Collateral Murder

[Bismillah]

Interesting.

No one has explained why the Apache gunship described these men as "shooting" at U.S troops.

No one has explained why the Apache gunship fired multiple rounds at wounded and dead men on the street, clearly after they were disabled.

No one has explained why of the four men who could possible construed as carrying weapons, eight other unarmed civilians were killed.

No one has explained why a van coming to the assistance of a dying man was described as carrying weapons and bodies.

No one has explained why this van was shot multiple times after the airmen lied about the driver's intentions, even when an officer asked for a damage report and was ignored in favor of another round of bullets.

No one has explained why they think it is unreasonable that a TAXI should be making its rounds in its regular neighborhood.

No one has explained the unstable condition of these soldiers reflected in their statements that urge a man to pick up a weapon, longing to shoot the civilians within the van, and laughter as an humvee runs over the body of a dead man. Yeah spin it as you like, these men hold no reservations of killing people, extending to people who didn't pose a threat to any American.

The official story of "insurgents" engaging American troops is a lie. The statements of these men attacking American soldiers is a lie. The pretext of the civilians aiding the dying man on the street is a lie. The actions and justifications for their actions is based on a lie.

 

[dressale]

Hello dressale,
Our records indicate that you have never posted to our site before! Why not make your first post today by saying hello to our community in our Introductions forum.

Why not start with your first post today and become an active part of AllCDCovers Forum now!

 

[dallas1125]

Interesting.

No one has explained why the Apache gunship described these men as "shooting" at U.S troops.

This happened during a firefight in the area and they did ID people carrying weapons.

No one has explained why the Apache gunship fired multiple rounds at wounded and dead men on the street, clearly after they were disabled.

When you engage an enemy, its to kill them.

No one has explained why of the four men who could possible construed as carrying weapons, eight other unarmed civilians were killed.

Good question

No one has explained why a van coming to the assistance of a dying man was described as carrying weapons and bodies.

I dont remember it being described that way.

No one has explained why this van was shot multiple times after the airmen lied about the driver's intentions, even when an officer asked for a damage report and was ignored in favor of another round of bullets.

Well again. They decided they were insurgents. So when you shoot at a car, you have no clue whether the targets inside are dead, so you continue until your positive. The officer was not very audible too (from memory.)

No one has explained why they think it is unreasonable that a TAXI should be making its rounds in its regular neighborhood.

It wasnt a taxi.

No one has explained the unstable condition of these soldiers reflected in their statements that urge a man to pick up a weapon, longing to shoot the civilians within the van, and laughter as an humvee runs over the body of a dead man. Yeah spin it as you like, these men hold no reservations of killing people, extending to people who didn't pose a threat to any American.

Yes, it has been explained actually. It was brought forward earlier in the thread. They are blowing off steam when they do it, kinda like trash talking an opposing sports team.

The official story of "insurgents" engaging American troops is a lie. The statements of these men attacking American soldiers is a lie. The pretext of the civilians aiding the dying man on the street is a lie. The actions and justifications for their actions is based on a lie.

They found rpg's, and a loaded rpg on site. Definitely a threat to the helicopter and this area already was known to be unstable. As stated earlier, it was a tragedy but not murder.

 

[Bismillah]

This happened during a firefight in the area and they did ID people carrying weapons.

They did not SHOOT at U.S troops at any time. They were not engaged in hostilities against any U.S troops.

When you engage an enemy, its to kill them.

What construes an enemy? Clearly it is one who is engaged in hostile actions against fellow soldiers. These men were not engaged in any hostilities. If anything, to disable and wound them would have been enough. Shooting from a Gatling gun clearly incapacitates any man on the scene. They were not a danger to anyone prior to the shooting and certainly not after. The second and third rounds of shooting were unnecessary.

Good question

One has to wonder if the ratio of kills of 2:1 unarmed men to possible hostiles is acceptable.

I dont remember it being described that way.

It clearly is.

Well again. They decided they were insurgents. So when you shoot at a car, you have no clue whether the targets inside are dead, so you continue until your positive. The officer was not very audible too (from memory.)

Who were insurgents? The civilians who rushed to the assistance of a dying man? Is that a crime? Is it punishable by death? My oh my you might as well slap a terrorist label on any Iraqi killed in the war. These were innocent people helping a dying man, perhaps it wasn't the smartest thing to do but it sure was the humane course of action.

It wasnt a taxi.

The man made a living ferrying people around in his van, i.e a taxi

Yes, it has been explained actually. It was brought forward earlier in the thread. They are blowing off steam when they do it, kinda like trash talking an opposing sports team.

I understand trashtalk, I follow basketball. This isn't trashtalk, it is reveling in their own sick form of justice. Their urge, justification, and glee in of killing men who were not endangering anyone and

They found rpg's, and a loaded rpg on site. Definitely a threat to the helicopter and this area already was known to be unstable. As stated earlier, it was a tragedy but not murder.

An RPG is not a threat to an Apache. The RPG was never pointed at any U.S soldier. The weapons were held casually at their side and the ambling nature of the men didn't indicate any intention of engaging American soldiers. This is vital as the helicopter decides to engage PRIOR to the journalist taking a picture of an American humvee. As in at that point in time, there had been no cue that indicated any aggressive intentions of the group. And yet again, the eight people who were unarmed and killed are ignored, the men in the van who were unjustly killed are ignored, the orphaned children who were shot and seriously wounded are ignored.

There is no justification for their actions. Period.

 

[dallas1125]

They did not SHOOT at U.S troops at any time. They were not engaged in hostilities against any U.S troops.

How where they supposed to know that? There was a battle going on around there and you see men carrying weapons. Logic tells you they are hostile.

What construes an enemy? Clearly it is one who is engaged in hostile actions against fellow soldiers. These men were not engaged in any hostilities. If anything, to disable and wound them would have been enough. Shooting from a Gatling gun clearly incapacitates any man on the scene. They were not a danger to anyone prior to the shooting and certainly not after. The second and third rounds of shooting were unnecessary.

Just because they werent engaged at the time is doesnt make them less of a threat. If those men had been insurgents then they could have engaged soldiers at a later time. Yes they were a danger, rpgs were found.

Who were insurgents? The civilians who rushed to the assistance of a dying man? Is that a crime? Is it punishable by death? My oh my you might as well slap a terrorist label on any Iraqi killed in the war. These were innocent people helping a dying man, perhaps it wasn't the smartest thing to do but it sure was the humane course of action.

This is war and usually those helping your enemies are not going to be friendly to you.

The man made a living ferrying people around in his van, i.e a taxi

This is information that the soldiers did not have. Expecting them to know this is crazy. The van did not have any markings on it that showed it to be a taxi.

I understand trashtalk, I follow basketball. This isn't trashtalk, it is reveling in their own sick form of justice. Their urge, justification, and glee in of killing men who were not endangering anyone

How do you know that? In basketball your life isnt constantly under threat. Trashtalking gets worse as the danger gets worse.

An RPG is not a threat to an Apache.

Both of the Black Hawk helicopters lost by the U.S. during the Battle of Mogadishu in Somalia in 1993 were downed by RPG-7s.

The RPG was never pointed at any U.S soldier. The weapons were held casually at their side and the ambling nature of the men didn't indicate any intention of engaging American soldiers.

Some of the people looked around at the soldiers down the street in a somewhat suspicious way.

This is vital as the helicopter decides to engage PRIOR to the journalist taking a picture of an American humvee.

They actualy engage after. Although, they did make the decision to engage before.

And yet again, the eight people who were unarmed and killed are ignored, the men in the van who were unjustly killed are ignored, the orphaned children who were shot and seriously wounded are ignored.

They are not being ignored. We all agree this is a tragedy and wish it never happened, but I dont think you can point fingers at the soldiers for their actions.

 

[kai]

Interesting.

No one has explained why the Apache gunship described these men as "shooting" at U.S troops.

They described them as taking aim at US troops nearby( mistakenly this was with a camera) in fact the US troops were under fire before, during and after this incident

No one has explained why the Apache gunship fired multiple rounds at wounded and dead men on the street, clearly after they were disabled. Well thats a moral question of how many shots do you take at a enemy? and dont forget its an automatic weapon.

No one has explained why of the four men who could possible construed as carrying weapons, eight other unarmed civilians were killed. You are surmising they are civilians when in fact its an armed group and several weapons were recovered from the scene AK47s and RPGs

No one has explained why a van coming to the assistance of a dying man was described as carrying weapons and bodies.
No one can ! all the weapons crew statements say that they were extracting insurgents and weapons though and theres only two options they are lying or mistaken and all are well aware the incident is being filmed from a camera so lying is not really an option unless you are unaware of the camera.


No one has explained why this van was shot multiple times after the airmen lied about the driver's intentions, even when an officer asked for a damage report and was ignored in favor of another round of bullets. Again this weapon is not single shot abd the weapons crew had to make sure the van was disabled.

No one has explained why they think it is unreasonable that a TAXI should be making its rounds in its regular neighborhood.

They did not know it was a taxi . what they did think was, it was the same vehicle that had been moving insurgents around the area that morning

No one has explained the unstable condition of these soldiers reflected in their statements that urge a man to pick up a weapon, longing to shoot the civilians within the van, and laughter as an humvee runs over the body of a dead man. Yeah spin it as you like, these men hold no reservations of killing people, extending to people who didn't pose a threat to any American.

Callousness does not have national boundaries and Kathryn did offer an explanation

The official story of "insurgents" engaging American troops is a lie. The statements of these men attacking American soldiers is a lie. The pretext of the civilians aiding the dying man on the street is a lie. The actions and justifications for their actions is based on a lie.

Insurgents were engaging US troops all morning from may directions these guys were an armed group near a ground element and were thought to present a danger, not to the Apaches but to the ground troops.

Hi Abibi you may have missed those points, its a long thread and take a look at this . the video in the OP is edited and annotated .

Collateral Murder « Road to Academia

 

[Bismillah]

How where they supposed to know that? There was a battle going on around there and you see men carrying weapons. Logic tells you they are hostile.

It's a pretty standard procedure, I recall, for troops to radio in from which direction they are under fire. They are clearly capable of tracing and knowing when they are being shot at.

It is pretty clear from the figures ambling down a road, loosely holding their "weapons", that they are not shooting at anyone or anything. It is a clear lie.

Just because they werent engaged at the time is doesnt make them less of a threat. If those men had been insurgents then they could have engaged soldiers at a later time. Yes they were a danger, rpgs were found.

Wow, really this is a simple message. Their intentions and actions were not in accordance with any perceived hostile or aggressive manner. Any Iraqi on the side of the street can be construed as a "danger" to U.S troops. How are you supposed to know which one has a bomb strapped to his chest. This is NO argument for attacking, unprovoked, at men who were minding their own business.

Any Iraqi can "engage a U.S trooper" at a later time. You have to restrict to your bloodletting to those who are actually engaging you.

This is war and usually those helping your enemies are not going to be friendly to you.

Nice use of the word "enemy". Again, these men were not the "enemy" of any soldiers. These men did not attack U.S soldiers when clearly given the chance and the general idea of them strolling down a street is not consistent with an insurgent readying to kill Americans.

Regardless, it is still against the Geneva conventions to kill a man aiding the wounded. Medics are given immunity during battle. Civilians who rush to the aid of a dying man are not enemies.

But they ARE enemies if they pick up weapons and the dead. The pilot lied and gained permission to fire from his CO with this justification. A clear breach of the RoE.

This is information that the soldiers did not have. Expecting them to know this is crazy. The van did not have any markings on it that showed it to be a taxi.

As in they did everything and were in the uniform of civilians. Their actions were in the manner of civilians. The murder of these men was the murder of civilians.

You do not kill people unless you are sure they are the bad guys. This feels like I'm explaining the morality of right and wrong to a small child, this is a fundamental concept.

Regardless, I mentioned the taxi for one purpose. To absolve any and all rumors of any "sinister" intention of the van being spotted prior to the shooting.

How do you know that? In basketball your life isnt constantly under threat. Trashtalking gets worse as the danger gets worse.

This is not trashtalk, I am starting to doubt you understand what trash talk is. This is their urges and eagerness to kill unarmed men and their reveling and justification in the death of these men.

Both of the Black Hawk helicopters lost by the U.S. during the Battle of Mogadishu in Somalia in 1993 were downed by RPG-7s.

Yeah, I think every American has seen blackhawk down. Thanks. Like I said, an RPG is no threat to an Apache.

Some of the people looked around at the soldiers down the street in a somewhat suspicious way.

Watch the video again. They had not even rounded the corner, let alone seen any U.S troops. The decision to engage was PRIOR to any Iraqi making eye contact with a U.S troop. During that time they had casually walked down a road in a scattered group with any possible weapons held loosely at their side.

There was no justification for their decision to attack these men.

They are not being ignored. We all agree this is a tragedy and wish it never happened, but I dont think you can point fingers at the soldiers for their actions.

Why not? Why can you not blame these men for murder? Clearly the alibi "I didn't know!" is not enough. They are responsible for hastily assuming and lying about the situation to gain clearance to kill these unarmed men. Clearly they should be punished for their actions.

 

[Bismillah]

kai: I read the link, it didn't address my points.

If i missed something, feel free to point it out.

 

[kai]

kai: I read the link, it didn't address my points.

If i missed something, feel free to point it out.

See my previous post.

 

[Blackheart]

Why is this such a big issue? If the incident was defensable the military wouldnt have had to lie to cover it up. So many people are trying to make excuses for the military when there is no need. Do you think they joined the military to save lives or take lives? Did they join the Peace Corp or the Army?

We all agree this is a tragedy and wish it never happened, but I dont think you can point fingers at the soldiers for their actions

This statement sums up what im saying. If this happened to your family there would be an inquest and somehow I dont think you would be describing the incident in the same way.

The problem with alot of people living in cozy power hungry countries is that they have absolutely no respect for human life and the reality of what is done in their name. When you see foriegners as nothing more than ants under your feet it is easy to 'not blame the soldiers'. Why would you? The soldiers are 'just doing there job'. Millions of these people have died or been mamed for commiting no other crime than being born in a country forgien to the U.S.

If after watching that sick video you still cant spot a war crime then try redubbing the voices into Arabic. Now you can call it terrorisim.

 

[Blackheart]

For Americans to demonize people who are fighting for us I think is despicable, particularly when it is thoughtless.

So if innocent people are killed it shouldnt be condemed so long as its American soldiers who are doing the killing? Is that seriously what your saying?

And how are they fighting for you? What have you got against Iraqi civilians?

 

[darkendless]

Why is this such a big issue? If the incident was defensable the military wouldnt have had to lie to cover it up. So many people are trying to make excuses for the military when there is no need. Do you think they joined the military to save lives or take lives? Did they join the Peace Corp or the Army?



This statement sums up what im saying. If this happened to your family there would be an inquest and somehow I dont think you would be describing the incident in the same way.

The problem with alot of people living in cozy power hungry countries is that they have absolutely no respect for human life and the reality of what is done in their name. When you see foriegners as nothing more than ants under your feet it is easy to 'not blame the soldiers'. Why would you? The soldiers are 'just doing there job'. Millions of these people have died or been mamed for commiting no other crime than being born in a country forgien to the U.S.

If after watching that sick video you still cant spot a war crime then try redubbing the voices into Arabic. Now you can call it terrorisim.

Our countries cop way too much flak for doing a job in the middle east. Its sad that we have to send over armed personnel just to protect non-combatents trying to build more efficient infrastructure for these people. What kind of world do we live in where people shoot at those attempting to make life better?

Surely enough is enough, let these people have what they want and be done with the death, the anger and the suffering. Why must our young men and women doing their job be put in harms way at extreme risk and cost only to battle not only confirmed militants but hostile civilians as well? Why should locals be put in harms way in order to achieve freedom?

No one deserves to die and no one should, not for this.

 

[darkendless]

So if innocent people are killed it shouldnt be condemed so long as its American soldiers who are doing the killing? Is that seriously what your saying?

And how are they fighting for you? What have you got against Iraqi civilians?

Put yourself in their shoes. Its easy enough to sit 12000 miles away and moan about injustice. Put yourself in that situation and see how you go. It aint so black and white mate, please keep that in mind.

 

[kai]

At 54 pages i dont blame people for not starting at the beginning and sifting through the many articles including the statements of the air crew and US troops on the scene . the Army investigation , the statement from Reuters or watching the uncut unedited film or weighing up the context of the incident.

But dont blame anyone else if your post looks completely out of place in a serious conversation about a tragic incident.

 

[Blackheart]

Our countries cop way too much flak for doing a job in the middle east. Its sad that we have to send over armed personnel just to protect non-combatents trying to build more efficient infrastructure for these people. What kind of world do we live in where people shoot at those attempting to make life better?

Surely enough is enough, let these people have what they want and be done with the death, the anger and the suffering. Why must our young men and women doing their job be put in harms way at extreme risk and cost only to battle not only confirmed militants but hostile civilians as well? Why should locals be put in harms way in order to achieve freedom?

No one deserves to die and no one should, not for this.

You a talk as if Bush went in there as some kind of a charity mission. He invaded and occupied for his own purposes and that should never be forgotten. These people are dying because a politician saw an opportunity. Now he walks off into the sunset and the naive stay behind continuosly defending him, some with their own lives.

If you want them to have 'freedom' then get the occupiers out of there and im not just talking about the soldiers.

 

[darkendless]

At 54 pages i dont blame people for not starting at the beginning and sifting through the many articles including the statements of the air crew and US troops on the scene . the Army investigation , the statement from Reuters or watching the uncut unedited film or weighing up the context of the incident.

But dont blame anyone else if your post looks completely out of place in a serious conversation about a tragic incident.

I saw it some time ago but havn't read through the statements. SBS news in Australia showed what happened. However, it concerns me how many of these actually happen without getting released.

I stand by my point that if we weren't there, deaths like this wouldn't happen. With stuff like this being reported around the world the "coalition" have really brought animosity upon themselves.

Imagine if they did have an RPG though, no one would think twice about it.

 

[Blackheart]

Put yourself in their shoes. Its easy enough to sit 12000 miles away and moan about injustice. Put yourself in that situation and see how you go. It aint so black and white mate, please keep that in mind.

You see thats the difference. I wouldnt go 12,000 miles to start shooting at people that aint shooting at me. How about putting yourself in the situation of the people that are now dead for doing no more than walking with a camera. Remember they too were just 'doing their job'.

 

[darkendless]

You see thats the difference. I wouldnt go 12,000 miles to start shooting at people that aint shooting at me. How about putting yourself in the situation of the people that are now dead for doing no more than walking with a camera. Remember they too were just 'doing their job'.

You're speaking as if servicemen get to pick their fights.

The video was horrible but as i said above, imagine if the bloke did have a RPG?

 

[darkendless]

You a talk as if Bush went in there as some kind of a charity mission. He invaded and occupied for his own purposes and that should never be forgotten. These people are dying because a politician saw an opportunity. Now he walks off into the sunset and the naive stay behind continuosly defending him, some with their own lives.

If you want them to have 'freedom' then get the occupiers out of there and im not just talking about the soldiers.

Well i'm not American (... if i had a dollar for every time i said that) and had a cousin in Afghanistan who protects engineers rebuilding infrastructure. They get shot at daily.

I too wonder how Bush walked away from the mess he created. That man has a lot of innocent blood on his hands.

 

[Blackheart]

You're speaking as if servicemen get to pick their fights.

Anyone that joins the military since this madness started knows the liklihood of being sent to kill.

The video was horrible but as i said above, imagine if the bloke did have a RPG?

What? They would of had a chance to fight back? What would you have done with an RPG if your country was invaded and occupied by a force well know for indiscriminately killing your friends and family? Please lets not speak as though this is an isolated incident.