wikileaks
dave_1
Posts: 9,512
I see US govt trying to track down the person behind wikileaks....I hope the govt fail. Wonder what happened to the terrorists inside the apache?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/ju ... CMP=AFCYAH
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/ju ... CMP=AFCYAH
0
Comments
-
Pure objectivity here.
It looked like, to me, initially that a group of men were gathering at the corner with the 2 news guys. The camera guy was on the corner ready to film and the other news guy was on his mobile with the rest coming up behind. 2 of the other guys were armed, both had weapons un-slung and were walking to the corner before the apaches opened fire. It looked like to me, that a very small group was going to have a go at an American patrol and the film crew wanted to film it, or it could well have been just a bad set of circumstances that 2 guys had guns and were all moving off anywhere.
Total overkill on the americans part, disgusting that they were waiting for a wounded man to lift a "weapon" to open up on him, then again, if they are the rules of engagement....
No way should they have fired on the van, a patrol or iraqi police could have taken care of that and the fact that kids were injured is just wrong.
What a fcuking mess Iraq was and still is.0 -
dmclite wrote:Pure objectivity here.
It looked like, to me, initially that a group of men were gathering at the corner with the 2 news guys. The camera guy was on the corner ready to film and the other news guy was on his mobile with the rest coming up behind. 2 of the other guys were armed, both had weapons un-slung and were walking to the corner before the apaches opened fire. It looked like to me, that a very small group was going to have a go at an American patrol and the film crew wanted to film it, or it could well have been just a bad set of circumstances that 2 guys had guns and were all moving off anywhere.
Total overkill on the americans part, disgusting that they were waiting for a wounded man to lift a "weapon" to open up on him, then again, if they are the rules of engagement....
No way should they have fired on the van, a patrol or iraqi police could have taken care of that and the fact that kids were injured is just wrong.
What a fcuking mess Iraq was and still is.
with the amount firepower they had on the ground near there, surely would have been better to take a look first? and then have those guys above solve things. Your comment about rules of engagement...did you hear the desperation in their voices for that gun to be picked up? Pure evil, sheer pleasure was what they got, the detachment -psychopaths. What I'd like to see done to them I dare not even write on this forum.0 -
zoom in a few frames and they'd have seen as well kids on the passenger side...where are the rules of engagement on using sights correctly?0
-
Dave_1 wrote:dmclite wrote:Pure objectivity here.
It looked like, to me, initially that a group of men were gathering at the corner with the 2 news guys. The camera guy was on the corner ready to film and the other news guy was on his mobile with the rest coming up behind. 2 of the other guys were armed, both had weapons un-slung and were walking to the corner before the apaches opened fire. It looked like to me, that a very small group was going to have a go at an American patrol and the film crew wanted to film it, or it could well have been just a bad set of circumstances that 2 guys had guns and were all moving off anywhere.
Total overkill on the americans part, disgusting that they were waiting for a wounded man to lift a "weapon" to open up on him, then again, if they are the rules of engagement....
No way should they have fired on the van, a patrol or iraqi police could have taken care of that and the fact that kids were injured is just wrong.
What a fcuking mess Iraq was and still is.
with the amount firepower they had on the ground near there, surely would have been better to take a look first? and then have those guys above solve things. Your comment about rules of engagement...did you hear the desperation in their voices for that gun to be picked up? Pure evil, sheer pleasure was what they got, the detachment -psychopaths. What I'd like to see done to them I dare not even write on this forum.
I agree, they should have watched and waited, kept the ground forces informed what was going on and should only have fired as a last resort, not at the first tenuous opportunity.
The rules of engagement comment i made, i don't think I was clear enough. I meant the fact they could fire on an injured man, were desperate to shoot him but could not until they could see he was going for a weapon, then apply the ROE's. In this instance the ROS's would be used as a getout clause for murdering an injured man, and not a set of rules designed to use minimun force to stop situations.
The pilots should be court martialled, mistakes can happen, but they weren't even fired on and there seemed to be no immediate threat.0 -
dmclite wrote:Dave_1 wrote:dmclite wrote:Pure objectivity here.
It looked like, to me, initially that a group of men were gathering at the corner with the 2 news guys. The camera guy was on the corner ready to film and the other news guy was on his mobile with the rest coming up behind. 2 of the other guys were armed, both had weapons un-slung and were walking to the corner before the apaches opened fire. It looked like to me, that a very small group was going to have a go at an American patrol and the film crew wanted to film it, or it could well have been just a bad set of circumstances that 2 guys had guns and were all moving off anywhere.
Total overkill on the americans part, disgusting that they were waiting for a wounded man to lift a "weapon" to open up on him, then again, if they are the rules of engagement....
No way should they have fired on the van, a patrol or iraqi police could have taken care of that and the fact that kids were injured is just wrong.
What a fcuking mess Iraq was and still is.
with the amount firepower they had on the ground near there, surely would have been better to take a look first? and then have those guys above solve things. Your comment about rules of engagement...did you hear the desperation in their voices for that gun to be picked up? Pure evil, sheer pleasure was what they got, the detachment -psychopaths. What I'd like to see done to them I dare not even write on this forum.
I agree, they should have watched and waited, kept the ground forces informed what was going on and should only have fired as a last resort, not at the first tenuous opportunity.
The rules of engagement comment i made, i don't think I was clear enough. I meant the fact they could fire on an injured man, were desperate to shoot him but could not until they could see he was going for a weapon, then apply the ROE's. In this instance the ROS's would be used as a getout clause for murdering an injured man, and not a set of rules designed to use minimun force to stop situations.
The pilots should be court martialled, mistakes can happen, but they weren't even fired on and there seemed to be no immediate threat.
I think, the injured guy making for a gun, am not sure if rules of engagement would mean kill given it seemed to take the man ages to crawl to the gun... the army on the ground would have had warning if the man had got to the gun I guess... the lack of zoom in to the kids in the van shows these animals weren't too interested, just kill ..., and then to shoot the van for rescuing. A court martial is not enough. The animals inside that apache would be a threat to the public anywhere so surely a placing them in psychiatric wing with other serial killers-their peers- would be safest? They are at large I believe.
Go on wikileaks...spill the beans on the US govt.0 -
Join HM Forces first. then start criticising.
It is war - don't blame the soldiers, blame those that sent them.
They had guns. The guns were not for fun. This is what happens in a war zone.
I'm not saying it is right, but this preaching isn't for me. Men and women have died on both sides and it is horrible. But sitting at home and judging is not fair.0 -
Watching the video a second time, it is interesting to note that the editor points out a camera, phone etc with arrows and focus but doesn't point out the 2 if not 3 assault rifles the group of guys were carrying
the thing is, as well is that war correspondants and thier employers get a bit high and mighty over journalists being killed, but they are taking massive chances in desperate countries. You cant pi55 and moan when someone gets hurt when they put themselves in that position of their own free will.
I was a soldier, I have been on operational tours and I knew the risks and accepted them.0 -
Not going to offer any judgements on the video. The whole war in Iraq stinks though and thanks to the efforts of Rupert Murdoch (the same RM that owns the Sky racing team and most of the popular press in the US, UK, Austrailia and New Zealand), George Bush and many other politicians were able to sell this fraud practically unopposed. Something to think about when using any of Mr. Murdochs' services. I find him to be one of the most frightening figures in the world today as he has so much control over the english speaking press in the world. It's not that he's just a right wing news supporter, it's the fact that he's more propoganda than reporting facts. His news agency has led the way in the US reporting that Pres. Obama is secretly Muslim and supports Al-Qaeda, that he was not born in the US thus making him ineligible to be President, that Obamas' health care plan included a "death list" of people not worthy of investing in care for since it wouldn't be cost effective and also the fact that they regulary use former Bush cabinet members as "journalists" and commentators. Any of the accusations mentioned above against Mr Obama can easily be confirmed by doing some casual research easily accomplished by the receptionist at any news organization yet Mr. Murdoch dragged these stories on for weeks. You most certainly will not be seeing any of this footage on Mr. Murdochs' news broadcasts.0
-
crankycrank wrote:Not going to offer any judgements on the video. The whole war in Iraq stinks though and thanks to the efforts of Rupert Murdoch (the same RM that owns the Sky racing team)and most of the popular press in the US, UK, Austrailia and New Zealand, George Bush and many other politicians were able to sell this fraud practically unopposed. Something to think about when using any of Mr. Murdochs' services. I find him to be one of the most frightening figures in the world today as he has so much control over the english speaking press in the world. It's not that he's just a right wing news supporter, it's the fact that he's more propoganda than reporting facts. His news agency has led the way in the US reporting that Pres. Obama is secretly Muslim and supports Al-Qaeda, that he was not born in the US thus making him ineligible to be President, that Obamas' health care plan included a "death list" of people not worthy of investing in care for since it wouldn't be cost effective and also the fact that they regulary use former Bush cabinet members as "journalists" and commentators. Any of the accusations mentioned above against Mr Obama can easily be confirmed by doing some casual research easily accomplished by the receptionist at any news organization yet Mr. Murdoch dragged these stories on for weeks. You most certainly will not be seeing any of this footage on Mr. Murdochs' news broadcasts.
This really stands up, I do like it when you get a different viewpoint and information o a subject. Food for thought. 8)0 -
It doesn't stand up!!
Give me one link to prove any of it. One link to RM owned press that is printing this stuff...
Without references it is tosh.0 -
Scrumple wrote:It doesn't stand up!!
Give me one link to prove any of it. One link to RM owned press that is printing this stuff...
Without references it is tosh.
You've got the internet google it. Try the: Obama birther movement and Fox news, Obamas health care death list & Fox news, Carl Rove & Fox news, Dick Cheney & Fox news. No question about it for me. I've been watching this drivel on Mr. Murdochs US Fox news network for years. I'm sure you have plenty of info for any UK owned companies of Mr Murdoch. Time to do some research and quit buying into the spoon fed info.0 -
I prefer those lecturing me to do it first.
News companies reporting news? Whatever next?
"Obamas health care "death list" & Fox news" - nothing.
Great.
tosh0 -
dmclite wrote:Watching the video a second time, it is interesting to note that the editor points out a camera, phone etc with arrows and focus but doesn't point out the 2 if not 3 assault rifles the group of guys were carrying
.
Because they were carrying rifles doesn't mean they were terrorists. Was it not possible that they were armed security bodyguards for the reporter? Every "important" person in Iraq/Afghan has a bodyguard.
The attack on the van was appalling and cowardly. can you imagine if you stopped your car to help an injured person then murdered for it? There was absolutely no need for it but it was gun-ho Gi Joe on the trigger.
Military decisions are hard to judge on the spot, but very easy in hindsight. However, the voices of the US pilots were almost begging to kill and not making a decision.CAAD9
Kona Jake the Snake
Merlin Malt 40 -
That's a pretty overloaded search! Try 'death panel' & 'Fox News':Scrumple wrote:"Obamas health care "death list" & Fox news" - nothing.
http://mediamatters.org/research/200908100054#
ETA:
http://rawstory.com/rawreplay/2009/08/1 ... nel-claim/0 -
Scrumple wrote:I prefer those lecturing me to do it first.
News companies reporting news? Whatever next?
"Obamas health care "death list" & Fox news" - nothing.
Great.
tosh
news companies dont just 'report news' they put their own idealogical slant on it compare the daily mail to the guardian for example
have you watched any fox news reporting?- they are off the scale!'dont forget lads, one evertonian is worth twenty kopites'0 -
Well I'm hoping that people are willing to find out and decide for themselves what to believe. For some I guess that's a crazy idea since all news is accurate and unbiased.Scrumple wrote:I prefer those lecturing me to do it first.
News companies reporting news? Whatever next?
"Obamas health care "death list" & Fox news" - nothing.
Great.
tosh
0 -
I just read about a story on Fox about me landing a big yank fish on my hook...
Come on England (in a real "world" cup).0 -
Buckled_Rims wrote:dmclite wrote:Watching the video a second time, it is interesting to note that the editor points out a camera, phone etc with arrows and focus but doesn't point out the 2 if not 3 assault rifles the group of guys were carrying
.
Because they were carrying rifles doesn't mean they were terrorists. n.
how about the kids that got hit?0 -
Buckled_Rims wrote:dmclite wrote:Watching the video a second time, it is interesting to note that the editor points out a camera, phone etc with arrows and focus but doesn't point out the 2 if not 3 assault rifles the group of guys were carrying
.
Because they were carrying rifles doesn't mean they were terrorists. n.
how about the kids that got hit?0 -
Buckled_Rims wrote:dmclite wrote:Watching the video a second time, it is interesting to note that the editor points out a camera, phone etc with arrows and focus but doesn't point out the 2 if not 3 assault rifles the group of guys were carrying
.
Because they were carrying rifles doesn't mean they were terrorists. n.
how about the kids that got hit?0 -
not sure they have invented kid proof bullets yet??
What were kids doing near AK47's and RPG's?? Blame the parents, not the soldiers.0 -
Crankycrank...I agree totally re your comments about Rupert Murdoch.He owns News Corp which in Australia prints a national daily "The Australian" and many other smaller city newspapers. The Rudd Labor government has just brought in a super profits tax on the foreign owned mining companies.Rupert has gone berserk! His papers are even trying to whip up a leadership spill against Rudd. It's getting very nasty. I wonder what makes Rupert tick...I mean he's in his 80s and a multi billionaire so why the endless pursuit of power and money.
On a happiness level I bet us peasants are far happier than he is.0 -
dmclite wrote:Watching the video a second time, it is interesting to note that the editor points out a camera, phone etc with arrows and focus but doesn't point out the 2 if not 3 assault rifles the group of guys were carrying
the thing is, as well is that war correspondants and thier employers get a bit high and mighty over journalists being killed, but they are taking massive chances in desperate countries. You cant pi55 and moan when someone gets hurt when they put themselves in that position of their own free will.
I was a soldier, I have been on operational tours and I knew the risks and accepted them.
fair comment by you. The pleasure taken and the desperation in the helo for further kills shows their mental health to be very poor. They shouldn't have been up in any helo making life or death decisions surely?0 -
Buckled_Rims wrote:dmclite wrote:Watching the video a second time, it is interesting to note that the editor points out a camera, phone etc with arrows and focus but doesn't point out the 2 if not 3 assault rifles the group of guys were carrying
.
Because they were carrying rifles doesn't mean they were terrorists. Was it not possible that they were armed security bodyguards for the reporter? Every "important" person in Iraq/Afghan has a bodyguard.
The attack on the van was appalling and cowardly. can you imagine if you stopped your car to help an injured person then murdered for it? There was absolutely no need for it but it was gun-ho Gi Joe on the trigger.
Military decisions are hard to judge on the spot, but very easy in hindsight. However, the voices of the US pilots were almost begging to kill and not making a decision.
i was wondering...is there not some process to ascertain by ground soldiers going and checking who the guys were rather than just killing and loving it. They didn't use the guns so is having a gun enough reason to shoot at children in a van on purpose?0 -
The British Army, would have checked it out on the ground with air cover on call, not the other way around.
Americans are too willing to press buttons rather than connect with people on the ground.0 -
dmclite wrote:The British Army, would have checked it out on the ground with air cover on call, not the other way around.
Americans are too willing to press buttons rather than connect with people on the ground.
I heard that often. I respect your experience as you've been a soldier dmc. The Brits definitely sound a more professional fighting force than the Americans-far too trigger happy. Even their NYPD cops look too gung ho, a disgrace in that critical mass cycle protest where they attack a cyclist. It's perhaps their mentality?0 -
Dave_1 wrote:dmclite wrote:The British Army, would have checked it out on the ground with air cover on call, not the other way around.
Americans are too willing to press buttons rather than connect with people on the ground.
I heard that often. I respect your experience as you've been a soldier dmc. The Brits definitely sound a more professional fighting force than the Americans-far too trigger happy. Even their NYPD cops look too gung ho, a disgrace in that critical mass cycle protest where they attack a cyclist. It's perhaps their mentality?
The American culture does not really comprehend other peoples cultures as they think they have the best way of life. Hence the lack of respect given to other peoples, countries that do not correspond with American ideals. This is of course a generalisation of American foreign policy not on an individual basis.You do change when you put on a uniform, but the Americans go potty.0 -
dmclite wrote:Dave_1 wrote:dmclite wrote:The British Army, would have checked it out on the ground with air cover on call, not the other way around.
Americans are too willing to press buttons rather than connect with people on the ground.
I heard that often. I respect your experience as you've been a soldier dmc. The Brits definitely sound a more professional fighting force than the Americans-far too trigger happy. Even their NYPD cops look too gung ho, a disgrace in that critical mass cycle protest where they attack a cyclist. It's perhaps their mentality?
The American culture does not really comprehend other peoples cultures as they think they have the best way of life. Hence the lack of respect given to other peoples, countries that do not correspond with American ideals. This is of course a generalisation of American foreign policy not on an individual basis.You do change when you put on a uniform, but the Americans go potty.
it's got them in a lot of trouble post cold war...China controls them with debt holdings ,won't do what US wants in currency pegging and the Iraq disaster. China will surpass them in GDP shortly,0
