Page 32 of 45 FirstFirst ... 22303132333442 ... LastLast
Results 311 to 320 of 447

Thread: Leaked footage from Apache showing "US military slaughter" in Baghdad

  1. #311
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Past the edge of the universe, through the singularity, and out the other side.
    Last Seen
    09-01-10 @ 05:23 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,324

    Re: Leaked footage from Apache showing "US military slaughter" in Baghdad

    Quote Originally Posted by Skateguy View Post
    I fully understand the 911 thing. but what tie did those people walking in their own city streets have to do with it? Everyone in world is not responsible for 911. Please get a grip. We don't own or control the entire world. We are not Gods.
    lol you're a twoofer so what do you mean by that anyways?

  2. #312
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    06-23-10 @ 11:33 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,320

    Re: Leaked footage from Apache showing "US military slaughter" in Baghdad

    Quote Originally Posted by Skateguy View Post
    I fully understand the 911 thing. but what tie did those people walking in their own city streets have to do with it? Everyone in world is not responsible for 911. Please get a grip. We don't own or control the entire world. We are not Gods.
    9/11 has nothing to do with this discussion. The tie is that they were in a "hot" area carrying weapons. Savvy?

  3. #313
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    06-23-10 @ 11:33 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,320

    Re: Leaked footage from Apache showing "US military slaughter" in Baghdad

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    I didn't see them and I just read them nothing in there contradicts what I said, nothing in the GC allows for the aid of escape of wounded combatants to fight another day.



    No actually it said that an agreement can be made with local parties for them to extract the wounded, no such agreement was reached, these people came in using children as cover to aid in the escape of insurgents.



    Yes actually I do, they brought children into a gun fight to help aid them in the extraction and escape of enemy combatants.



    How so?



    No they didn't.



    Nothing in the GC allows for the escape of wounded enemies to rejoin their own ranks and fight another day. Apparently in your world it would be off limits to fire on a U.S. soldier who strips out of uniform, hops into an unmarked humvee, and goes into aid in the escape of his fellow soldiers who are under fire. Is that your contention yes or no?
    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    None of these men surrendered, and it is unknown of their fighting condition when they are fired on a second time by the second Apache because the first Apache which fired and is taking the video has its view blocked by a wall.
    When you decide not to simply bull**** your way through a debate let me know.

  4. #314
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    06-23-10 @ 11:33 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,320

    Re: Leaked footage from Apache showing "US military slaughter" in Baghdad

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    Apparently you have no idea what you're talking about:



    The AKM and two RPGs were recovered by ground troops after the attack.
    Again, you aren't reading the thread because I already corrected my mistake.

  5. #315
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Last Seen
    01-03-16 @ 02:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,761

    Re: Leaked footage from Apache showing "US military slaughter" in Baghdad

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    A Humvee is a civilian and a military vehicle not that it makes a difference, if we replaced our Humvees with vans would that make them off limits?



    Oh please there was a sizable contingent of ground troops in the area taking fire from insurgents, and their were at least two Apache helicopters flying in attack formation who had just opened up with a very loud machine gun.



    They never said the people in the van were armed they said that they were possibly picking up weapons.



    Um he did see a gun and so did the video:



    The 2 RPGs and one AK47s were recovered by the ground troops after the firefight.



    What? He was talking about the guy who was crawling and the guy didn't pick up a gun pilot didn't shoot at him. What minute in the video is that at? It didn't happen.
    Ok, I think we're getting confused about the specific issues I'm talking about... so I'm going to use :
    [nomedia]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0&feature=player_embedded[/nomedia]
    for the timestamps.

    4:39 - "... you got about four humvees... (I'm noting this because the insurgents they were looking for were in humvees, like you were talking about)
    4:59-5:02 - He shot 3 quick volleys at a single person when he was hit by the first of the three... (which is excessive but justifiable here with the lag time between firing and the bullets hitting the targets)
    5:20 - This is when the camera switches, if this is the second gunner?? He 'twitches' on his aim gets chewed out for shooting too close

    So far there's a couple 'errors', but like you said these guys had guns, and errors like that aren't really cause for anything more then a 'hey watch out'.

    5:50-5:55 - Like you said, can't really see it, but those were the guys with the guns, and if they were getting up and getting there guns then there's nothing else to say.

    7:24 - He mentions a group of TRUCKS that they are looking for in the area.
    7:30 - "I got a guy down there ... but he's wounded" (Which shows the ROE that they had restrictions to shooting the wounded)
    8:02 - Q. Does he have a gun? "No I haven't seen one yet"
    *8:32 - "Come on Buddy"
    *8:34 - "All you gotta do is pick up a gun"
    9:09 - "We got some vans picking up bodies"

    The van pulls up to the wounded man...
    *9:37 - "Come on, let me shoot"
    10:31 - They shoot down the van
    *10:54 - As the smoke clears the van hasn't moved, and he just starts shooting.

    The ones with the *'s are the parts I actually have issue with... The people with the guns were all killed in the first few volleys. The ONLY thing the van demostrated an interest in was in helping a man that's been severely wounded that's probably going to end up dying anyway... they didn't have weapons, none of them, and with that guy's attitude, even if the van had a red cross painted on the top the gunners attitude showed his anticipation to keep shooting.

    I'm not saying that it's enough for a dishonourable discharge or anything like that... As for your claims about the Geneva convention, the WHOLE CONVENTIONS intent was to limit the barbarity of war.

    International Humanitarian Law - First 1949 Geneva Convention
    In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:

    (1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed ' hors de combat ' by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.
    To this end, the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:

    (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.

    (2) The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for.

    An impartial humanitarian body, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, may offer its services to the Parties to the conflict.
    The Parties to the conflict should further endeavour to bring into force, by means of special agreements, all or part of the other provisions of the present Convention.
    The application of the preceding provisions shall not affect the legal status of the Parties to the conflict.
    In effect, a person not participating in the combat and a 'combatant' that was wounded were shot at. I expect you to come back and explain somehow that the Geneva convention doesn't apply, but whatever. You're thinking that my perspective is a much harsher criticism then it actually is though...and of a different section of the video.

  6. #316
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Past the edge of the universe, through the singularity, and out the other side.
    Last Seen
    09-01-10 @ 05:23 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,324

    Re: Leaked footage from Apache showing "US military slaughter" in Baghdad

    Quote Originally Posted by NoJingoLingo View Post
    When you decide not to simply bull**** your way through a debate let me know.
    O.K. sport, I read the link to the GC regarding the treatment of the sick and wounded but maybe I missed something, so why don't you copy and paste the specific section you are referencing? KTHXBAI.

  7. #317
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,502

    Re: Leaked footage from Apache showing "US military slaughter" in Baghdad

    Quote Originally Posted by NoJingoLingo View Post
    Try and keep up, we are talking about the engagement of the van of rescuers.



    Try to keep up. the Van entered into a gunfight.
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

  8. #318
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,502

    Re: Leaked footage from Apache showing "US military slaughter" in Baghdad

    Quote Originally Posted by NoJingoLingo View Post
    That's your problem right there, you just make **** up to argue. They didn't rush into a fire fight, the shooting had ceased and a human was obviously struggling for his life, NOT looking for a weapon or doing anything other than trying to move.

    How long did the "Shooting ceased". Please. I'm thinking you have never been in combat....


    Besides, I never said it was prudent, heroic perhaps, but that's usually how heroism works.


    So wait, the people who took childeren into the middle of a battle between people pointing RPG's a US troops, are "hero's" to you?


    How freaking pathetic, brother.
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

  9. #319
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Past the edge of the universe, through the singularity, and out the other side.
    Last Seen
    09-01-10 @ 05:23 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,324

    Re: Leaked footage from Apache showing "US military slaughter" in Baghdad

    Quote Originally Posted by BmanMcfly View Post
    8:02 - Q. Does he have a gun? "No I haven't seen one yet"
    *8:32 - "Come on Buddy"
    *8:34 - "All you gotta do is pick up a gun"
    And he didn't pick up the gun so he didn't shoot.

    *9:37 - "Come on, let me shoot"
    10:31 - They shoot down the van
    *10:54 - As the smoke clears the van hasn't moved, and he just starts shooting.
    He says in between that that he "can't fire" as if there was a weapons malfunction, to me it looks like his intent was to destroy the van and insure that it was immobilized and you can't really see anything at that point anyways.


    In effect, a person not participating in the combat and a 'combatant' that was wounded were shot at. I expect you to come back and explain somehow that the Geneva convention doesn't apply, but whatever. You're thinking that my perspective is a much harsher criticism then it actually is though...and of a different section of the video.
    I see no violation of the GC, these people put themselves in the middle of a firefight and attempted to aid in the escape of unlawful combatants, an equivalent would be an armed robber who got shot was surrounded by police and I burst through in a van to try to rescue him.

  10. #320
    King of Videos
    dirtpoorchris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    WA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:46 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,008

    Re: Leaked footage from Apache showing "US military slaughter" in Baghdad

    Notice how when the gunner asks for permission to engage the van he lies. He says that they are removing the bodies. (Hiding the dead?) But the van only ever picked up a guy that was hurt. Is there a difference between picking up a wounded person and removing dead from the battlefield in terms of legality.

    Did he intentionally make it sound like the van was scooping up all the dead even though they put one living wounded man in it?
    Last edited by dirtpoorchris; 04-21-10 at 11:59 PM.
    I'm Finding it Harder to be a Gentleman, White Stripes ~ "You think I care about me and only me. When every girl needs help climbing up a tree."

Page 32 of 45 FirstFirst ... 22303132333442 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •