U.S. soldiers shooting civilians

[dead]

http://www.ichblog.eu/index.php?option=com_seyret&task=videodirectlink&id=543

Winning the hearts and minds is still going on :banghead:

[Kazimierz]

In any war zone, mistakes will be made, and crimes will be committed. However, this shouldn't be used as a generalization of all of our troops. We've had a lot of controversies involving soldiers doing things like this, but that in no way should be used to describe all of our soldiers.

[slapnpopbass]

1. This is the Current Events section. Not the video section.
2. I've read up on that video. Those "civilians" were armed.
3. Enough with the blanket terms. This is like posting a video of a lady crashing into a building and saying "All Women Are Bad Drivers".

We like to put a little more thought into our posts here in C/E.

[JaneEyre]

That seems like pretty far away. Glad I'm not a young boy having to make the determination on who to shoot and who not to shoot to protect my unit (or whatever, I'm trained to be protecting) from that far. I could barely see what was going on when those "civilians" crashed into that other car.

Glad I can make mass judgements from the comfort of my own home sitting at my computer. Guess that is what freedom is all about.

[American Infidel]

If the two posters (Kaz included...don't fall for the hype) believe it's to their best interests to bash the troops, they'll use any means accessible to them, to promote their propaganda.

[JaneEyre]

If the two posters (Kaz included...don't fall for the hype) believe it's to their best interests to bash the troops, they'll use any means accessible to them, to promote their propaganda.

Well, young men serve this country proudly every day, for people's freedom to talk trash about them on the internet. Although, I think that anything I'm going to say about someone who may die while serving this country (even if I don't believe in it), I'll chose to discuss it with them when they have the chance to respond. But, again...that's my opinion....

[Kory The Baker]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Graner

Yea i know not ALL of our soldiers are like this but its still sick becouse he did so much shit before and got away with it. He got ten years in military prison. He should have got the chair.

[dead]

1. This is the Current Events section. Not the video section.
2. I've read up on that video. Those "civilians" were armed.
3. Enough with the blanket terms. This is like posting a video of a lady crashing into a building and saying "All Women Are Bad Drivers".

We like to put a little more thought into our posts here in C/E.
1 This is a current event
2 post your source
I thought also first that this was just something to bash the troops but after i have seen this it makes me wonder how in the hell could these guys in the cars be ever shooting at those soldiers.
To me it just looked if they drived by and were the victims of some soldiers who needed to release some tension.
3 nope it isn't this just adds up more with some more scandals ,sure most soldiers are decent but if this is true they schould be brought to court.

[Chewy]

1 This is a current event
2 post your source
I thought also first that this was just something to bash the troops but after i have seen this it makes me wonder how in the hell could these guys in the cars be ever shooting at those soldiers.
To me it just looked if they drived by and were the victims of some soldiers who needed to release some tension.
3 nope it isn't this just adds up more with some more scandals ,sure most soldiers are decent but if this is true they schould be brought to court.

I agree in the sense it's not current, however I think there is a responsibility on yourself first to post anything to support your claim that it was civilians that were shot at.

[GotheriK]

It strikes me as irresponsible to say this video definitively shows proof of one thing or another. We don't know if those people were armed or not, we don't know if they're civilians or not. A more suiting title would be "U.S. Soldiers Shooting", not the one you gave.

[dead]

I agree in the sense it's not current, however I think there is a responsibility on yourself first to post anything to support your claim that it was civilians that were shot at.

I shot the guy in the white car right into the building.
got no more claim since i wasn't there but generally there happen more shit in wars than is being brought out.

[Chewy]

got no more claim since i wasn't there but generally there happen more shit in wars than is being brought out.

but no where do the soldiers claim "I shot that unarmed civilian." .. your claims are not substantiate... they are as flimsy as the claims of WMD's in Iraq. all claim with no substance.

[blabam]

you gotta love war... it's so.... cool.

[StCyril]

It strikes me as irresponsible to say this video definitively shows proof of one thing or another. We don't know if those people were armed or not, we don't know if they're civilians or not. A more suiting title would be "U.S. Soldiers Shooting", not the one you gave.

I agree with you GotheriK, do you remember about three years ago when the public was screaming for a chopper pilot to be court martialed for firing on civilians near a wrecked HUMV? What our wonderful media sources DIDN'T say was that someone in the crowd had fired at the chopper.

Yet some fools still thought he would be court martialed... Ok let me say this right now: One of the first things you are taught in the Military is SURVIVAL. Self-preservation and the preservation of your fellow soldiers is top priority for pilots and field commanders. (Not to mention basic human nature) Even the mighty Apache attack choppers are fragile, one or two hits in the right place can bring it out of the sky. So if your piloting one of those things and your shot at, you shoot back. If you hesitate, your dead period.

3. Enough with the blanket terms. This is like posting a video of a lady crashing into a building and saying "All Women Are Bad Drivers".

Dude... it kind of defeats your argument when you use ones that are true as an example...

[bergshadow]

First: US soldiers have been and still are shooting civilians, quite a few civilians. It's a problem. It's less obviously a problem than before the Iraqis joined in so enthusiastically, but it's still a problem.

Second: vague videos of uncertain context are not evidence of that, and videos in general are usually poor sources of support for assigning blame.

Third: Ok let me say this right now: One of the first things you are taught in the Military is SURVIVAL. Self-preservation and the preservation of your fellow soldiers is top priority for pilots and field commanders. Briing them home, then. They can't accomplish anything worthwhile in Iraq if they have to shoot large numbers of civilians for survival while they are there.

[Chewy]

First: US soldiers have been and still are shooting civilians, quite a few civilians. It's a problem. It's less obviously a problem than before the Iraqis joined in so enthusiastically, but it's still a problem.

Second: vague videos of uncertain context are not evidence of that, and videos in general are usually poor sources of support for assigning blame.

Third: Briing them home, then. They can't accomplish anything worthwhile in Iraq if they have to shoot large numbers of civilians for survival while they are there.
I'd have to agree with you on all accounts.

[Dayve]

In any war zone, mistakes will be made, and crimes will be committed. However, this shouldn't be used as a generalization of all of our troops. We've had a lot of controversies involving soldiers doing things like this, but that in no way should be used to describe all of our soldiers.

Not all your soldiers, but definately all your marines. Loud mouthed cocky arrogant, don't give a shit about civilian life pieces of shit.

[atc_ectccm]

Using science and angling I have found that angling a bullet 90 degrees and bouncing into a 180 degrees into a full 90 degrees into a person is useful.


Now the only problem is this is impossible.90 degrees can not go into 180 degrees.

[PitwrkzZ1]

Not all your soldiers, but definately all your marines. Loud mouthed cocky arrogant, don't give a shit about civilian life pieces of shit.
Generalizations and irony are fun! :wave:


:rolleyes:

[TFS]

got no more claim since i wasn't there but generally there happen more shit in wars than is being brought out.

It also fails to tell what happened prior to the start of this video CLIP.

You don't know if these were guys known to have been involved in a previous attack and the soldiers were ordered to take them out or not.





Oh, and no soldier is allowed to just release tension on living objects. That's what closed firing ranges with a range-master are for so as to ensure no one, US or otherwise is injured unnecessarily.

[Chewy]

Oh, and no soldier is allowed to just release tension on living objects. That's what closed firing ranges with a range-master are for so as to ensure no one, US or otherwise is injured unnecessarily.
well that didn't stop the My Lai Massacre did it? Whether we want to admit it or not just because it's a rule doesn't mean it's followed... just because it's a rule that's been broken doesn't mean it's not covered up. That being stated unless there is evidence to support a claim doesn't mean it's not plausible.

[Viet Era Marine]

Not all your soldiers, but definately all your marines. Loud mouthed cocky arrogant, don't give a shit about civilian life pieces of shit.



Gosh Dave, you sure have our number.

Thanks for the blanket.

[JaneEyre]

Not all your soldiers, but definately all your marines. Loud mouthed cocky arrogant, don't give a shit about civilian life pieces of shit.

Actually, most Marines are loud mouthed, cocky and arrogant. I'm glad they are too. Because if I'm in the situation where I need the Marines to go in...I don't want a quiet, shy, guy who is timid. I want someone who is going to be strong and bold....however, I disagree with the last part of your statment....

[Viet Era Marine]

Actually, most Marines are loud mouthed, cocky and arrogant. I'm glad they are too. Because if I'm in the situation where I need the Marines to go in...I don't want a quiet, shy, guy who is timid. I want someone who is going to be strong and bold....however, I disagree with the last part of your statment....



Well, I'd have to agree with that, right up till they get in their
first "Holy Shit! They're Trying To Kill Us" firefight. After that.
they become professionals or they die.

BTW: Davye: I'm guessing my response to your statement was
a bit too subtle since you didn't reply.

[TFS]

well that didn't stop the My Lai Massacre did it? Whether we want to admit it or not just because it's a rule doesn't mean it's followed... just because it's a rule that's been broken doesn't mean it's not covered up. That being stated unless there is evidence to support a claim doesn't mean it's not plausible.

Prove these events are condoned by the superiors above them in their entirety. Yes, corruption exists, but somewhere within the system exists responsible people with the ability to bring those responsible to justice and will do so as soon as they find out about such events.

The problem is uncovering such events with enough proof to be able to do that. We were lucky the proof about Aby Ghraib was undeniable.



Also, just because it's a rule in the military doesn't mean it's ignored constantly as an accepted action. Just because it does happen doesn't automatically mean there is corruption covering it up. Just because it's plausible doesn't make it true. We can go around in circles about what the vagueness makes plausible and possible all day long, but the bottom line is that without proof of the contrary, which we don't have, these soldiers did nothing wrong here according to the letter of the law.

[Chewy]

Prove these events are condoned by the superiors above them in their entirety. Yes, corruption exists, but somewhere within the system exists responsible people with the ability to bring those responsible to justice and will do so as soon as they find out about such events.

The problem is uncovering such events with enough proof to be able to do that. We were lucky the proof about Aby Ghraib was undeniable.



Also, just because it's a rule in the military doesn't mean it's ignored constantly as an accepted action. Just because it does happen doesn't automatically mean there is corruption covering it up. Just because it's plausible doesn't make it true. We can go around in circles about what the vagueness makes plausible and possible all day long, but the bottom line is that without proof of the contrary, which we don't have, these soldiers did nothing wrong here according to the letter of the law. It seems to me your claim is that things like what dead is suggesting can not happen because the military has 'rules' to prevent it. My claim is that it is plausible that could happen however there is a lack of evidence to support dead's claim.

[Eloqution]

The difference between the posts here and the replies to the thread in the videos section is like night and day.. except Dayve is still here being an idiot.

[TFS]

It seems to me your claim is that things like what dead is suggesting can not happen because the military has 'rules' to prevent it. My claim is that it is plausible that could happen however there is a lack of evidence to support dead's claim.

Not saying it can't happen, but that when it does happen and is found out, those rules bring harsh punishments.

I will say, though, while it is possible, what death suggests is not really plausible. If Abu Ghraib caught that much media attention on the civilian side, then videos of soldiers shooting civilians being leaked like this would cause mountains of controversy compared to Abu Ghraib.

Even if a soldier is stupid enough to do something like that (and I've met a few), there aren't enough of them lumped together anywhere for any of them to get away with it because everyone else around him would come down on that one idiot hard for putting the rest of them in such a bad spot.

[OE800]

how can you tell civilians from enemy combatants when they have no uniforms? the enemy looks like a normal iraqi citizen untill they set off a roadside bomb or open up with an AK from a roof top, maybe the soldiers knew something we didnt about the people in the cars, or maybe they were just shooting at random people, all we can do is speculate.

[dead]

Even if a soldier is stupid enough to do something like that (and I've met a few), there aren't enough of them lumped together anywhere for any of them to get away with it because everyone else around him would come down on that one idiot hard for putting the rest of them in such a bad spot.
If this was true scandals would never happen.
Take abu ghraib for example your saying that these things never can happen because there are never enough "nut cases" together.
But the truth is that you only need a few poeple who are doing crazy things or a "crazy" superior and most will follow.
And the millitary is a prime example where you are learned not to think but only to follow.
And abu ghraib took months to came out.

[TFS]

If this was true scandals would never happen.
Take abu ghraib for example your saying that these things never can happen because there are never enough "nut cases" together.
But the truth is that you only need a few poeple who are doing crazy things or a "crazy" superior and most will follow.
And the millitary is a prime example where you are learned not to think but only to follow.
And abu ghraib took months to came out.

Wrong. Aby Ghraib is more likely to happen because it doesn't involve killing people out where others can see you kill people, and it wasn't civilians that were the targets of that aggression.

In the US military, like them or not, local civilians are put up on a pedistal. If you fuck with them in a serious/fatal way, it comes back to haunt you and everyone around you.

And you're also wrong about learning not to think but to follow. All soldiers are trained to think "is this a legal or illegal order I have in front of me" and if it is illegal, they have an overriding order that is always in effect to refuse to obey that order. They may be hit for insubordination on the spot, but long term, they will be rewarded for their action. How about you go through the training before you try to tell someone who has what soldiers are trained to do? It's right there in the IEDT manual, part of UCMJ.

[bergshadow]

Aby Ghraib is more likely to happen because it doesn't involve killing people out where others can see you kill people, and it wasn't civilians that were the targets of that aggression. There were plenty of eyewitnesse in and around Abu Ghraib - and several deaths, btw, including a journalist doing a story on the jail who was shot by US forces just outside.

And civilians were abused at Abu Ghraib - mostly civilians, according to a couple of the dog handlers and investigators. The estimate from the dog handlers was "90%".

It was being run very much like the South American strongman prisons the US had been associated with for many years, worse than Gitmo before the spotlight went on. People were disappeared from the streets of Iraq, and ended up in Abu Ghraib.

And a lot of this has still not come out in the mainstream US press. Counting on the US media to be watchdogs in these matters is naive.

Do you suppose the Iraqi death squads associated with the US have set up other prisons, to handle the Abu job ? What are the odds that the US is itself running one or more similar prisons in Iraq right now, for renditions and disappearance handling and the rest of the needs of what the Argentinians called the "Dirty War" ?

[TFS]

All I see in that post is blah-blah-blah-no sources-blah-blah-blah-I know nothing about the military, but am going to once again open my big ugly mouth like I'm some sort of expert that was a general for 800 years-blah-blah-blah.

[dead]

All I see in that post is blah-blah-blah-no sources-blah-blah-blah-I know nothing about the military, but am going to once again open my big ugly mouth like I'm some sort of expert that was a general for 800 years-blah-blah-blah.
lol nope i am not a general and i admit that i was wrong with my threat title.
And no i am not starting a personal attack.
But I'll stay with it that in the military there is more room for excesses than i common life.
Sure all those rules are there and most people will be in general good people.
But under pressure and in a power positions strange things happen.
It's not only abu ghraib its thousands years of warfare history was it allowed for allied soldiers during ww2 to kill captured german prisoners ?

[TFS]

lol nope i am not a general and i admit that i was wrong with my threat title.
And no i am not starting a personal attack.
But I'll stay with it that in the military there is more room for excesses than i common life.
Sure all those rules are there and most people will be in general good people.
But under pressure and in a power positions strange things happen.
It's not only abu ghraib its thousands years of warfare history was it allowed for allied soldiers during ww2 to kill captured german prisoners ?

Was talking to Bergshadow with that last post.

And yes, mistakes are made, but not on the level you appear to be trying to say they do. And when they do they are dealt with accordingly much more often than you seem to be saying they do.

[evilmittens]

I will admit to one thing, in Somalia we opened fire on a lot of civilians. That was 90% due to the fact THEIR fighters were in among the civilians. Its not unheard of having civilian casualties, but TFS is right, all of us were trained to respect non-combatants.