Camera Crew and Civilians mistaken for insurgents - Wikileaks Guncamera video

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

Jive Turkey

ONE love, blood, life
Joined
Mar 28, 2005
Messages
13,645
I was debating whether or not to post this video. Its a recently leaked gun camera video of US Apache pilots falsely identifying a Reuters camera crew as insurgents and firing on them. Apparently cameras and tripods look enough like AK-47s and RPGs to warrant engagement. After the camera crew is hit, a van containing civilian men and children pulls up to help the wounded. They too are fired upon. Later in the video, a building is demolished by hellfire missiles with complete disregard for the innocent bystanders walking along the street. They were surely killed too. I hesitate in judging the soldiers overseas as I'm sure being in a constant state of heightened anxiety brings with it a lot of emotional and mental baggage. But the cavalier manner in which the pilots appear to be conducting themselves seems incredibly irresponsible. How can a firearm be positively ID'd at that range? Obviously it cant or else this would never have happened. If I'm not mistaken, there are one or two on these boards that have served overseas. What are your thoughts? Again, I'm trying very hard not to judge, but its incredibly difficult.
The video is very graphic, so use your own digression. Its also 40 minutes long. I was able to watch the entire thing as I found it fascinating. If you dont want to watch the whole thing, most of what you need to see is in the first 5 minutes. I dont know what kind of discussion this is supposed to raise, but I think its important to see, even if there isnt much discussion at all

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=is9sxRfU-ik&feature=player_embedded

Heres a short report on the incident

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/apr/05/wikileaks-us-army-iraq-attack

And a report from 2007 with some key differences in regard to what was claimed and what is seen in the new video

http://www.boston.com/news/world/middleeast/articles/2007/07/13/11_iraqis_dead_after_us_troops_clash_with_militiamen_in_baghdad/
 
I think this is one of the dangers of "disengaged" combat.

No one would have supported this war if it was a "fair match" gun vs gun.
 
this is a tragic accident, yes.

but let's get the facts right... it's not as if these two guys were walking down the street alone with just their camera. they were imbeded in a group of insurgents. the people around these two were carrying AK-47's and RPG's. the RPG could take the blackhawk out. they saw a threat, they acted.

would you prefer that they wait and allow the humvees to be ambushed, or for the guy with the RPG to attack the helicopters first?

cops face the same issue... they see what they feel is a threat, and they must react quickly, in the moment, to the best of their abilities. all we can do is hope that they make the right decisions. in this case they probably did, but there was no way in knowing that the news crew was also there.

war, cliche's aside, is hell. an embdeded camera crew, be they embdeded within insurgents or american troops, know full well that they are putting their lives on the line to get the story.


as for what the troops are saying... i have no real defense for that other than to say that i'm sure every one of us has said things while doing our jobs that if the general public knew we would be embarassed.

i'm not going to judge these soldiers for not being politicaly correct in what they say in the heat of battle. god knows they have to deal with this shit on a never ending basis. post traumatic stress syndrome is rampant in the military. if making it seem a little less real is their way of disassociating themselves from just how real it is, makes it easier for them to do the job? so be it.
 
Totally agree with Headache. Those reporters were aware of the risks, and not just from the insurgents.
 
this is a tragic accident, yes.

but let's get the facts right... it's not as if these two guys were walking down the street alone with just their camera. they were imbeded in a group of insurgents. the people around these two were carrying AK-47's and RPG's. the RPG could take the blackhawk out. they saw a threat, they acted.



Are you sure about that? Do you really want to get the facts right?

there are reports that the RPG was camera eqiptment,

According to U.S. officials, the pilots arrived at the scene to find a group of men approaching the fight with what looked to be AK-47s slung over their shoulders and at least one rocket-propelled grenade.

A military investigation later concluded that what was thought to be an RPG was really a long-range photography lens; likewise, the camera looked like an AK-47.
Video depicting killing by U.S. troops in Iraq is real, official says - latimes.com



and it is easy to distance ourselves from this, because afterall they are just Iraqis, who gives a shit?

but when the Federal Gov kills some gun nuts here, Ruby Ridge, because they are being fired on, we are supposed to be up in arms over Americans being killed?
 
but let's get the facts right... it's not as if these two guys were walking down the street alone with just their camera. they were imbeded in a group of insurgents. the people around these two were carrying AK-47's and RPG's. the RPG could take the blackhawk out. they saw a threat, they acted.

Where are you getting this from? From the video?
 
this is a tragic accident, yes.

but let's get the facts right... it's not as if these two guys were walking down the street alone with just their camera. they were imbeded in a group of insurgents. the people around these two were carrying AK-47's and RPG's. the RPG could take the blackhawk out. they saw a threat, they acted.

First of all, that's debatable.

Second, it has little to do with them firing on civilians in the van which contained children. Those civilians who were collecting bodies have international law protections. That part of the video is horrific and in fact the soldiers on the video clearly state that they see NO weapons.

i'm not going to judge these soldiers for not being politicaly correct in what they say in the heat of battle. god knows they have to deal with this shit on a never ending basis. post traumatic stress syndrome is rampant in the military. if making it seem a little less real is their way of disassociating themselves from just how real it is, makes it easier for them to do the job? so be it.

As a civilian who was on the other end of the deal, I can't even wrap my mind around this. A soldier who says the following in response to almost mortally wounding two children:

"Well it's their fault for bringing their kids into a battle."

has lost his humanity and I don't care if this makes his job easier. It's criminal.

War has innocents, they are the civilians, they are the children. And it is where my sympathies largely lie.
 
Are you sure about that? Do you really want to get the facts right?

there are reports that the RPG was camera eqiptment,

I think he was referring to the other insurgents. At any rate, that camera REALLY looked like an RPG, and I doubt that those onboard the helicopter wanted to wait and find out.

Second, it has little to do with them firing on civilians in the van which contained children. Those civilians who were collecting bodies have international law protections. That part of the video is horrific and in fact the soldiers on the video clearly state that they see NO weapons.

They were under the belief that the people they fired upon were insurgents. Insurgents tend to run off taking their dead with them to disguise the amount killed. To the helicopter gunner, they were just more insurgents. There was no way to know there was kids inside.

As a civilian who was on the other end of the deal, I can't even wrap my mind around this. A soldier who says the following in response to almost mortally wounding two children:


Quote:
"Well it's their fault for bringing their kids into a battle."

has lost his humanity and I don't care if this makes his job easier. It's criminal.

Honestly, what do you expect them to say?
 
I think he was referring to the other insurgents. At any rate, that camera REALLY looked like an RPG, and I doubt that those onboard the helicopter wanted to wait and find out.



They were under the belief that the people they fired upon were insurgents. Insurgents tend to run off taking their dead with them to disguise the amount killed. To the helicopter gunner, they were just more insurgents. There was no way to know there was kids inside.



Honestly, what do you expect them to say?

If your father or brother was in the alley behind your house repairing a fence and was blown away by a Policeman,

would you say, "Oh well, he had a hammer in his hand, the Policeman thought it was a gun, was he supposed to wait until he was shot?"
 
I think he was referring to the other insurgents. At any rate, that camera REALLY looked like an RPG, and I doubt that those onboard the helicopter wanted to wait and find out.



They were under the belief that the people they fired upon were insurgents. Insurgents tend to run off taking their dead with them to disguise the amount killed. To the helicopter gunner, they were just more insurgents. There was no way to know there was kids inside.

Really? This is all you have to say?

Cameras look like weapons, they thought they were bad guys so shooting people who were just walking the streets is OK :shrug:

I gurantee you if the roles were reversed you would be livid.
 
Not that. Obviously.
Once again, being under the impression that they were firing at insurgents, they were also under the impression that these were their kids (Or at least wanted to believe that). It certainly not a shock for an insurgent to use human shields.

Cameras look like weapons, they thought they were bad guys so shooting
people who were just walking the streets is OK

There were insurgent attacks in that area just shortly before, and the gunship was called in to look for them. If you want to push for better training in distinguising the difference between RPGs and camera lenses thats fine with me. But you'd never truly understand what it was like being in the position they were in. They made a mistake, but shit happens in war and everyone just has to deal with it, I know that sounds cold but that's the way it is. There has NEVER been a war fought where things like this didn't happen. They shouldn't be crucified for it, they already have to bear the burden of this in their mind. :shrug:
 
While I think the pilots' language is harsh, I cant bring myself to condemn them for it. Part of their job is to find people and to kill them. If they were to think about each and every family of each and every person they've ever killed, I doubt they, or anyone else in their position, would be able to deal with it. There has to be some serious emotional detachment from their actions. Its a coping mechanism and if it helps them sleep at night, I see no harm in it. The problems arise when that nonchalant attitude bleeds over to affecting the way in which they take action. That seems to be at least partly to blame here. Perhaps its impossible to not have one eventually affect the other
 
While I think the pilots' language is harsh, I cant bring myself to condemn them for it. Part of their job is to find people and to kill them. If they were to think about each and every family of each and every person they've ever killed, I doubt they, or anyone else in their position, would be able to deal with it. There has to be some serious emotional detachment from their actions. Its a coping mechanism and if it helps them sleep at night, I see no harm in it.

A lot of people don't understand that.

The problems arise when that nonchalant attitude bleeds over to affecting the way in which they take action. That seems to be at least partly to blame here.

That, and these people being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Didn't the helicopter pilot say they were taking small arms fire at one point before they opened up?
 
There were insurgent attacks in that area just shortly before, and the gunship was called in to look for them. If you want to push for better training in distinguising the difference between RPGs and camera lenses thats fine with me. But you'd never truly understand what it was like being in the position they were in. They made a mistake, but shit happens in war and everyone just has to deal with it, I know that sounds cold but that's the way it is. There has NEVER been a war fought where things like this didn't happen. They shouldn't be crucified for it, they already have to bear the burden of this in their mind. :shrug:

It's beyond cold, but that's another matter.

No one wants to crucify anyone, have you seen that in here?

Just a taking of responsibility and the military learning from it's huge mistakes.
 
It's beyond cold, but that's another matter.
The whole concept and idea of warfare is beyone cold. Massive amount of innocent civilians were killed by the Allies in WWII, but to put it bluntly, everyone just has to deal with things that happen in war.

No one wants to crucify anyone, have you seen that in here?
It sounds like that from a lot of people, not nessicarily on this board but still...

Just a taking of responsibility and the military learning from it's huge mistakes.

Something I'd like to see more of as well :up:
 
The whole concept and idea of warfare is beyone cold. Massive amount of innocent civilians were killed by the Allies in WWII, but to put it bluntly, everyone just has to deal with things that happen in war.

I think that is very easy for you to say, because you live in a country where your women and children aren't being killed in the streets and you haven't experienced war outside of your front door like many, many other people around the world.

And I don't fault you at all for your inability to understand just how difficult it is to "deal with things" that happen in war. It takes every shred of your humanity and then some. And for some people "dealing" with things might equal strapping on a suicide belt and blowing something up, which we then scratch our heads shocked that such cold bloodedness exists.

This war was wrong and a totally ill-conceived idea from the outset. It is wholly unsurprising to have events like this happen.
 
Are you sure about that? Do you really want to get the facts right?

there are reports that the RPG was camera eqiptment,

Video depicting killing by U.S. troops in Iraq is real, official says - latimes.com



and it is easy to distance ourselves from this, because afterall they are just Iraqis, who gives a shit?

but when the Federal Gov kills some gun nuts here, Ruby Ridge, because they are being fired on, we are supposed to be up in arms over Americans being killed?


well... i for one wasn't up in arms over ruby ridge at all.



there have been numerous reports about this issue and it's easy to get things confused... most of the original reports that came out said that people in the group did have weapons. now reports are coming out that they didn't... ok, fine. i know this, i looked at that video and i saw what i thought were AK47's and RPG's.

if there really weren't any in the group then it just makes it an even more tragic accident. nothing more.
 
That could have been easily avoided.

it's very easy to say that in hindsight. when a wrong decision means that you and your entire crew will die, it's a tad tougher to make that decision within a matter of minutes.

i know this... i see that video, i see what looks like an RPG.

put yourself in the middle of a war zone with known insurgents in the area, and you come across a group with what appears to be weaponry, including an RPG.

you gonna sit back and wait to find out?
 
it's very easy to say that in hindsight. when a wrong decision means that you and your entire crew will die, it's a tad tougher to make that decision within a matter of minutes.

i know this... i see that video, i see what looks like an RPG.

put yourself in the middle of a war zone with known insurgents in the area, and you come across a group with what appears to be weaponry, including an RPG.

you gonna sit back and wait to find out?

I understand what you are saying, and of course hindsight it's easier to see things, but that being said, the cameras were not being aimed at them. This was not an imminent threat where decisions had to be made in seconds. There's not even a sound of ungrency in the gunmen's voice.

Once again I can't put myself in their shoes, but it was obvious to me that they were cameras. The one lens I can see might be misconstrued, but this really comes down to training. If you're going to allow technology to disengage you somewhat from the battlefield, then also allow for the training to best utilize the technology. Those things have wicked zoom, they could have easily identified the objects as not being weapons.
 
Who cares about the RPG? I understand that, it looked like a weapon. That's not the disturbing part of the video, to me.

They fired on a van simply because they picked up an injured guy on the street. They sounded like eager teenagers playing fucking Modern Warfare.
 
it's very easy to say that in hindsight. when a wrong decision means that you and your entire crew will die, it's a tad tougher to make that decision within a matter of minutes.

So then you're saying that the soldiers have more rights than the civilians? What if it was a police officer who killed a man with a camera? Would you still be defending him? I'd say by virtue of being a soldier, its their responsibility to be sure they know they are engaging justly. They're in an urban environment. There are innocent civilians everywhere. Nobody forced these men to become soldiers. Its an amazing sacrifice that they're making, but they need to take on the greater responsibility that comes with it. They need to protect themselves, but they also need to protect the innocent. If you go a little further in the video, you'll see what I think is an even greater example of gross disregard for human life when they destroy the building along with all the bystanders on the street (34:30)
A man who they thought was carrying an AK-47 enters a building. Am I wrong in thinking that you then send a crew of soldiers in to get him rather than just blow up the building along with everyone else in and around it? I understand that its dangerous, but I would say that's part and parcel of what you signed up for
 
So then you're saying that the soldiers have more rights than the civilians? What if it was a police officer who killed a man with a camera? Would you still be defending him? I'd say by virtue of being a soldier, its their responsibility to be sure they know they are engaging justly. They're in an urban environment. There are innocent civilians everywhere. Nobody forced these men to become soldiers. Its an amazing sacrifice that they're making, but they need to take on the greater responsibility that comes with it. They need to protect themselves, but they also need to protect the innocent. If you go a little further in the video, you'll see what I think is an even greater example of gross disregard for human life when they destroy the building along with all the bystanders on the street (34:30)
A man who they thought was carrying an AK-47 enters a building. Am I wrong in thinking that you then send a crew of soldiers in to get him rather than just blow up the building along with everyone else in and around it? I understand that its dangerous, but I would say that's part and parcel of what you signed up for


i'm going to just agree to disagree, but as for your police officer argument, i would judge it on the merit of the situation...

and more simply, yes... i have defended police officers on this site in the past in controversial shootings. i specificaly remember a debate about a guy who was shot who was holding a comb... when officers were called to a situation of a man with a gun, who were threatened by the man, who said he had a gun, who proceded to point a long object under his jacket at the officers, who was shot dead... and upon inspection, it was a comb.

yes... i defended the actions of those officers.


as for your "nobody forced them to become soldiers" line... nobody forced anyone to be a reporter in a war zone.
 
I would agree with you on the situation you cited, but I'd hardly call that man innocent. The situations would be more analogous if the police were called to an area where a man with a gun had been seen, saw an innocent man carrying a comb, and killed him because they thought it was the gunman. Not very defendable

as for your "nobody forced them to become soldiers" line... nobody forced anyone to be a reporter in a war zone.

What about the man walking the street who got blown to smithereens?
 
What about the man walking the street who got blown to smithereens?


He was in a fuckin WAR ZONE !!!

we have young Americans over there killing bad guys and anyone that is stupid enough to be mistaken for bad guys, Americans spilling their blood for these ingrates

these young heroes could be back home playing video games and taking out student loans they will never pay back

instead they are in the country of Iraq, and basically the whole place is a hot war zone.
 
Back
Top Bottom