It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The US Army's 875th Combat engineers chase down and engage insurgents.

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 3 2007 @ 09:59 AM
link   
The US Army's 875th Combat engineers, chase down two insurgents who shot at them in Iraq. Notice they are both carrying weapons.
www.liveleak.com...




Join my LiveLeak channel!
www.liveleak.com...




posted on Sep, 3 2007 @ 10:08 AM
link   
and the purpose of your post is?



posted on Sep, 3 2007 @ 04:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Fett Pinkus
 


This is the War on Terror forum, is it not?



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 11:09 AM
link   
The US 1st BN 6th Marines/Charlie Co, return fire after being attacked at outpost Utley in Iraq 2006.

www.liveleak.com...


The US 1st BN 6th Marines/Charlie Co, Part 2 of the attack at Ulay outpost in Ramadi, Iraq 2006. US Marines are attacked in their outpost and return fire.

www.liveleak.com...



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 05:33 PM
link   
somebody has to say this and it might aswell be me,
normaly when its Iraqi insurgents and so on film attacks on US forces we get both sides debating with one side which i find my self on most of the time

*good blow for the Iraqis*

and the other side

damn terrorists , need to fudged up and so forth.


here is the main question
why is this acceptible but when its vice versa its a war crime?



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 05:38 PM
link   
Because one side purposely targets civilians and non military targets while the other side does not.



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by ChrisF231
Because one side purposely targets civilians and non military targets while the other side does not.


US has killed far greater cuvilians though
and you have to remember there are those that just strike at the US

and i am on about those not the terrorists that kill cuvilians.

back to the question that i asked


why is this acceptible but when its vice versa its a war crime?


and just to verify again i am talking about those that just target US targets and not cuvilian.



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 06:07 PM
link   
whoever says it was a war crime?



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 06:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vipassana
whoever says it was a war crime?


havent you read the past topics on ATS?
wont mention names, but there are some people that make it look like war crimes when its the other way round



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 06:10 PM
link   
reply to post by bodrul
 


There's a big difference between civilians being casualties of war and TARGETING civilians. We don't sit around and look for innocent people to kill. Obviously it's horrible that innocents die, but in this sort of war, what do you expect when the enemy hides among them? Again, big difference between civilians being killed while attacking enemies, and strictly targeting civilians.



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 06:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Jaruseleh
 


like the soliders thats killed an entire family?
how many more masicures and so on have happend by US hands?

not saying all deaths are on purpose by the US



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 06:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by bodrul

Originally posted by Vipassana
whoever says it was a war crime?


havent you read the past topics on ATS?
wont mention names, but there are some people that make it look like war crimes when its the other way round


First of all there is a huge difference between shaving off faces, beheading innocent people, car bombing them by the hundreds and engaging two armed insurgents who shot at you.

Secondly, there is no way we have killed anywhere near the amount of people AQ and the insurgents have killed. The car bombs alone, there is just no way we compare to that. After all, THEY target the civilians, we don't.



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 06:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dronetek
First of all there is a huge difference between shaving off faces,


so thats what the scene was of that masicure of that Iraqi family which they tried to cover up,

they were shaving the familys hair with their m-16s?


also my org question wasnt about terrorists that attack cuvilians
it was about people that just strike US targets,

jebus



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 01:28 AM
link   
It's very important to become informed on US War Fighting Policy and the different forms it comes in. There are plenty of sources for beginning to understand "Center of Gravity" war fighting and the more traditional role of "Just War" policy that are incorporated into the US system and understanding of war fighting.

There are plenty of White Papers out there to read that specifically discuss our war fighting policies and recent trends that have caused us to change our more traditional types of responses to national, international and asymmetrical types of threats. This is an evolving game and US military and Gov't. policy makers are struggling to find the most effective and prudent course of prosecuting modern war in the face of guerrilla and non-national, ideologically driven combatants. The international community and many NGO's are also involved in the evolution of the strategies.

It is not, nor has it ever been US policy to target "civilians" or "civilian infrastructure" for destruction or incapacitation, unless it has been, and can be shown that these assets are in direct support of forces or individuals, who are a direct threat or in opposition to US forces in the prosecution of their assigned objectives.

I'm sure this will stir them up.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join