Wiki leak, slaughter of non hostiles, including 2 Reuters employees on video.

Discussion in 'Politics' started by phenomena, Dec 1, 2010.

  1. <object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value=";hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src=";hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
  2. Arnie


    This has been posted before. Sorry to see those guys buy the farm but they were in a combat zone with enemy soldiers. You can clearly see one of them is carrying a rifle and then one points something at the 'copter from the corner of a building.
  3. This is what I mean about half truths and the mis-information of Wiki Leaks. Anyone with an ounce of intellectual honesty know that this vid shows nothing but another routine combat mission. People die! No shit!
  4. Could you give your definition of intellectual honesty, and use it to comment on your post including the number of ounces (negative numbers would be ok in your answer)?
  5. How do you know all the details and with clarity? Were you there? When did the events took place (on Hanukkah, etc)?
  6. Arnie


    That's just it, there is no "clarity" in a war zone. These guys were among enemy combatants. How the hell were the 'copter pilots supposed to know they were journalists? This video was taken in Falluja, an area of intense fighting.
  7. How on earth were those guys supposed to be considered ''combatants"? They had no guns. They claimed the guy's camera was a gun. Then he radios back to commander that there were "men armed with ak-47s" which was bullshit. They had their children with them for god's sake. How the fuck are you trying to make a case for them being "enemy combatants" and can you please point to which part of the video shows them "combating"
  8. Misinformation?? It's video footage!! Unless you are claiming that they doctored the video then there's no misinformation.

    It's also borderline retarded to call this a "combat mission". "Combat" involves two parties fighting each other. This wasn't a combat mission, this was a slaughter mission. Only one side was fighting. This was a slaughter of a group of unarmed, non hostile individuals.

    If you want to help the cause of national security groping people at the airports isn't going to help, but stopping shit like this will...

    They even killed the guy who was shot on the ground trying to crawl away. They killed the people who came to try to take the survivor to a hospital. Those men weren't armed either!

    The only party spreading "misinformation" is you, by calling this a "combat mission".

    If I was one of those guys, and I survived the attack, OR if I was one of those children I would absolutely become an "insurgent" or "jihadist" if I wasn't one. This is what endangers national security, not wikileaks.

  9. Yes it was a combat mission, and slaughter is what war is all about. Sorry to break that to you, but it is what it is.
    At 3:39 - 3:52 during the vid, the guys center screen were clearly carrying weapons in a combat zone. They were obviously hostile forces. The order of the day is seek out and engage the enemy. That's what happened.
    As to the reporters. If you're going to embed yourself with the enemy, enemy being a relative term, then don't be surprised if you get shot at. That goes the same for those that embed themselves with our troops. Everyone is fair game.
    Shooting the van and the occupants. Again, clearly it was a combat zone. If you're going to drive around with your kid in the van during such operations, well, war is hell and shit will happen. Clearly the gunship pilot had no idea a kid was in the van. What should be noted is how quickly and compassionatly our troops gave aid to that child.
    The video illustrates why we should take great pause before engaging in war with political adversaries. When the shooting starts there is no such thing as collateral damage. Least not if you're intending to win. We're not, so shit like this is a big deal, when in reality, it's just another day in the hell of war. Don't have the stomach for it, then don't go to war.
  10. There were no guns shown at all. It wasn't a "combat zone" until the helicopter started shooting the people. None of the people had any visible weapons and none showed any hostility whatsoever. The van came in long after the shooting was over and was simply trying to collect the bodies and take the wounded for help. They showed no aggression whatsoever, neither did the unarmed men who were killed. War entails killing, but also entails people fighting each other. If only one side is fighting, then that isn't war, it's slaughter. LOL!!! The troops "compassionately" gave aid to the child? The troops also compassionately murdered the child's unarmed, non hostile father in front of her face who was in the process of trying to help wounded people and collect dead bodies. What planet are you on? What you are spewing is the misinformation. Then you are going to accuse wikileaks of misinformation for posting a video of it? How can video footage be 'misinformation'?

    Yes, precisely we shouldn't be at war! We don't have the money for it. We need the troops here, to protect our borders. Most importantly, we have no business there!!

    #10     Dec 2, 2010