NEWS: Spanish Judge Issues International Arrest Warrants For 3 US Soldiers

Santiago Pedraz, a Spanish High Court Judge, has issued 3 international arrest warrants for 3 U.S soldiers. The warrants pertain to a 2003 incident in Iraq where an American tank fired at the Palestine Hotel killing 2 journalists, a Spanish cameraman and a Ukrainian reporter. The warrant charges the soldiers with murder and of breaking the Geneva Conventions.



If they've done nothing wrong there is nothing to fear, that's how the line goes right? A Spanish citizen died and understandably they want answers. Will they get the opportunity though? I hope the United States plays ball with this case. I remember watching the news when it happened.

The tank literally took aim and fired at the Hotel which was deliberately chosen to host international journalists. The location of the Hotel was deliberately advertised as housing journalists and the firing upon it is at worst a deliberate attack on international journalists, at the least its criminal negligence.

There will be those who will say, well things happen in war. Yes they do, but they shouldn't escape scrutiny. Im sure Saddam will use the excuse of war in his trial too, but you can rest assured that wont get him any slack.

The U.S soldiers named in the international arrest warrants are:

Sgt. Shawn Gibson
Capt. Philip Wolford
Lt. Col. Philip deCamp

It's funny how in a war we can designate a place for journalist, just so we can watch it all from the comfort of our homes and cast our judgements.

Killing is Killing regardless of the circumstances. I doubt anything happens to them.

Here's the video of the tank attack.

Iraq-Spanish-Cameraman-killed-2003

It's from the documentary Deadline Iraq: Uncensored stories of the war.

Sadly civilians die in wars its sad but its true. When your a journalist and you go to a Warzone you have to know there is a risk of getting killed, they dont call them warzones for nothing. Chances are this tank crew saw a man with a large object on his shoulder pointing it at them. Thought it was a anti-tank missile which you fire from the shoulder and defended themselves.

Good luck Spain arresting US soldiers your going to need it

This is the real story for those of you who don't know.

At the time the tank fired, US forces were under heavy artillery fire ( heavy mortars ) and they were intercepting transmissions from an Iraqi artillery observer correcting the incoming rounds. The tanks were told to look for anything suspicious in the surrounding buildings, they did. They thought the camera man was using a spotting scope and thought he was the spotter, so they fired one round.
PS. It could be entirely plausible that the arty observer was within the hotel as well. There is no such place as a safe haven in the middle of a battle.

So no fault of the US soldiers, if anything it's the camera mans fault. Talk about stupid.

Ya like this will ever go thru... Guess maybe he should not have been on a blacony holding a large object up on his shoulder aimed at the bridge. Those soldiers did what they are trained to do. They assesed the situation and fired. For all they knew it could have been shoulder fired missile or a spotter as some one else said.

Originally posted by rogue1
This is the real story for those of you who don't know.

And heres the real truth not propaganda

the tank was not engaged by anyone and turned and fired on the hotel without warning or provacation. the cameraman died for no reason other than a bored tanker. talk about stupid.

Originally posted by HarlequinAnd heres the real truth not propaganda

the tank was not engaged by anyone and turned and fired on the hotel without warning or provacation. the cameraman died for no reason other than a bored tanker. talk about stupid.

open your eyes, the video clearly shows a fire fight on 2 sides of the building with an a-10 giving suppression fire very near the building, if the gunner is guilty of anything, its poor aiming.

Being alligned with Israel I supposed they thought they could wipe out a few palestinians while they're at it!! Foolish American Infidels!!

posted on 19-10-2005 at 10:08 PM
ics.leeds.ac.uk...
According to Tomlinson, the round that was fired was a heat round, an incendiary shell that is intended to kill people and not destroy buildings. If the tank had fired an armor-piercing round, the damage to the building would have been much more severe.

The immediate reaction from U.S. commanders to the attack on the Palestine Hotel was anger and consternation. Lt. Col. Philip DeCamp, Captain Wolford's commanding officer, began screaming over the radio, "Who just shot the Palestinian [sic] Hotel?" according to Tomlinson. Tomlinson listened as DeCamp confronted Wolford. "'Did you just f***ing shoot the Palestinian [sic] Hotel?'" he demanded of Wolford.

Tomlinson said that at first, Wolford was not sure that what he had hit was in fact the hotel. Tomlinson continues:

"[After a delay of some minutes] Wolford says, 'Yes, yes. We had an observer up there. And DeCamp says, 'You're not supposed to fire on the hotel.' And then there is a brief discussion about what he did see and why did he fire because this was very serious. They weren't supposed to shoot at the Palestine Hotel."

Afterward, DeCamp ordered Wolford to cease firing and drove his tank to meet Wolford, apparently to have a private discussion.

After hearing the exchange, Tomlinson immediately went to Colonel Perkins, DeCamp's commanding officer, to tell him that his effort to locate the Palestine Hotel to prevent it from being hit by an air strike was too late.

"I know, I know," Perkins told Tomlinson. "I have just given the order that under no circumstances is anyone to shoot at the Palestine Hotel, even if they are taking fire, even if there is an artillery piece on top of the roof. No one is allowed to shoot at the Palestine Hotel again."

and

noted that it was difficult to tell whether the tanks did or did not receive fire from the eastern bank of the river because of the hotel's distance from the bridge. Jules Crittenden, the embedded U.S. reporter who was on the western side of the bridge, reported hearing on the radio that there were up to 40 Iraqi RPG teams on the eastern side. According to journalists in the hotel, the tanks took fire from various government buildings on the eastern bank in the period before the shelling of the hotel. In fact, Sinz's tape shows the tanks firing on several targets on the east side of the bridge. It also shows a dark plume of smoke rising from the west side of the river - described by one reporter as an air strike - for several minutes before the tank raises its turret and fires a single round at the hotel. Explosions of what appear to be tank fire also occasionally echo in the background.

[edit on 20-10-2005 by namehere]

Originally posted by namehere
open your eyes, the video clearly shows a fire fight on 2 sides of the building with an a-10 giving suppression fire very near the building, if the gunner is guilty of anything, its poor aiming.

NO - YOU Open your Eyes!

This Hotel is Known to Host Foreign Journalists, and knowning that all US Troops Know that, WHY did they fire on it? Poor Aiming? In a Tank, that has so much Hi-Tech "toys" inside, that it can not miss, while moving, shooting at another moving tank? YEA SURE!

Pure IGNORANCE!



And Again another Reuters Journalist Dead...

Originally posted by Harlequin
And heres the real truth not propaganda

the tank was not engaged by anyone and turned and fired on the hotel without warning or provacation. the cameraman died for no reason other than a bored tanker. talk about stupid.

If you are a tanker and you see someone whos holding a rpg or something large by it's sholders would you shoot or you say put down the weapon? by that time the rpg is already fire and your tank is blown up and your dead!

Originally posted by ulshadow
If you are a tanker and you see someone whos holding a rpg or something large by it's sholders would you shoot or you say put down the weapon? by that time the rpg is already fire and your tank is blown up and your dead!

You want to know how this Goes?

"Sir, I think I have seen some RPG on that Building!"

"Where?"

"Up there - In that Hotel!"

"Shoot!"

"But, Sir, isn't that Hotel reserved for International Journalists Only? There are supposed to be no Insurgents up there. I just think I saw something like an RPG, could be a camera or something."

"Wanna call them up and ask if they are pointing an RPG or a camera at you? SHOOT DAMNIT!"

"But Sir...."

"NO Butts - Private, if you do not Fire this Round at that Hotel, you will be Court Martialed for Disobedience! Now Fire a volley at that damn Terrorist in that building and SHUTUP!"

"...fine..."

*BANG!*

....

The simple fact is that the Palestinian Hotel was located in a battle zone. Us tanks had already been under heavy fire for several hours. It was a split second decision by the tank gunner to hit the balcony as he thought it was a legitimate target. Hell, you don't find a target in the middle of a heavy firefight and then look at a map before you hit it, that's inviting disaster

If you want to read more about this battle, I recommend you read the book " Thunder Run " which is a detailed account of the first american armoured incursions into Baghdad in 2003.

Permission to Fire?

A Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) investigation into the incident—based on interviews with about a dozen reporters who were at the scene, including two embedded journalists who monitored the military radio traffic before and after the shelling occurred—suggests that attack on the journalists, while not deliberate, was avoidable. CPJ has learned that Pentagon officials, as well as commanders on the ground in Baghdad, knew that the Palestine Hotel was full of international journalists and were intent on not hitting it.


The immediate reaction from U.S. commanders to the attack on the Palestine Hotel was anger and consternation. Lt. Col. Philip DeCamp, Captain Wolford's commanding officer, began screaming over the radio, "Who just shot the Palestinian [sic] Hotel?" according to Tomlinson. Tomlinson listened as DeCamp confronted Wolford. "‘Did you just f***ing shoot the Palestinian [sic] Hotel?'" he demanded of Wolford.

Tomlinson said that at first, Wolford was not sure that what he had hit was in fact the hotel. Tomlinson continues:

"[After a delay of some minutes] Wolford says, ‘Yes, yes. We had an observer up there. And DeCamp says, ‘You're not supposed to fire on the hotel.' And then there is a brief discussion about what he did see and why did he fire because this was very serious. They weren't supposed to shoot at the Palestine Hotel."

"I know, I know," Perkins told Tomlinson. "I have just given the order that under no circumstances is anyone to shoot at the Palestine Hotel, even if they are taking fire, even if there is an artillery piece on top of the roof. No one is allowed to shoot at the Palestine Hotel again."

Source:
CPJ Investigates the Attack on Palestine Hotel

Thanks for the quote Souljah

As you can see, the fact that the Palestine Hotel was offlimits was known to the U.S military. In the days of precision bombing and high tech weaponry there is no excuse for errant tankers firing at innocent civilians. Do they let any old knucklehead drive Abrahms tanks these days? Surely those firing around that area of Baghdad had been briefed to "not shoot at the Palestine Hotel!" but some tankers did shoot at it and killed 2 journalists. Time to explain your actions in court.

In this day & age we like to accuse people of things which of course naturally makes them guilty. There comment was sarcastic. It has to do with how everyone is so quick to discard people who get captured by U.S. troops and shipped off to Cuba. We call them terrorists. Its funny that we call them that without a fair trial. Based on those standards the 3 soldiers in question in this discussion are murderers and should be locked up. Right? I mean fair is fair after all. Or perhaps we as a society are extremely arrogant and have double standards. If I or anyone else should care what those 3 soldiers have to say and if I or anyone else should allow them to defend themselves then we MUST do the same for people we accuse. Based on American standards those 3 soldiers are murderers.

Poor journalists. The want to go to war, but they don't want to get hurt. It's called the fog of war. It's sad it happened, but if you aren't willing to take the risks, stay out of the war zone.

If Spain touches our men, blow them off the map. They're cowards, anyway.

That is exactly the kind of attitude I'm talking about. Just kill em all. I mean we are Americans so we are better than the rest of the world. We are above judgement and above the law. It takes a real brave man to turn a tank on journalists.

Our military holds our men accountable. If you were in that tank, what would you have done. You don't know what you would have done. In a combat zone, you don't take chances. If you do, you die. This thread is just one more excuse to bash America and the military. Most of the posters to this thread never contribute anything but anti-American propaganda.

If you haven't been there you don't know. There might be 10 men on this board who are in a position to judge. The rest are just blowing smoke.