From CollateralMurder.com:
WikiLeaks has released a classified US military video depicting the indiscriminate slaying of over a dozen people in the Iraqi suburb of New Baghdad — including two Reuters news staff.
Reuters has been trying to obtain the video through the Freedom of Information Act, without success since the time of the attack. The video, shot from an Apache helicopter gun-site, clearly shows the unprovoked slaying of a wounded Reuters employee and his rescuers. Two young children involved in the rescue were also seriously wounded.
I’ll give you the first attack was justified. But really do you need to put more bullets in an unarmed guy crawling on the ground. Let alone when a guy pulls up in a van with 2 of his kids in the front seat. Do you really have to blast that car to bits in fear of a wounded guy might get away. It is just the disreguard for life that blows my mind in this clip. From laughing about running over bodies, to the eagerness in the guys voice to get his approval to light the van up full of lead when NOTHING is threatening him.
@Anon US forces don’t use lead or copper ammo in combat heavy autos. They use depleted uranium (DU).
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depleted_uranium#Ammunition
I can’t help but visualise all the available army staff posting defensive comments on these video’s to try and downplay it.
Even if you justify the first shooting with ‘we saw an RPG’ from a mile away (which is absolutely NO threat to an apache – Hell they didn’t even see the heli) then the second shooting of people trying to save lives is nothing but brutal murder.
GET THE FUCK OUT OF IRAQ YOU MURDERING SOBS!
I completely second What RUFUS said on April 5th, 2010 at 2:59 pm
Thanks U.S. for raping the world!
You are really great!
#62, the video clearly shows that the vehicle in question bore no markings of a rescue vehicle and the men who ran out of the van to grab the wounded man wore no uniforms identifying themselves as such. Legitimate rescue operations would have included markings on the vehicle and on uniforms to let hostile forces know to hold fire.
#65, Tell me what threat that minivan posed to that apache. Exactly. NONE WHATSOEVER. (just like the guys in the first ,killing session by the way). Now tell me the reason for killing those people? Exactly. NONE WHATSOEVER.
Or the opposite side of the argument: the people running out of the van were picking up a fataly wounded man. Pilots even identified them as such. They did not wear a uniform or weapons depicting them as enemy combatants, nor did they undertake any action to indicate they posed a threat to ANYBODY. So once again; why open fire?????
Lemme guess… You’re army, right?
#66. Nope. Never served. And because I have never served, I am not going to pass judgment on our armed forces.
iTampon
#64 said, “Thanks U.S. for raping the world! You are really great!”
Thank you, thank you! If we get sent to your country and you’re so much as carrying a water bottle, we will kill your ass. Count on it. Training pays off. The bottom line is, do not fuck with the U.S. If we get sent to your country, we are pissed off about being there and we will pretty much kill anything that moves, wears a towel or says Jihad.
you’ll run outta sanity before canada runs outta oil… dude
Winning the War?
Winning the Peace?
Hearts and Minds.
Creating more terrorists than we are killing.
I’d love to read the “Rules of Engagement” that were controlling this engagement. The fact that the Apache was not in danger is IRRELEVANT to my simple way of thinking. “If” this was a group of terrorist/insurgents/enemy then they were an active threat to whomever they came into contact with next and should have been taken out. After the first few bursts THE RULES OF ENGAGEMENT were somewhat/partially obvious as the Apache Crew member wanted the injured man to go for a weapon. What I don’t get/why I’d like to see the RULES, is why the unarmed men could be attacked in a group where 1-2 men had weapons but after the initial attack the one’s left crawling away had to have a weapon. If they were indeed “the enemy” I would think a good rule is if they are crawling away, they are crawling towards a weapon to be used later. But thats not the rule in play or the apache would have shot again.
The notion that only marked vehicles should expect protection when rescuing the injured–is that in the rules as well? SOP?
WAR–innocent people do get killed. Kill too many and the locals will revolt.
Not knowing the specifics, if I had been in command I would not have fired at a “group” of people mostly unarmed unless someone in that group was a highly valued target. Absent that, something more should be present before killing many to get at only a suspect few.
The crew laughing and having good fun==what do you expect???? A moral man would hesitate, be remorseful, become either useless or as demonstrated. Even sounded kind of nervous and defensive, but I could be projecting that. But these attitudes, necessary and REQUIRED for war, are why troops need good training before their service, which USA is good at, AND good debriefing and training before their discharge===something the USA does a really bad job of.
War. A last resort.
Unless you were there, in that situation, being shot at, don’t pass judgment. Using hind sight and evidence collected after the engagement is over, from the safety of those who were putting their own lives at risk, is cowardice and only serves to amplify the pussification of society today.
Without the people serving in the armed forces of today you have no rights, either support them, or get the hell out of this nation.
#72–Nitroneo==thats a particularly retarded thing to say. The exercise of command authority and our larger national interests are entirely dependent on what you say not to do.
Don’t confuse YOUR hindsight that this was ok with someone else having the same right in hindsight to think it was not ok.
Hypo==helicopter decides to strafe a bus full of Nun’s “for the fun of it.” Still no exercise of hindsight?
How about a bus full of injured USA Marines being transferred to the hospital???
Its all the exercise of judgment in hindsight. STOP trying to prevent others from thinking just because you have chosen to stop yourself.
Is it your judgment that the apache crew was personally at risk??? A mile away and not even known to be there? If they were as chickenshit as you, they would have never made it threw flight training.
Nitroninny==total FAIL on the appropriate role of the military. Now go polish your jack boots and let the adults continue.
I wonder how two kids survive fire from a 30mm chain gun the Apache uses. The M230 is a wicked weapon. They must of been hit by ricochet or fragmented rounds. Being hit with a 30mm canon round pretty much guarantees death.
In urban fighting you take a lot of casualties to avoid collateral damage, or the reverse.
they never did target the passenger side
if this makes you think. everybody wins
How can you tell who the enamy is? Its not like these people wear uniforms. Heck they strap bombs to kids for God sake. The media are idiots. They think these kind of wars should be so civil. They are probably the least civil. You are fighting a war where civillians are right in the middle.
I say, you can’t make an omlet without breaking a few eggs.
Some comments say that an unmarked vehicle is a potential threat, which leads to all Iraqi vehicles that are not marked. It would be best for the Iraqis to paint red crosses on all of their vehicles.
If the bad guys look like Iraqis then it might be best to kill every Iraqi. The US can not win their engagement in Iraq if they can not tell the difference between a bad Iraqi and a good Iraqi. A good Iraqi takes arms to protect himself from the bad Iraqis, then comes an American that kills him for holding a gun. It is justified because the American can not trust any Iraqi.
The US probably should either conquer Iraq or get out.
Dammit, this has nothing to do with “Guys doing their job” (even if you considerate slaying for oil a job)
This is war crime, pure and simple. Americas army has got equipment, they can watch your nose hair from that distance! So don’t tell me, it was impossible to see that they did not see the group was unarmed. And don’t tell me, it is ok to shoot a van that wants to rescue wounded people! Shot that badly, even a fundamentalist Taliban would not be any threat for the next 5 to 10 years, so why keep on the shooting, if not a) for the amusement of the soldiers or worse, b) to make an example. I consider THIS terrorism! The army is not helping but terrorizes the civilians of New Baghdad. And you fucking wonder, why there are so many people willing to blow themselves up?? This is what fuels the hate and helps the Taliban. But hardliners of both sides always agree to keep up the “good shooting”.
Get those fucking troops out NOW! For the sake of everybody! Save what can be saved and prosecute that chain of command and those responsible for the cover up in the court-martial!
Everyone should donate to Wikileaks. We need to know the truth about what’s going on, not limited to just Iraq.
please stop commenting unless you want toilet paper to win
Don’t you dare question our troops or our government. What do you think this is, a democracy?
Your a sick war mongering lot. Killing people trying to rescue the wounded is no different then the Japanese shooting at stretcher bearers during WW II. It doesn’t matter your trying to defend these war crimes, you’ve already lost all respect in the worlds eyes.
Two points…
1. Wikileaks shouldn’t have edited the footage. Notes should have been provided in addition to the video but not within it. It fuels complaints of editorial bias and devalues the truth evident in the footage.
2. A very evident truth in this video is that the technology and skills employed in identifying an enemy remain stone-age. “It looks like an AK47”, “It looks like an RPG”. Warfare remains a pathetic exercise in waste.
if this wasn’t murder, then why’s the murdering pilot so eager for the dying guy crawling along to pick up a weapon; he was just begging to shoot him again. Scum
Interesting, when you couple this with Gen. McChrystal’s recent statement on civilian casualties:
http://nytimes.com/2010/03/27/world/asia/27afghan.html?hpw
For you TLDRs, “We have shot an amazing number of people, but to my knowledge, none has ever proven to be a threat,” said Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal.
For those fucktard idiots who are defending these murdering bastards (because a shoulder bag somehow looks like a dangerous weapon, yeah right), how the HELL do you explain the almost child like:
“Can we shoot him, please dad, can we, can we, can we, look he’s dragging his 1/2 dead corpse across the ground, must be getting a gun, can we shoot him now? PLEASE, awww dad, please?”
It was absolutely sickening. Everyone responsible for this act including the obviously blind gunners and the CO who gave the ‘okay’ should be locked the hell up for a LONG time.
It was a war crime, plain and simple. And just because it was committed by american troops DOESN’T mean it should be ignored.
Actions like this are ample proof that the terrorists have won!
#10 for the win: “News flash! War sucks.”
We need to pull out of Afghanistan since it can at best only result in a permanent peace keeping operation. We were trying to get Bin Laden: he isn’t there.
We should gradually draw down in Iraq since that country looks like it is doing well now and has developed stability.