John Sedgwick was thinking the same thing before he was shot.
Unarmed...so it seems, but are they medics? Just looked like some people in a minivan.
Wikileaks releases apache footage.
- Thread starter Kristoph
- Start date
John Sedgwick was thinking the same thing before he was shot.
Unarmed...so it seems, but are they medics? Just looked like some people in a minivan.
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Nov 2002
- Posts
- 16,379
- Location
- 38.744281°N 104.846806°W
Yes I'm dev. adv. I have (some) morals!
I don't know the US rules of engagement to be honest. I know the British ones are incredibly (overly?) strict.
Gotta say, i was shocked by how easily approval to attack was given. I would have thought the pilot's would have wanted to be 110% sure they were insurgents before they killed 10+ people. Unfortunately, it seems that this video fits with the stereotype that the American's are trigger happy and seem to value American lives more than anyone elses - which severely damages their image.
I appreciate that Baghdad isn't a picnic, but do these pilots not realise that they're in a city of millions of people and *occasionally* a group of 10 people may congregate for whatever reason? I also can't help but think that the pilots saw what they wanted to see and seemed eager to get clearance to open fire...
I appreciate that Baghdad isn't a picnic, but do these pilots not realise that they're in a city of millions of people and *occasionally* a group of 10 people may congregate for whatever reason? I also can't help but think that the pilots saw what they wanted to see and seemed eager to get clearance to open fire...
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 May 2006
- Posts
- 5,786
This isn't you're local high street, this is Iraq, there are plenty of reasons for individuals to be carrying rifles that are not for the purpose of attacking foreign forces, e.g. police, guards, etc.
Sure, retrospect is a very convenient thing, but it doesn't mean these pilots had absolutely no other choice - in fact it seems to me they had plenty of choices but were dead set on one, right from the get go.
Sure, retrospect is a very convenient thing, but it doesn't mean these pilots had absolutely no other choice - in fact it seems to me they had plenty of choices but were dead set on one, right from the get go.
Performing the roles of medics. Did you not see them get out the van and pick up the wounded guy? But yeah i wonder if a giant red cross on the van and proper uniforms would have stopped the soldiers firing.... whatdya reckon?
For all the helicopter pilot's knew, they could have just been civilians that had come across the injured man - yet they still fully laid into the van, not knowing who these people were, or what they were doing.
IMO they were far to eager to open fire, and whilst i understand that they need to remain detached from situations like this, some things they were saying were bordering on psychopathic.
I saw nothing wrong with what they did, but you were labelling them medics, which I don't believe they were, especially with kids in the front.
Indeed, I agree.
The man was taking his children to school he was not a medic just a man who saw a injured man on the floor and tried to help.
Its a warzone. I'm gonna take a stab in the dark and guess that the insurgents didn't have the kind of structure or equipment that would readily identify them as medics.
Perhaps if they had waved a white flag, fair enough. But to my mind if they are performing the same duties as a medic does on a battlefield...ie providing aid, trying to help wounded etc then yes to all intents and purposes they are medics - in other words clear non-combatants.
This is in reference to the US soldiers attacking and killing the unarmed men who try to carry the wounded guy into their van. I assume the wounded guy was killed as well.
Cheers for your thoughts on that dont think we will agree on that one.
@trent Thanks for posting the video about the children surviving
Perhaps if they had waved a white flag, fair enough. But to my mind if they are performing the same duties as a medic does on a battlefield...ie providing aid, trying to help wounded etc then yes to all intents and purposes they are medics - in other words clear non-combatants.
Longbow said:
This is in reference to the US soldiers attacking and killing the unarmed men who try to carry the wounded guy into their van. I assume the wounded guy was killed as well.
Cheers for your thoughts on that dont think we will agree on that one.
@trent Thanks for posting the video about the children surviving
Absolutely shocking but it doesn't surprise me. Lots of soldiers (particularly american ones) seem like trigger happy idiots. When the van comes and they're awaiting permission to engage, one of them is like "come on, just let me shoot!" like he thinks it's fun or something. They were just flying around looking for an excuse to pull the trigger - it was the same with the wounded guy dragging himself across the street.
This is just one leaked incident but you can bet worse has happened often.
This is just one leaked incident but you can bet worse has happened often.
Trigger happy Americans, what a suprise. Ive a cousin in Iraq (been there and back loads since 2004 or thereabouts) and he absoloutely hates being anywhere near these idiots. According to him the majority of them are just adrenaline junky flag waving kids who will fire at anything that moves.
Ignoring any of the backstory (just impartially watching the video, giving in to neither suggestion or sentiment) I fail to see how these people would have provided any kind of threat. It was acknowledged on radio that there were no 'friendly's' in the vicinity and the helicopters themselves were clearly a good distance away. Certainly not in danger of small arms fire, or even an RPG.
There were possibly 2 weapons in a group of what, 15 people? I certainly saw none on the ground in the aftermath... I'm sure there are many people armed for varying reasons int he area. None of them seemed to be acting suspiciously or aggressively.
I can understand firing on people if they are approaching your forces, rallying in numbers and are clearly armed or even openly engaging, but I fail to see why this group needed to be gunned down.
Surely the most appropriate action would have been to report it, observe and send ground troops to the area? If the helicopters felt they were threatened they should move on surely? Instead they hastily request permission to engage over radio, whilst exaggerating the situation to make it appear they are under threat. Permission seems to be given with no thought whatsoever...
As for attacking the van, I cannot understand this at all. Clearly unnarmed, clearly meaning only to give aid to the wounded. Since when has that been a reason to shoot??
I see no reason to defend the actions of these pilots, they had no reason to panic, no reason for concern, they acted in a calculating manner in order to engage in hostilities.
To my eyes this was neither self-defence, or legitamtely a pre-emptive assualt. Blatant trigger happy warmongering and murder.
There were possibly 2 weapons in a group of what, 15 people? I certainly saw none on the ground in the aftermath... I'm sure there are many people armed for varying reasons int he area. None of them seemed to be acting suspiciously or aggressively.
I can understand firing on people if they are approaching your forces, rallying in numbers and are clearly armed or even openly engaging, but I fail to see why this group needed to be gunned down.
Surely the most appropriate action would have been to report it, observe and send ground troops to the area? If the helicopters felt they were threatened they should move on surely? Instead they hastily request permission to engage over radio, whilst exaggerating the situation to make it appear they are under threat. Permission seems to be given with no thought whatsoever...
As for attacking the van, I cannot understand this at all. Clearly unnarmed, clearly meaning only to give aid to the wounded. Since when has that been a reason to shoot??
I see no reason to defend the actions of these pilots, they had no reason to panic, no reason for concern, they acted in a calculating manner in order to engage in hostilities.
To my eyes this was neither self-defence, or legitamtely a pre-emptive assualt. Blatant trigger happy warmongering and murder.
Firing explosive shells from an attack helicaopter?
Sounds fun to me
Did you listen to the recording? The guy sounds really eager to shoot at the van, it does sound like he thinks it's exciting - sounds like he is enjoying it.
edit: maybe you were trying to be funny?
Did you listen to the recording? The guy sounds really eager to shoot at the van, it does sound like he thinks it's exciting - sounds like he is enjoying it.
edit: maybe you were trying to be funny?
Indeed, all he (gunner) really has to do is look in their direction and press a button. And when you think about the fact that the video that we can see is exactly what they could see they seem to be picking out anything with a strap on it as a weapon. Apparently all weapons on the planet must have straps attached.
How exactly do you expect and apache to collect the wounded?
Out of curiosity has anyon e here seen the recording of the US fighter plane bombing a UK armoured convoy?