It's not like the dude decided to drive his kid to some distant 'combat zone' battlefield somewhere. He was probably just running routine errands in his own neighborhood. The U.S. government has this disturbing pattern of attacking first and checking if the target was actually an enemy to begin with later.
Well, there's your half truths and mis-information. The guys were CLEARLY carrying weapons. Not the reporters, the enemy combatants. All were considered to be hostile, because it's a f'n combat zone. To say that these people had no weapons in beyond mis-information, it's an outright lie.
Com'on man, I know you know better than this, you been there. It's urban warfare. There is no "battlefield". The whole place is a combat zone, and that particular time and place it was hot as hell action going on. If I'm running errands, I ain't gonna' stop and pick up bodies in a frggin' firefight. Sounded to me like these guys, the gunship crew, jumped through some hoops before they started shooting.
Here lies the problem: We are not officially in any wars, Only congress can declare war. They will never declare war because of contract laws (Force Majeure). If we declare war then essentially all contracts become voidable by any party. We have been working under the War Powers Resolution act of 1973. The War Powers Resolution requires the president to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing armed forces to military action and forbids armed forces from remaining for more than 60 days, with a further 30 day withdrawal period, without an authorization of the use of military force or a declaration of war. Congress granted Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists. This is a money pit and grey area. No formal war declaration and an open ended mission also known as Operation Enduring Freedom. This ongoing mission was authorized on September 14, 2001 with the opponents listed as Afghanistan and Al Qaeda.
I agree! The public was hoodwinked again. It's not a war, it's another silly ass police action. Listen, I don't think we belong there. Should we have went in the first place? Tough to say given the intel and state of mind right after 9/11. Did the Bush administration know there were no WMD's? I don't know. What I do know is once we were certain there were no WMD's we needed to leave Iraq and give a clear and simple message. After 9/11, we ain't playing. You talk trash we're coming after your ass. Message would have been clear. Now it's just another clusterf***. All that said, wars, police actions, whatever, will get messy and innocents will die. It's just the way it is, which is why I oppose any type of combat operations unless we are prepared to do whatever it takes to win. That kind of certainty can only be obtained in a just war, and it's been a long, LONG, time since we've had one of those.
I'm fairly certain we have different opinions on rules of engagment. Mine are simple. If I'm not absolutely certain you're not the enemy, then you are the enemy, and I will kill you. There are no rules, no collateral damage, no nothing. That's exactly why I oppose this "war" as it stands now. We cannot justify that type of action in this particular situation. It is not a just war.
From that distance in a moving helicopter I can see why the camera appeared to be a weapon. Had it not been for the notes placed in the video after the fact I would have thought it was a weapon as well. And then there were some of the men that DID have weapons. Standing near armed men in a "combat zone" IS dangerous period. Doesn't matter who you are. And while both children were clearly visible IMO it was NOT clear, from the helicopter, that they were children. The only second guessing I'd allow myself in that situation, with the benefit of hind sight the helicopter crews did not have at the time, is I would have liked to see weapons in hand of the would be rescuers before engaging the van.
All this misses the point. It was not a "combat zone" until the helicopter started shooting people. Even then there was no combat in the "combat zone" except for the helicopter killing non hostile targets. None of these guys even raised a gun, much less fired a shot at any American forces. This wasn't "combat", it was a fcking slaughter. The guys in the van were doing what most any of us here would do. They were driving along and saw dead bodies and hurt people, so they tried to help. They didn't have weapons and sure as fuck weren't hostile. They were doing what any decent person would do, try to help the dude who is shot and bleeding to death.. The the fucking trailer trash gun man says "that's what you get for bringing your child to a battle". WTF?? A battle??? Who is he kidding? That wasn't a battle! That was a slaughter of non hostiles in front of children! Shit like this happening then we wonder why there are national security problems... Not to mention the fact we're paying billions per year for this bullshit. We have no business there, and further we are getting invaded here at home by 3rd world illegals.
Not a cambat zone? Watch the video. There are no other people around, just 2 guys carrying rifles (top center screen, 3:48 in the video) the two "reporters" and a few others. At 4:10 we see a guy peering around the corner with tube shaped object. If you're a 'copter pilot, is your first guess going to be..."gee, that guy is trying to take my picture"? Later we see about 3-4 miltary vehicles come on scene. Even the radio chatter shows it was combat zone.