Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

From WikiLeaks, Collateral Murder

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Originally posted by gunnut View Post
    Who forced who into Superdome? Who stopped the Walmart truck full of water, and when?



    You didn't even see the kid. You expect guys in combat to?

    How would you be an "alleged" insurgent? Were you walking around on the streets of Bagdad in 2008?
    This whole scenario assumed those guys on US streets. Have you lost the thread?

    No, I didn't see the kid but I didn't see danger either. I didn't put my crosshairs on the passenger's side windshield and squeeze.
    Last edited by Roycerson; 07 Apr 10,, 01:50.

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by Roycerson View Post
      This whole scenario assumed those guys on US streets. Have you lost the thread?

      No, I didn't see the kid but I didn't see danger either. I didn't put my crosshairs on the passenger's side windshield and squeeze.
      Context. Context. Look at the context! They shot at the van because the soldiers saw a van full of people that were aiding a wounded insurgent.

      Your scenario is different because no one has labeled you as an insurgent, and you weren't hanging out with armed insurgents, either
      Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

      Abusing Yellow is meant to be a labor of love, not something you sell to the highest bidder.

      Comment


      • #93
        Originally posted by Roycerson View Post
        Dude, I'm young and live in America.
        I think we have found the problem here.

        Originally posted by Roycerson View Post
        Of course I personally know several soldiers. ALL of them laugh about torture and ALL of them believe Innocent Iraqi is an oxymoron or at least rare enough not to matter. You might tell me go out there and talk to soldiers one on one and see what they say when the cameras are off. I have. They say: "I kill people for college money".
        Since you like to split hair, I'll split hair with you.

        "I kill people for college money."

        That term is correct. However, you infer that as "I kill innocent civilians for pleasure." That's a huge difference. Insurgents are people. Non-combatants are people. Uniformed combatants are people. Terrorists are people. "People" covers a wide range.

        You had a problem when soldiers in the video referred to a "gun" as an "AK." AK was too specific for you. You would rather have them use the generic term of "gun" and preferably the make and model along with the country of origin.

        Here, you have a problem when the soldiers you talked to used the generic term of "people." Can you make up your mind on how specific, and when, you want our soldiers to be? When is it OK to use generic terms and when would you like to hear very specific "lawyer" talk?

        Lastly, "for college money." They are professional soldiers. That part is entirely accurate. They did not express joy or happiness at killing "people." They did it because that's their job.

        Would you rather have them say "I kill people for free?" How about "I kill people for fun?" Or would you rather have them "kill innocent civilians for the sheer joy of it?"
        "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by bigross86 View Post
          Context. Context. Look at the context! They shot at the van because the soldiers saw a van full of people that were aiding a wounded insurgent.

          Your scenario is different because no one has labeled you as an insurgent, and you weren't hanging out with armed insurgents, either
          That's right. The soldiers saw insurgents where they should have seen reporters. YOU have not labeled me an insurgent but if I were in the same situation that van driver were in I would have done the same thing and I would be just as dead.

          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by Roycerson View Post
            This whole scenario assumed those guys on US streets. Have you lost the thread?

            No, I didn't see the kid but I didn't see danger either. I didn't put my crosshairs on the passenger's side windshield and squeeze.
            Whoa...wait a second here.

            You said we have soldiers on the streets in America.

            You said you are afraid of American soldiers, because they would shoot you if you render aid to someone bleeding to death.

            You said our soldiers forced people into Superdome.

            You said our soldiers stopped Walmart trucks full of water.

            I merely ask for proof of these allegations.

            Or do you admit that you're just making up stuff to justify your fear of American soldiers in a combat zone?
            "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

            Comment


            • #96
              Because the soldiers identified them as insurgents, not reporters. The cameras were not noticeable, while the weapons, especially the RPG, were extremely noticeable.

              Unfortunate mistake, but that's one of the risks you take hanging out with armed insurgents.

              And yes, you'd be just as dead...
              Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

              Abusing Yellow is meant to be a labor of love, not something you sell to the highest bidder.

              Comment


              • #97
                Lastly, "for college money." They are professional soldiers. That part is entirely accurate. They did not express joy or happiness at killing "people." They did it because that's their job.
                I'm talking about a very specific soldier. Not the ONLY specific soldier I know. But one of them, and a fairly normal one. No, he didn't smile at killing anyone. At the time he was chastising a stranger in an airport for "thanking" him for "serving". That particular soldier did laugh his ass off at the guy and the car battery though.

                The army is sending him to law school now, probably a useful guy to have when you want to find a way to say hooking a guy up to a car battery is OK cuz "we" didn't do it. We let the IA borrow him for 15 minutes while we watched "them" do it (chuckles and sneers). I'll never believe a word he says when he defends a bad shoot. I know him too well.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by S-2 View Post
                  [B]I saw none of that. "Medical personnel"? Really? I saw an unmarked vehicle pull to the scene and attempt to remove a wounded combatant. I don't know that it was "exclusive" or if that vehicle held ammunition, arms and other combatants. I sure didn't see an aid bag or anything remotely resembling medical equipment.
                  Since they were not carryign arms and were carrying a wounded man the presumption should be they are merely rendering aid which is protected.

                  Snide and smarmy. Reads a tad flippant and short-sighted from here.
                  They opened fire on a van and people that were presenting no threat.

                  "...hot shot..."?

                  Aren't you the tough-guy now?
                  Looking on an ittybitty you tube screen I could clearly see they were rendering aid to a wounded man.

                  "...broke the f'ing law..."

                  I don't see that proven. Least by you.
                  I provided the treaty in question.

                  Nothing flippant in my observations. I see no crime. There's more than enough mitigation to make the absence of criminal intent or CONDUCT clear.
                  They are begging permission to fire even after its clear they are helping a wounded man- intent and action.

                  Not true. I'm not implying anything. However, I've little doubt that there are many whom disagree with me WHO ARE ENEMIES OF AMERICA. Others might more closely qualify as unwitting fools/tools. I think there are many here who are bent on absolving those at the scene responsibility for their own demise.
                  The responsibility is laid out by treaty, and we violated it.



                  Get in line. Now if you'd only learn when to use it with accuracy you might have a case. You're no less but no more annointed to such a "right" as myself and I DON'T consider my view of the matter bullsh!t.
                  You should have said that earlier instead of saying anyone who dissagrees with hates America.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by Roycerson View Post
                    That's right. The soldiers saw insurgents where they should have seen reporters. YOU have not labeled me an insurgent but if I were in the same situation that van driver were in I would have done the same thing and I would be just as dead.
                    If I were walking around with a rifle on my back, and there's an armed robbery in progress, and the police has set up a cordon trying to catch the perps, how do you think I would be treated?

                    Just so you know, it is entirely legal in California to openly carry an unloaded firearm in public.
                    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

                    Comment


                    • With all due respect to your views on torture or your friend's moral ethics, that's not what we're discussing here.

                      Can you bring proof to support any of the claims you've laid out before? Gunnut posted a list of 4 of your statements not 10 minutes ago. Where's your proof?
                      Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

                      Abusing Yellow is meant to be a labor of love, not something you sell to the highest bidder.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Roycerson View Post
                        I'm talking about a very specific soldier. Not the ONLY specific soldier I know. But one of them, and a fairly normal one. No, he didn't smile at killing anyone. At the time he was chastising a stranger in an airport for "thanking" him for "serving". That particular soldier did laugh his ass off at the guy and the car battery though.

                        The army is sending him to law school now, probably a useful guy to have when you want to find a way to say hooking a guy up to a car battery is OK cuz "we" didn't do it. We let the IA borrow him for 15 minutes while we watched "them" do it (chuckles and sneers). I'll never believe a word he says when he defends a bad shoot. I know him too well.
                        So this one soldier frames your entire world view of 2 million American soldiers?

                        That's like saying all white people are racist because Robert Byrd was in the KKK.
                        "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by zraver View Post
                          The responsibility is laid out by treaty, and we violated it.
                          Can you please show me how you came to that conclusion. I showed you that in the same treaty you quoted, there clearly is a requirement for a specific insignia in order to qualify for protection as a medic. How do you resolve that?
                          Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

                          Abusing Yellow is meant to be a labor of love, not something you sell to the highest bidder.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by bigross86 View Post

                            Unfortunate mistake, but that's one of the risks you take hanging out with armed insurgents.
                            He wasn't hanging out with armed insurgents. He was two blocks away when the shooting happened. Did you read the article? It's a major metropolitan area! There is no doubt a drug dealer or 3 on my block. My stopping to help a wounded one who I don't know is a drug dealer, just a wounded person on the side of the road does not make me an active participant in a gang war and it doesn't make that guy an insurgent.

                            Are you saying it's no big deal? Not a situation to be corrected? Dead children and reporters and not a single shot fired by them or anyone but US troops and you saying:

                            "That's how we roll. I don't see anything that needs to be corrected here. Should have known better than to try and save a dying reporter".

                            Is that your take?

                            Forgive me, clearly I can expect you and all soldiers to live up to the lowest forms of accountability.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Roycerson View Post
                              I served enough to know that active duty soldiers don't give a damn about Iraqis innocent or not and would rather see the whole place nuked. I served enough to know this wasn't self-defense it was soldiers killing people because they could, that's what soldiers do, they like it.
                              Clearly you didn't serve enough, because I can tell you that we gave a damn (which isn't to say that all do, but a far cry from your blanket statement that implied none do). I had a NCO who had to do a demolition breach to enter a building from which we were being shot at from, cleared the house with a family in it, and while clearing upstairs in one of the last rooms where the shooter could be, entered and secured a room with the shooter. His weapon was off to the side, round chambered, barrel hot, but not a round was fired. The man had taken and held a little kid from the family and used the kid as a human shield. My soldiers didn't fire despite the clear adrenaline rush that they had knowing by the process of elimination that the shooter was going to be in the room.

                              As far as liking it, once again, a far cry from the truth. Maybe a handful of pathological guys that haven't been weeded out as a danger to the mission. Lots of bravado? Absolutely. It's tough to try and process taking another human life, and talking smack is one of the ways in which humans routinely attempt to process and come to grips with their actions. As you remove yourself farther from the kill (like being in an Apache), the easier it is to try and be clinical and detached so as to ease the psychological burden, which is not the same thing as not caring.
                              "So little pains do the vulgar take in the investigation of truth, accepting readily the first story that comes to hand." Thucydides 1.20.3

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by bigross86 View Post
                                Can you please show me how you came to that conclusion. I showed you that in the same treaty you quoted, there clearly is a requirement for a specific insignia in order to qualify for protection as a medic. How do you resolve that?
                                What does it matter? It's not a war with another state. The average joe who works at 7-11 does not have a cross on his car and yet most people think you still shouldn't shoot him when he stops to save a reporter's life.

                                Or again is it a "That's how we roll and the average joe who stops to save a reporters life can expect to die and we should all support those who killed him cuz that's what the American army does and we're proud of it" thing.

                                Not a single soldier in this thread has proposed that it would be better if they had seen there were cameras and kids and not killed reporters and kids. Not one. Obviously innocent people, obviously dead. Not one soldier said...

                                "man.... you gots to be careful where you point your gun in a working city, clean targets clean background people. gee I wish my fellow soldiers were more diligent about that. I like to think we have a higher level of professionalism than to go shooting kids while no other bullets are flying anywhere"

                                not one

                                I mess up in my job every day. I never do anything perfect. And I'm good. Are all you guys so much better that you can't see room for improvement? If you're not unhappy with good enough you will never be excellent and dead kids and reporters are not good enough.
                                Last edited by Roycerson; 07 Apr 10,, 02:24.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X