Collateral Murder

[KatNotKathy]

Is their home the street?

Better stay inside, war zone.

I mean, seriously, if Texas were declared a war zone, would you just stay inside all day until the invaders leave? After all, the street isn't your home. Better keep away from anybody who is carrying anything though, because some guy in a helicopter a mile away might think it's a gun and replace your bones with bullets.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Well, I disagree that the men were not a threat. If you're armed, you're a threat, and especially in a war zone. You don't need to be pointing your gun at anything.

But this gets into what I see as an inherent problem in this kind of conflict: when is a war zone not a war zone? Yes, you've got soldiers out on patrol, but they're performing a quasi-police role. What may be appropriate action for a solider on the battlefield might not be appropriate for a cop, and a lot of the time, these soldiers' role is somewhere between, which IMO would make it difficult to decide what's appropriate and what's not.

Yeah, that's why civilized countries do not engage in urban warfare.

Since when?

I think it might even be prohibited by the Geneva Conventions, but I haven't got time to look that up now.

I'm rather certain that urban warfare isn't prohibited by the Geneva Conventions. Carpet-bombing cities would be, but not the mere act of engaging in warfare in an urban environment.

Again, even outside of a war zone, a group of armed men - particularly with assault rifles - is a threat.

And a group of unarmed men is vulnerable. It's a bad situation all around.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Better stay inside, war zone.

I mean, seriously, if Texas were declared a war zone, would you just stay inside all day until the invaders leave? After all, the street isn't your home. Better keep away from anybody who is carrying anything though, because some guy in a helicopter a mile away might think it's a gun and replace your bones with bullets.

I wouldn't be walking around the streets with an assault rifle unless I was fighting. And I damn sure wouldn't have my kids in the car with me when I go to where there are dead people and weapons lying around.

 

[Amill]

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

Fighting for us? How exactly are they fighting for us in this war and how many iraqi civilians need to be shredded to keep us Americans "safe" and "free"? When I see the numbers of how many people have died from this invasion I fail to see the logic in what we were ever doing there. I realize that this incident is just a part of war, but it makes me see how unecessary this war has always been. What good has come from this war, and how has this helped keep American civilians safe? And how many body bags are worth our safety?

If someone tried to invade our country I sure would support the troops and maybe take up a spot beside them, but not all of us appreciate seeing a soldier beg to destroy people helping a wounded man.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Fighting for us? How exactly are they fighting for us in this war and how many iraqi civilians need to be shredded to keep us Americans "safe" and "free"?

I think you're speaking to two separate issues:

- Did the soldiers in Iraq sign up to fight in wars as directed by Congress? Yes.

- In the case of Iraq, did Congress use this authority wisely? I'd say no.

Respect for soldiers comes out of the first one. Condemnation of the war comes out of the second. Condemnation of the war need not imply condemnation of the soldiers themselves.

 

[tumbleweed41]

Watch the video again. Turn down the sound.
Now imagine that the captions are translations from Russian.
And that the video is from the Russian-Afghan war.
And that the two reporters were AP reporters from New York.

If that were the case, the video would be on every major news network decrying the Russian atrocities committed in Afghanistan. Congress would pass resolutions against Russia. Apologies would be demanded.

Now come back to the reality that it was the US in Iraq.

War is war.

 

[linwood]

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

Back up a second AE.

These people aren`t fighting for me nor have they EVER fought for ME.

These people are fighting for the agendas of their masters.
Those agendas have never aligned with my wants or needs.

I have no respect for anyone who wears a military uniform merely because they wear the uniform.
In fact I`m less likely to offer respect BECAUSE you`re wearing it.

I consider anyone wearing the uniform in this day and age to be voluntarily culpable of war crimes at worst and/or simply ethically challenged at best.

This video is an embarrassment to US Forces no matter how you slice it.

That second attack (on the van)was not only uncalled for but calls into question the thought process those Air Assault teams were working under which in turn calls into question the thought process of all operational standards.

I`ve seen too many of these kind of videos to entertain any thoughts of American righteousness in Iraq.
.

 

[linwood]

I think you're speaking to two separate issues:

- Did the soldiers in Iraq sign up to fight in wars as directed by Congress? Yes.

- In the case of Iraq, did Congress use this authority wisely? I'd say no.

Respect for soldiers comes out of the first one. Condemnation of the war comes out of the second. Condemnation of the war need not imply condemnation of the soldiers themselves.

I disagree.

I refer to your first point as basis for my disagreement.
We are nearly a decade in Iraq.
A soldier who volunteers to fight in a war directed by our congress has knowledge that the wars being directed by our congress are ethically wrong by western standards.

I learned from Vietnam that you don`t volunteer for service in the American military if you care to live by a humanistic ethical standard.

Any soldier active today is guilty by voluntary association with our congress`s wars.
They know whats going on.
They weren`t conscripted.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Back up a second AE.

I consider anyone wearing the uniform in this day and age to be voluntarily culpable of war crimes at worst and/or simply ethically challenged at best.

The American people bear the guilt of the American soldier, if indeed he/she is guilty of anything. Like it or not, they are our representatives, and it is morally reprehensible and intellectually dishonest to neglect that truth.

I will make the same argument for Americans that I made for Britons:

It's too late for action against Blair. If the British people wanted to take action against him, they should have done it through their democratic process when he was Prime Minister. His authority was the British people, and now they should be paying attention to the new Prime Minister and demand from him what they desire.

The British people are culpable for what Blair did. Any indictment they have on him is an indictment on themselves.

Under whose jusrisdiction?

If he did anything illegal, especially something as big as an invasion of a country, his indictment should have come when he was Prime Minister, PARTICULARLY because he was PM for so long after the alleged crime.

AND he did so as a representative of the people of Briton. As a representative, it's the people that committed the crime, not Blair.

Active and thoughtful participation in the democratic process.

Briton and the USA both have balances of power in place so that this kind of thing doesn't happen, and when it does, the people can punish their leaders.

The idea that the problem is solved by a "citizen's arrest" is meaningless and stupid.

This is just an immature and irresponsible way to handle the problem. The people of Britian and the United States are responsible for the crimes in Afganistan and Iraq. Accusing George Bush or Tony Blair of starting an illegal war is a blantant and slimey way of denying personal culpability in the killings of both innocents and soldiers in both these countries.

As democracies, these leaders were doing our will. In the USA, both the House and Senate, our representatives, stood and applauded actions that enacted both wars. Our citizen soldiers are killing people in our stead. Our money is paying for it.

The crime is not in the representatives, but in the represented.

 

[linwood]

The American people bear the guilt of the American soldier, if indeed he/she is guilty of anything. Like it or not, they are our representatives, and it is morally reprehensible and intellectually dishonest to neglect that truth.

AE, some of us don`t take our "Truths" from "On high" but prefer to measure our own involvement in a rational manner.

The simple fact that I`m an American does not necessarily correlate to my personal culpability for the American military`s actions.

This is a truth that can not be altered.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

AE, some of us don`t take our "Truths" from "On high" but prefer to measure our own involvement in a rational manner.

The simple fact that I`m an American does not necessarily correlate to my personal culpability for the American military`s actions.

This is a truth that can not be altered.

I disagree. The whole American system is based on the idea that power is derived from the consent of, and ultimate responsibility rests in, the governed. You're the governed.

Well, part of the governed, anyway.

 

[KatNotKathy]

But can you be responsible for something you actively oppose because other people voted for a war?

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I disagree. The whole American system is based on the idea that power is derived from the consent of, and ultimate responsibility rests in, the governed. You're the governed.

Well, part of the governed, anyway.

... and no matter how helpless one may feel, the simple fact is that Congress controls the money and most of the power related to the military, and the wars that we fight are the closest we get to a direct democracy.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

But can you be responsible for something you actively oppose because other people voted for a war?

It's a symbol of your failure to be effective in the democratic process.

 

[linwood]

I disagree. The whole American system is based on the idea that power is derived from the consent of, and ultimate responsibility rests in, the governed. You're the governed.

Well, part of the governed, anyway.

You may disagree as much as you like.
No amount of disagreement will make me culpable for American military action in any universe anyone happens to reside in.

Technically what you say makes me culpable for the war of 1812 as well.

Fortunately most would see the lack of rational basis that idea has.

 

[linwood]

It's a symbol of your failure to be effective in the democratic process.

NO IT IS NOT!!

What kind of BS is that AE?
I`m hoping that`s sarcasm.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

You may disagree as much as you like.

No amount of disagreement will make me culpable for American military action in any universe anyone happens to reside in.

Technically what you say makes me culpable for the war of 1812 as well.

Fortunately most would see the lack of rational basis that idea has.

Did your money pay for it?

(Just curious)

 

[Aquitaine]

... and no matter how helpless one may feel, the simple fact is that Congress controls the money and most of the power related to the military, and the wars that we fight are the closest we get to a direct democracy.

Pffft! Nobody wants this damn war. The population were fear-mongered into "accepting" this war because they were told 24/7 "ZOMG TERRORISTS", and the sentiment behind the tragedy of 9/11 was manipulated and twisted to try and channel a sense of "revenge" against Iraq for it. Also, when the Vice-President of the Administration was also the former CEO of one of the conglomerates awarded a massive cost-plus award-fee contract in Iraq, you seriously have to start wondering who truelly influenced the decision to illegally invade Iraq.

Bottom line is, the people barely get a say in the matter when it comes to wars.

 

[linwood]

Did your money pay for it?

(Just curious)

Being extorted for money to finance criminal activity does not make one a criminal .

 

[Mr Spinkles]

In the video eselam posted, at the end one of the marines says to another, "That sniper round hit right next to you!" So it sounds like there was a firefight. I don't think there is a single military in the world that hasn't committed war crimes during battle. Insurgents have deliberately blown up unarmed civilians in crowded market places. At any rate, war is horrible and any US personnel who commit war crimes should stand trial, but I can't tell that unarmed civilians were being shot in the particular video eselam posted.