Reuters Staff Killed in Iraq

[screamin_weasel]

well i think that was pretty *fruitcage* shocking.

 

yes there were a couple of guys with guns, clearly not shooting anybody, and yes there were guys with 'slings' ont he shoulders, that could have have been a gun, a camera, a handbag, who knows ?

 

clearly the pilots didnt.

 

ignoring the fact all those people got gunned down probably while trying to assertain how to get the best angle on the photo they wanted, the fact they didnt let up on the van is horrific. at that point, nobody was going to shoot at an apache, even if they ahd the ability to move properly. dropping down a few feet and zooming in a bit they may have seen the kids, they may not have done.

 

i did think it was was amusing that after celebrating killing 'insurgents' - which is fair enough at the time, the pilots shut up pretty *fruitcage* quickly when they started dragging the 2 kids from the van. then had the cheek to say "shouldnt bring their kids to battle" what *fruitcage* planet are they on ?

 

but, to top it all off, even worse, was the general shortCummings or whoever he was saying "i don't know how the kids got hurt"

 

oh really. i'd say it was down to trigger happy, inept at ID'ing targets pilots and a few rounds of apache ammo.

 

for what its worth, after training for years to do that job the pilots are doing, and seeing guys that DID have a couple of guns and possibly something else, i can almost understand what went on. but it seemed to me FAR to easy to get the go-ahead to shoot. is the footage from the apache's streamed to a base or anything on the ground ? or does whoever gave the go ahead to shoot just go on the judgment of the pilot ?

[Harmless]

Just ignoring the reasons for the initial engagment, when did it become ok to shoot the injured and those trying to remove the injured and apparently within the ROE's

[-Angel-]

If they believed the initial group were insurgents, then people coming to thier aid are likely to fall into the same category.

 

Are there any after-action reports confirming who the other men were? Were they actually insurgents?

[thewallhitme]

Just ignoring the reasons for the initial engagment, when did it become ok to shoot the injured and those trying to remove the injured and apparently within the ROE's

 

 

This is exaclty what i was going to point out. If the guy is rolling around on the floor and you cant see a weapon, he is not a thrat and so you would disengage. Also, I didnt see the guys in the van with any weapons (unless a child is a weapon) and they were no doubt going to take the guy to hospital. So instead of potentially saving one guy, they killed 3 others and wounded 2 kids. What the *fruitcage* is going on here? If i was the commanding officer, I wouldent cover it up, I would have their heads on pikes. disgrace these pilots, make sure the world knows that the forces dont stand for this retardedess. I would also string up the humvee driver by the nads for running over the body. That is some sick *suitcase*.

 

There is no way that was a weapon, let alone an RPG. To the best of my knowledge, those are about 4 feet long and you fire them on top of your shoulder. The camera was no wider than the side of his body, so at best it could be mistaken for an UZI, not the generic AK47 or RPG. From what I saw, there was one guy who was holding something that *could* have been weapon, but it could also have been a camera stand or something? Either way, gunning down a group of people who were mostly unarmed, with a few *potentially armed* amongst them is not on at all. I'd hate to be their defence lawyer.

[GuzziHero]

Of course, Guzzi needs to stop posting utter ######

 

You are more than capable of posting utter ##### yourself.

 

Now, would you like to point out what part of my previous posts was ##### or untruthful? I'll start collecting some Veterans Against The War speeches and reports about times where soldiers were actively encouraged to show a blase or in some cases murderous attitude towards Iraqi citizens.

 

---

Firing on an ambulance is not justifiable in any case whatsoever. That part of it is particularly disgraceful. The "Dont know how the kids got hurt" struck me strongly as well. Even after the fact, they are trying whatever pathetic way they can to weedle out of it.

 

Cowardly ****s.

[-Angel-]

Firing on an ambulance is not justifiable in any case whatsoever. That part of it is particularly disgraceful.

There isn't an ambulance in that video. A van with a sliding door rolls up and tries to recover a person who the pilot/s identified (incorrectly, in hindsight) as an insurgent and therefore enemy. They seek permission from higher office to engage and do so when it is granted.

 

 

p.s. The opposition people are taking to your post is down to your extreme anti-war bias. Rather than discussing the issue at hand subjectively, you've decided to grandstand about the legitimacy of the entire war.

[spetsnazdave87]

Yeah once we realise that they're civilians doing an extremely noble thing it's utterly heartbreaking to watch, but insurgents have been documented repeatedly in recovering weapons and comrades after engagements. Once that initial mistake has been made it just snowballs.

[GuzziHero]

There isn't an ambulance in that video. A van with a sliding door rolls up and tries to recover a person who the pilot/s identified (incorrectly, in hindsight) as an insurgent and therefore enemy. They seek permission from higher office to engage and do so when it is granted.

 

 

p.s. The opposition people are taking to your post is down to your extreme anti-war bias. Rather than discussing the issue at hand subjectively, you've decided to grandstand about the legitimacy of the entire war.

 

Thats because for me it is a microcosm of the entire war illegal occupation. Too much used on too little with not enough forethought and planning. Seems they're too eager to reach for the big guns at a moment's notice.

 

For example, the times in Fallujah when a curfew was in place and US troops were firing on firemen putting out blazes. I dont see this as much different to that. They failed to correctly identify what they were looking at, and instead of sending someone in to take a closer look, switched their brains(?) straight onto 'PARTY HARD'.

 

My original point stands. Every bullet the allies fire makes more enemies. I really Do feel for our troops out there. Men and women sign up to do what they think is right, and stuff like in this video happens. I know it can't be easy on them. But they cannot pretend they are making friends out there.

[jotohomomoto]

At no time is that helicopter being "threatened." I think they were on a "search and destroy" mission and that changes the ROE. That being said, more discretion should have been used when deciding to fire on a large group of people AND the rescuing van. I think the pilots were just a little to eager to engage. The incident is much worse from our 20/20 hindsight/sterile perspective. The video makes it obvious that if no weapons were found than a huge mistake was made and the senior officers should have recognized that fact more resolutely.

[Harmless]

There isn't an ambulance in that video. A van with a sliding door rolls up and tries to recover a person who the pilot/s identified (incorrectly, in hindsight) as an insurgent and therefore enemy. They seek permission from higher office to engage and do so when it is granted.

 

 

It may not be an ambulance, but the ROE's seem to assume anyone helping a target is themselves a legitimate target. Seems a little harsh, also justifying attacks by insurgents on ambulance (if there has been any, or maybe that's the way this started, however it doesn't seem like cricket, thought we were the good guys).

[Kalmar]

That video is pretty lame. I got way more kills in chopper gunner last night. Almost got a nuke too.

[ThaFlash]

 

The point is that you try to minimise the *suitcase* that happens. One of the major failings has been all the *suitcase* that has happened pushing the population into the arms of the insurgents. Hence as someone said earlier the changes in the use of air power in Afghanistan.

 

We don't know the clear context to this situation but it's clear there were gross failings that need to be dealt with. Which would never happen as this incident was covered up. It's what makes WikiLeaks such a useful group in the long run as they expose this sort of thing and hold some of the less accountable parts of government/corporations up to the light of day.

 

Minimize unwanted casualties is not the same as prevent unwanted casualties. This is just the military acting within their role, this is what they do, this is why you don't target a small group of people in the middle of a civilian population with aircraft, and this is why you need to do your homework before going to war.

 

And this isn't directed solely at you, but the entire, clear context of this situation is really inconsequential. The video is long enough that there really isn't a good justification other than "it's war, bad things happen to innocent people". And that just adds fuel to the anti-war fire and makes more anti-US civilians want to do something about the matter.

 

Personally, I know why all these people hate America. The problem is that the people in charge of our policies don't. And it's not because of our civil liberties.

[mattmanic]

That video is pretty lame. I got way more kills in chopper gunner last night. Almost got a nuke too.

 

*facepalm*

 

I must say though, that is almost funny just in the sheer inappropriateness

[medic23]

its kind of funny how everyone goes up in arms when iraqi's who may have been acting like insurgets gets killed but when an american or british reporter embedded gets killed no one could care less. unless anyone has been to iraq or afghanistan and been in a firefight and watched insurgents run into a mosque, ran into a group of civvilians, hid behind children, or used an ambulance to get away, dont go picking apart something that had to be decided at the moment. hindsight is 20/20 as someone stated but unless you've been in that situation dont speculate on what they should or shouldnt have done based on the information they had at the time. Descsions have to be fast and accurate as HUMANLY possible if there were not any prompts in that video i guarantee you 90% of the people who posted would have said something along the lines of "got what they deserved".

[Seraphim989]

Ya its not like the helicopter pilots had nice arrows pointing out and naming everyone, and no text boxes to tell them exactly what happened. I fully agree that it was a terrible thing to happen, and the pilots should have looked more carefully. But they saw what they thought was a threat to them, and they felt the need to react quickly.

[Danke]

I agree with Medic here, where was the outcry when Michelle Lang, Sergeant George Miok, Sergeant Kirk Taylor, Corporal Zackery McCormack, and Private Garrett Chidley were murdered by an IED in Afghanistan last December. She was journalist killed covering a war, why doesn't she rate the same respect from the people at wikileaks?

 

It couldn't be because they marked her off as reporting for the wrong side could it? That wouldn't be very objective.

 

 

[ThaFlash]

That ranks up there as one of the worst attempts at an analogy, there are no parallels in that attempt other than journalists getting killed.

 

Journalists in the battlefield get killed like everyone else. How they get killed does matter, just like everyone else.

 

You can try to justify it however you want, actions like this create more enemies than they kill. The fact of the matter is that no decision maker in the U.S. really cares about this. But what our policy makers fail to understand is that the people that do care are the people that end up becoming our enemies. Our policies focus on killing enemies rather than preventing enemies, it's a lot like our domestic policies which focus too often on treating the symptoms of problems rather than the causes.

 

Nobody with a grain of intellect can debate the fact that our international policies and practices have led to an environment where violent actions towards our citizens (whether in uniform or not) are accepted by enough people to make it impossible to single them out. That won't change until our policies and practices change. And until then our enemies will have more than enough instances like these to recruit people.

 

If this happened in Juarez, with American journalists being killed by the Mexican Army, it wouldn't take 2 years and all this trouble for the information to get out.

[Smitty619]

According to the Committee to Protect Journalist, the US has killed 16 journalists in Iraq since 2003.

(CPJ has not found evidence to conclude that U.S. troops targeted journalists in these cases. While the cases are classified as crossfire, CPJ continues to investigate.)

Tragic?

Yes.

But where is the outrage about the 105 journalists killed by Iraqi insurgents?

Link

[ThaFlash]

Short sighted.

[Agent47]

More boots on the ground would have probably helped ID who the targets really were, but I guess the thing is that everyone's afraid of closing with the enemy to some extent. If they think someone's dug in or they are outranged heavier ordnance is used to blast them out of hiding. The ordnance is not always precise and the operators of the ordnance have a very limited perception as to what's going on.

 

What is needed is a huge leap forward in infantry armor. If you take a hit or two in the vest, that's it, the vest is done, you're out there naked - even multiple hits eventually ruin a vest - and if not for the vest ruined, any gear you've attached to it is ruined (not to mention if your arm was in the way...). Don't even think about going up against a machine gun (obviously). Advances in armor that can cover up the human body and still be lightweight could possibly give soldiers more confidence to engage and move toward the enemy and make better decisions in engagement.

[Chimpy]

But where is the outrage about the 105 journalists killed by Iraqi insurgents?

 

I am outraged by that as I am outraged by intentional targeting of civilians by insurgents. I don't see why you'd reduce the responsibility of the US Military to the moral level of terrorists that would commit these heinous acts intentionally though. Clearly your military personnel should be held to a higher standard, the legal and ethical codes that they claim to operate by should ensure that. Which is why people are more vocally outraged by their actions and in particular a cover up of them.

[billytehbob]

IMHO, I agree that the Apache crewmen made a mistake, but that it's nothing to go "TRY 'EM FOR DEATH!" for. This is war, and unfortunately, civilians die, and these guys were in the wrong place at the wrong time. If it were me, in the same situation, I would have probably made the same decision. They had American troops in the area, during such a volatile state of the war, and they were just looking out for the grunts on the ground. Don't tell me that if you were in the same situation, you might not have done the same.

As for the van, I don't know about that. However, the fact that it had two kids in there and the driver drove the van to the just bombed area is a fatal mistake on his part. The area just got blasted, and is still smoldering, and you're going to drive your car into there risking the lives of two children just to save one guy?

 

It sickens me how some people can just easily throw around accusations. Our reporters die in such horrific ways as this, and they only get a few days worth of media coverage, yet this will probably get weeks, and just because the "good guys" did it.

[Kalmar]

For everyone who says there was no "threat" to the helicopter or it's crew, go watch this video and see how fast *suitcase* gets *fruitcage*ed.

 

It's easy to discern a camera from an RPG while sitting behind your computer screen watching videos on Youtube. You don't have that luxury when you're relaying radio communications, tracking multiple targets and flying a multi-million dollar aircraft all at the same time. Oh yeah, and don't forget the people on the ground are potentially trying to kill you.

 

In a situation like that, there is no wait and see. There is only kill or be killed. With the limited information provided to the pilots they did what was necessary to protect themselves and their fellow soldiers (who had already been taking fire from that location). The men had mistakenly been identified as carrying weapons. Understandable, considering the way they presented themselves and pointed what could only be assumed as a weapon. From that point on the engagement was carried out in accordance to ROE and was perfectly legitimate. Proper clearance was received for every target including the van and pilots demonstrated amazing restraint in doing so.

 

Yes that right, I said amazing restraint. Given the fact 2007 saw some of the worst US casualty rates, I bet you'd be anxious to light up some bad guys too. Now with your presumed enemy in the crosshair and your own life at risk, it would take everything you've got from raining down 30mm HEDP right that instant. Yet these men sit and wait, and wait, despite everything their instincts are telling them. It takes the finest training in the world to pull that off, and big, big *albatross* brass ones.

 

Really though, who's bright idea was it that 'bring your kids to work day' was a good idea when you work in a warzone? Never mind the fact human shields and children are used like this all the time because Iraqi's know it will reflect badly upon the US.

 

And if you don't understand why the pilots are joking between shots and celebrating after the fact, it's because you've never been faced with a situation like that. Soldiers, EMT's and ER doctors do that all the time.. it's a coping mechanism. You'd go bat *suitcase* *fruitcage* insane with stuff they deal with everyday if you were 100% serious all the time.

 

Look I'm all for pulling our men out of the middle east and ending pointless wars. But people need to take emotion out of the equation and look at this incident objectively. Our soldiers are not blood thirsty murderers. Certainly not more so than the Youtube commentors shouting "Death to America" and "Kill the troops." For those of you that feel that way, I suggest you head on over there and pick up a rifle. Just see what happens.

[Chimpy]

Really though, who's bright idea was it that 'bring your kids to work day' was a good idea when you work in a warzone? Never mind the fact human shields and children are used like this all the time because Iraqi's know it will reflect badly upon the US.

 

What happens if you unfortunately happen to live in a war zone? AFAIK there isn't any evidence that the people that stopped to help the wounded were on there way to work with the children. It's such a ###### cop out to pin the blame for their death on the people driving the van that stopped to help a wounded journalist.

 

I don't necessarily blame the gunners but there was a failure in the system somewhere here and no one will chalk this up as 'a good day out'. On top of that this was sat on and hidden. I'd reserve terms like 'remarkable restraint' for the people that don't shoot up a bunch of civilians in spite of being shot at rather than when they do and aren't under fire or real threat at all.

[Kalmar]

Hindsight is 20/20 and perception is reality. The pilots believed this was a critical situation therefore it was. This topic has been debated ad nauseum in many places by many people. Some of those people who have had the experience of being there and dealing with these events. The consensus in that respect is that the Iraqi population knows not to wander around carrying weapons, stand near anyone carrying weapons, and most certainly not render aide to anyone who just got blown up by coalition forces. So what possibilities does that leave the pilots with? More enemy combatants attempting to remove insurgents or weapons from the battlefield? It wasn't marked as an ambulance. Like it or not, right or wrong, it was a legitimate target and was obliterated as such.

 

I feel much worse for the pilots that now have to live with this incident than I do for the poor bastards that died in it. Call me evil, those reporters new the dangers and chose to be there by there own free will. You try to take pictures of hell and you just might get burned.