Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community (https://thetfp.com/tfp/)
-   General Discussion (https://thetfp.com/tfp/general-discussion/)
-   -   Your opinion please. Wikileaks vid of U.S. Soldiers gunning down civ/children/photogs (https://thetfp.com/tfp/general-discussion/153989-your-opinion-please-wikileaks-vid-u-s-soldiers-gunning-down-civ-children-photogs.html)

Shauk 04-06-2010 03:05 AM

Your opinion please. Wikileaks vid of U.S. Soldiers gunning down civ/children/photogs
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by http://wikileaks.org/
Collateral Murder

WikiLeaks has released a classified US military video depicting the indiscriminate slaying of over a dozen people in the Iraqi suburb of New Baghdad -- including two Reuters news staff. Reuters has been trying to obtain the video through the Freedom of Information Act, without success since the time of the attack. The video, shot from an Apache helicopter gun-site, clearly shows the unprovoked slaying of a wounded Reuters employee and his rescuers. Two young children involved in the rescue were also seriously wounded. For further information please visit the special project website Collateral Murder.

<-- annotated video

<-- full video

I saw lots of pretty unsettling video/image stuff coming out of it that the media wouldn't cover, like tanks purposely destroying civilian cars, one of which was a taxi one used to generate his income.

Then the whole detention center thing where they were humiliated and tortured then they took pictures with them like it was an attraction at an amusement park etc...


I mean, what's done is done, and I don't doubt war is atrocious all around for either side involved, I just wonder where the fault lies in situations like this.

Is it just the way they're trained? was it really murder or what it just an accident?

Seems to me that in this odd guerrilla style warfare that the troops are facing now would require some serious friend or foe recognition when opening fire in a civilian area, I mean, it's their homes, this isn't a military base or anything where this happened. It just kind of baffles me.

With what's demonstrated here, would you not now be more terrified than ever if you had to depend on some distant gunman to pick out the right people to shoot in a scenario where we were the occupied nation?

I've always been one of those "walk a mile in the other person's shoes" types and it just seems to me, that this really was more of a "kill em all" exercise instead of exercising precision and trying to discern friend from foe. I thought we were "rescuing" these people?

In the unedited footage, it goes so far to demonstrate 3 missile strikes to take out a building which they "guess" may hold 8 or so individuals, only one of which they said anything about being armed/having an RPG, and for the 2 or the 3 strikes I saw, there were unarmed people just chillin on the street from the looks of it.


Quote:

Originally Posted by http://www.iraqbodycount.org/
Civilian deaths caused by Coalition and Iraqi state forces

Non-combatant Iraqi deaths resulting directly from actions involving US-led coalition forces were dramatically lower than in the preceding year, with a total of 64 reported by Dec 25 (2008: 594): deaths due to air attacks reduced from 365 in 2008 to 0 in 2009 (as of Dec 25). Deaths involving Iraqi forces were down from 519 in 2008 to 103 in 2009.

Of these deaths caused by US-coalition and Iraqi state forces, the number killed in joint actions fell from 114 in 2008 to 16 in 2009; the overall number of civilians killed by state forces (US-coalition, Iraqi, or both) was 999 in 2008 and 151 in 2009.

It seems they've addressed the issue with the air attacks killing so many civilians. So it seems my huffing and puffing over the issue is pointless here in april of 2010 right?




It only bothers me because I want to hold our government to a higher standard, When we become that which we claim to be against, by killing civilians, torture, or various other despicable acts, it doesn't reflect well on those who do uphold and carry out the higher standard of conduct. Other nations will not make the distinction, would-be terrorists would not make the distinction. Our ugliest faces are the ones they will remember and apply to the U.S. as a whole, as an army, as civilians, and it's scary to think how this will influence or act as a catalyst for future hostilities.


In the end, I agree, there was really no way to identify them as photographers, but on the inverse. I think they could have gone about handling that whole engagement differently.

I suppose this blood is on Bush's hands since this was under his era and this war was his engagement.

Just found a video that sums up what I feel on this.

Jump to 15:50

Credibility is the word I was looking for.

dksuddeth 04-06-2010 03:45 AM

i'm never amazed anymore how some people are totally incensed that the military kill civilians in other countries, sometimes wantonly and blatantly, yet are completely non-chalant about the thousands of Americans murdered in this country by it's paramilitary forces, otherwise known as law enforcement. Appropriately termed 'faux outrage'.

Shauk 04-06-2010 03:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dksuddeth (Post 2775131)
i'm never amazed anymore how some people are totally incensed that the military kill civilians in other countries, sometimes wantonly and blatantly, yet are completely non-chalant about the thousands of Americans murdered in this country by it's paramilitary forces, otherwise known as law enforcement. Appropriately termed 'faux outrage'.


great, now how about the topic at hand?

Lasereth 04-06-2010 04:15 AM

Yeah the video is pretty messed up. It's spreading like wildfire. I like how at one point, one of the gunners says "come on, let us shoot." REQUESTING PERMISSION TO MURDER PEOPLE, SIR!

The building that got 3 hellfires shot into it I can understand a little more because those guys DID have AK-47s. But in the civilian episode, there might have been an AK, but there were obviously civilians in the mix, they were completely non-threatening, and it seemed like the gunners were trying to persuade their superiors to let them shoot by saying important stuff like "he's got an RPG." They were bloodthirsty. They wanted to shoot and show their might.

Now at one point before they start shooting, one guy DOES peak around a corner at them with a black tubular object that could have been an RPG, but it's pretty much the only arguing point for this slaughter.

Shauk 04-06-2010 04:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lasereth (Post 2775136)
.

Now at one point before they start shooting, one guy DOES peak around a corner at them with a black tubular object that could have been an RPG, but it's pretty much the only arguing point for this slaughter.

http://mikeatkinson.net/tutorial-ima...-technique.jpg

RPG

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/516/rpgm.jpg



though, to be fair, I gotta wonder what kind of screen they're looking at this on. I mean I'm looking at video that's 3 years old on an LCD 28" HD monitor and it's still "eh, I could see it being a mistake" where I can pick out details and stuff like that, but if they're working on like a little netbook sized display, who knows what I'd say it was.

Reese 04-06-2010 04:37 AM

I have a few issues. I think they did everything right by the book up until the van pulling up. It's unfortunate that they fired on civilians but they did at least (mis)identify AK47s and an RPG. That's a deadly mistake, but it's forgivable, in my opinion. When the van pulled up though, they didn't even bother identifying anything or anyone and fired on them without cause. They may have been within their rules of engagement, but I still disagree with their actions at this point.
The big problem I have is that US officials lied about what exactly happen. Reading the quotes and comparing them to the actual video it's obvious they are intentionally misleading.

---------- Post added at 07:37 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:33 AM ----------

I don't think they were bloodthirsty. They're in a helicopter and they think there's an RPG pointed at them, I'd be begging to let me shoot too.


I also wondered why the hell the video is still so damn shitty. Seriously it's 2010, can we get some HD color displays in those gunships? Seriously though, I would imagine the had a better view than just the video, they could at least look out the damn window.

Baraka_Guru 04-06-2010 05:12 AM

What frightens me more than seeing this "inefficiency" of America's military-industrial complex is the thought of all the ones we won't ever see.

Glory's Sun 04-06-2010 05:22 AM

There is no flag big enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people.

Civilians are always going to be a casualty of war and it's a little understandable in certain zones where there is heavy resistance, but, to want to do it willingly should be prosecuted to the highest extent.

I've never been to a war zone, probably never will be so my opinion should be seen as merely that. An opinion. I might change my opinion if I were to be in a war zone where everyone was trying to put a bullet in my head at every opportunity.

PonyPotato 04-06-2010 05:29 AM

I was bothered by the video until I got more of the context: that ground forces had been under attack in that area for a while before the Apaches got involved. The group fired upon looked like they were setting up an ambush for ground forces (especially with what looked like an RPG).

And yes, you might be able to look out of the helicopter.. but those cameras are using their full zoom capabilities. At some points in the video, they zoom it out and you can see how far away they actually were.

roachboy 04-06-2010 06:04 AM

this is an interesting perceptual problem grafted onto what i personally take as being a psychotic moment. the perceptual problem is obviously how to gestalt this information, what the sense of a whole is into which this fits & where it comes from.

watching the clip & particularly listening to what gets said, i had the sense that these people were unhinged and that what we are watching is a group of people perhaps stressed by the waiting that's involved with being in a war zone and who basically snap at the same time because they have an opportunity, they think, to fire away. the video game disregard for the kids' lives in particular is stunning.

i can't tell for sure, but this could be an entirely cynical article:
Quote:

Video of Son’s Killing Brings Closure to Family
By MUJAHID YOUSEF

MOSUL, Iraq — The family of a Reuters photographer killed in an American military airstrike watched the video of it late Monday and burst into tears as they saw what appeared to be the crews of two American Apache attack helicopters kill their son and 11 other people, gloating at what the crewmen seemed to think was a successful strike on insurgents.

“At last the truth has been revealed, and I’m satisfied God revealed the truth,” said Noor Eldeen, the father of the photographer, Namir Noor-Eldeen, who was 22 when he was killed in July 2007. “If such an incident took place in America, even if an animal were killed like this, what would they do?”

Other family members said Tuesday that the video was clear enough to remove any doubt about the identity of their son. Also among the dead was a Reuters driver, Saeed Chmagh, 40.

The video was released Monday by Wikileaks.org, an online organization that said it had received it from a military whistle-blower and used donated computing power to decrypt it. United States military officials have confirmed that it appears to be authentic.

In the video, the group of men on the street in the eastern Baghdad district of New Baghdad on July 12, 2007, seemed to be mostly unarmed, although the chatter among the air crews shows they are convinced that the people on the ground have both AK-47s and a rocket-propelled-grenade launcher. An American Army ground unit nearby was receiving fire from insurgents at the time.

On the video, there is at least one of the group of victims who appears to be carrying a rifle, but it is dangling at his side in a relaxed manner, and he does not appear to deploy it. In another scene, a large camera lens poking around the corner of a building is interpreted as a rocket-propelled-grenade launcher. The view of the men is obscured by a building as the attacking helicopter circles around it. The helicopter opens fire almost immediately after they come into view again.

“Look at those dead bastards,” one of the cockpit voices says. “Nice.”

When a vehicle arrives at the scene to help the wounded, the helicopters fire into it. United States troops call for a child who had been in the vehicle to be taken to the hospital.

“Well, it’s their fault bringing their kids into the battle,” one of the cockpit voices says.

The Associated Press quoted a spokesman for the United States Central Command, Navy Capt. Jake Hanzlik, as saying that the military had no reason to believe the video is a fake, but that they were still comparing the video and audio to see if it matched the original.

The United States military’s censored version of its report on the episode maintains that the crewmen acted appropriately and within the rules of engagement and that the Reuters employees were mixed in with a group of insurgents so their cameras were easily mistaken for weapons.

“My question is, how could those highly skilled American pilots with all their high-tech information not distinguish between a camera and a rocket launcher?” the photographer’s brother, Nabeel Noor-Eldeen, an archaeology professor at Mosul University, said on Tuesday after watching the video with the rest of the family a few hours earlier.
Video of Son?s Killing Brings Closure to Family - NYTimes.com

naturally, in fine american style, wikileaks was designated a national security problem in a pentagon report, which later showed up on the site:

Wikileaks in the crosshairs | Joseph Huff-Hannon | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

Pacifier 04-06-2010 06:10 AM

problem is, that iraq is not a "normal" war zone. the US is there to help then to built a democracy. Do you think you can achieve that by shootig everyone who holds something black and pointy that might be mistaken for an RPG? Your whole point of beeing there is to help those people and you act like you are in a shooting range. When in doubt, kill ...

The fact that they are basically begging for shooting the wounded is disturbung. And since when someone who wants to give medical assistance is a legal target? It was clear that they were helping them even without any markings (which also don't seem to help anyway...)

First, the 3 killed women, now this. not a good week for the US military.

mixedmedia 04-06-2010 06:40 AM

Two things that especially disconcerting while watching the video:
1. They really want to shoot them.
2. They are so far removed from the area that it's not really 'real' to them.

A young family member of mine was in the Air Force being trained to operate 'drones' that would essentially carry out the same tasks, but only from a remote base here in the states. I would think that the more we remove ourselves from our own conflicts, the more likely it will be that events like this will happen. The people are just figures walking around on a screen and most young people are already enured to killing figures that walk around on screens. How very convenient.
Consequently, my young family member also happens to be a first class dickhead who was asked to leave the Air Force after a drunk-driving incident. It's really comforting to know that drunk-driving is the character flaw that gets you tossed out even though you're an asshole who doesn't care about anything but himself - and being trained to shoot people half the world away on a tv screen.
I don't mean to cast aspersions on all the young people in the military, but I'm also not so naive and unaware as to assume that young men like my nephew are a rarity these days.
/sorry to take the discussion off topic.

Baraka_Guru 04-06-2010 06:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mixedmedia (Post 2775165)
I would think that the more we remove ourselves from our own conflicts, the more likely it will be that events like this will happen. The people are just figures walking around on a screen and most young people are already enured to killing figures that walk around on screens. How very convenient.

This has been at the fore in the discussions of the changing nature of technology and warfare:
Baudrillard argues [in The Gulf War Did Not Take Place] that the style of warfare used in the Gulf War was so far removed from previous standards of warfare that it existed more as images on RADAR and TV screens than as actual hand-to-hand combat, that most of the decisions in the war were based on perceived intelligence coming from maps, images, and news, than from actual seen-with-the-eye intelligence.

Most provocatively, Baudrillard argues that the startlingly one-sided nature of the conflict (fewer US soldiers were killed in this 'war' than would have died in traffic accidents had they stayed at home) means that it should not be seen as a war, simply because the US-led coalition chose not to engage with the Iraqi army or to take the kind of risks that constitute war. The US-led coalition was fighting a virtual war while the Iraqis tried to fight a traditional one - the two could not entirely meet. A great deal of violence took place, but the Gulf War did not; rather than belittling the effects of this violence, this means that the Gulf War should be seen not as a war but as "an atrocity masquerading as war."

The Gulf War Did Not Take Place - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

roachboy 04-06-2010 07:07 AM

obviously the parallel to the game mediation of war is the attempts to limit or eliminate access to footage that works closer to real-time, so closer to the ground.

these efforts began with the falklands war and go straight back to the conservative "diagnosis" of opposition to the war in vietnam: there weren't any substantive objections to the war...o no....there was only the "problem" created by allowing all those journalists to wander around and show stuff. whence the pooled press fed pre-packaged pseudo-information by official infotainment officers kinda in the way that baby birds are fed by the mother except without the benign parts.

every once in a while little fragments of reality break through and require Explanations that make them fit somewhere all the better to go away.

MSD 04-06-2010 07:23 AM

As I saw him crouching behind the corner, I piked out the lens he was using as a Canon 70-200 L series with the cylindrical black hood. If I can spot this on a low-resolution video compressed by Youtube, anyone who cannot recognize it as a camera does not have sufficient visual capacity to be deciding who to shoot. There are two men with AKs, which Iraqis are allowed to carry for defense as per US-backed law.

The range display on the gun sight starts out at 1340 yards and barely drops below 1300 as they come around the building. The RPG-7 used by Iraqi insurgents and combatants is unguided and detonates after 920 meters if it does not strike a target. There was small arms fire reported in the area, but it would be physically impossible for the group of men who were targeted to do any damage to the men in the helicopter.

The gunner begging an injured man to reach for a gun so he could shoot him and showing the general attitude he expressed during the video was looking for people to kill, not to determine who the good guys and the bad guys are. The reason the man in the van brought a kid to the battle is because he was driving them to school and stopped to help a man dying in the gutter.


As little will come of this as came from the video of Blackwater mercenaries driving down the street taking pot shots at civilian cars for fun. Regardless of the justifications offered by the military, at least the gunner should be court martialed and locked up for a long time with psychiatric help because he is obviously disturbed. Anyone complicit in the coverup of this incident should similarly be brought to justice, sentenced as appropriate, and dishonorably discharged.

Pacifier 04-06-2010 07:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MSD (Post 2775171)
There are two men with AKs, which Iraqis are allowed to carry for defense as per US-backed law.


can you show the two guys with the AK?
I only see some long unidentified item, given the cameras etc. that could also be a tripod.

Plan9 04-06-2010 07:49 AM

This thread is full of delicious Monday Morning Quarterbacking.

The technology used by our armed forces, even in multi-million dollar aircraft, is still 10 years behind everything else. Visual identification of friend-or-foe is wholly determined by this technology. War doesn't move in seconds anymore; it's nanoseconds. If I see you running with a gun-shaped object in your hand and I'm engaged in a fire fight, I have to assume it's a gun and act accordingly.

IIRC, the Blue Force Tracker, the vehicle navigation system used by the US Army, still uses Windows 95-era hardware and software.

dlish 04-06-2010 07:52 AM

innocent people got killed with total disregard for sanctity of life, or death...."nice". War, and death is never pretty, but this video is troubling. seeing triggerhappy soldiers is troubling.

American soldiers not only failed to fulfill their duty of care, but they failed to distinguish between a threat and gathering....

I have a lot of friends who happen to be journalists and photographers writing and shooting for local papers. I dread the day they have to cover a story where US soldeirs are involved.

....and people are asking why 'they' hate you??

Congratulations. You just created a few thousand potential insurgents who were sitting on the border.

Plan9 04-06-2010 08:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by guccilvr (Post 2775147)
There is no flag big enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people.

What does the flag have to do with this?

Quote:

Originally Posted by guccilvr
Civilians are always going to be a casualty of war and it's a little understandable in certain zones where there is heavy resistance, but, to want to do it willingly should be prosecuted to the highest extent.

Prove "willingly." It's all situational. Do I want to kill the guy that may try to kill me or the high school graduate next to me? You bet your ass I do. It's called war. As you said, there is no escaping the "atrocity" that is "collateral damage." I hang those terms in quotes because they're relative.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guccilvr
I've never been to a war zone, probably never will be so my opinion should be seen as merely that. An opinion. I might change my opinion if I were to be in a war zone where everyone was trying to put a bullet in my head at every opportunity.

It isn't your opinion that would change, bro. It's your reaction time. You lose the luxury of asking questions before you shoot because the cost of being wrong is all bad. You get into something called an OODA loop and you've got choices that tell you: live or die, me or him.

...

Quote:

Originally Posted by dlish (Post 2775176)
innocent people got killed with total disregard for sanctity of life, or death...."nice". War, and death is never pretty, but this video is troubling. seeing triggerhappy soldiers is troubling. American soldiers not only failed to fulfill their duty of care, but they failed to distinguish between a threat and gathering.... I have a lot of friends who happen to be journalists and photographers writing and shooting for local papers. I dread the day they have to cover a story where US soldeirs are involved.

....and people are asking why 'they' hate you??

...the fuck? Don't give me this 1984 we're-stomping-East-Asia bullshit. Every country swinging a uniformed army has done this kind of thing at one time or another. The Brits, the Germans, the Russians, Iraq/Iran War, South American 100-medal dictatorships, Israelis... anybody you can name. This situation is not unique. History is rife with gnarly examples. The only difference is that we don't have the other incidents on YouTube. A four minute clip does not provide deep enough context and certainly can't put you in the boots of a guy who has that kinda decision at his fingertips. For every "monster," there are a thousand normal guys who are laughing because the threat is gone and are simply grateful to be alive.

Damn, quarterback of the year awards in this thread.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dlish
Congratulations. You just created a few thousand potential insurgents who were sitting on the border.

Do tell me about this border.

I've read a few books detailing the recruitment of terrorists and I get the feeling it isn't nearly as fence-like as you would have us believe.

...

Quote:

Originally Posted by MSD (Post 2775171)
The range display on the gun sight starts out at 1340 yards and barely drops below 1300 as they come around the building. The RPG-7 used by Iraqi insurgents and combatants is unguided and detonates after 920 meters if it does not strike a target. There was small arms fire reported in the area, but it would be physically impossible for the group of men who were targeted to do any damage to the men in the helicopter.

Turns out the RPG-7 isn't the only rocket-propelled grenade launcher used in theater over there and certainly isn't the only shoulder-fired weapon available. I wouldn't want the pilot of such an expensive aircraft to be so arrogant as to make bets on whether or not the badguys can hit him. We made (and continue to make) similar mistakes with the Humvee (and other convoy vehicles) vs. IED game.

That and you never figure that a bad guy is alone when deploying a RPG. A common tactic is to deploy them in teams of two due to accuracy issues.

Even if they had 100% confirmation that the the weapon was a RPG-7, assuming that a badguy can't hurt you because you're 300 meters further away than the max range of the most popular weapon is stupid. That'd be like me standing on a target range at 300 meters while someone shot at me with a 12 gauge slug gun.

roachboy 04-06-2010 08:24 AM

Quote:

This thread is full of delicious Monday Morning Quarterbacking.
what does this phrase mean, mister 9?
you seem to like using it in this context.
i just want to be clear about what you're doing with it.

Plan9 04-06-2010 08:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mixedmedia (Post 2775165)
Two things that especially disconcerting while watching the video:
1. They really want to shoot them.
2. They are so far removed from the area that it's not really 'real' to them.

Interesting book about this.

MSD 04-06-2010 08:30 AM

2 Attachment(s)
I see this as a tragic case of collateral damage due to intelligence failure and understand that horrific things happen in war. I can accept this as a tragic mistake

I cannot, by any stretch of my imagination, apply those same standards to what is going on in this massacre. They are out of weapons range of the people they say are firing at them, and they keep the camera on the guy with the obvious camera for several seconds before going around the building. The gunner is excited to kill, and it looks like he's not concerned with who's on the receiving end of it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Plan9 (Post 2775178)
...the fuck? Don't give me this 1984 we're-stomping-East-Asia bullshit. Every country swinging a uniformed army has done this kind of thing at one time or another. The Brits, the Germans, the Russians, Iraq/Iran War, South American 100-medal dictatorships, Israelis... anybody you can name. This situation is not unique. History is rife with gnarly examples. The only difference is that we don't have the other incidents on YouTube. A four minute clip does not provide deep enough context and certainly can't put you in the boots of a guy who has that kinda decision at his fingertips. For every "monster," there are a thousand normal guys who are laughing because the threat is gone and are simply grateful to be alive.

Just because everyone has done it doesn't make it right. This stands out to me as a case of cold-blooded murder, not a tragic and accidental consequence of war. When the evidence is in front of us, is would be wrong not to address these things and prosecute people who act criminally. Even if we disregard the first part of the video, firing on someone helping the wounded is a war crime under the First Geneva Convention (1864.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pacifier (Post 2775172)
can you show the two guys with the AK?
I only see some long unidentified item, given the cameras etc. that could also be a tripod.

The circled guy in one picture and the guy with the striped shirt in the other. I could identify the camera lens, but it took a few views to be sure these guys had AKs.

dlish 04-06-2010 08:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Plan9 (Post 2775178)

...the fuck? Don't give me this 1984 we're-stomping-East-Asia bullshit. Every country swinging a uniformed army has done this kind of thing at one time or another. The Brits, the Germans, the Russians, Iraq/Iran War, South American 100-medal dictatorships, Israelis... anybody you can name. This situation is not unique. History is rife with gnarly examples. The only difference is that we don't have the other incidents on YouTube. A four minute clip does not provide deep enough context and certainly can't put you in the boots of a guy who has that kinda decision at his fingertips. For every "monster," there are a thousand normal guys who are laughing because the threat is gone and are simply grateful to be alive.

Damn, quarterback of the year awards in this thread..


i wasnt referring to east asia.

sure, this type of thing has happened before. Innocent people have been killed in other warzones. but for a nation that prides itself on human rights, womens right, gay right, animal right et al, they seem to care very little about the lives of those they are purported to help.

sure, we're all not in their shoes, and we're not the one choosing whether or not to pull that trigger, but you cannot deny that these guys were eager to pull that trigger. It's like letting the greyhounds out after the hare. except in this case, the hare was stationary and had no chance.

But if you think this 'threat is gone', then you're wrong. This incident has only increased the ranks of those that oppose american occupation in iraq. so, it really hasnt decreased the threat against american soldiers, but quite the contrary, it has increased it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Plan9 (Post 2775178)
Do tell me about this border.

I've read a lot of books detailing the recruitment of terrorists and I get the feeling it isn't nearly as fence-like as you would have us believe.

fuck the hardened terrorists. fuck em. Those that are won over are already won over...

you think the 'arab street' wont get a hold of this to show their people how inhumane the american forces are?

you think the average arab, the average muslim will brush off the grim realities in this video without giving thought that the wanton killings of innocent people while those behind the artillary laugh at its dead?

you think alqaeda looneys wont use these videos to recruit more impressionable youngsters into ther ranks?

do you really believe that ordinary people like me, professional people will turn even more against this occupation?

do you really believe that the families, loved ones, friends of those that were killed in this innocent and those children will grow to hate those that killed their loved ones?

will those two children grow up to teach their kids that the americans had the right to kill their grandparents and that all will be forgiven?

border? what fucking border?

you may speak about us as quarterbacks for not being able to see it from a soldiers view because we havent been there or done that, but you need to live here to understand how the world goes round young jock.

Plan9 04-06-2010 08:38 AM

Dlish, the "East Asia" thing was a joke. Major World Powers Bend Truth To Justify Needless War routine.

And don't call me a jock. I suffered under some ultra-nerdy Coke bottle glasses for twenty plus years.

You took a lot of my comment out of context. I'll try to explain my point later.

...

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy (Post 2775189)
what does this phrase mean, mister 9?
you seem to like using it in this context.
i just want to be clear about what you're doing with it.

Ugh... basically it means I concur with your assessment above. GI Joe is primed-primed-primed to kill, stuck in a boring-ass "war zone" for 12-18-24 months... and is only "let off the leash" a handful of times. You can't train a dog to fight and then be surprised when he (right or wrong) bites someone.

But it's far more complicated than that. I'll attempt to rub my two braincells together and come up with something more useful later.

timalkin 04-06-2010 08:44 AM

..

Plan9 04-06-2010 08:45 AM

Hmm... all this bitterness does not help our mission.

mixedmedia 04-06-2010 09:03 AM

hmm, three vagina references in one post...i think that's a new record for timalkin.

Plan9 04-06-2010 09:04 AM

Yeah, he's typing-a-fool. The whole "the military is better than the civvie body" masturbation is often most popular with non-military folks.

Those that actually served know the truth: the military is 50/50: 50% adult daycare for slack-jawed morons and 50% genuine badasses.

I've got pictures if this requires evidence.

silent_jay 04-06-2010 09:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timalkin (Post 2775202)
The only disturbing thing in this entire thread is the pussified attitude towards war, killing, and the moral judgment of someone else's split-second decisions during combat.

Shit happens in a war, and no amount of crying and vaginal bleeding will keep civilians from getting killed. There's a reason why a court-martial jury is made up of other military members: To keep disgusting, fat body, pussy-ass civilians from casting judgment over something they don't have even the slightest clue about. Believe it or not, your extensive knowledge of Hollywood war movies is vastly different from the realities of actual, real-life war.

The men in the street appeared to be armed. The local U.S. military units were taking small arms fire in the area. Insurgents are known to gather in groups and film their exploits during small arms attacks. These facts, taken together as a whole, provide justification for engaging and killing the men in the street. The end. So, who's on American Idol nowadays?

Always enjoy the chuckles when you show up, you may never have a clue what you're on about, but it's good for a laugh.......
Quote:

hmm, three vagina references in one post...i think that's a new record for timalkin.
He just has vagina on the brain, maybe getting laid would clear his head......

The_Jazz 04-06-2010 09:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timalkin (Post 2775202)
The only disturbing thing in this entire thread is the pussified attitude towards war, killing, and the moral judgment of someone else's split-second decisions during combat.

Shit happens in a war, and no amount of crying and vaginal bleeding will keep civilians from getting killed. There's a reason why a court-martial jury is made up of other military members: To keep disgusting, fat body, pussy-ass civilians from casting judgment over something they don't have even the slightest clue about. Believe it or not, your extensive knowledge of Hollywood war movies is vastly different from the realities of actual, real-life war.

The men in the street appeared to be armed. The local U.S. military units were taking small arms fire in the area. Insurgents are known to gather in groups and film their exploits during small arms attacks. These facts, taken together as a whole, provide justification for engaging and killing the men in the street. The end. So, who's on American Idol nowadays?

You know, subtract the misogyny, over-compensation and holier-than-thou attitude out from this post, and I actually agree with the message. But you're doing our cause such a disservice that I'm really embarrassed that we're on the same side of this argument.

Plan9 04-06-2010 09:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Jazz (Post 2775222)
You know, subtract the misogyny, over-compensation and holier-than-thou attitude out from this post, and I actually agree with the message. But you're doing our cause such a disservice that I'm really embarrassed that we're on the same side of this argument.

+1

dksuddeth 04-06-2010 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Plan9 (Post 2775219)
Yeah, he's typing-a-fool. The whole "the military is better than the civvie body" masturbation is often most popular with non-military folks.

Those that actually served know the truth: the military is 50/50: 50% adult daycare for slack-jawed morons and 50% genuine badasses.

I've got pictures if this requires evidence.

pictures of demi moore as GI Jane don't count. :)

The_Jazz 04-06-2010 09:28 AM



-+-{Important TFP Staff Message}-+-
There are numerous questionable posts in this thread. Let's get it back on track before private conversations about what the rules of debate are at TFP have to occur in the back channels.

Plan9 04-06-2010 09:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dksuddeth (Post 2775225)
pictures of demi moore as GI Jane don't count. :)

Shaved head was a surprising plus (she's got a purdy skull), but the insane no-way flotation devices were a big downer.

/threadjack

roachboy 04-06-2010 09:45 AM

Massacre Caught on Tape: US Military Confirms Authenticity of Their Own Chilling Video Showing Killing of Journalists


Iraq slaughter not an aberration - Iraq war - Salon.com


so you watch what is arguably a war crime and want to explain it away.
o you weren't there man, you don't know.
but that's exactly why there have to be rules.
gunning down kids and people who are trying to help medically---that's against the fucking rules.
o but you don't understand the stress.

maybe not. but again that's why there have to be rules.

this crew should stand trial.

o no really, man, you weren't there. you don't know. you can't pass judgment.
but obviously for some of the folk who were and are there, judgment is a Problem.

Plan9 04-06-2010 09:59 AM

Roachboy, are you referring to my comments? If so, let us entertain this lame little retort:

"So you watch an incident and assume it's a war crime. Okay, Rodney King."

...

If you're expressing frustration at "The Rules," let's talk about the flip side here:

How many convoys do US forces go on where they aren't allowed to return fire?

Brass is so worried about bad press that they don't allow soldiers to defend themselves.

My truck had bullets holes in the sides and no shell casings in the cab. That's unacceptable.

...

I wouldn't say anything against the fact that the wrong people got zapped. It's all bad.

That aside, if you want to know why it happened... well, you already seem to know.

...

Also: There's a lot of philosophical and political weaving going on in this thread.

It has been my experience that most US service members are not geniuses nor brainwashed tools.

They're just average people put through character-changing training and stuck in a shitty situation.

I didn't see groupthink in the military. We had conservatives and liberals and nutjobs and apathetics.

Big Duh: They didn't decide to invade Iraq. If you wanna blame somebody... blame the administration.

dippin 04-06-2010 10:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timalkin (Post 2775202)
The only disturbing thing in this entire thread is the pussified attitude towards war, killing, and the moral judgment of someone else's split-second decisions during combat.

Shit happens in a war, and no amount of crying and vaginal bleeding will keep civilians from getting killed. There's a reason why a court-martial jury is made up of other military members: To keep disgusting, fat body, pussy-ass civilians from casting judgment over something they don't have even the slightest clue about. Believe it or not, your extensive knowledge of Hollywood war movies is vastly different from the realities of actual, real-life war.

The men in the street appeared to be armed. The local U.S. military units were taking small arms fire in the area. Insurgents are known to gather in groups and film their exploits during small arms attacks. These facts, taken together as a whole, provide justification for engaging and killing the men in the street. The end. So, who's on American Idol nowadays?

Yes, war is dirty. But here's the thing: over the past 60 years all we've heard from the chicken hawks is how precise the American military is, how they'd never be part of any atrocities, how they are liberating people. Because, of course, if people remembered that war is a dirty thing they wouldn't be so quick to do this shit.

It is a classic bait and switch: before the war it's all liberation, precision, killing the bad guys and defending human rights, during and after it when all that bullshit was exposed for what it was it's "what do you expect? it's war."

The fact is that people who opposed the war from the start have said that this shit would take place. The chicken hawks were the ones going on about a clean war.

roachboy 04-06-2010 10:18 AM

i wasn't actually referring to you, mister 9. that post got started by timalkin and then the posts that followed it that were in agreement with its general line, sans the cretin-speak.

my basic position is that there really should be a legal proceeding about this. because there are rules, because the united states agrees to abide by them (unless you have no problem with the americans becoming exactly what they claim to oppose, just bigger and seemingly a bit more psychotic because of the scale of the technology). because they united states never seems to tire of talk talk talk about its own exalted moral and political status. because they cheapen some pretty important categories in the contradiction they seem to have no problem setting up between the blah blah blah democracy freedom rules of law blah blah blah and the all too often barbarism on the ground.



but "pragmatically"?
of course it's always the other guy's fault. we all know that.
and the only real war crime is losing a war.

Shauk 04-06-2010 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timalkin (Post 2775202)
The only disturbing thing in this entire thread is the pussified attitude towards war, killing, and the moral judgment of someone else's split-second decisions during combat.

Shit happens in a war, and no amount of crying and vaginal bleeding will keep civilians from getting killed. There's a reason why a court-martial jury is made up of other military members: To keep disgusting, fat body, pussy-ass civilians from casting judgment over something they don't have even the slightest clue about. Believe it or not, your extensive knowledge of Hollywood war movies is vastly different from the realities of actual, real-life war.

The men in the street appeared to be armed. The local U.S. military units were taking small arms fire in the area. Insurgents are known to gather in groups and film their exploits during small arms attacks. These facts, taken together as a whole, provide justification for engaging and killing the men in the street. The end. So, who's on American Idol nowadays?


OH FUCK, my bad BRO, I thought this was a forum for intelligent discussion. Jesus Christ people like you make my head hurt.

Plan9 04-06-2010 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy (Post 2775241)
i wasn't actually referring to you, mister 9. that post got started by timalkin and then the posts that followed it that were in agreement with its general line, sans the cretin-speak.

I actually concur with a bit of what Timalkin said in his post, sans the cretin-speak. Maybe I should mod-a-quote it to express my feelings more clearly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachbizzle
my basic position is that there really should be a legal proceeding about this. because there are rules, because the united states agrees to abide by them (unless you have no problem with the americans becoming exactly what they claim to oppose, just bigger and seemingly a bit more psychotic because of the scale of the technology). because they united states never seems to tire of talk talk talk about its own exalted moral and political status. because they cheapen some pretty important categories in the contradiction they seem to have no problem setting up between the blah blah blah democracy freedom rules of law blah blah blah and the all too often barbarism on the ground.

There should be and most likely will be legal proceedings. You can't sweep this under the carpet now that it has been YouTube'd. It will be addressed in some fashion. We can speculate about how its a kangaroo court, slap-on-the-wrist'd, and a good ole boy system all we want, too. Fap fap fap.

I'm not a smart guy, so I don't know where people develop that sentiment about the US. I guess it's my liberal public school education, but I see the United States as a arrogant bumbling rich white teenager with good intentions, horrible eyesight, and an absent mind regarding taking care of its own house. We aren't exactly all gunslinging cowboys and we certainly aren't European. I'd say ignoring economic segregation is our current epic fuckup.

The war was a not-so-clever distraction.

Quote:

Originally Posted by roshizzleboi
of course it's always the other guy's fault. we all know that. and the only real war crime is losing a war.

I'd suggest that the only real war crime is fighting beyond your initial justification.

With Iraq? We didn't have it to start with.

...

Please note that the Universal Life Excuse #1 joke does not apply to this thread.

...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shauk 2.0
OH FUCK, my bad BRO, I thought this was a forum for intelligent discussion [where people with different opinions come to share their perspective regardless of how polished or shit-caked it may be].



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:59 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360