An unpopular stance regarding the wikileaks video (My Breakdown of events)

So the wiki leaks video came out and didn't deliver the goods as they promised. I was expecting to see execution style shooting or something of that nature to keep the media on its toes and to only report what needed to be reported. Instead what we got was a video with friendly fire, a pentagon cover up, with tidbits of sensationalism in between. So lets break down the video shall we.

Beginning of the video they go into the two mens lives that were killed. This is very sad and hard to watch. Showing the kid holding his fathers pictures especially. This honestly depicts perfectly how propaganda is used. If they told you nothing of the people in the video, you won't feel so bad. You see them but you know nothing of them. Lets be honest here, when those first bombings in Baghdad took place do you remember how you felt? Being completely honest I really don't remember what I was thinking but judging how I am probably nothing as war is constantly depicted in the media. Now lets say those videos of Baghdad being bombed came out and beforehand showed the names and children and professions of everyone killed by collateral damage. Well to be honest its war, its not good, but the experience would change drastically. You would find connections among the random dead people and would just be so saddened and scared for them at the same time. A real flood of emotions which soldiers are not immune to, so onto the second part of the video.

The main piece of this video that is so disgusting to so many people is the soldier in it talking crap. I believe this is merely a psychological response. Remember that soldiers are trained to kill but they are not immune from emotion. Now I don't wanna defend him too much but I have no idea what the circumstances are regarding this video thus it is necessary. When you here him talking "crap" especially that line "Shouldn't have brought a kid" I believe that this was raw emotion. When something like this happens you will generally be flooded by raw emotion. Think about when you are really embarrassed, that blood flow to your head followed by the emotion like you wanna cry but you know you can't, I truly believe this is what happened here. In a warzone you aren't going to cry, thus you have to say something to keep your cool, to make yourself feel better. That is what seems to be happening here. As far as the rest of the video with him talking and killing, I can't begin to speculate. There is a chance that he is a sociopath, but at the same time, he may be targeting these people because something happened and he was commanded to respond. I saw many debates yesterday stating one way or another that he should have known that those weren't rpg's but actually they were tripods. I call bs on this. You are in a war, most people walking around aren't carrying around 6 foot tripods. We do have the option of looking after the fact and blowing up videos and what not.

I know my position isn't popular. I understand completely why it isn't popular. I also understand why many of you are so heated about this. I do find it particularly offensive though that this many members on this forum who are supposedly denying ignorance are shoot first ask questions later type individuals. How many yesterday were out there calling for this soldiers head on a platter? For everyone that was saying this was disgusting and he should be killed, you now have seen war. Granted by these brash statements you should know that you are now eligible to run for office as our leaders do the same thing by calling for someone to be killed and then deploying the troops. Now I have said my piece, some will flame me, for those that flame me, all I ask if for you to read my post in its entirety. We as humans do very bad things to each other, I myself have seen much worse than this video in my own town. It is really something you need to think about.

reply to post by ventian


Popularity notwithstanding, you of course have a right to your opinion. I wonder however why you think it is special enough to merit its own thread as opposed to the opinions of all those whom have taken the time and effort to express theirs on the existing threads on the subject?

Your stance is not that firm. It was hard to find your stance. If you were to put yourself in the position of having your nieghborhood invaded and then you get shot because somone down the street had an RPG, then you will start to see the light. We have no business being the law of that land, just as you would feel if your town was invaded. We have no business shooting people over there, weather they are armed or unarmed.

reply to post by earthdude


My stance is very firm. Our soldiers are over there because of politicians that decided who the bad guys are for "we the people". I understand why the Iraqi's would hate us and I can't blame them one bit. We invaded based off of W's signature. But you should understand that is what soldiers do. They aren't some college professor dissecting every piece of information, they kill. That is their job.

Thanks for a more logical view on the matter ventian. I've avoided those threads because of that type of thinking. It reminds me of all the people who ask "why don't cops shoot the gun out of his hand or shoot out the cars tires". It's easy to sit after the fact and over analyse the events. Especially if you know nothing of what the enviroment it occurred in.

reply to post by hangedman13


I agree that it is quite easy after the fact. As I said I don't know what happened but everyone that has this stance seems to be labeled some right wing fringe member or simply heartless. I think the soldier may need to be evaluated most certainly but I think ending the war is a necessity. The more propaganda pieces like these that get out means the worse our image in the world gets and we really don't need that considering our current financial and border problems.

Originally posted by ventian
reply to post by earthdude

 

My stance is very firm. Our soldiers are over there because of politicians that decided who the bad guys are for "we the people". I understand why the Iraqi's would hate us and I can't blame them one bit. We invaded based off of W's signature. But you should understand that is what soldiers do. They aren't some college professor dissecting every piece of information, they kill. That is their job.

Don't you see that is just enabling? You can't blame the Iraqi's and may think its wrong, but you don't hold our men and woman in the forces to any high standards of morality.

We KNOW we didn't attack Iraq out of defense, we all KNOW this, so in my opinion, while bush and others are responsible for starting the war, our soldiers and we at home are responsible to say NO MORE. Its like arguing about whether it's OK to shoot a man after breaking in his house!

I can go as far as understandable on this issue but not make the leap towards justified considering the barbarism displayed. It is war, war is hell, hell hath no fury like a woman's corns - I understand that our young men are the warriors in the field - I'm also aware of the video game exploits of many and the massive media blitz we endure. Yes, it is disgusting, the realities of war - but we have standards and rules of engagement to minimize our barbaric tendencies towards our enemies, to reign in the warrior spirit in compassion for the populace. Young men are desensitized to violence as is society as a whole. Cops, TrueTV, Locked Up Abroad, Dog the Bounty Hunter, DEA - 24 and just about every other media infotainment event bombard us with horrifying depictions of everyday life and we celebrate the carnage rather than question the message. This is the way things are for those who drink it all in without feeling anything about the content.

gj

reply to post by ventian


I think the job of a soldier is much harder than just killing. My hat goes off to them for trying to do a good job. We must realize, they are young and do not make the right desision at times. To ignore misdeeds like the ones in the video and the cover-up is just immoral. We cannot force our morality on others, especially when it is flawed and contradictory. If we were to take a vote, you would see that our soldiers are not obeying the will of the people. Those who would vote to continue this fruitless war are mislead. Justifying the killing of unarmed men is going to be a very hard thing to do. I would just give up.

I watched only the gun camera footage with the overlays. What I saw was the two journalists walking down the street. I only know they were journalists because in the overlay they were labeled as such. Then I saw a moped drive off in the top left of the frame and two other guys, one with an AK, the other with an RPG, are standing near where the moped was. The guy with the AK should be good because civilians are allowed one for self defense. The guy with the RPG, on the other hand, should not be there. Civilians are not allowed to have them, and just having one displays hostile intent. The perspective of the video comes around the building and you see someone crouching behind the wall holding something that looks like a camera with a telephoto lens. At the last second he pops up and aims the something at the chopper.

So there's a group of guys standing around a couple blocks away from a coalition ground element. They have what appears to be small arms and at least one AT weapon. It only takes one to down an aircraft or kill a vehicle. Also, something that I haven't read mentioned is that the insurgents try to get evidence of themselves attacking coalition forces so that they can get paid. So having a camera does not really mean they are friendlies.

Ok, so based on these observations the crew gets permission to engage. When they come around and open fire you can see the guy with the RPG again, he drops it next to the wall. It's pretty brutal, but it's not the worst thing I've ever seen. After the first pass the van comes up. It's unmarked. The crew remarks that they're collecting weapons, the only evidence that these were armed combatants. Remember the request for the ground element to "Get pictures"? They're not trying to cover anything up, they want the scene to be documented as-is before it is tampered with.

The patrol arrives on the scene and saves the kids. There is chatter regarding an RPG round under a body.

This is what I saw and heard. I don't see anything that would make me believe the crew acted inappropriately. I suppose, though, that people sometimes see what they want to see.

The driver of the van made a decision to put those kids in the kill zone.

OR

The driver of the van heroically attempted to save a stranger at the risk of his family's and his own life.

Spin it however you want. In my mind he acted irresponsibly.

OP, you are absolutely justified in making your own thread on this topic. I could not believe I was the only one not buying into the hype.

reply to post by ventian


It really depends on where you're posting from. If you're in the US maybe this isn't such a big deal.

But for countries that are part of the Geneva convention this is a clear violation of the articles of war and a criminal act.

Especially when you consider these guys were press the coverup of this crime is despicable.

I think it took great courage to bring this video out and I commend wikileaks for their efforts.

The area where you live is being attacked by criminals, destroyed
the Army that patrols your area is doing a piss poor job, people die dialy and criminals are running a muck.

You decide to carry a weapon where ever you go. You and your friends are walking down the street with a reporter ,

Some 20 year old punk in a helicopter taught to ignore his conciseness guns you down from the safe comfort a safe distance away.

Not only did they murder you for patrolling your street for criminals,they fired on you without provocation, carrying a weapon is not grounds for deadly force.

Well your neighbor passes by in his mini van with his kids in tow and sees you laying bloody in the streets.He decided to help you to the hospital.

Well good old solder in the helicopter , says hey Never mind that you are picking up a wounded person, most likely to take to a hospital. We decide who helps the people we shot. Now 20 year old punk in camo or AF blues shoots the mini van. Mind you this helicopter has not taken one single shot. Is in no harms way has not been attacked.

Well once your buddies in trucks show up and find little kids you blown apart and missing limbs, you decide to turn your concise back on and save them!

To bad you never used that concise to find out that you were never under attack you took no fire and the persons you murdered never fired a shot your lack of humanity not only killed men but children as well as 2 journalists with deadly cameras.

Oh and when one guy tried to crawl away you gunned him down as well.

reply to post by ventian


Friendly fire ?!!!!! Do you even know the definition of that term ?

Am I the only one who sees the absurdity of that statement ?

I am of the opinion that the soldiers in question did what they felt was necessary in the situation they were in. I saw the video and I think they were very rational. There was no hunting for sport mentality that is obviously trying to be depicted by wiki. You people, like I, saw 15 minutes out of the day in the life of a U. S. soldier in a hostile environment. I will not sit in my comfy house thousands of miles away and demand that these soldiers be brought up on charges. We sit in our safe little homes and berate bosses, teachers, cops, and military, anyone who has chosen to take a step ahead of others to try to make a difference. I suggest to anyone that doesn’t like what they saw in the video to try to understand that the ones there are the best judges of what to do in that situation. Its bad enough we have men and women dying over in Iraq and Afghanistan and have armchair Politian’s telling them what to do from their secure little offices. I will not sit here and try to believe I can decide what to do from a few minute video. Anyone that does is thinking they are “Holier Than Thou” and are just looking for something to bash America with again. As B. Hussein Obama would say…”Workers Unite!”
Damn Communists!

Why does this warrant it's own thread?! Isn't this being discussed elsewhere?!
I thought voicing where you stood was being done in the existing thread.
Man I'm confused.

reply to post by belial259


Yea and the Taliban took part in the Geneva Conventions. Considering the treatment we have seen of prisoners in the M.E. like Daniel Pearle getting his head cut-off w/a knife we see how much more civilized the Taliban and other groups are than the US. Before you throw stones at the US forces and the not following the conventions remember that the enemy doesn't follow it either!

There is no real excuse to take a life. We all make choices, and those lead us to the trials in life we recieve. It is still a choice. If you can be talked into, or pushed into taking a life, you have made some poor decisions in the past. As far as his remarks being some sort of defense mechanism, he would only need that since he made his choice to go to war.
"Don't bring your kids to war"... we came to their home with guns and bombs, so thats kinda like saying "Don't bring your kids to your home"
Thanks for the post though, I am glad i got the chance to disagree.

reply to post by hangedman13

Explanation: The US is a political allie of Australia! The Taliban are NOT!

I will throw stones as I, as an Australian, will hold the US to a higher standard!

Especially when they have signed up for that standard and also hold a PERMENANT position on the UN security council!

Personal Disclosure: Acting the same as the enemy and then hiding behind the actions of the enemy MAKES them THE ENEMY!, regardless of who pays their wages or why!