It won't affect the war at all. Shit happens, get over it.

>>563242

Why wouldn't liberal lobbyists want to jump on this?

This story is like embarassing facebook comments, except that the comments are by soldiers and the facebook is a helicopter

>>563245
So what if they do? It's not like anyone has the balls to stop the US government from doing anything they want.

>>563255

Whats more interesting is that typing "wikileaks" in google won';t bring up "wikileaks murder video" in the little scroll bar thing and nor will "collateral" both of which were at the top of the list less than 24hrs ago...

its not specific to partisian policy whatsoever, both sides are corp-war happy.

still, every american needs to be reminded that we are fucking killing ppl at a rate of insanity, and what that means IRL outside of expositional rhetoric

>>563255

I'd shoot those fuckers down with my cannon.

>>563226
Can someone please explain to me the apparent controversy behind this? I've watched the onboard FLIR camera with commentary and they were able to identify the group as carrying at least 1 AKM & RPG , and I suppose they made the immediate decision that the camera's the others were carrying did appear to be rpgs/guns.

The one section of the film where you see the photograph journalist sort of peering from behind the wall (seemingly to take a picture with his camera) was mistaken for an RPG being aimed in their direction. It didn't look like an RPG to me, but that action looks like he was aiming something, and it's hard to fault the helicopter crew for taking them as a threat since they had been taking shots just prior to that. It's a shame they had to injury the kids and the journalists, but is this being blown out of proportion?

I'm not really taking sides, but I'm starting to lean on the side of the military personnel in this case. Anyone else have similar rationale conclusions, or am I missing something here?

This happened in 07 the iraqis knew what happened happened three eyars ago

>>563398

thats bullshit

I think the most important question we should be asking ourselves is why the fuck is why the fuck the military can't put a camera in a helicopter that goes beyond 4x or at least does so without distorting the fuck out of the image.

>digg

>>563603
That part only gets shit because the military lied and covered it up.
The actual problem is with the unarmed people in the Van and the guy who was walking by when they fired at a building. (Breaking Geneva and probably their RoE)

>>563642
the helicopter was circling at 40mph at over a mile away

Hey, I see a bunch of guys with cameras down.......wait a minute....

Also, the reporters weren't wearing IR strobes to show that they were friendlies (which may have saved their asses if they did).

And that guy in the van really deserves the "Father of the Year Award" for driving his kids into a warzone, and stopping right underneath where an Apache is firing to pick up a half dead insurgent.

>>563629

Whats bullshit about it? They removed "wikileaks murder video" but left "wikileaks iraq video". Theres no mention of collater murder anywhere.

>>563666

yeah those fucking hajis should just move somewhere to like afgahinstan, not in a WARZONE mirite?

>>563642
(con't from that post XXX.603)

I'm an engineering graduate, i did a project on FLIR cameras and other infrared type devices, this equipment believe it or not isn't particularly advanced yet in terms of resolution capacity yet, and if anything else exists i'm sure it's not production ready yet, this looks like a pretty typical FLIR camera you'd have outfitted on a gunship.

Believe me, if they could afford upgrades or if it was a pressing issue, it's either already under consideration or being thought about, it's not something that would be passively considered, you'd want to have the best technology possible, while still being within budget).

It's in the US Forces best interest to have the most advanced FLIR as well, so they can discern between their own troops and potential hostiles.

>>563666
>AK
People haven't been denying that bro. AK's are common and legal among both civilians and bodyguards in Iraq. (not that the aftermath picture looks like an AK tho)
The Van couldn't really have known it was a "war zone" in the sense of milita fighting (or seen the apache that was easily beyond a mile, likely two away) they do however tend to help each other when it comes to suicide bomb attacks. (not much shooting tends to happen after those, no?)

The Van wasn't a justifiable target.
Nor was shooting the missile when the civvie was strolling by.

>>563686
Hey retard, if a foreign nation is occupying your town would you drive around in a van full of your kids to a spot where a bunch of hicks with guns just got shot up?

>>563666
>And that guy in the van really deserves the "Father of the Year Award" for driving his kids into a warzone, and stopping right underneath where an Apache is firing to pick up a half dead insurgent.

Yeah, what a dumbass. I mean, driving around with his kids in the car in the neighborhood that he lives in? Stupid fucking bastard.

And then, and then, and then...get this...stopping to fucking help somebody whose been shot? Numbskull.

>>563706

see

>>563703

serious question.

>>563703
>would you drive around in a van full of your kids to a spot where a bunch of hicks with guns just got shot up?
You mean he actually could have known it was a war zone before he showed up?
Who's being retarded now?

>>563706
Yes let's totally stop to help a half-dead insurgent, where an Apache helicopter just killed 8 guys, and hope that he doesn't fire on us.

>>563714
So seeing the explosions of 30mm shells, and dead bodies everywhere isn't an indicator enough for you?

>>563716
>Apache helicopter
They couldn't have known that.
All they saw was some guy crawling and possibly some of the corpses.
Again, helping out after some suicide bomber has been around is the right thing to do.

That you're outright ignoring the wrong on the part of the soldiers is rather disgusting by the way.

>>563714
Dead bodies and gunfire = WARZONE

I'm sorry if someone didn't draw a line in chalk signifying that it is a hot area.

Maybe the US troops should have run down there and thrown police tape around for the stupids?

>>563712
uh...would I drive around the town that I lived in? yeah. Would I take my two young children with me rather than leave them at the house alone? yeah. Would I stop and try to help someone that I saw lying in his own blood on the side of the street? I hope so.

>>563723
>So seeing the explosions of 30mm shells
How long after that where they on the scene?
That guy managed to crawl quite a bit in the unedited video before the van showed up.

>>563729
And now you have dead kids.

Your dumb train of logic in a war zone just failed you.

>>563727
Dead bodies and wounded guy = common occurence under the occupation.
But then most non-Americans don't blame them for helping each other.

>>563729

your making up your own questions.. try to envision yourself in his shoes..at that moment. be logical.

HURF DURF I GUESS ALL THESE GUYS MUST HAVE TRIPPED AND SCRAPED THEIR KNEES I SHOULD HELP THEM WHILE THE HELICOPTER OUTSIDE IS STILL THERE LOL

OH MY GOD AHHHHHHHHHH AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

>>563745
And the soldiers are at fault for that, faggot.
Shooting at the Van is against Geneva.
And the Kids survived but wasn't allowed to be brought to the nearby base hospital and where instead handed over to the Iraqi Police.

>>563754
HURF DURF I'M IGNORING THAT SUICIDE BOMBERS (WHO HAVE NO AFTER VICTIMS) ARE A COMMON OCCURENCE IN IRAQ.
I'M ALSO A TOTAL FAG THAT BLAMES THE VICTIMS RATHER THAN THE CRIMINALS.

>>563729
>uh...would I drive around the town that I lived in? yeah
And this is your fatal mistake. If there was a foreign nation in your city, driving around in an unmarked van would be the worst thing you could do next to openly shooting at them.

This is war, you babby. Deal with it.

>>563754

i lol'd IRL.

but seriously, war sucks, some people suck, and its never going to stop. nothing is black and white- its all shades of gray. that is the only truth.

>>563770
>I'M ALSO A TOTAL FAG THAT BLAMES THE VICTIMS RATHER THAN THE CRIMINALS.
The way they where dressing you just -know- they where asking to be shot.

>>563750

helicopter was more than a fucking mile away, he was helping a human being that was shot. Who knows, maybe he thought he had been shot by actual insurgents shooting innocent civilians and not a bunch of blood thirsty teenage hicks shooting innocent civilians,

>>563770
So insurgents are victims now? LOL U GUYS

>>563771
>unmarked van
Because good shit happen to civilians who fake being official medics, amirite?

>>563758
>shooting at an unmarked black van
>guy inside was helping out an insurgent
>no way of knowing what is in the van

So you're telling me, that you could have a suspicious looking van, that you suspect is used by the insurgency, and you aren't allowed to fire on it. No wonder we have started losing wars.....

>>563782
Funny how you liberalfags don't recognize the hors de combat protections our grandparents set out after WW2.

>>563750
>your making up your own questions.
>your
*snicker*
I am not. I am answering the questions that were posed. You and the others defending these irresponsible piece of shit soldiers are however making up your own facts.

>try to envision yourself in his shoes..at that moment. be logical.
I just did.

Also. >>563745
You make it sound like that's okay and somehow my fault for having done nothing wrong.

>>563780
THAT WOULD BE EVEN MORE REASON NOT TO FUCKING HELP THE GUY

holy shit, think before you type

>>563791
>having done nothing wrong.
You're applying everyday situations to a wartime one.

YES, DRIVING AROUND IN "YOUR" CITY WHEN IT IS OCCUPIED BY ANOTHER COUNTRY IS BAD, RETARD.

>>563788

No we started losing wars because our fucking military thinks having mass civilian casualties doesn't fuel the current insurgency.

"Join us in expelling the white devil from our lands before he kills any more of our family"

Suprise suprise having the occupied city/state/country have a highly negative opinion of you leads to more attacks on your army. Its like rocket science!

>>563788
No hostile intention?
No you aren't allowed to fire on it.
Suspicion was never good enough despite what you've been taught.
Sorry.

They got their engagement orders thanks to them saying they where picking up corpses and [this is the imporant part] WEAPONS. This would have likely allowed them to open fire, except it wasn't true, so they commited a war crime.

inb4 Liberalfags complaining about rules of war that where set out by better people than them.

>>563758
Bro, let's say your engaged in combat. You've revealed your position. You're in the helicopter. A van rolls up.
There could very likely be 3 guys holding rocket launchers in the van. In fact, that would be the very first thing that would come to mind for me. The fact that there was a child present, or that the driver was trying to rescue someone off the street, doesn't mean anything, they mix their civilians and soldiers all the time.
Now, I don't want to die, just because I decided at the wrong moment to be a humanitarian. The van could present a threat, and it would have to go.

>>563806
>Soldiers on opposing side turn guerilla and dress as civilians

What now?

>>563723
>>563716
>>563727
>>563771

ITT: conservafags show their compassionate side
>>563795

>>563795

Not every single fucking person is brainwashed by the US Army to be heartless killing machines you fucking idiot. People helping wounded people is something that doesn't register in your mind? Are you fucking stupid?

>>563820
I'm not a conservative. You just need to stop being such an insufferable faggot and realize that during war these things happen.

It's why it is called war.

>>563814
You are aware that they where at least 2.5 miles away, right?
There ain't shit some insurgents could do.
>Now, I don't want to die, just because I decided at the wrong moment to be a humanitarian. The van could present a threat, and it would have to go.
You'll die anyway if your put in front of a honest tribunal.
You do know that most of our rules against War crimes came as a result of hanging Nazis for them, right?

/new/
what kinda game is it?
I wanna play it on my xbox 360

>>563810
you're spot on about the weapons,
but isnt a vehicle engaged in the act of emergency medical recovery, (NOT PICKING UP WEAPONS) an firing on said vehicle a war crime, despite lack of ID markers on it?

>losing wars
>implying the US is losing the war anywhere
If it weren't for the bleeding heart international media and hippies who listen to it we could've just scorched the whole fucking Middle East by now

>>563819

What the fuck does that have to do with anything?

I personally find it hilarious that a satellite a shitload miles away can reveal perfectly my house on Google Earth and the US Military has a crappy black and white camera that can't even zoom in well. Thats contractors for you.

>>563820
anonymous shows his idiotic side

"hurf durf it might not have been soldiers that shot these guys... it could have been insurgents massacring unarmed civilians, in that case its totally safe to have my kids help me haul some bodies!"

>>563845

hgurr durr murrica

>>563843
Yes, that's what I said.
Since the vehicle wasn't picking up any actual weapons it became a war crime.
It's also why they couldn't shoot that wounded insurgent/civilian when he didn't pick up a weapon, since hors de combat protections applied at that point.

>>563852
The US military has to issue thousands of those things.
Google doesn't have thousands of satellites with that quality of camera.

>>563852
aerial photography=/=satellites

>>563857

Yeah those pesky Iraqi's looking after their countrymen. I mean, who does that gay faggot shit? Not America thats for sure.

>>563858
You're telling me you wouldn't like to see the MIddle East erased so we could all stop hearing about their shit? Doesn't matter where you live, I think we're all pretty tired of reading about their antics.

>>563882

>>Their antics
>>American occupation of Iraq

hmmm...

The reality of war. Stop acting like you're surprised this exists just because you now have to watch a video of it, faggots.

>>563874
hell yea you know i put the well-being of half dead possibly hostile strangers above the safety of my 2 children

have you made a single rational thought in your life?

The "reality of war" is that civilians like the journalists die.
The reality of our training is the Van and the missile.
Faggots ought to get their Colonel's boot up their ass so far there wouldn't be anything left to court-martial.

well I wouldn't be surprised if this was just unavoidable collateral damage, It's impossible to keep civilian casualties to zero, also doesn't the military do a lot of long distance missile attacks.

>>563938
Collateral is the Journalists, an honest mistake.
The Van sure as shit wasn't.

>>563924
They won't and you'll just be mad

>>563948
Of course they won't.
If our army still had a lick of honor in it's upper ranks they would though.
Too bad the Army politics is even dumber than our normal politics.

>>563864
so then that point is perfectly clear.

although it certainly doesnt help that the gunmen were frothing at the mouth waiting for an excuse...
but this is the thing the people need to see.
we are engaged in an occupation for natural resources.

if we're going to tout and flag-wave over spreading democracy, we should really do some work on our busted-ass one first.

OF COURSE the rest of the world is fucking sick of us, our national statements are dripping hypocrisy, its utterly abhorrent.
excuses make it more so.

Yes, America is "that guy"

>>563898
Middle East has a history of stirring up shit, killing eachother and everyone, don't play dumb with me. Iraq is hardly a nation to be pitied, they're not exactly a sparkling example of lovely pacifists in modern world history.

>>563978
>not to be pitied
>actions of the army and of their government
>government that took control through a coup
cool story bro.
Maybe you should bring that up next time we go lick Saudi ass on our next oil deal.

Its hilarious how people are always so pissed off when America kills civilians but when we save millions of others with aid from our country no one seems to care. Weird.

>>563978
>a shining example
they dont need to be motherfucker

So you're actually saying that their history of civil and tribal wars (which is SOOOO fucking unique amirite) is justification for the supreme military power in teh world to go stomp on them?
No, of course its altruistic, and not for resources AT ALL

>>564015
dude, do some research about our historic application of foreign aid and where it goes.

prepare to throw up

>>564015
Probably because compared to the rest of the world we give less than many others per capita.
And besides, where you aware that people sent aid money to us during Katrina?
No?
Because that isn't shit that comes up particularly often. (I only learned about it because people where bitching about Haiti aid and someone pointed out they actually gave us help during that)

The van was a valid target. They were picking up corpses and weapons in an area that was JUST fired upon and that had troops heading to on ground.

"OH BUH BUH BUH THE CHILDRENS"

If the Nazis filled their tanks with orphans, is it the Allied force's faults for destroying them and discovering the bodies of the deceased kids?

You guys will no doubt hurf and durf at my post so whatever, go ahead. You won't change how the system and how war works with your crying and whining.

>>564036
Not quoted but what do you mean?
Only shit I know about today is Egypt bribe money and Israel weapons. Anything more?

'MERICA

I Trolololol each time when I see this.

ITT: 4chan trying be moralfags

>>564038
>They were picking up corpses and weapons
They weren't.
The soldiers claims that during the com but the video shows they don't.
Hence why it's a war crime jesus christ read the thread already.
It's been mentioned several times.

Lets not forget why we're in the middle east people.

1.To stabilize the region and fight terrorism
2. To spread democracy
3. To protect our oil interest in the region

however anyone may feel about our objectives overseas, they are important and our well being and security in the future depends on them.

>>564064
Really, you deduced this from the blurry black and white footage with the van obscuring their movements half of the time?

Oh wait, you're hurfing and durfing at me! Of course!

>>564038
Funny you should mention the Nazis.
Most of our definition of War Crimes comes from what they did.
Hence why shooting the unarmed people in the Van who did nothing but pick up the wounded man was a war crime.

ITT: 4chan liberals acting like this is something new.

>>564079
You mean the unedited video that's several minutes long and the people DON'T FUCKING MOVE AWAY FROM THE VAN WHILE THE CORPSES ARE ALMOST A HUNDRED METERS AWAY JESUS CHRIST

These comments on Youtube are hilarious.

Operation
Iraqi
Liberation

>>564093
>>564081
The ancient prophecy has come true!

Funny how liberalfags get pissy about Geneva.
I guess none of you even understand what Conservative actually means?

>>564049
tons man

just check it out, I got a lost going on right now on tabs, the shits not hard to find out about

>>564106
Go cry some more Liberalfag.
The rest of us are trying to preserve the ideals our grandparents handed down.
But concepts like honor are above you faggots.

Pilot had no way of knowing there was a reporter.

No way of knowing there were kids in the car

From his pov there were several men with AKs & possibly an RPG(later confirmed) who were likely involved in nearby attacks on US forces earlier that day or moving to attack them.

Even if he did see the cameras, the lack of any press markings or indication of press in the area would indicate it was likely insurgents filming attacks once again.

The van would be seen as another case of insurgents coming to pick up their weapons and bodies like they have before as it was unmarked unlike aid vehicles should be.

>>564119
>Liberalfag

Wait, I'm a liberalfag? But I'm saying the van was a justified target. How does that make me a liberal?

Oh I get it, more hurf n' durf.

>>564131
Except they didn't actually wait for the Van to do that shit, hence why it was a war crime and utter faggotry after he waited for the insurgent to pick up a weapon.

The reporters aren't being discussed because that's regrettable but understandable.
The Van fucking wasn't. That kids where there is competely inconsequential to anyone but spinfaggots.

>>564119
> concepts like honor are above you faggots

Yes, you are a shining example of purity an light in this degraded and filthy world.
thx for that, I haven't laughed that hard all day.

Ohhhhh god.

>>564119

Thats just it, a concept. I never understood Honor. Why everyone is so wrapped up about it...I particularly hate living in America even though I was born here. All the criticism she gets makes me want to move somewhere else where I don't have to deal with some of the true stereotypes about the USA.

>>564140
>Ignoring the Geneva conventions which was when better people than you outlined what is okay in wars and what isn't.
Sounds like a liberalfag to me.

>war
>complains about lack of honor

SURE IS NAIVE CHILDREN IN HERE

>>564171
You should relax, you're producing amazing amounts of herp and derp.

>>564173
>War has no honor
You do know that we actually had that shit prior to Vietnam, right?
After Korea we started the reflexive shooting instead of sport shooting which leads to more civilian kills and soldier trauma (not as easy to justify to yourself) but it was cheaper when the everyone started using automatic to do so. And much easier to kill people in a jugnle setting like Vietnam.

That you seriously don't understand that makes me do little but despair.

>>564185
Glad to see Liberals still can't argue properly.

>>564197
>implying war before Vietnam was honorable

>>564160

The black van showing up out of nowhere at the insurgent's location was highly suspicious in and of itself.

He didn't want to wait, but he did. We see a man get out of the van and try to gather up the bodies before they are engaged.

>>564212
>implying the average soldier wasn't actually taught boy scout shit before it failed hard on certain counts in Korea and automatics became prominent.

>>564218
Actually no, we see two out of three men get out of the van.
They pick up the wounded man.
And then they're shot.

>>564197
see the Philippines and our "benevolent assimilation"

sorry to wreck ya, but we've been fucked up Imperialist since long b4 the debacle of vietnam

>>564220
Your nostalgiafagging is amazing.

>>564238
Fairly true. soldiers weren't particularly better people for it but the training was different.

The soldiers obeyed the laws of war and the ROEs, and the journalists knew the risks of working in a warzone. Ground units in the area of the group witbh the journalists had been taking fire from small arms and rpgs prior to this engagement. The helicopter crew obtained clearance to fire, and coalition forces that investigated the scene found several weapons and rpgs with the dead bodies. The van had no clear markings to indicate that it was an ambulance or was attempting to provide medical aid, and as such was fair game under the geneva conventions. Had the journalists been wearing something to denote the fact that they were international press members then the incident may not have occurred, but the military was justified on this occasion.

US made it clear in 2003 that carrying an RPG was cause for instant fire from our troops. Anybody who would be within 100 meters of somebody carrying an RPG is either working with the insurgents or too stupid to live.

>>564262
>was fair game under the geneva conventions.
Wrong. The unmarked van did not show hostility as is necessary and the wounded insurgent fell under hors de combat protection.
They broke Geneva when they shot at the Van, it's very simple.

>>564263
>RPG = instant kill
So Iraqi police are fired upon now, faggot?

>>564288
LET'S GO ASK GENEVA AND SEE WHAT HE THINKS ABOUT IT

>>563944
>>563864
>>563845


You are all incorrect. Only clearly marked medical personnel and vehicles have protections under the law of war. Seeing as this was an active combat zone (the military had ground troops en route to do a BDA on the insurgents) that van had no business being there. They could have been gathering weapons, removing valuable intelligence from the bodies, or planting booby traps on the bodies. Even retarded tree hugging pacifists have heard about the IED threat in the middle east, that helicopter HAD to fire on that van in order to ensure the safety of the troops that were approaching the scene.

I see people with camera equipment, and totally appropriate armed escorts for said camera crew.

>>564350
>totally appropriate armed escorts for said camera crew.
0/10 you're super retarded

>>564292
Iraqi police wear uniforms, faggot

>>564288
wrong. from the geneva conventions, all medical installations and vehicles, in order to fall under protected status, must:
(1) Display the distinctive flag of the Geneva Conventions (red cross on a white background)
over the unit/facility and in other places on the unit/facility as necessary to adequately identify it. (The
other emblem recognized by terms of the Geneva Conventions is the red crescent. Emblems not recognized
by the Geneva Conventions but used by other countries, such as the red shield of David by Israel, should
also be respected.)
(2) Mark with the distinctive Geneva emblem (red cross on a white background).
(3) The GWS protects from attack any medical vehicle appropriately marked and exclusively
employed for the evacuation of the sick and wounded or for the transport of medical personnel and
equipment. The GWS prohibits the use of medical vehicles marked with the distinctive emblems for
transporting nonmedical troops and equipment.

>>564359
You mad, apologist xenophobe?

>>563814
>There could very likely be 3 guys holding rocket launchers in the van. In fact, that would be the very first thing that would come to mind for me.

Have you watched the fucking tape? The guys get out of the van and are trying to help the man in, then the van starts turning to drive away, and that's when the helicopter shot them up. Two of the helpers didn't have a chance to even get in the damn van and the helicopter took them out too when they tried running. But yeah, they posed a real fucking threat right?

>>564327
This man makes a good argument.

>>564404
BUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUT THEY WERE SAVIIIIIIING LIIIIIIIIIIIIVES

All of this is based on the "unlawful combatant" shit Bush propagated.
In fact the GCs say that there are two categories of combatant: unlawful and lawful, and - crucially - they have the full protection of the GCs until a competent tribunal has decided otherwise.

What is called here an "unlawful combatant" has the rights of a war prisoner, except that he could be tried for war crimes, but he is still afforded the same status as any war prisoner per the GC.
Andthe crawling man falls under hors de combat.

Under article 3 of the 4th Geneva convention shooting at the Van was a war crime.

Article 3 states that even where there is not a conflict of international character the parties must as a minimum adhere to minimal protections described as: noncombatants, members of armed forces who have laid down their arms, and combatants who are hors de combat (out of the fight) due to wounds, detention, or any other cause shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, with the following prohibitions:
(a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;
(b) taking of hostages;
(c) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment
(d) the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.

Posing a threat at that exact moment doesn't matter.

You take out your enemies when you can.

They will do the same to you.

Current Rules of Engagement in Iraq:
(1) You must feel a direct threat to you or your team.
(2) You must clearly see a threat.
(3) That threat must be identified.
(4) The team leader must concur that there is an identified threat.
(5) The team leader must feel that the situation is one of life or death.
(6) There must be minimal or no collateral risk.
(7) Only then can the team leader clear the engagement.

Before anyone CONTINUES to baaaaw over Geneva just remember that both the US and Iraq are signatories.

"-The black truck is seen on the scene at the beginning of the video and is identified. They were very likely a shuttle vehicle for the armed insurgents, not some random people.

-Reported small arms and RPG fire reported earlier came from the exact direction and area as the armed group of insurgents.

-Left out of the short video, after the ground troops arrive on the scene of the engagement, they again start to receive small arms fire from an abandoned building not far away. They see six individuals with weapons enter the same building. Crazyhorse then fires three hellfire missiles into the building."

>>564442
Unless you are marked as a medic, if you go running out to rescue wounded during a battle, you are a legitimate target.

>>564466
>Van
Or just people buying groceries on their way home.
Seriously, that's weak reasoning if I ever saw it.
>hellfire missiles
Unrelated to them and pretty damn creepy that he didn't wait the 5-6 sec for the Civvie to pass either.

>>564327
>They could have been gathering weapons, removing valuable intelligence from the bodies, or planting booby traps on the bodies.

Yeah, but if you watch the tape, they weren't doing any of those things before the helicopter opened fire. So that's kind of a moot point.

>>564469
Except you aren't, unless you believe and accept Bush's bullshit about unlawful combatants, which no one sane really has.

>>564442
They were not firing at the combatants who were out of the fight, they were firing at the van that was clearly active in a battlezone. The geneva convention states that any medical vehicle will:
They shall bear, clearly marked, the distinctive emblem prescribed in Article 38, together with their national colours on their lower, upper and lateral surfaces. They shall be provided with any other markings or means of identification that may be agreed upon between the belligerents upon the outbreak or during the course of hostilities

>>564453
this is a childish, naive attempt at an argument. First, the rules of engagement vary from area to area and any ROE's for a broad area are often modified to adapt to changing situations. Second, this video was shot in 2007, when the ROE's were different

>>564486
From the video it is impossible to tell exactly what they were doing. If we cannot be absolutely certain that they were not part of the fight from watching it over and over on our computers, the gunner on the apache surely could not be sure during the few seconds he had to engage them.

We should just drop daisy cutters on the whole fucking country. Since the Geneva conventions obviously don't apply to civilians- fuck them all.

>>564493
>they were firing at the van that was clearly active in a battlezone
In their neighbourhood. And battlezone is rather specious in that there wasn't any fighting going on around them. The "clearly marked" medic shit is rather beside the point. They fired at unarmed and non-hostile people as well as the wounded, supposed, insurgent. That shit doesn't fly.
>RoE's change
inb4someonequoteswikileaksLeakedRoE'sfor2007

>>564477


You don't drive up in a black van with your kids inside into an area where you just heard gunfire/explosions.

every iraqi would know this.

Don't even try to say he didn't hear it, because that shit is fucking loud

>>564525
>where you just heard gunfire/explosions.
Rather heavy assumption on your part.
Not like they got there 5 sec after it happened, no?

>>564488
The unlawful combatant bit refers to combatants posing as civilians to gain ingress or egress, conduct espionage, sabotage or aid those who do. You can't wear civies under your uniform and ditch the uniform to escape as a non-combatant. Conducting acts of war in civilian clothes makes you a spy and as such, you have no rights under any conventions.

>>564535


Like I said that shit is fucking loud.

If he got there in time for the video he heard it.

>>564535
It's pretty obvious how the troops work in Iraq.

IF SOMETHING BLOWS UP

STAY THE FUCK AWAY FROM IT BECAUSE IT'S GONNA KEEP BLOWING UP FOR THE NEXT 10 MINUTES

>>564522
Wrong, and wrong. If the van were just chillin the the neighborhood they would not have been fire upon. They approached an area that had just been shot up and started to engage in suspicious activities. As for the ROE's, the engagement had already been commenced before the video was even shot.

>>564540
Wrong.
>What is called here an "unlawful combatant" has the rights of a war prisoner, except that he could be tried for war crimes, but he is still afforded the same status as any war prisoner per the GC.

>>564562
>suspicious activities
>helping a wounded man and being fired upon almost immediately.
Yeah. Failing hard at the apologist shit today.

>>564517
Watch it again bro. They get the wounded guy into the van, and it starts turning and moving, and the helicopter shoots it. Now if they had waited 30 more seconds to see if the guys helping the wounded started moving to the other bodies to 'check for intel', 'plant explosives', or what have you, I'd agree. But it seems to me they opened fire way too early.

Honestly all the Geneva breaks really boil down to Iraq being an illegal war to begin with.

>>564575
Stick to your flower garden hippie, obviously you don't know what you're talking about anymore.

itt: liberals still trying really fucking hard to give a shit.

>>564591
>hippie
>not liking that our troops are allowed to act like pigs without getting court-martialed
How about you shut the fuck up you Palin humping liberalfag?

>Van
War crimes.
>Missile
Disgusting but doubt it'd get any kind of conviction
>Reporters
Honest mistake.
>Apologists for the Van
Disgusting.

>>564598
>Palin humping liberalfag?

guys I'm fucking confused, shouldn't I be called a conservative or something instead?

inb4OpenCarryFolksSeeingTheHypocrisy

>>564615
There's nothing conservative about those crazies.

>>564525
You don't shot unarmed civilins, every soldier should know this.

But lets assume for a moment that the van was the "bad guys", what then?
Well then the gunship attacked wonded as well as a medical unit who showed no hostility and were not even collecting the weapon (because there was only one AK in the entire event).
In responce to these people helping wounded the gunship opens fire.

SO we have two versions of events.

EVENT 1: A horrible tradgery followed by brutal and needless unprovoked slaughter at the hands of men who begg to be allowed to kill more people.
War crime.

EVENT 2: A unfortunate series of circmstances that lead to the attacking of opposing forces as they cared for their wounded.
Aaand, hey! It's still a war crime!

This kind of shit is what the bastards we are fighting do, we are better than them. Apart from the people in the video, they disgrace all those who died for their nations through their disgusting actions.

>>564466
There were no reports of small arms fire in that area.

So has anyone seen this on TV?

I haven't watched the news lately (don't usually because it's all partisanshit). Curious to whether or not they've blacked the story out.

>>564635
So the chopper is there for no raisin, right?

HURF A DURF!

itt liberals pretend to give a shit about less fortunate people

AS ALWAYS

>say van shooting was justified
>LIBERAL LIBERAL LIBERAL

>say it wasn't justified
>LIBERAL LIBERAL LIBERAL

Shouldn't you kids be playing the Halos or something?

>>564637
Fox News, MSBNC and BBC has it up on their sites.

>>564664

>>564638
Because the only reason possible is gunfire was there?

>>564642
>Caring about Geneva
>Liberals

>>564664
It's a troll, accusing everyone of being liberal regardless of their position.

ITT Pragmatic Liberalfags pretending to be Conservatives.

>>564624


There was shit going down all day in this case and the "one AK in the whole event" thing is just bullshit.

Hell with insurgents you don't even have a non hostile "medical unit"

>>564704
The fortage shows only one AK and it was the only weapon ever confermed.

And you can clearly see the van shows no hostilities, its not even insurgents. Either there were insurgents and this is a war crime, or there wasn't and this is a war crime.

Pick your poision.

>>564624
There were no war crimes committed here. Without a clearly identifiable international marking that denotes medical personnel, the van is afforded no protections under the geneva conventions. If a soldier drives up in a regular humvee to grab his wounded buddy HE IS FAIR GAME. Even if the van were doing nothing but helping the wounded IT IS FAIR GAME. The international red cross/red crescent markings exist in order to identify those who are afforded special protections under the GCs. If they were regular civilians they should have stayed away from what is clearly an active combat engagement (there are several explosions clearly visible while the van is approaching the battle, the people in the van would have had to be blind and deaf to not think there was fighting occurring.

>>564748
>the van is afforded no protections under the geneva conventions.
Except the killing of the wounded insurgent who had hors de combat protections is a war crime. (you'll note they didn't shoot him when he crawled around and wanted him to pick up a weapon)
And killing possible civilians on top of that?
Whoee. :)

http://www.scribd.com/doc/29487634/Centcom-FOIA

I didn't see anybody trying to surrender.

>Its the drivers fault for being there
This just in, driving your kids to school is a sign of being an insurgent. Your kids are better off walking. On second thought, scratch that. They're probably terrorists and book-bags might look like explosives. I'd recommend building underground tunnels to get your kids to school. On second thought, that'll get you killed by insurgents for use against the army, so its best that you stay inside your home and arm yourself so that the large gangs roaming the middle east don't get to you. On second thought, arming yourself will get you killed by American soldiers so the best thing to do is.... well... nothing.

OH HEY, WHY DO THESE PEOPLE WANT US TO LEAVE THEIR CUNTRY? WE SEND THEM MILITARY THEY SEND US BOMB FUCK THEM. STUPID SAND NIGGER MUSLIMS CAN'T DO ANYTHING RIGHT LOOK AT THESE IQ TESTS THAT SAY THEY'RE INFRASTRUCTURE IS BAD. MORONS.

>>564743

>The fortage shows only one AK and it was the only weapon ever confermed.

Bull. Shit.

>>564743
There were waaay more than one AK, at minimum three.

>>564775

>implying you can surrender when you've got two Apaches raining down hell from 2+ miles out

>implying they in all likelyhood had any idea they were being watched by multiple Apaches

Haha that's a funny joke.

>>564748
You're not aware of the "rules of war" are you?

Christ I'm done with this, News has to many facists for my tates.

There was no reason to attack the van and the pilot lied in order to have one, it is not something you can defend, and attempting to degrades the sacrifice of soldiers who died doing their duty with honour. To place those heros at the same level as the killers in this video is disgusting. Those men are not soldiers, they are insane killers degrading those who serve with integrity.

>>564782
>This just in, driving your kids to school is a sign of being an insurgent.
You just invalidated your post with this incredibly stupid remark.

>>564763
The insurgent that was wounded was not fired upon, the van with at least 3 insurgents that attempted to help him evade capture was. Without clearly identifiable medical markings, the van was performing hostile acts in a combat zone (providing aid to the enemy) and was fair game. The protections for civilians do not apply when the civilians actively participate in a battle. If that van had not approached the wounded man, there is a good chance that he would have lived.

>>564791
Your tastes are raspberry wine cooler, right?

>>564791
>they are insane killers degrading those who serve with integrity.
Well the gunner and the man lying over the com at any rate.

I know a guy who was involved in this. He later found out that they were journalists. Heavy shit. Thought he had buried it. All of the sudden it pops up. He's going through all sorts of turmoil right now. I feel bad for him.

However, as a journalism student and aspiring foreign correspondent, I'd hate to have my ass killed on a fucking interview and not have that shit reported.

Really, it's just a sad tragedy. The only ones to blame are the people up stairs who tried to cover it up

>>564799
>there was no war crime
Article 3 states that even where there is not a conflict of international character the parties must as a minimum adhere to minimal protections described as: noncombatants, members of armed forces who have laid down their arms, and combatants who are hors de combat (out of the fight) due to wounds, detention, or any other cause shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, with the following prohibitions:
(a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;
(b) taking of hostages;
(c) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment
(d) the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.

and combatants who are hors de combat (out of the fight) due to wounds, detention, or any other cause shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, with the following prohibitions:
(a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;

and combatants who are hors de combat (out of the fight) due to wounds, detention, or any other cause shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, with the following prohibitions:
(a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;

>>564799
>providing aid to the enemy
>I've never read the Geneva conventions
>dtisc

>>564817
I'll just clarify this for those of you who inevitably will post how they're not "combatants"
>What is called here an "unlawful combatant" has the rights of a war prisoner, except that he could be tried for war crimes, but he is still afforded the same status as any war prisoner per the GC.

>>564817
Again, they were not firing upon the wounded combatant, they were firing upon the van. If the van were civilian, it would not have approached a raging battle in the middle of a war. If the van was providing medical support, it should have had clearly identifiable medical AND national markings. As has been previously stated, the van could have been there for any reason, the fact that they picked up a wounded insurgent does not give them automatic protection under the geneva conventions.

>>564857
You seem to believe that killing the insurgent like that isn't a war crime because they picked him up.
Sorry, but that's a no go.
Try again.

THE FACEBOOK IS A HELICOPTER!

OH SHIT

Hell wikileaks & Reuters knew the reporter and the van both made just as many if not more mistakes than the pilot and gunner, but they couldn't let that get in the way of their agenda.

That's why they they throw in the quotes and mark the cameras and not the weapons in the video instead of just releasing it untouched like any decent outlet would.

>>564917
http://www.scribd.com/doc/29487634/Centcom-FOIA

>>564857
There was no raging battle you stupid fuck. There was 8 men gun downed by an Apache that was safe a fucking mile away. Furthermore asshole, maybe it wasn't a registered medical vehicle. Maybe it was a civilian trying to help a wounded man to the god damn hospital. I sure as fuck hope you're never allowed in an Apache. You'd probably shoot some guy who was talking on a cell phone half a mile away from an IED explosion.

>>564917
They did release the unedited 40 min video, bro.

>>564917
>>564937
Link was in support of your post.

ITT: Liberalfags screaming "war crime" left and right. Says there is going to be hell to pay.
>My face when the military has already found them innocent of any crime and they are most likely on active duty braggin about it and killing more sand niggers.

Wikileaks apparently got their hands on a video where some 97 people got blown to bits too.
Gonna laugh my ass off when that one comes out.

Glad to see this sort of information making to the public

Just wish the people defending this could be punished somehow.

>>564975
You do realize wanting Geneva to apply is a very conservative view, right?

>>564949
Oh, and just to add on to this, the van shows up nearly 4 god damn minutes after the helicopter had stopped shooting. It's not like he pulled up immediately after the gunfire ceased.

>Geneva convention

My face when a bunch of shit tier countries gather around and makes rules about war as if it were some kind of backyard football game, then expect the worlds only superpower to obey them

Fuck that noise.

i think its justified

but a good excuse to leave

>>565029
Yeah, you said that in a different thread, and it was pointed out there that the U.S. signed the Geneva Convention. You can shut the fuck up now.

>>565029
>My face when retards don't realize most of the contingents about War Crimes came from us and are based on the actions we hanged nazis for. And that we signed it.

>>565029
Then don't be a signatory.

What did you think it was imposed upon you?

>>565003
It's a view everyone should and most likely does share. It's just that the ratio of dem:rep on 4chan is a like 4:1. Most of the people in here are most likely democrats so it would've been the only real way to go. I just used liberalfags to try and make some people mad, but it most likely failed.

>>564975
>Trolls misusing quotes intentionally, labeling everyone as liberal.

>HURR DERR LIBRULS AND CONSVERITRS EVEROYONE!

I can't believe the number of imbiciles in this thread. All the people that died were confirmed civilians--I don't understand why some people are saying the van was picking up an "insurgent"--they weren't.

>>565039

It was also pointed out that you didn't get the point of the comment, the point being, that rules only exist if they can be enforced.

Stupid Kid.

>>565196
All of them civilians? Not according to:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/29487634/Centcom-FOIA

ITT we don't read any of the written statements or reports from the Army

>in b4 they lied to kill 8 random assholes in Iraq

>>565257
Seeing as I'm not the guy who posted it in the other thread, there wasn't shit pointed out to me.

Stupid Kid.

>>565045
>implying we are burning iraqi civilians in ovens

>>565287
You're making an argue about semantics and ignoring the argument about the Geneva convention not being enforced. Not the guy you're arguing with btw.

>>565196
inb4they actually discovered aks and RPGs on the bodies. inb4several news links confirm this.

>>565287

The fact that you felt the need to reply proves my point.

My point still stands.

Unlike your 1 legged whore of a mother.

>>565320
She may be a one legged whore, but she's still a beautiful woman, you jerk!

>>565280

Totally, they're going to give the most unbiased, objective report of the incident. I mean it's not like they tried to prevent the video from coming out or anything..

I see dead terrorists. It's all good.

To be honest in a conflict zone If someone is going around pointing things I ain't going to wait minutes or so to identify the object I'ma shoot first and ask questions later

>>565341

If people saw every video the Army ever made, all we would hear from them is shit like this.

HURR THOSE PEOPLE WERE CIVILIANS, WAR IS BAD, KILL AMERICANS DURPA DURRRR

>>565341

I think they're supposed to.

Or else, you know, face imprisonment or whatever other punishment people would get for false testimony/actually murdering defenseless people.

The American military said in a statement late Thursday that 11 people had been killed: nine insurgents and two civilians. According to the statement, American troops were conducting a raid when they were hit by small-arms fire and rocket-propelled grenades. The American troops called in reinforcements and attack helicopters. In the ensuing fight, the statement said, the two Reuters employees and nine insurgents were killed.

“There is no question that coalition forces were clearly engaged in combat operations against a hostile force,” said Lt. Col. Scott Bleichwehl, a spokesman for the multinational forces in Baghdad.

>>565353
The van guys wasn't pointing shit. And that's what's been discussed for most of this thread.

I found it hard to believe that anyone could mistake those for weapons.

Insurgents don't just walk casually down a street in an unorganized group like that.

Also, they don't limit themselves to having only two weapons per group.

Were there any ACTUAL hostiles in the area? They say there were people shooting at them with AK-47s, but I didn't see anything like that.

>but I didn't see anything like that.

I don't think you were there or had a 360 video camera.

>>565448
per the insurgent handbook?

terrorists MUST walk single-file, must have no fewer than 1 gun per 2 insurgents, and must always put wear their "angry face" while on duty.

shut the fuck up, faggot.

>>565353

Is that how we "win the hearts and minds of the people"?
Shoot first and ask questions later?

The worst part of this, which many people ignore, is that we ruined the families of those men who were killed. Those were the heads of the household. Those children and women could easily be recruited to be suicide bombers now.

Thankfully, you're not in charge over there. Otherwise, we'd have more of these incidents and a much more pissed off population to deal with.

>>565495
Are you defending these fuckers?

Were there insurgents or not?

Well let's see if these guys are really news men or whatever and they didn't coordinate their whereabouts with local commanders then they got what they deserve

>>565533

>Those children and women could easily be recruited to be suicide bombers now.

>>565546
Yes, there were plenty.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/29487634/Centcom-FOIA

>>565571

>implying the muslims haven't done that before without provocation

>>565576
I'd like a source that isn't the ones who fucked up.

>>565600
1. Go to toilet
2. Take a hard dump
3. There's your source.

Still nobody cares .But, we keep forcing the story.

Agitprop.

>>565503

Did I say single file, faggot?

Let me rephrase myself, to make it more clear for your rodent brain. This isn't according to the "insurgent handbook", it's according to logic.

If you watched the video, you'll see that the people are just strolling down the street. Not running. Not hustling. Not looking out for Americans. Kinda strange for insurgents, no?

If these were the insurgents who had fired on the Americans, why were they just sauntering down the street, like they were on there way to the 7-11?

Plus, why did only TWO of the men have "weapons"? If you're an insurgent going into battle, why wouldnt you have a fucking weapon? It's common sense.

The helicopter should have showed some discretion before killing these people and should have waited at least till he could say confidently that those were weapons and the men were insurgents.

>>565633

>If these were the insurgents who had fired on the Americans, why were they just sauntering down the street, like they were on there way to the 7-11?


>implying the insurgents don't train to act all innocent and cool and pretend to be bystanders

>>565633
The guy was a fucking sociopath. he pans over the dead bodies, laughs and says "nice". A normal, healthy human being would burst into tears and be devastated by having shot up two children. what does he say? "It was their fault". He laughs at having shot them right through the windshield. It sickens me that these people exist, let alone "protect" our country.

>>565571

Yeah, I know it's hard to believe, right?

>>565582

I didn't say that, I'm just saying that for a war that's supposed to be based around us stablizing the country, ripping apart families isn't the way to do it. I think it's making it much EASIER for those sons of the men killed to grow up and want to kill Americans.

>>565600


Better not believe anything a Reuter reporter says then.

>>565655

Trained? You act as if they go to a camp to learn this shit. They're not going keep that facade up 24/7. Especially, since they didn't think anyone was watching.

Lop, how can you guys defend those trigger happy killers. They're just a bunch of dumb hicks looking for some action. They should persecuted. At least dishonorably discharged.

>>565766
>persecuted
I think you meant to say prosecuted.

>>565668
Funny. I took the "It's their fault" comment as evidence that he wasn't psychotic. It sounded a hell of a lot like he was trying to commute guilt off of himself and onto the dead.

>>565855
That's one way to think about it. I was thinking about it more like a crazy guy mowing down a kid on a sidewalk and then saying "WELL WHAT THE FUCK WAS HE DOING SO CLOSE TO THE CURB?"

>>565855
with your magik powers you should have saved them all.

>us gov tries to suppress video coming out
>everyone wastes time arguing the minutea of the video
>???

yes it's true folks, everyone is really this retarded.

This whole shitfest has been pretty thoroughly picked apart on /k/, including the after-action report and testimony from an anon who flew medivac in Iraq.

Bottom line: There were two RPG's and multiple munitions on site. The reporters were embedded with insurgents. There was a running battle in progress that day, the people who died were all valid targets, and I'm glad they're dead.

At worst, the van was an understandable fuckup. Given our enemy's track record of using human shields whenever possible, and given the van was driving into a running firefight -- which was why the choppers were called in -- I have my doubts. All we know for sure is that the two girls were medivacced to a US field hospital and treated.

You can believe whatever you want to, but there are the goddam facts, kids.