US attack on Iraqis, intentional?

[Night Strike]

I've only read the last few pages, but I don't think anyone has posted how the military has questioned the compilation of this posted film. They claim parts have been selectively edited to portray the military of doing wrong, and purposefully excluding clear footage of an RPG.

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- WikiLeaks, the self-proclaimed "whistle-blowing" investigative Web site, released a classified military video Monday that it says shows the "indiscriminate slaying" of innocent Iraqis. Two days later, questions linger about just how much of the story WikiLeaks decided to tell.

At a press conference in Washington, D.C., WikiLeaks accused U.S. soldiers of killing 25 civilians, including two Reuters journalists, during a July 12, 2007, attack in New Baghdad. The Web site titled the video "Collateral Murder," and said the killings represented "another day at the office" for the U.S. Army.

The military has always maintained the attacks near Baghdad were justified, saying investigations conducted after the incident showed 11 people were killed during a "continuation of hostile activity." The military also admits two misidentified Reuters cameramen were among the dead.

WikiLeaks said on Monday the video taken from an Army helicopter shows the men were walking through a courtyard and did nothing to provoke the attack. Their representatives said when the military mistook cameras for weapons, U.S. personnel killed everyone in sight and have attempted to cover up the murders ever since.

The problem, according to many who have viewed the video, is that WikiLeaks appears to have done selective editing that tells only half the story. For instance, the Web site takes special care to slow down the video and identify the two photographers and the cameras they are carrying.

However, the Web site does not slow down the video to show that at least one man in that group was carrying a rocket-propelled grenade launcher, a clearly visible weapon that runs nearly two-thirds the length of his body.

WikiLeaks also does not point out that at least one man was carrying an AK-47 assault rifle. He is seen swinging the weapon below his waist while standing next to the man holding the RPG.

"It gives you a limited perspective," said Capt. Jack Hanzlik, a spokesman for U.S. Central Command. "The video only tells you a portion of the activity that was happening that day. Just from watching that video, people cannot understand the complex battles that occurred. You are seeing only a very narrow picture of the events."

Hanzlik said images gathered during a military investigation of the incident show multiple weapons around the dead bodies in the courtyard, including at least three RPGs.

"Our forces were engaged in combat all that day with individuals that fit the description of the men in that video. Their age, their weapons, and the fact that they were within the distance of the forces that had been engaged made it apparent these guys were potentially a threat," Hanzlik said.

Military officials have also pointed out that the men in the video are the only people visible on those streets. That indicated something was going on and that these individuals still felt they could walk freely, one official told Fox News.

Julian Assange, a WikiLeaks editor, acknowledged to Fox News in an interview Tuesday evening that "it's likely some of the individuals seen in the video were carrying weapons."

Assange said his suspicions about the weapons were so strong that a draft version of the video they produced made specific reference to the AK-47s and RPGs. Ultimately, Assange said, WikiLeaks became "unsure" about the weapons. He claimed the RPG could have been a camera tripod, so editors decided not to point it out.

"Based upon visual evidence I suspect there probably were AKs and an RPG, but I'm not sure that means anything," Assange said. Nearly every Iraqi household has a rifle or an AK. Those guys could have just been protecting their area."

The military has said Army units on the ground were experiencing RPG fire before calling in close air support. And although it could be argued AK-47 rifles are common household items, RPGs are not.

Assange said video evidence of the cameras was much clearer than it was of the weapons and that military statements about the presence of weapons had already been widely distributed. But critics say those watching the video online or on television for the first time may not have had any knowledge of those statements.

"It's ludicrous to allege that we have taken anything out of context in this video," Assange told Fox News.

Another point of contention comes later in the video when U.S. Apache helicopters open fire on two men in a van who had arrived at the courtyard to carry away one of the wounded. It was later learned that the wounded man was one of the photographers. WikiLeaks argues that attack violated the Army's rules of engagement. However, the military says that because the van had no visible markings to suggest it was an ambulance or a protected vehicle, it was fair game under Army rules.

According to Assange the assault on the van was the most damning piece of video evidence. "I'm very skeptical that was done under the rules of engagement; and if it was legal, the rules of engagement must be changed," Assange said.

So far the rules of engagement in Iraq have not changed.

Hanzlik called the death of the Reuters photographers "incredibly unfortunate." That sad part is, he said, they weren't wearing any markings or jerseys that would have signaled to U.S. forces they were members of the media.

WikiLeaks has another classified military video in their possession they plan to release in about a month. This time, Assange said, the public will see what happened during the controversial May 2009 NATO airstrike in Farah province, where Afghan officials say at least 150 civilians were killed.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04 ... latestnews

[Symmetry]

I've only read the last few pages, but I don't think anyone has posted how the military has questioned the compilation of this posted film. They claim parts have been selectively edited to portray the military of doing wrong, and purposefully excluding clear footage of an RPG.

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- WikiLeaks, the self-proclaimed "whistle-blowing" investigative Web site, released a classified military video Monday that it says shows the "indiscriminate slaying" of innocent Iraqis. Two days later, questions linger about just how much of the story WikiLeaks decided to tell.

At a press conference in Washington, D.C., WikiLeaks accused U.S. soldiers of killing 25 civilians, including two Reuters journalists, during a July 12, 2007, attack in New Baghdad. The Web site titled the video "Collateral Murder," and said the killings represented "another day at the office" for the U.S. Army.

The military has always maintained the attacks near Baghdad were justified, saying investigations conducted after the incident showed 11 people were killed during a "continuation of hostile activity." The military also admits two misidentified Reuters cameramen were among the dead.

WikiLeaks said on Monday the video taken from an Army helicopter shows the men were walking through a courtyard and did nothing to provoke the attack. Their representatives said when the military mistook cameras for weapons, U.S. personnel killed everyone in sight and have attempted to cover up the murders ever since.

The problem, according to many who have viewed the video, is that WikiLeaks appears to have done selective editing that tells only half the story. For instance, the Web site takes special care to slow down the video and identify the two photographers and the cameras they are carrying.

However, the Web site does not slow down the video to show that at least one man in that group was carrying a rocket-propelled grenade launcher, a clearly visible weapon that runs nearly two-thirds the length of his body.

WikiLeaks also does not point out that at least one man was carrying an AK-47 assault rifle. He is seen swinging the weapon below his waist while standing next to the man holding the RPG.

"It gives you a limited perspective," said Capt. Jack Hanzlik, a spokesman for U.S. Central Command. "The video only tells you a portion of the activity that was happening that day. Just from watching that video, people cannot understand the complex battles that occurred. You are seeing only a very narrow picture of the events."

Hanzlik said images gathered during a military investigation of the incident show multiple weapons around the dead bodies in the courtyard, including at least three RPGs.

"Our forces were engaged in combat all that day with individuals that fit the description of the men in that video. Their age, their weapons, and the fact that they were within the distance of the forces that had been engaged made it apparent these guys were potentially a threat," Hanzlik said.

Military officials have also pointed out that the men in the video are the only people visible on those streets. That indicated something was going on and that these individuals still felt they could walk freely, one official told Fox News.

Julian Assange, a WikiLeaks editor, acknowledged to Fox News in an interview Tuesday evening that "it's likely some of the individuals seen in the video were carrying weapons."

Assange said his suspicions about the weapons were so strong that a draft version of the video they produced made specific reference to the AK-47s and RPGs. Ultimately, Assange said, WikiLeaks became "unsure" about the weapons. He claimed the RPG could have been a camera tripod, so editors decided not to point it out.

"Based upon visual evidence I suspect there probably were AKs and an RPG, but I'm not sure that means anything," Assange said. Nearly every Iraqi household has a rifle or an AK. Those guys could have just been protecting their area."

The military has said Army units on the ground were experiencing RPG fire before calling in close air support. And although it could be argued AK-47 rifles are common household items, RPGs are not.

Assange said video evidence of the cameras was much clearer than it was of the weapons and that military statements about the presence of weapons had already been widely distributed. But critics say those watching the video online or on television for the first time may not have had any knowledge of those statements.

"It's ludicrous to allege that we have taken anything out of context in this video," Assange told Fox News.

Another point of contention comes later in the video when U.S. Apache helicopters open fire on two men in a van who had arrived at the courtyard to carry away one of the wounded. It was later learned that the wounded man was one of the photographers. WikiLeaks argues that attack violated the Army's rules of engagement. However, the military says that because the van had no visible markings to suggest it was an ambulance or a protected vehicle, it was fair game under Army rules.

According to Assange the assault on the van was the most damning piece of video evidence. "I'm very skeptical that was done under the rules of engagement; and if it was legal, the rules of engagement must be changed," Assange said.

So far the rules of engagement in Iraq have not changed.

Hanzlik called the death of the Reuters photographers "incredibly unfortunate." That sad part is, he said, they weren't wearing any markings or jerseys that would have signaled to U.S. forces they were members of the media.

WikiLeaks has another classified military video in their possession they plan to release in about a month. This time, Assange said, the public will see what happened during the controversial May 2009 NATO airstrike in Farah province, where Afghan officials say at least 150 civilians were killed.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04 ... latestnews

Ah Fox News- Wikileaks release an edited and an unedited version of the video. It's a shame that the article was misleading for you. I'd advise sending them an e-mail pointing out their mistake and asking that they be be more clear in the future.

[Phatscotty]

You don't know much about terrorism, do you? Let me put it this way...a ROUTINE method that terrorists use is to set off a bomb (say, in a building) so that when workers and others come to rescue those people, another bomb will go off...and often followed by a third.

You claim they are "no danger" and yet, a terrorist would seriously have no qualms at all about using an ambulance as cover to try to get a better shot at opposing troops.

In fact, that's precisely a problem we run into...we try to follow the Geneva Conventions for how a battle is supposed to be waged, but it's almost impossible due to the enemy not being willing to follow them themselves.

Also Geneva convention rules only apply to recognized uniformed military combatants. NOT TERRORIST ASSHOLES.

Sure, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't still TRY to adhere to those codes. Those codes are actually far more important for the well-being of OUR military personnel from a psychological perspective than they are for the enemy. By knowing that you're following the rules for warfare that have been laid out as "acceptable", it's much easier for you to avoid a lot of the pitfalls that arise from the guilt associated with the actual things you have to do. That's why even in this sort of a situation, we should TRY to follow them, for the benefit of OUR troops.

When you play by the rules with cheaters, you usually lose

That's quite simply NOT true. In fact, I would go so far as to say that the opposite is true. For instance, did we really lose World War II, because I don't remember reading that we lost that war.

I won't play until you also add where the "cheating" comes into that analogy....you don't have to get too technical, because you won't surprise me with anything, so long as it is honest examples "1 cheating, 1 playing by rules"

[Uncle Death]

It's our tax dollars at work. A journalist I know made this comment which I agree with and probably only a few of you will as well:

"Clearly, the invasion is like an effing video game to some of these guys. It's been going on for seven years now, and I'm (not) wondering where is the outrage -- a fascist state has to fetishize military service, wrapping it all up in religious/racist/patriotic/macho packaging so few dare to criticize. The tea partiers claim they're about financial responsibility, well, here's a great example of a wasted couple trillion dollars.
But no special federal prosecutor looking at Dick Cheney."

[THORNHEART]

It's our tax dollars at work. A journalist I know made this comment which I agree with and probably only a few of you will as well:

"Clearly, the invasion is like an effing video game to some of these guys. It's been going on for seven years now, and I'm (not) wondering where is the outrage -- a fascist state has to fetishize military service, wrapping it all up in religious/racist/patriotic/macho packaging so few dare to criticize. The tea partiers claim they're about financial responsibility, well, here's a great example of a wasted couple trillion dollars.
But no special federal prosecutor looking at Dick Cheney."

um dude you are so far out of the picture here.

I love that you brought up fascist state...you wouldnt be meaning saddam control iraq right...or cuba or iran or venuzuela or north korea or vietnam right? OH yeah srry my bad your talking about the horrible terrible usa...your a FUCKING moron

[TheProwler]

The callous remarks by the gunner just demonstrates the mental state that most people would have to enter to do the job of killing other people. If he said "Shit, I think I just killed some kids. I'm an evil bastard." then he wouldn't be able to do his job.

No, that's simply not true. Do they have to become detached? Of course. But if they're so detached that they're reveling in having killed children that were not a threat (some children ARE a threat, sadly), then they MUST be removed from the situation.

You are exaggerating what actually happened. They didn't see that there were children there until after the children were dead. And they were not "reveling" in it. So they did not display that they are "so detached" as you described.
You should really think before you spout off "No, that's simply not true." What I said is very true and you just tried to twist it with exaggeration.

No, I definitely did not exaggerate anything. It is absolutely NOT necessary to be able to make the sort of statements that you put in quotes in order ot be able to do that job. As well, their having not known there were children there until after the children were dead has NOTHING AT ALL to do with whether or not they were reveling in what they had done (the reveling being done after the fact, in that case).

Don't get me wrong...in general, I agree with the gist of what you're saying, because they do have to detach themselves in order for self-preservation. But it's not necessary for them to go to that length.

This boils down to you claiming that the soldiers "reveled" in having killed children. What did they say that would be considered "reveling" with regards to the children?

Quick edit: They said "Well it's their fault for bringing their kids into a battle." "That's right."

It might just be a matter of opinion, but I hardly consider that reveling. I suppose you do...which I find surprising. Because the tone in which they said it didn't express any sense of happiness.

[TheProwler]

again i listen same words-COmbat area-combat zone?
Can someon explane to me what its Combat area?
Its look that,like i say previous,every city,or every streets in Iraq can be Combat zone.
Ofcourse for iraq people who live in these streets,they risk lives,but for US soldiers its good word to say "What civilians doing in combat zone".
I can not imagine,that every civilian in iraq need to dig bunker,to hide when US soldiers go to search for terorist. But from other side, maybe some of these civilian will be alive today,if they hide and use bunker every time when US come to search for terorist.

It's a combat zone when people with machine guns and RPGs are gathering.

[TheProwler]

I've only read the last few pages, but I don't think anyone has posted how the military has questioned the compilation of this posted film. They claim parts have been selectively edited to portray the military of doing wrong, and purposefully excluding clear footage of an RPG.

It's apparent that WikiLeaks is just trying to build their reputation while tarnishing the US military's reputation further.

As I pointed out, they actually did very clearly show people with weapons. Look at the short film at 3:42-3:47...the men at the top of the screen. AK47 and RPG...in plain site. So even with their creative editing, they still showed that the military acted properly.

[Woodruff]

Sure, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't still TRY to adhere to those codes. Those codes are actually far more important for the well-being of OUR military personnel from a psychological perspective than they are for the enemy. By knowing that you're following the rules for warfare that have been laid out as "acceptable", it's much easier for you to avoid a lot of the pitfalls that arise from the guilt associated with the actual things you have to do. That's why even in this sort of a situation, we should TRY to follow them, for the benefit of OUR troops.

When you play by the rules with cheaters, you usually lose

That's quite simply NOT true. In fact, I would go so far as to say that the opposite is true. For instance, did we really lose World War II, because I don't remember reading that we lost that war.

I won't play until you also add where the "cheating" comes into that analogy....you don't have to get too technical, because you won't surprise me with anything, so long as it is honest examples "1 cheating, 1 playing by rules"

Do you actually need me to list the well-documented atrocities committed by the Japanese, or do you want to just quit with the delaying tactics and admit you made a statement that just doesn't hold up under scrutiny?

[Woodruff]

It's our tax dollars at work. A journalist I know made this comment which I agree with and probably only a few of you will as well:

"Clearly, the invasion is like an effing video game to some of these guys.

I think it's particularly clear that neither the journalist nor yourself has ever been in combat. This right here is an idiotic statement.

[Woodruff]

The callous remarks by the gunner just demonstrates the mental state that most people would have to enter to do the job of killing other people. If he said "Shit, I think I just killed some kids. I'm an evil bastard." then he wouldn't be able to do his job.

No, that's simply not true. Do they have to become detached? Of course. But if they're so detached that they're reveling in having killed children that were not a threat (some children ARE a threat, sadly), then they MUST be removed from the situation.

You are exaggerating what actually happened. They didn't see that there were children there until after the children were dead. And they were not "reveling" in it. So they did not display that they are "so detached" as you described.
You should really think before you spout off "No, that's simply not true." What I said is very true and you just tried to twist it with exaggeration.

No, I definitely did not exaggerate anything. It is absolutely NOT necessary to be able to make the sort of statements that you put in quotes in order ot be able to do that job. As well, their having not known there were children there until after the children were dead has NOTHING AT ALL to do with whether or not they were reveling in what they had done (the reveling being done after the fact, in that case).

Don't get me wrong...in general, I agree with the gist of what you're saying, because they do have to detach themselves in order for self-preservation. But it's not necessary for them to go to that length.

This boils down to you claiming that the soldiers "reveled" in having killed children. What did they say that would be considered "reveling" with regards to the children?

Quick edit: They said "Well it's their fault for bringing their kids into a battle." "That's right."

It might just be a matter of opinion, but I hardly consider that reveling. I suppose you do...which I find surprising. Because the tone in which they said it didn't express any sense of happiness.

No, I wasn't referring to that quote. I was referring to the too-light "evil bastard" quote.

[TheProwler]

This is getting too convoluted.

I said:

"The callous remarks by the gunner just demonstrates the mental state that most people would have to enter to do the job of killing other people. If he said "Shit, I think I just killed some kids. I'm an evil bastard." then he wouldn't be able to do his job."


I was simply saying that if they felt a bunch of guilt for unintentionally killing some kids, then they wouldn't be able to continue performing their job properly. They would be too hesitant to open fire in some situations where they should. Period.


You said "No, that's simply not true." Then you started to talk about "reveling" in having killed children which had nothing to do with what they actually said, or with the "evil bastard" quote.


So, what exactly about my statement did you mean was "simply not true"?

[Uncle Death]

It's our tax dollars at work. A journalist I know made this comment which I agree with and probably only a few of you will as well:

"Clearly, the invasion is like an effing video game to some of these guys. It's been going on for seven years now, and I'm (not) wondering where is the outrage -- a fascist state has to fetishize military service, wrapping it all up in religious/racist/patriotic/macho packaging so few dare to criticize. The tea partiers claim they're about financial responsibility, well, here's a great example of a wasted couple trillion dollars.
But no special federal prosecutor looking at Dick Cheney."

um dude you are so far out of the picture here.

I love that you brought up fascist state...you wouldnt be meaning saddam control iraq right...or cuba or iran or venuzuela or north korea or vietnam right? OH yeah srry my bad your talking about the horrible terrible usa...your a FUCKING moron

No, you are a fucking moron with no clue about what real war is like. You are a little bitch that wouldn't even survive boot camp let alone going to war. I have my father's account and my uncles's accounts of what war is like when they served in the Pacific in WW2. My Dad was with MacArthur in Tokyo Harbor when the Japanese surrendered. My Uncle survived 2 landings as a Marine and died blind due to the wounds he took. They killed their share of men and never were as callous about it as these soldiers were safe in their choppers gunning down non-combatants and children. I talked to my Dad about this and his reaction was that these guys who did this were sick.

I really don't know why I bother. Maybe I am a moron for wasting my time posting in these forums that appear to be mostly populated by little boys like you who have no idea what the real world is like. You are a joke. You have no life experience but yammer on like you do. You have no fucking clue dummy. We both know that you are a worthless little shit that only feels big by repeating the hate speech and ignorance that all your kind do. I've read enough of your posts to know that you are an insignificant little turd who knows nothing of the world and will never know anything of the world. Now go tell your Mommy to make you some more cheesy puffs and f*ck off and die.

[TheProwler]

There nothing like homemade cheesy puffs.

[jaimito101]

It's our tax dollars at work. A journalist I know made this comment which I agree with and probably only a few of you will as well:

"Clearly, the invasion is like an effing video game to some of these guys. It's been going on for seven years now, and I'm (not) wondering where is the outrage -- a fascist state has to fetishize military service, wrapping it all up in religious/racist/patriotic/macho packaging so few dare to criticize. The tea partiers claim they're about financial responsibility, well, here's a great example of a wasted couple trillion dollars.
But no special federal prosecutor looking at Dick Cheney."

um dude you are so far out of the picture here.

I love that you brought up fascist state...you wouldnt be meaning saddam control iraq right...or cuba or iran or venuzuela or north korea or vietnam right? OH yeah srry my bad your talking about the horrible terrible usa...your a FUCKING moron

No, you are a fucking moron with no clue about what real war is like. You are a little bitch that wouldn't even survive boot camp let alone going to war. I have my father's account and my uncles's accounts of what war is like when they served in the Pacific in WW2. My Dad was with MacArthur in Tokyo Harbor when the Japanese surrendered. My Uncle survived 2 landings as a Marine and died blind due to the wounds he took. They killed their share of men and never were as callous about it as these soldiers were safe in their choppers gunning down non-combatants and children. I talked to my Dad about this and his reaction was that these guys who did this were sick.

I really don't know why I bother. Maybe I am a moron for wasting my time posting in these forums that appear to be mostly populated by little boys like you who have no idea what the real world is like. You are a joke. You have no life experience but yammer on like you do. You have no fucking clue dummy. We both know that you are a worthless little shit that only feels big by repeating the hate speech and ignorance that all your kind do. I've read enough of your posts to know that you are an insignificant little turd who knows nothing of the world and will never know anything of the world. Now go tell your Mommy to make you some more cheesy puffs and f*ck off and die.

i second this.

its a one way street here, most the guys responding this thread have their own locked beliefs and don't dare to stray from their JAYy America thoughts. I say to them, imagine what your reaction would be if you were on the receiving end of this. What would you think if iraqui's did this on US territority while fighting "armed terrorists" in a self proclaimed war you had not asked for. Would they be wrong then?

[TheProwler]

i second this.

its a one way street here, most the guys responding this thread have their own locked beliefs and don't dare to stray from their JAYy America thoughts. I say to them, imagine what your reaction would be if you were on the receiving end of this. What would you think if iraqui's did this on US territority while fighting "armed terrorists" in a self proclaimed war you had not asked for. Would they be wrong then?

So if this were the case, would you be the guy walking around the streets with an assault rifle? Or would you carry the RPG?

The complaint here was aimed at the soldiers, who did nothing wrong. The complaint was not directed at the policies of the US government. These are two separate issues. If you are saying "See what is going to happen when the government decides to occupy other countries in this way!", well, fine. It is as expected. Complain away. Just don't point the finger at the soldiers who are doing their job.

With respect to the men who fought in WWII, the situation in Iraq is quite different than what they faced.

[Night Strike]

No, you are a fucking moron with no clue about what real war is like. You are a little bitch that wouldn't even survive boot camp let alone going to war. I have my father's account and my uncles's accounts of what war is like when they served in the Pacific in WW2. My Dad was with MacArthur in Tokyo Harbor when the Japanese surrendered. My Uncle survived 2 landings as a Marine and died blind due to the wounds he took. They killed their share of men and never were as callous about it as these soldiers were safe in their choppers gunning down non-combatants and children. I talked to my Dad about this and his reaction was that these guys who did this were sick.

To be fair, this IS a real war, but it's also NOTHING like the wars of the past century. The enemy no longer wears the uniform of their country as they march across open land. They fight as cowards in civilian clothes in populated areas. They claim that being killed for their beliefs is the highest honor, yet they hide behind women and children for protect. It's the TERRORISTS who are the sick ones, not the US military.

[targetman377]

Nice read. Interesting views. targetman is correct too

My last opinion on this.

This is not a conflict between the armed forces of recognized or established countries. It is a war against terrorism. Against those who do not fight by accepted rules of combat. IE. Geneva convention.

These are people that strap bombs on their backs. On childrens backs. Drive car bombs. That fight in civilian clothing. They snipe and bomb and go back home and pretend to be something else.

Normal Rules of combat and protocol and GC rules really do not apply.

The United States military at least has protocol's and rules of engagement that attempts to identify and protect non combatants.

Unlike the Soviets in Afghanistan. Unlike Al Qaeda.

i agree with JEFJEF!!!!! what its the END OF THE WORLD!!!!!!

[targetman377]

You don't know much about terrorism, do you? Let me put it this way...a ROUTINE method that terrorists use is to set off a bomb (say, in a building) so that when workers and others come to rescue those people, another bomb will go off...and often followed by a third.

You claim they are "no danger" and yet, a terrorist would seriously have no qualms at all about using an ambulance as cover to try to get a better shot at opposing troops.

In fact, that's precisely a problem we run into...we try to follow the Geneva Conventions for how a battle is supposed to be waged, but it's almost impossible due to the enemy not being willing to follow them themselves.

Also Geneva convention rules only apply to recognized uniformed military combatants. NOT TERRORIST ASSHOLES.

Sure, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't still TRY to adhere to those codes. Those codes are actually far more important for the well-being of OUR military personnel from a psychological perspective than they are for the enemy. By knowing that you're following the rules for warfare that have been laid out as "acceptable", it's much easier for you to avoid a lot of the pitfalls that arise from the guilt associated with the actual things you have to do. That's why even in this sort of a situation, we should TRY to follow them, for the benefit of OUR troops.

When you play by the rules with cheaters, you usually lose

That's quite simply NOT true. In fact, I would go so far as to say that the opposite is true. For instance, did we really lose World War II, because I don't remember reading that we lost that war.

WAIT u actually think we played by the rules all the time Woodruff i expect more from you.

[THORNHEART]

It's our tax dollars at work. A journalist I know made this comment which I agree with and probably only a few of you will as well:

"Clearly, the invasion is like an effing video game to some of these guys. It's been going on for seven years now, and I'm (not) wondering where is the outrage -- a fascist state has to fetishize military service, wrapping it all up in religious/racist/patriotic/macho packaging so few dare to criticize. The tea partiers claim they're about financial responsibility, well, here's a great example of a wasted couple trillion dollars.
But no special federal prosecutor looking at Dick Cheney."

um dude you are so far out of the picture here.

I love that you brought up fascist state...you wouldnt be meaning saddam control iraq right...or cuba or iran or venuzuela or north korea or vietnam right? OH yeah srry my bad your talking about the horrible terrible usa...your a FUCKING moron

No, you are a fucking moron with no clue about what real war is like. You are a little bitch that wouldn't even survive boot camp let alone going to war. I have my father's account and my uncles's accounts of what war is like when they served in the Pacific in WW2. My Dad was with MacArthur in Tokyo Harbor when the Japanese surrendered. My Uncle survived 2 landings as a Marine and died blind due to the wounds he took. They killed their share of men and never were as callous about it as these soldiers were safe in their choppers gunning down non-combatants and children. I talked to my Dad about this and his reaction was that these guys who did this were sick.

I really don't know why I bother. Maybe I am a moron for wasting my time posting in these forums that appear to be mostly populated by little boys like you who have no idea what the real world is like. You are a joke. You have no life experience but yammer on like you do. You have no fucking clue dummy. We both know that you are a worthless little shit that only feels big by repeating the hate speech and ignorance that all your kind do. I've read enough of your posts to know that you are an insignificant little turd who knows nothing of the world and will never know anything of the world. Now go tell your Mommy to make you some more cheesy puffs and f*ck off and die.

Then leave and go live in cuba or iran...I'm sure its very nice over there...They would never kill or arrest an innocent person...Oh wait there is some real estate I heard about availible in china...I guess they stole this chruches land and are trying to sell..anyways

Your a fucking pussy my friend...If you want to list family trees...

Well My great grandpa came over to the usa My Grandpa on my dads side was chief warrent officer for the entire usa coast guard. My other Grandpa on my moms side is a vietnam war hero wounded 3 times. My uncle is a Major in the usmc. My Cussin brook his foot in OCT so he couldn't finish there. My Dad is a politcal and miliatry history major and has 2 degrees in that and taught in schools...I went To ALERT accademy and passed their boot camp which is on par with marine boot camp as inspected by some marine officers.

I think I come from decent stock. YOUR just a pussy.

[Woodruff]

This is getting too convoluted.

I said:
"The callous remarks by the gunner just demonstrates the mental state that most people would have to enter to do the job of killing other people. If he said "Shit, I think I just killed some kids. I'm an evil bastard." then he wouldn't be able to do his job."

I was simply saying that if they felt a bunch of guilt for unintentionally killing some kids, then they wouldn't be able to continue performing their job properly. They would be too hesitant to open fire in some situations where they should. Period.

You said "No, that's simply not true." Then you started to talk about "reveling" in having killed children which had nothing to do with what they actually said, or with the "evil bastard" quote.

So, what exactly about my statement did you mean was "simply not true"?

Ah, I'm glad you did this...because in looking back at that post of yours that I was responding to, I mis-read it a bit. Where you said "IF HE SAID", I read "IF HE DIDN'T SAY". So...my bad, from that point forward. My misunderstanding.

[Woodruff]

It's our tax dollars at work. A journalist I know made this comment which I agree with and probably only a few of you will as well:

"Clearly, the invasion is like an effing video game to some of these guys. It's been going on for seven years now, and I'm (not) wondering where is the outrage -- a fascist state has to fetishize military service, wrapping it all up in religious/racist/patriotic/macho packaging so few dare to criticize. The tea partiers claim they're about financial responsibility, well, here's a great example of a wasted couple trillion dollars.
But no special federal prosecutor looking at Dick Cheney."

um dude you are so far out of the picture here.

I love that you brought up fascist state...you wouldnt be meaning saddam control iraq right...or cuba or iran or venuzuela or north korea or vietnam right? OH yeah srry my bad your talking about the horrible terrible usa...your a FUCKING moron

No, you are a fucking moron with no clue about what real war is like. You are a little bitch that wouldn't even survive boot camp let alone going to war. I have my father's account and my uncles's accounts of what war is like when they served in the Pacific in WW2. My Dad was with MacArthur in Tokyo Harbor when the Japanese surrendered. My Uncle survived 2 landings as a Marine and died blind due to the wounds he took. They killed their share of men and never were as callous about it as these soldiers were safe in their choppers gunning down non-combatants and children. I talked to my Dad about this and his reaction was that these guys who did this were sick.

I really don't know why I bother. Maybe I am a moron for wasting my time posting in these forums that appear to be mostly populated by little boys like you who have no idea what the real world is like. You are a joke. You have no life experience but yammer on like you do. You have no fucking clue dummy. We both know that you are a worthless little shit that only feels big by repeating the hate speech and ignorance that all your kind do. I've read enough of your posts to know that you are an insignificant little turd who knows nothing of the world and will never know anything of the world. Now go tell your Mommy to make you some more cheesy puffs and f*ck off and die.

i second this.

its a one way street here, most the guys responding this thread have their own locked beliefs and don't dare to stray from their JAYy America thoughts. I say to them, imagine what your reaction would be if you were on the receiving end of this. What would you think if iraqui's did this on US territority while fighting "armed terrorists" in a self proclaimed war you had not asked for. Would they be wrong then?

There's a huge problem with your analogy...Our actual military would be defending us here, not every Joe in the street, which would avoid most of the problems we're having to deal with.

[Woodruff]

Sure, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't still TRY to adhere to those codes. Those codes are actually far more important for the well-being of OUR military personnel from a psychological perspective than they are for the enemy. By knowing that you're following the rules for warfare that have been laid out as "acceptable", it's much easier for you to avoid a lot of the pitfalls that arise from the guilt associated with the actual things you have to do. That's why even in this sort of a situation, we should TRY to follow them, for the benefit of OUR troops.

When you play by the rules with cheaters, you usually lose

That's quite simply NOT true. In fact, I would go so far as to say that the opposite is true. For instance, did we really lose World War II, because I don't remember reading that we lost that war.

WAIT u actually think we played by the rules all the time Woodruff i expect more from you.

Read it again. <sigh>

[spurgistan]

It's our tax dollars at work. A journalist I know made this comment which I agree with and probably only a few of you will as well:

"Clearly, the invasion is like an effing video game to some of these guys. It's been going on for seven years now, and I'm (not) wondering where is the outrage -- a fascist state has to fetishize military service, wrapping it all up in religious/racist/patriotic/macho packaging so few dare to criticize. The tea partiers claim they're about financial responsibility, well, here's a great example of a wasted couple trillion dollars.
But no special federal prosecutor looking at Dick Cheney."

um dude you are so far out of the picture here.

I love that you brought up fascist state...you wouldnt be meaning saddam control iraq right...or cuba or iran or venuzuela or north korea or vietnam right? OH yeah srry my bad your talking about the horrible terrible usa...your a FUCKING moron

No, you are a fucking moron with no clue about what real war is like. You are a little bitch that wouldn't even survive boot camp let alone going to war. I have my father's account and my uncles's accounts of what war is like when they served in the Pacific in WW2. My Dad was with MacArthur in Tokyo Harbor when the Japanese surrendered. My Uncle survived 2 landings as a Marine and died blind due to the wounds he took. They killed their share of men and never were as callous about it as these soldiers were safe in their choppers gunning down non-combatants and children. I talked to my Dad about this and his reaction was that these guys who did this were sick.

I really don't know why I bother. Maybe I am a moron for wasting my time posting in these forums that appear to be mostly populated by little boys like you who have no idea what the real world is like. You are a joke. You have no life experience but yammer on like you do. You have no fucking clue dummy. We both know that you are a worthless little shit that only feels big by repeating the hate speech and ignorance that all your kind do. I've read enough of your posts to know that you are an insignificant little turd who knows nothing of the world and will never know anything of the world. Now go tell your Mommy to make you some more cheesy puffs and f*ck off and die.

i second this.

its a one way street here, most the guys responding this thread have their own locked beliefs and don't dare to stray from their JAYy America thoughts. I say to them, imagine what your reaction would be if you were on the receiving end of this. What would you think if iraqui's did this on US territority while fighting "armed terrorists" in a self proclaimed war you had not asked for. Would they be wrong then?

There's a huge problem with your analogy...Our actual military would be defending us here, not every Joe in the street, which would avoid most of the problems we're having to deal with.

Well, obviously this analogy has an Iraq that was capable of utterly destroying the United States government (presumably allied in this case with Glenn Beck) and used that ability successfully. Blaming Iraq for not having a functioning government or defense authority in 2007 is beyond hypocritical. So, given that this analogy has the Iraqi Red Dawn succeeding, what say you?

[AAFitz]

It's our tax dollars at work. A journalist I know made this comment which I agree with and probably only a few of you will as well:

"Clearly, the invasion is like an effing video game to some of these guys. It's been going on for seven years now, and I'm (not) wondering where is the outrage -- a fascist state has to fetishize military service, wrapping it all up in religious/racist/patriotic/macho packaging so few dare to criticize. The tea partiers claim they're about financial responsibility, well, here's a great example of a wasted couple trillion dollars.
But no special federal prosecutor looking at Dick Cheney."

um dude you are so far out of the picture here.

I love that you brought up fascist state...you wouldnt be meaning saddam control iraq right...or cuba or iran or venuzuela or north korea or vietnam right? OH yeah srry my bad your talking about the horrible terrible usa...your a FUCKING moron

No, you are a fucking moron with no clue about what real war is like. You are a little bitch that wouldn't even survive boot camp let alone going to war. I have my father's account and my uncles's accounts of what war is like when they served in the Pacific in WW2. My Dad was with MacArthur in Tokyo Harbor when the Japanese surrendered. My Uncle survived 2 landings as a Marine and died blind due to the wounds he took. They killed their share of men and never were as callous about it as these soldiers were safe in their choppers gunning down non-combatants and children. I talked to my Dad about this and his reaction was that these guys who did this were sick.

I really don't know why I bother. Maybe I am a moron for wasting my time posting in these forums that appear to be mostly populated by little boys like you who have no idea what the real world is like. You are a joke. You have no life experience but yammer on like you do. You have no fucking clue dummy. We both know that you are a worthless little shit that only feels big by repeating the hate speech and ignorance that all your kind do. I've read enough of your posts to know that you are an insignificant little turd who knows nothing of the world and will never know anything of the world. Now go tell your Mommy to make you some more cheesy puffs and f*ck off and die.

Then leave and go live in cuba or iran...I'm sure its very nice over there...They would never kill or arrest an innocent person...Oh wait there is some real estate I heard about availible in china...I guess they stole this chruches land and are trying to sell..anyways

Your a fucking pussy my friend...If you want to list family trees...

Well My great grandpa came over to the usa My Grandpa on my dads side was chief warrent officer for the entire usa coast guard. My other Grandpa on my moms side is a vietnam war hero wounded 3 times. My uncle is a Major in the usmc. My Cussin brook his foot in OCT so he couldn't finish there. My Dad is a politcal and miliatry history major and has 2 degrees in that and taught in schools...I went To ALERT accademy and passed their boot camp which is on par with marine boot camp as inspected by some marine officers.

I think I come from decent stock. YOUR just a pussy.

Im sure your stock is just fine. You, however may want to go to accademy like yourre cussin thow, because they probably teech yous how two speel.