NSFW Wikileaks latest video

[Ch3tan]

war crimes from a supposed "peace keeping force"

 

[Garaen]

They attacked people who they perceived were carrying weapons around the streets I can't see a problem with them engaging. The small arms may not have been a threat to the apache but they would damn sure well have been a threat to the troops on the ground patorlling the city.

What would be your opinion if that exact video was released with an announcement that three taliban leaders were killed in the attack? It would definately change your perception. People only give a shit about the two photographers, no one would bat an eyelid if they weren't there. Being a photographer in a war torn / post war country which is still highly charged comes with a certain amount of risk and danger. I'm not saying what happened was right all i'm saying is that I can understand how the situation occured.

Attacking the van was a little less understandable but if you take the view they were protecting a potential insurgent you can understand their mentality more.

I'm sure i'll get hammered for this post but you have to remember that we are watching the video in hindsight and from our armchairs. We're not tasked with protecting colleagues and friends patrolling the streets on the ground as the apache pilots were.

 

[Ch3tan]

It doesn't excuse their attitudes or their lack of training, nor the guy who gave them the call to fire doing so so easily with very little info.

Had it been insurgents firing at the chopper I would have no issues, but it was not.

 

[Job]

There was no RPG, and as stated in the general forum thread, even if there was an RPG, it was no threat to the Apache.

It was certainly a very RPG carrying pose and the threat was not to the Apache as has been stated but to troops on the ground, that is the job of the
Apache patrols and ground troops wouldn't be to happy if an Apache gunner said he didn't shoot because he had the feeling they might have had journalists with them.
If I was on the ground in Iraq with Apaches flying around I would be in a cellar.

 

[Ch3tan]

Given the tech available to them, and the money they spend on their military forces, they should be able to spot the difference between an rpg and a camera.

 

[BloodOmen]

Given the tech available to them, and the money they spend on their military forces, they should be able to spot the difference between an rpg and a camera.

tbh it wouldnt surprise me in the least if the gunner did see it was a camera and just wanted to shoot anyway... he seemed very impatient and trigger happy.

 

[Garaen]

Their attitude can probably be attributed to the horrific conditions out there. Frequently seeing limbless colleagues being brought back from the front lines because of a suicide bomber or seemingly friendly pedestrians you just passed turning around and shooting at you 1 minute later would definately dehumanise me a bit.

I agree with what you're saying about the seeming lack of information before being given the ok to engage but we don't know exactly how much previous intel was given in the area nor what the commanding officer could actually see (although the impression I get from the video regarding the attack on the van was a case of 'I don't give a shit, just shoot it').

 

[Lamp]

the "rules of engagement" were followed

 

[Tuthmes]

Well to me it all makes sense tbh.

Americans see a RPG when it's the wrong people holding a camera. A hostile target when it's civilians in the wrong place. Weapons of mass destruction when its the wrong country (and the right president).

Rule of engagement my ass. Begging to shoot people who are taking care of an injured man whas (and is) the lowest thing you could do. It whas low even in WWII. Hell even the medieval times hade more "chivalry".


Just think about it for a second. If you are gonne fire an RPG @ an apache (or set an ambush). Would you go at it the exact same way the people in the movieclip do? Walk casually down the streets with your m8's, al bunched together like pro's.

Or would you seek a good hidden spot, preferbly somewhere up on a roof. :<

 

[Thorwyn]

Don´t want to get too far into the discussion because it´s a waste of time really (some people think it´s ok, some people think it´s not)...

Just two things to add:

1. The pilots didn´t have a 320x240 20fps b/w picture, they had the full RL view and they circled around those people a couple of times before they opened fire. If modern pilots are unable to tell a RPG from a camera in bright daylight from 100m distance... god help all journalists out there.

2. It´s obvious that the people noticed the Apache and didn´t try to run away, aim at it, hide their "guns" or act strangely.

 

[Overdriven]

Watched it all. Didn't phase me at all. Odd, I've seen more gory (omg, wait for it..) scenes in games. But yeah, completely agree with Thor on this one.

 

[Tuthmes]

Don´t want to get too far into the discussion because it´s a waste of time really (some people think it´s ok, some people think it´s not)...

Just two things to add:

1. The pilots didn´t have a 320x240 20fps b/w picture, they had the full RL view and they circled around those people a couple of times before they opened fire. If modern pilots are unable to tell a RPG from a camera in bright daylight from 100m distance... god help all journalists out there.

2. It´s obvious that the people noticed the Apache and didn´t try to run away, aim at it, hide their "guns" or act strangely.

1. 142 or something journalists where killed during this war. So yeah, they can use all the help they can get.

2. Exactly.

3. Shooting people that are helping an injured person is a warcrime.

 

[Corran]

Havent watched the link, I plan to watch the full video on wikileaks, which is almost 20minutes long.

The discussion about how they are talking, the possibility is that this is the only way in which these people can get through a day where it is deemed necessary for them to open fire on another person is to marginalise them in such a manner.

From skim reading yesterday it seems that the main reason the call was made to fire was related to the fact that there was ground personel in the nearby area and spose they deemed these a threat to them, and not the helicoptor.

When it comes to defending the innocent then you need someone willing to pull the trigger, if this is the only way they can do it so be it.
If this is people acting in a manner they shouldnt, and that they basically just wanted to fire on someone and made up an excuse on the spot then action needs to be taken and the people that gave the orders to fire should be made to answer for it.

Context is always needed I spose. If people werent told that these were innocent people being shot and that they were rpg's, then the words spoken may be a bit surprising but people would have let it go due to the pressure situation.

Toht actually brings up a good point, that i would say more on if i remember what he said but i cant be bothered to go back for. I try remember to come back and say something a bit more about it when I see it properly though.. which wont be till later tomorrow as got doctors in morning yet again. blah

 

[megadave]

dont comment if you havent seen it


Also, even it was a load of gun crazy militants, once they're all dead or incapicitated on the floor, there is no reason to want to keep firing at them and the innocent people helping. The threat to ground forces was eliminated. What they did is against the geneva convention and should be punished.

 

[Ch3tan]

Havent watched the link,.
blah

That negated everything you said after. There are lots of comments on this thread from people who have not watched the full video, and they are making random unrelated points, which others are then answering.

The ground support was more than 10 minutes from the incident, infact the only reason they came was because the chopper crew called them in.

 

[fl3a]

Just two things to add:

1. The pilots didn´t have a 320x240 20fps b/w picture, they had the full RL view and they circled around those people a couple of times before they opened fire. If modern pilots are unable to tell a RPG from a camera in bright daylight from 100m distance... god help all journalists out there.

2. It´s obvious that the people noticed the Apache and didn´t try to run away, aim at it, hide their "guns" or act strangely.

i was under the impression (from watching the wikileaks video) that the shooting took place at around 400-500 meters. i dont think you can discern an AK47 from firewood with the naked eye at that distance. and if they have to zoom, they have exactly that, a badly zoomed in video feed

my initial reaction was that with the rules of engagement being as they were, the shooting could have been avoided by a) more timid soldiers b) better sighting technology, and i stand by it

shooting the truck was bullshit though, and they know it as well

 

[Chronictank]

the "rules of engagement" were followed

Yes, the first instance they were right under the rules of engagement

HOWEVER massacring the "medics" (based on their role in the scenario) when they showed no apparent threat and carried no weapons is impossible to justify
The van was wide open, there was no threat apparent and they weren't collecting weapons as the video showed.
From another forum i frequent:

Former Blackhawk pilot, Iraq veteran here. I understood engaging the first group of people. Anything resembling an RPG is going to be interpreted as a first order threat by any aircrew. And if you have any experience with that sort of threat, you know it doesn't really work like the movies. There's no.... 'RPG, five o' clock, break left...' from your crew chief. That **** doesn't work in the real world. RPG's, despite their reputation, move faster than any ordinary human can react to. By the time any crew member is done telling you about it, it's already past you. So you have to identify and engage it before it's fired. Which is what the Apache crew was trying to do. I have no problem with this.. right or wrong, they saw a potential threat and acted appropriately. Firing on the van, however, is in my opinion as a former Army Aviator, a complete departure from any ROE I've ever been subject to. Bottom line is, no weapons or hostile intent were evident. I can't think of any reason why they should have fired on the van. 'Enemy combatants' are fair game, but there's nothing in the video to suggest that the occupants of the van were doing anything but removing a wounded person from the battle. In war, horrible things happen and this is one of those things. After spending more than a year of my life in Iraq, I can't rationally defend the actions of these particular pilots but I can't stress enough that they are NOT an example of business as usual in Iraq. In all of my time in that theater of operations, I never witnessed such an example of disregard for ROE. The vast majority of soldiers over there are exercising restraint and good judgment to a point where it puts their very lives in great danger. This was a horrible, horrible thing that happened. But don't ever think it's 'just the way things are' in Iraq. It isn't.

They subsequently lied about it to cover up their mistake, the same way the US army press office attempted to

The problem is the people aren't covered by the Geneva convention thanks to Mr Bush, so they can do whatever they want over there and it is still legal

 

[Raven]

Its very easy to make a judgement after seeing the video. It was a mistake, a very big mistake. No soldier goes around thinking "yeah! today I am going to waste a bunch of civvies with my Gatling gun!!"
They thought there was a threat (not necessarily to them but their army) and acted on it, precisely what they are asked to do, if they see a weapon then they neutralise it. As it turns out they were not weapons so they fucked up. It happens in war. Nobody here has ever been under anywhere near the sort of pressure a soldier is under, with true life and death choices that have to be made instantly. Obviously it should not have happened but everyone makes mistakes, nothing and nobody is 100% right all the time.

The secondary engagement was wrong though, any perceived threat had been neutralised and they should be nailed to the wall for it.

I wonder if wikileaks will show any of the 1000s of times that an Apache has gunned down people planting IEDs or carrying rockets etc?

 

[Jiggs]

The van part is hard for most people to rationalise, and I put myself in that group. However, if my brother was the pilot I wouldn't want him to hesitate long enough to decide if it's a camera or a rpg pointed at him.

I don't lose much sleep over this, more people are killed every week by Doctors fucking up in the NHS than in this video.

 

[Corran]

dont comment if you havent seen it

Most people in this forum comment on things they know nothing about. Least I read some things on the situation before i commented even if i didnt watch the video. So blame the media for misrepresenting the video.

And to be fair even after watching the full clip we will not know the full situation. We dont know what radio communications come before the video, if any attacks had happened in the area etc etc.

Not condoning what happened in all, but the 1st part is fine. See something that could be an RPG then you have to open fire, you dont have time to react after it is shot so you do it the moment you perceive the threat. Sometimes you are wrong but at 500yrds you dont get the best of looks at what is being carried.

Firing on "medic" type is another thing. Not got to that point in the video. Taking a break as need to go shopping

 

[Sparx]

I try stay away from these threads for obvious reasons mainly about my history of actually being a soldier and i dont like to discuss these things with armchair generals. Its very easy to sit there 2 years on and say how you think its wrong. Its another thing to be there and use your first instinct which you are trained to follow

 

[dub]

we kill children and laugh like barbarians while we do it , neo-imperialism at its finest.

 

[Marc]

I try stay away from these threads for obvious reasons mainly about my history of actually being a soldier and i dont like to discuss these things with armchair generals. Its very easy to sit there 2 years on and say how you think its wrong. Its another thing to be there and use your first instinct which you are trained to follow

Well if you are trained to murder a couple of individuals who were unarmed than im glad I never joined up to be a soldier. Of course, there might have been guns in the van so what the hell, lets shoot it up. But why stop there, those kids playing football might be suicide bombers, lets put a few rounds into them aswell.

That attack on the van was disgusting. I read somewhere that under the geneva convention, unarmed people who are rescuing the injured, are not allowed to be fired on. It might not be as simple as that, but the point is, the 2 guys in the van were not legitimate targets and I dont care about a supposed instinct. It was wrong and totally uneccessary

 

[Raven]

those kids playing football might be suicide bombers, lets put a few rounds into them aswell.

There is an achievement for that.

 

[Corran]

Well if you are trained to murder a couple of individuals who were unarmed than im glad I never joined up to be a soldier. Of course, there might have been guns in the van so what the hell, lets shoot it up. But why stop there, those kids playing football might be suicide bombers, lets put a few rounds into them aswell.

That attack on the van was disgusting. I read somewhere that under the geneva convention, unarmed people who are rescuing the injured, are not allowed to be fired on. It might not be as simple as that, but the point is, the 2 guys in the van were not legitimate targets and I dont care about a supposed instinct. It was wrong and totally uneccessary

Still not watched the end part the video fully, but skimmed it (football after being out) the van being fired on seems a bit strange
... but ... I understand why they thought an RPG in the first group of people.

The photographer was acting suspecious, the way he was leaning around the corner peering towards the chopper, as if using the building as cover for an attack. The end of a large lense camera sticking out that could look like the end of RPG at glimpse.

The video part being shown on most sites is edited so they only show the fully zoomed in video footage. You know that the chopper is actually a very long distance from the target from the footage of them opening fire. Think of how fast a bullet from the high caliber weapons move at, now watch the footage again and see how long it takes between the first shot being fired and the first shot landing. It is actually a massive range at which they engaged them in so people saying they should been able to see better then what the video is are clearly not understanding the footage.

Watching dexter now, but after the episode, depending on the missus mood, I may watch the last 10minutes which contains all the van stuff. What I seen in regards to that so far though seems very wrong

There is an achievement for that.

Be more of an achievement if they could engage the ball from that range, using the bullets to kick up the dirt too move teh ball, and score a goal!
Keeper certainly wouldnt get into that

 

[Zede]

This shit has been going on in every war/military engagement, oh since forever. In fact i'd be willing to bet the current fun in the middle east has had the least amount of these so called "atrocities" attributed to it, compared to previous conflicts through out history.

A few weeks of atrocities during the Vietnam war would account for all so far in the iraq conflict.

 

[Tuthmes]

This shit has been going on in every war/military engagement, oh since forever. In fact i'd be willing to bet the current fun in the middle east has had the least amount of these so called "atrocities" attributed to it, compared to previous conflicts through out history.

A few weeks of atrocities during the Vietnam war would account for all so far in the iraq conflict.

A few days of atrocities in WWII (or pick a certain day in WWI) would account for all of it in Vietnam. Let's not start compairing war's with eachother just so we can say, ahh well it aint so bad.

Add to the fact that it's basically still ongoing. We prolly havent heared the halve it yet and that once all of the allied forces leave, the shit will prolly start all over.