Army FAIL in Iraq

[asusi]

The United States of America, the land of the free and the equal. Right?

Here is a tricky part, it's about the US army not about America

[/Pi]

[Blindfire]

The United States of America, the land of the free and the equal. Right?

Land of the free and the home of the brave. Nothing in the song about equality.

[EvGa]

Nobody is going to comment on the fact that the journalists were embedded with insurgents? That they found RPGs and AK-47s at the site?

This thread went off topic...

[TheDrop]

^nah, everyone wants to stay ignorant and bash the US and its army. Its SRF afterall

I personally think that the middle east will become a better place to live for everyone if people can become secular and treat islam as regular islam instead of it pervading society up to the point it disrupts everything. I also think that if the world can somehow reduce its dependence on oil, we can get the middle east to start developing like everyone else so they can enjoy things others enjoy. Notice how countries like Korea, Japan, dubai, Switzerland, (insert resource poor country here), etc. are all developed and modernized. If oil becomes obsolete I'm absolutely positive that countries like afghanistan and saudi arabia will modernize and become a regular old country like france or canada.

lolwut

The United States of America, the land of the free and the equal. Right?

Fail lolz

[Reise]

It's funny when people call others tools, while regurgitating the exact words of the sensationalist report from FoxNews. VIDEO GAME KILLERS!

Spoiler!

Does anyone have information that contradicts EvGa's post?

[Evil_Venom]

There is an article on Yahoo about this thing now.

I read a little bit and found out that this happened in 2007. Over the 3 years since this happened I'm sure more things like this have happened. This is war people die in war. Innocent people die guilty people die. In 2 weeks this thread will die as well and nothing more will come of it. There are 6,692,030,277 people in the world and everyone is flipping over 11 people dieing. Get over over it.

[Jstar1]

dubai is a prime example of how a country that runs out of oil is forced to develop its people's brains instead of developing the latest oil pump unless they want to become a third world country.

Nobody is going to comment on the fact that the journalists were embedded with insurgents? That they found RPGs and AK-47s at the site?

This thread went off topic...

Maybe the naysayers just shut up after seeing the hard evidence. I do agree though that after the first barrage of bullets, everything the pilots did was completely wrong. Someone said dishonorable discharge? I agree.

[asusi]

There is an article on Yahoo about this thing now.

I read a little bit and found out that this happened in 2007. Over the 3 years since this happened I'm sure more things like this have happened. This is war people die in war. Innocent people die guilty people die. In 2 weeks this thread will die as well and nothing more will come of it. There are 6,692,030,277 people in the world and everyone is flipping over 11 people dieing. Get over over it.

clearly somebody don't get the seriousness of the situation here. And i won't tell who too

[Snazzi]

^nah, everyone wants to stay ignorant and bash the US and its army. Its SRF afterall

I personally think that the middle east will become a better place to live for everyone if people can become secular and treat islam as regular islam instead of it pervading society up to the point it disrupts everything. I also think that if the world can somehow reduce its dependence on oil, we can get the middle east to start developing like everyone else so they can enjoy things others enjoy. Notice how countries like Korea, Japan, dubai, Switzerland, (insert resource poor country here), etc. are all developed and modernized. If oil becomes obsolete I'm absolutely positive that countries like afghanistan and saudi arabia will modernize and become a regular old country like france or canada.

Canada, regular ?

[Charatsandhu]

It's funny when people call others tools, while regurgitating the exact words of the sensationalist report from FoxNews. VIDEO GAME KILLERS!

Does anyone have information that contradicts EvGa's post?

there's two sides to every argument. just because they have weapons doesn't automatically mean they are terrorists. everyone keeps saying that it's a war zone and they should have known better. but maybe the fact of the matter is that they did know better and brought the guns along for protection. not every arab with a gun is a terrorist.

...

TL;DR There are many factors that influence why the arab world hates america. Not just one, as Charatsandhu likes to suggest. Boy I just can't wait to see Charatsandhu write a bunch of garbage in the face of this if he makes the juvenile mistake of not being able to read properly a 2nd time.

i didn't suggest that it is the only one, i said thats the MAIN one. and in your post i quoted earlier, you start your argument by asking why they bombed us on 9/11, and chose to remain ignorant to the history before that. you asked for a reason, and i gave you one. and then you answer your own question in five parts in your next post, totally voiding your own argument. get your sh*t straight.

[TheDrop]

It's funny when people call others tools, while regurgitating the exact words of the sensationalist report from FoxNews. VIDEO GAME KILLERS!

Does anyone have information that contradicts EvGa's post?

there's two sides to every argument. just because they have weapons doesn't automatically mean they are terrorists. everyone keeps saying that it's a war zone and they should have known better. but maybe the fact of the matter is that they did know better and brought the guns along for protection. not every arab with a gun is a terrorist.

Yes, they brought AK-47s and RPGs for protection...you're getting desperate here...

[Charatsandhu]

Yes, they brought AK-47s and RPGs for protection...you're getting desperate here...

the ak we can clearly see, but that still doesnt look like an rpg.

[Reise]

In the .gif I posted in the spoiler above, picture the guy holding it casually by the trigger guard.

It's loaded in the video (as confirmed by Army statements), so you can see the diamond-shaped warhead pointing upward in the .gif image as he turns to look backward.

[Mindy]

The United States of America, the land of the free and the equal. Right?

Here is a tricky part, it's about the US army not about America

Thought that an army was representing their country i.e America

[Brago]

Get over it, it was 3 years ago. They shoot us we shoot them, its war you would shoot them if you were in that situation to. stop making a big fuss about something that is correct as self defense.

[Snazzi]

Get over it, it was 3 years ago. They shoot us we shoot them, its war you would shoot them if you were in that situation to. stop making a big fuss about something that is correct as self defense.

Yes, we know all that, but its about how they did it.

[DarkJackal]

[_Scarlett_]

there's two sides to every argument. just because they have weapons doesn't automatically mean they are terrorists. everyone keeps saying that it's a war zone and they should have known better. but maybe the fact of the matter is that they did know better and brought the guns along for protection. not every arab with a gun is a terrorist.

That sir is NOT knowing better.

Only idiots bring weapons into a war zone and expect to be taken as non-hostile; It's a war zone, anyone not on your side with a weapon is automatically considered a threat regardless of their intention. What are you going to walk up to them and ask what they're doing, or would you rather be safe than sorry?

Both sides can be blamed here for the mistakes that were made; sadly, stupid can't be fixed.

[EvGa]

Ok, watched it all over again after reading the official reports.

What exactly is all the hype about!???? The questionable comments by the chopper pilots? Give me a break..

-There was small arms fire near the ground forces.
-There was a group of men seen, in the same area as the fire, carrying AK47s and RPGs (confirmed).
-Van pulls in trying to help the enemies, no way for pilots to know that they are trying to help a "reporter". (who is embedded with insurgents mind you...)
-More small arms fire and men seen going into building with weapons.
-Said building gets three hellfire missiles.

Pilots make a few jeers, but nothing that bad really. They are in a combat zone and have to do this shit every day.. of course they are going to lose remorse for the enemy.

The fact the girl was injured is unfortunate.

Stop blowing this shit out of proportion. The pilots acted as they should given the situation and intelligence they received.

DarkJackal, your gif, that hellfire was on it's way when the man walked into view. At one point I think I heard the pilot saying they were 1500+ m away. Apaches can take out targets from almost a mile away.

You guys conveniently forget all the details and jump on the bleeding hearts band wagon. Stop using emotion to jump to conclusions and actually analyze wtf is going on..

[Sharp324]

Remember its always easy being a armchair commander, analyzing everything. They didn't have the liberty to pause, rewind a video 100 times to look at every detail. They had a split second to act and decide what to do, and for you guys saying how they talk, well maybe they are just trying to dehumanizing them? You cant go around killing people and not feel it emotionally less your a sociopath.

[CeLL]

when in fact they're coming for the oil.

heroo, this deserves a facepalm. we only get like3% of the oil we use from there. most of our oil is from our side of the planet. dont falll for this bullshit propaganda.

we cant use that oil for our cars it dosent have enough of what is requuired for use in our cars. now Brittan and the EU maybe, they can use that oil. think/research b4 you speak.

[Doppleganger]

[cpinney]

When a nonprofit group this week released video footage, leaked via a source in the Pentagon, showing a 2007 U.S. helicopter attack on a group of civilians in Baghdad, the clip unleashed a viral online sensation and ignited an intense debate about the conduct of U.S. forces in Iraq.

But the simple fact of the video's release also reflects the ongoing revolution in how news gets produced and published.

The group, called WikiLeaks, released the Pentagon video on Monday. Less than 24 hours later, the clip had netted more than 1.3 million viewers on YouTube alone.

The transmission of information, in and out of regularly authorized channels, has become much more immediate — and far more viral — than at any point in history. Virtually anyone with a browser and a DSL connection can now bring news to light in dramatic and instantaneous fashion. All these trends converged with the WikiLeaks video.

Seven noncombatants were killed in the Baghdad attack — among them a driver (Saeed Chmagh) and photographer (Namir Noor-Eldeen) employed by the Reuters news service. Reuters, indeed, had been seeking to obtain internal Pentagon materials pertaining to the attack — including the footage that went online yesterday — for the past three years, using the Freedom of Information Act. The agency's efforts had so far proved fruitless.

And that's where WikiLeaks came in. The nonprofit website launched in 2006 as an online clearinghouse for whistleblowers seeking to publicize leaked government documents across the world. But prior to posting the video footage, the site had functioned as repository of information; with this latest scoop, which it says came from "a courageous source" within the U.S. military, it has morphed into an investigative news source in its own right. (The full 18-minute video can be viewed — albeit with the clear warning that the material is quite disturbing — at the special project URL that WikiLeaks established for it, under the incendiary name of collateralmurder.com.)

"The material was encrypted with a code, and we broke the code," WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange told wired.com. "In terms of journalism efficiency, I think we discovered a lot with a small amount of resources."

But this was much more than a question of cracking an encryption code from a renegade PC. WikiLeaks also reported the story the old-fashioned way — by sending two reporters to Baghdad to research the 2007 incident. The group says its correspondents verified the story by interviewing witnesses and family members of people killed and injured in the attack. These accounts helped to flesh out the gaps in the official account of the incident; as the materials at CollateralMurder.com explain, the "military did not reveal how the Reuters staff were killed, and stated that they did not know how the children were injured." And now that silence is starting to abate: In response to the release of the WikiLeaks video, the Pentagon has circulated some documents relating to the incident, and MSNBC reported this morning that American soldiers mistook a camera held by one of the fallen journalists for a weapon.

Still, the release of the video has also drawn criticism — not so much for the broader WikiLeaks mission of promoting government transparency, but for the site's failure to supply a fuller context to help viewers better understand what they're seeing. A former helicopter pilot and photographer named A.J. Martinez, for example, has dissected the footage on his blog, and attacked the site's packaging of the footage as misleading — and making it seem like the Apache unit was acting out of cold-blooded malice rather than genuine confusion about a possible ground attack taking shape below. "There are many veterans with thousands of hours experience in both analyzing aerial video and understanding the oft-garbled radio transmissions between units," he writes, adding that it would not be unreasonable for the WikiLeaks staff to solicit such interpretive input for concerned vets. "Promoting truth with gross errors is just as shameful as unnecessary engagement" on the field of battle, Martinez concludes.

Yahoo! News contacted Reuters for comment, and a Reuters spokeswoman directed us to their story on the episode, in addition to providing us with the following statement:

"The deaths of Namir Noor-Eldeen and Saeed Chmagh three years ago were tragic and emblematic of the extreme dangers that exist in covering war zones. We continue to work for journalist safety and call on all involved parties to recognise the important work that journalists do and the extreme danger that photographers and video journalists face in particular," said David Schlesinger, editor-in-chief of Reuters news. "The video released today via WikiLeaks is graphic evidence of the dangers involved in war journalism and the tragedies that can result."

Meanwhile, WikiLeaks appears to be far from done. The group is openly soliciting donations to defray the expenses involved in the upcoming release of another video that allegedly documents other civilian deaths at the hands of the U.S. military, this time in Afghanistan.

(Update: Greg Sargent, at the Washington Post's Plumline, reports that the Pentagon is preparing to issue an official response in the wake of the leaked video, perhaps as early as today.)

[Reise]

Meanwhile, WikiLeaks appears to be far from done. The group is openly soliciting donations to defray the expenses involved in the upcoming release of another video that allegedly documents other civilian deaths at the hands of the U.S. military, this time in Afghanistan.

Oh wow. I can't wait to weather the next storm of ignorance.

[Jstar1]

i didn't suggest that it is the only one, i said thats the MAIN one. and in your post i quoted earlier, you start your argument by asking why they bombed us on 9/11, and chose to remain ignorant to the history before that. you asked for a reason, and i gave you one. and then you answer your own question in five parts in your next post, totally voiding your own argument.

Did I not write in my post that there is no such thing as a "main reason"? Its a combination of many different factors why a lot of arabs hate America. How can you be so clueless unless you didn't read what I wrote? And I'm voiding my argument by answering my own question thoroughly? Do you even know what you are talking about? I voided my own argument by giving a logical answer as to why they hate America and ultimately why they attacked 9/11?

there's two sides to every argument. just because they have weapons doesn't automatically mean they are terrorists. everyone keeps saying that it's a war zone and they should have known better. but maybe the fact of the matter is that they did know better and brought the guns along for protection. not every arab with a gun is a terrorist.

Who on earth carries ak-47s and RPGs for personal protection? Its called a handgun. This is just common sense, I have no idea why you even suggest that someone carries an ak-47 in the middle of iraq for "protection". I think we are done here.

[Disconn3cted]

The first guy appeared appeared to be holding what I would have guessed was a laptop bag, but the other people did appear to be holding guns. I found the way they treated this like a video game horrifying and it explained a lot of things to me. My dad was in the 1st gulf war and is a total nut case. War is sickening and takes away a person's humanity!

edit: For all the people saying, "Its War!" those guys look really nonthreatening for people with weapons with an helicopter flying nearby. I guess we should go around killing everyone who looks like they could have a weapon: college students, business men, camera men. The soldiers aren't evil, they just made a mistake. If they can't tell the difference between a camera and a gun than your army is failing you and you should be concerned.

[TheDrop]

The first guy appeared appeared to be holding what I would have guessed was a laptop bag, but the other people did appear to be holding guns. I found the way they treated this like a video game horrifying and it explained a lot of things to me. My dad was in the 1st gulf war and is a total nut case. War is sickening and takes away a person's humanity!

edit: For all the people saying, "Its War!" those guys look really nonthreatening for people with weapons with an helicopter flying nearby. I guess we should go around killing everyone who looks like they could have a weapon: college students, business men, camera men. The soldiers aren't evil, they just made a mistake. If they can't tell the difference between a camera and a gun than your army is failing you and you should be concerned.

did you read the fucking thread?

There were journalists embedded with insurgents with both AK-47s and RPGs found on scene.

Troops on scene:








http://www2.centcom.mil/sites/foia/rr/C ... CTID=&View
Thread I pulled the photocopies from, plenty more there.
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthrea ... =123592621

Guys were with insurgents carrying rpgs and ak-47s... yea... what did they expect.

fckin hell DC, atleast read the thread before posting crap

[Disconn3cted]

It still doesn't change anything. Just because they had weapons doesn't mean they should open fire on someone who is trying to rescue them.

[TheDrop]

It still doesn't change anything. Just because they had weapons doesn't mean they should open fire on someone who is trying to rescue them.

who was trying to rescue them? completely lost me there