryan,
With the utmost respect and without shouting or name calling, may I ask if you were looking for a reason to feel better about this video and when one was presented, it filled your need to not only feel better but then release any emotional baggage you were feeling? I'm not being judgemental, I also struggle with my need to release some fear and uncomfortable realizations and we all have a tendency to seek out information that confirms our beliefs.
Thanks for civility my friend. I have read at one or more posts from you and almost everyone here on this blog and I respect all of your opinions (although some of you could leave out the profanity and probably still get your point across - unless of course the point IS the profanity, hm, I'll have to think about that one ;-).
Anyway, what I was looking for was some reason other than "the evil US Army delights in killing random innocent people and then runs them over with tanks," which seemed to be the consensus here. A rational person would want to know the background of the incident, what was in the minds of the people involved, what political forces were in effect, etc. before jumping to conclusions that fortify their prejudices about America and its use of the military. I am admittedly pro-American, Christian and conservative in my political views. I am fiscally conservative as well and believe that we should have a balanced budget and spend only as much as we take in. I like it when people accept responsibility for their actions, are sincere, honest and seek out the truth. I like open dialog and honest debate without flame wars and pissing contests. I also like long walks on the beach at sunset. lol
So... there's my prejudice laid out for you all. I appreciate the candor and hope we can all come to agreement that we don't like watching people being killed, children put in harms way, civilians getting caught up in a gunfight... We all fear for our lives, our families and our way of life. I think that's why there was so much spirited debate on this topic.
Anyway... sorry to digress. This topic really stirs me. Did I answer your question?
Bryan
Bryan,
I watched this tape VERY carefully looking for exactly what you are talking about. I wanted to keep in mind the context in which these soldiers are working, so as to understand their actions in a reasonable light (if there is such thing in warfare). And up to a point, I can see how this happened. It is ugly, and war is ugly, and war is hell. It is also, however, why I am focused on the van. What happened with the van is where they went over the line. Let's even assume they were insurgents in the van. I'll even give the army that. But to claim that when the insurgents try to take a wounded man out of harm's way that they are "escaping" instead of the humanitarian response of helping a fellow human in suffering (whatever the cause), and that therefore it is okay to kill everyone inside that van? No. That doesn't jibe with my sense of humanity. I want the insurgents not to attack our ambulances, and I condemn them totally for those acts. I apply that same standard here. One big difference to keep in mind, however, is that this is THEIR country. It's NOT OURS, and we acted no better than did the terrorists in this instance. Fighting for your home --which is what most "terrorists" are trying to do, whether or not you agree with their tactics (I don't) -- is a more admirable act than projecting American military power in a country 5 thousand miles from here. I am greatly saddened as an American.
Yes, with 20-20 hindsight, it's easier to make a judgement now because we know there were children in the van. If the pilot had seen children, they would not have fired. However, the presence of men loading a wounded person into their unmarked van would not immediately register "ambulance" to me, or to the pilot/gunner apparently. I think we're making assumptions that may or may not be true. I don't know the whole story of who those people were and why they were there at that time and why they were trying to load the wounded man into their van and where they were planning on going afterward. Perhaps there is more to this tape than simply what we see. I would like to hear from the ground troops and the air support people before I rush to judgement about what their decisions were and why they did what they did. Without that info, I can only assume they were following their ROE and did what they were trained to do.
Now, whether or not you disagree or agree with the politics, war, ROE, killing, etc. of that period is another matter.
Bryan
By the way... most 'terrorists' I believe generally are not fighting for their home -- they just want you to be dead because you don't worship Allah. That's *you*, personally, and your family as well, and me and my family. If you strolled into their compound and smiled and tried to shake their hand and give them candy and have a discussion about why you're really nice, they would likely murder you on the spot. Or if they came into your house and you asked them to sit down and have some tea and cakes, they would likely kill you in front of your family and rape and then kill your wife and children. Or if you do worship Allah, then they want you to kill people who don't. It's not a very intellectual group and their charter is not real complicated. I think many people don't realize that this group of extremists hates them with a deadly passion, regardless of whether we're nice or not. These are people that you hunt down and eliminate, before they do get a chance to enter your house and etc. etc. This is all just MHO.