Wikileaks Video Released!!

"That's what they get for bringing their kids to a battle," says the invader.

That´s it for America.

Originally posted by racerzeke
How can you tell the van is full of innocent civilians?

The Iraqi's have been under sanctions for 20 years. Where are they gonna get the money to buy a nice shiny black whatever that thing was? It was huge!

And it looked to be armoured from the bullet hole in the windscreen.

Originally posted by racerzeke
So if there was no audio this video would be okay? Who cares if he was itchy to kill them? He waited for clearance it isnt like he just lit up the whole courtyard without permission.

Put yourself in a situation where you think you are killing these men who can potentially kill your friends or other innocents.

I would like to listen to the audio of what you said.

Your poisonous posts are disturbing, this was murder. Nothing more, nothing less...

reply to post by rufusdrak


True, very true. I just wanted to avoid having someone say 'They intentionally fired on an Iraqi ambulance' or 'Of course they opened fire it was insurgents offering medical care'. But yes, at the time they had no idea who was in the van.

The msnbc link says that 2 children were wounded? Is that possibly the two children in the van, did they actually make it??

I don't remember who's sig it was in but this saying feels quite appropriate to express my angers towards this.

"Men in uniform are merely the extension of another mans will"

Originally posted by MischeviousElf

Originally posted by burdman30ott6
Alright, the last several pages of this thread are providing a classic example of the ridiculousness of non-soldiers attempting to analyze the actions of soldiers in a theater of battle.

I'm seeing comments like:
"If you slow the video down, you can see..."
"If you magnify the video, it becomes apparent..."
"If you pause the video here, then clearly..."

Where are the guns and weapons in this video then burdman?

Are all cars Weapons for driving down the street?

Where is the confusion in this evidense?

(click to open player in new window)

Elf

I don't know how to repost this video in the current page we're on so I'm just going to "quote" it into my post.


I'm really surprised so many of you are saying you're utterly appalled and 'shaking' at seeing this new wikileaks video.

This video up here that someone posted has been around for several years already and is even WORSE than the new wikileaks one.

Just take a look, in this video U.S. soldiers are shooting innocent civilians driving down a road and when they shoot the driver and make him crash his car he runs for his life and the soldiers with glee in their voices gun him down and everyone else. All while screaming like it's a video game "Omg dude, we nailed him. Awesome dude, yeah get 'em dude." etc.
They acted like it's Call of Duty the video game as they murdered innocent civilians on the streets who were just driving by.

But I guess the apologists here will say that those civilians were armed too.

Originally posted by racerzeke
So it's okay to allow insurgents to go free and potentially kill innocents and our soldiers because they are hiding behind human shields? No. It's not like they were firing on a market place. The reporters knew who they were with. If you hang around with people carrying RPGs and AK-47s then you cant be too surprised if you're mistake as a combatant also.

You keep assuming 2 things.

1. The people killed were "enemies"
2. They had weapons.

If they were the "enemy" don't you think they would have fired their "weapons" in self-defence?

Also w/regards to the "ambulance":

Military ambulances often carry a red-cross (painted or whatever) to signal their intent (non-hostile)
Yes, in this case there were no such markings on this van... meaning what?

IT WASN'T A MILITARY VEHICLE MAYBE??

More likely it was some guys helping out their buddy laying bloodied and broken on the sidewalk after having just been impaled by bullets fired from a helicopter... for God knows what reason.

Originally posted by racerzeke
So it's okay to allow insurgents to go free and potentially kill innocents and our soldiers because they are hiding behind human shields? No. It's not like they were firing on a market place. The reporters knew who they were with. If you hang around with people carrying RPGs and AK-47s then you cant be too surprised if you're mistake as a combatant also.

About the Geneva Convention and medics, doesnt the van have to be marked?

How do we know they werent friends of the insurgents?

What!! What!!!
"Insurgents"???? Do you mean FREEDOM FIGHTERS???
The US INVADED their country.. if someone invaded the US would you fight them? Would you be arngry if the invading country called you insurgents for DEFENDING your country?
Get Real

Hah, this is exactly why Wikileaks is so important!! Great video, shows us what "they" don't want us to see.

Originally posted by Wide-Eyes

Originally posted by racerzeke
So if there was no audio this video would be okay? Who cares if he was itchy to kill them? He waited for clearance it isnt like he just lit up the whole courtyard without permission.

Put yourself in a situation where you think you are killing these men who can potentially kill your friends or other innocents.

I would like to listen to the audio of what you said.

Your poisonous posts are disturbing, this was murder. Nothing more, nothing less...

War is murder

Have you ever seen any other apache gun cam video? Insurgents riding around in their shiny new toyota pickups full of weapons. Who cares if it was new? If anyone has the money to buy one it would be the terrorists.

None of you have any proof that the people inside the van were innocents or not. Yet you all claim that ITS SO OBVIOUS there are children in the fan and they just wanted to help.

Yes its murder what else am I calling it? Was it justifiable, in the eyes of the troops on the ground and the men in the apache it was. For that situation in that moment.

Whether they should be there or not is none of their, mine, or your business. In that moment, the video shows that what they did was right.

Originally posted by racerzeke
So it's okay to allow insurgents to go free and potentially kill innocents and our soldiers because they are hiding behind human shields? No. It's not like they were firing on a market place. The reporters knew who they were with. If you hang around with people carrying RPGs and AK-47s then you cant be too surprised if you're mistake as a combatant also.

About the Geneva Convention and medics, doesnt the van have to be marked?

How do we know they werent friends of the insurgents?

Thank god your not on the battlefield with you judgement skills.

reply to post by VintageEnvy


yes, the two kids from the van, from what i know they survived... too tired to go find a source though, need to get some sleep

[edit on 5-4-2010 by Naphariel]

this is a very interesting video. its shocking. i just dont know what to say about this. this world is messed up that we live in. thats my opinion.

Originally posted by racerzeke
None of you have any proof that the people inside the van were innocents or not.

They're people. And they're in Iraq. That's all the proof of innocence I need.

WMD remember?

So it is a good idea to go outside at night pointing a lets say hairbrush at a police officer? If he thinks it's a gun he can shoot me. He doesnt have to wait until I shoot him first. Sure people would feel bad for me but it would be what I was asking for.

Do you know how far away the apache is? They probably couldnt even see it or hear it. They were wiped out rather quickly. How could they have time to react and shoot back at something they never saw?

And thanks, I'm glad you're not on the battlefield since you wouldnt have the heart to do your job.

According to this article:

www.msnbc.msn.com...

It added that "the video, shot from an Apache helicopter" gun sight "clearly shows the unprovoked slaying of a wounded Reuters employee and his rescuers. Two young children involved in the rescue were also seriously wounded."

In 2008, Reuters said it had been shown video of the incident shortly after it happened, and that it immediately filed a Freedom of Information Act request to have the video released. That request was never met, Reuters said.

Reuters stated that its photographer and his driver "had gone to the area after hearing of a military raid on a building around dawn that day, and were with a group of men at the time. It is believed two or three of these men may have been carrying weapons, although witnesses said none were assuming a hostile posture.

"The U.S. military said the helicopter attack, in which nine other people were killed, occurred after security forces came under fire," Reuters stated at the time.

So the reporters basically walked right in to the middle of battle. Those pilots were set up to kill Insurgents fleeing a raid. Given these facts, I don't see how you can call the soldier murderers by any stretch.

Originally posted by racerzekeWhether they should be there or not is none of their, mine, or your business.

That's the problem with everything that has transpired since 9/11...

It IS and SHOULD BE our business.

However, we let it NOT become our business... which has indirectly led to what we see now on this video.

In an indirect way... we are all as guilty as the "soldiers" in the video.

Originally posted by MajinRoshi
According to this article:

www.msnbc.msn.com...

It added that "the video, shot from an Apache helicopter" gun sight "clearly shows the unprovoked slaying of a wounded Reuters employee and his rescuers. Two young children involved in the rescue were also seriously wounded."

In 2008, Reuters said it had been shown video of the incident shortly after it happened, and that it immediately filed a Freedom of Information Act request to have the video released. That request was never met, Reuters said.

Reuters stated that its photographer and his driver "had gone to the area after hearing of a military raid on a building around dawn that day, and were with a group of men at the time. It is believed two or three of these men may have been carrying weapons, although witnesses said none were assuming a hostile posture.

"The U.S. military said the helicopter attack, in which nine other people were killed, occurred after security forces came under fire," Reuters stated at the time.

So the reporters basically walked right in to the middle of battle. Those pilots were set up to kill Insurgents fleeing a raid. Given these facts, I don't see how you can call the soldier murderers by any stretch.

In the middle of a battle? It said that raid occured a DAY AGO. How is that in the middle of the battle. You need to learn better comprehension skills. The battle was long over and the people were obviously not armed that were down there.