Am I the only one noticing all of the outraged armchair quarterbacking over this? Yet, not a single thread expressing outrage over the embassy bombings in Pakistan and Baghdad.Ottomania wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0
Thats just horrible. How the fuck they can open fire on people without a single hesitation?
True.Cybargs wrote:
Hajji shouldn't have been hanging out in a large group with huge slings. Should've stayed the fuck out of a combat zone.Iconic Irony wrote:
You people are idiots.
If they hadn't shot them and they turned out to be insurgents and then later bombed a market, the pilots would have been called idiots for not shooting them.
Excuse the fuck out of the pilots for not being able to differentiate between a camera on a sling and an AK-47 on a sling from 1000 feet up while circling at 100mph. I mean seriously, I had the ability to pause this shit and zoom in and I couldn't tell the difference, if it hadn't of been for the commentary and description of events I would have never known.
When on duty, assume every hajji is out to kill you and mortar you at night.
war sucks. you and the bunch of monkey sheeple like you who decide to choose what to be outraged over and ignore other things just as relevent, just as bad, need to do the world a favor and stick your heads in an oven. or, just admit you are completely one sided on an issue.Beduin wrote:
So... You agree it is fucked up there, right? It is so fucked up that we are comparing ourselves with "freedom fighters". Saying look.... they are doing it too... it is a bad place, thats how things goes down there"...yes?
Last edited by eleven bravo (2010-04-05 14:47:24)
Start a thread on those bombings and I'll happily be outraged over them too.lowing wrote:
Am I the only one noticing all of the outraged armchair quarterbacking over this? Yet, not a single thread expressing outrage over the embassy bombings in Pakistan and Baghdad.Ottomania wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0
Thats just horrible. How the fuck they can open fire on people without a single hesitation?
In this video (in real time, not analyzed time after the fact) these guys clearly thought they were engaging insurgents with weapons.
not ignoring them, but this thread is about helicopter pilots shooting a bunch of civvies and journos.eleven bravo wrote:
war sucks. you and the bunch of monkey sheeple like you who decide to choose what to be outraged over and ignore other things just as relevent, just as bad, need to do the world a favor and stick your heads in an oven.
Last edited by ruisleipa (2010-04-05 14:47:25)
No. I am just trying to help you discern the difference between believable and unbelievable.Beduin wrote:
So... You agree it is fucked up there, right? It is so fucked up that we are comparing ourselves with "freedom fighters". Saying look.... they are doing it too... it is a bad place, thats how things goes down there"...yes?
That was not unbelievable. I would say that was something we are used to see/hear.Kmarion wrote:
No. I just trying to help you discern the difference between believable and unbelievable.Beduin wrote:
So... You agree it is fucked up there, right? It is so fucked up that we are comparing ourselves with "freedom fighters". Saying look.... they are doing it too... it is a bad place, thats how things goes down there"...yes?
Around 3:47 there may have been a RPG. The two guys who stop walking, the guy on the left. He kind of swings the weapon.Ottomania wrote:
You have a good imagination, there was no one with RPG.Vilham wrote:
1. Those pilots have to react instantly, they don't have time to send the video back, let it be analyzed for a few hours then open fire.ruisleipa wrote:
shooting at unamred civilians and children? noooooo...nothing wrong there. good show pilots!
2. Those straps on the cameras from several hundred feet up will look just the same as any guns strap.
3. Two of them DID have AKs.
4. The guy who sat on the corner pointing something up at the choppers is A, an insurgent with a RPG. B, a fucking moron for sitting in a hidden position pointing something at someone who is on the lookout for people trying to kill him.
relax, easy now. You are not in a battlefield, soldier! You are free.. time to be human!eleven bravo wrote:
war sucks. you and the bunch of monkey sheeple like you who decide to choose what to be outraged over and ignore other things just as relevent, just as bad, need to do the world a favor and stick your heads in an oven. or, just admit you are completely one sided on an issue.Beduin wrote:
So... You agree it is fucked up there, right? It is so fucked up that we are comparing ourselves with "freedom fighters". Saying look.... they are doing it too... it is a bad place, thats how things goes down there"...yes?
Where in that video did they claim to have encountered a fire fight? O wait they didn't, everything they said over the voice comms to command was true. So the entire basis for claiming the pilots did something that was against the rules of engagement, is wrong.ruisleipa wrote:
oh yeah?Vilham wrote:
sorry but its pretty much impossible to debate this with children who don't realise the pressure a pilot is under in situations like that. Fucking armchair soldier.
I even stated that the fact that the military tried to cover it up was wrong. So, fuck you.
The pilots did nothing wrong here. If you have a problem with that, take it up with the UN.
....
Morally speaking, what is unbelievable is tying up a family and executing children in front of their parents.Beduin wrote:
That was not unbelievable. I would say that was something we are used to see/hear.Kmarion wrote:
No. I just trying to help you discern the difference between believable and unbelievable.Beduin wrote:
So... You agree it is fucked up there, right? It is so fucked up that we are comparing ourselves with "freedom fighters". Saying look.... they are doing it too... it is a bad place, thats how things goes down there"...yes?
It is normal, thats the claim here?
So, there was an RPG? How many AK-47's again?Vilham wrote:
...everything they said over the voice comms to command was true.
here you go again. Always compare the forces with insurgents. eleven bravo said it, war sucks. Nothing to see here, move along!Kmarion wrote:
Morally speaking, what is unbelievable is tying up a family and executing children in front of their parents.
Engaging someone who has a weapon looking at you from behind a corner in war.. not.so.much.
capiche?
It's not fucked up at all, it's the complete reality of this war. The 1% will always, always be magnified. Civilians will always, always die. Why can't people accept it, both ways.FM wrote:
I wish everyone could see what war would be like if first world nations tied up their technology so thoroughly in the bureaucracy of avoiding civilian casualties that even when groups of people openly carrying weapons are considered no-go targets.
It's not that civilian casualties don't suck. But when everyone collectively pisses their pants when they see the 1% of the time that the reasonable call was in error while ignoring the 99% of the time the call is correct and lives are saved, that is a fucked up world. Utterly entranced by individual incidences and unaware or even worse uncaring of the overall trends.
Yes, war sucks. Innocents die. Same way I can accept one innocent sent to death row for every 99 truly guilty. Cover-up, well, I have an issue. Admit the wrong call and move on.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
I wish everyone could see what war would be like if first world nations tied up their technology so thoroughly in the bureaucracy of avoiding civilian casualties that even when groups of people openly carrying weapons are considered no-go targets.
It's not that civilian casualties don't suck. But when everyone collectively pisses their pants when they see the 1% of the time that the reasonable call was in error while ignoring the 99% of the time the call is correct and lives are saved, that is a fucked up world. Utterly entranced by individual incidences and unaware or even worse uncaring of the overall trends.
Could've mistaken the camera equipment for weapons very easily. The pilots didn't do anything wrong.ruisleipa wrote:
shooting at unamred civilians and children? noooooo...nothing wrong there. good show pilots!Vilham wrote:
I see nothing that pilots did wrong.
So you are really trying to claim that guy holding that black object aimed at the chopper round a corner didn't look like an AT? Because it certainly did to me, sitting comfortably in my room not under any kind of threat. So now consider that your sitting in a piece of metal in the sky, you have been shot at dozens of times over your tour, you have seconds to decide if it is a AT or you might die....Ilocano wrote:
So, there was an RPG? How many AK-47's again?Vilham wrote:
...everything they said over the voice comms to command was true.
If it was as you suggested earlier then we would be in the exact position that you just quoted of FM. No soldier would ever fire their gun just in case. Its why there are rules of engagement and why if someone acts within them like the pilots did then there are no repercussions.Mekstizzle wrote:
So does anyone have any responses to my posts or are all of you guys going to be either defending the soldiers to your hardest or condemning them all like hell
Can anyone not just stop and think, these guys might have stepped over the line, something ought to happen, even if you take into the reality of war. Or like I say, the consequences of accidentally killing civilians is a huge aspect of the very reality of this war in the first place. Sitting in that court martial or whatever is the same reality as sitting in a HMMVW manning the .50 cal or whatever.It's not fucked up at all, it's the complete reality of this war. The 1% will always, always be magnified. Civilians will always, always die. Why can't people accept it, both ways.FM wrote:
I wish everyone could see what war would be like if first world nations tied up their technology so thoroughly in the bureaucracy of avoiding civilian casualties that even when groups of people openly carrying weapons are considered no-go targets.
It's not that civilian casualties don't suck. But when everyone collectively pisses their pants when they see the 1% of the time that the reasonable call was in error while ignoring the 99% of the time the call is correct and lives are saved, that is a fucked up world. Utterly entranced by individual incidences and unaware or even worse uncaring of the overall trends.
I said people should accept that soldiers should or could be in a court martial in the same way they accept that civilians die in wars. Despite any contradiction that involves. Because it's the reality of this war, as people in this topic bring up.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
I practically directly responded to your post. How you can say "The 1% will always, always be magnified. Civilians will always, always die. Why can't people accept it, both ways." and then say the soldiers should be court-martialed out the other side of your mouth I don't even understand. They did everything right.
What a supremely ridiculous sentence.Mekstizzle wrote:
Despite any contradiction that involves.
Yeah, because an RPG at that range could take out an Apache.Vilham wrote:
So you are really trying to claim that guy holding that black object aimed at the chopper round a corner didn't look like an AT? Because it certainly did to me, sitting comfortably in my room not under any kind of threat. So now consider that your sitting in a piece of metal in the sky, you have been shot at dozens of times over your tour, you have seconds to decide if it is a AT or you might die....Ilocano wrote:
So, there was an RPG? How many AK-47's again?Vilham wrote:
...everything they said over the voice comms to command was true.
The exact number of AKs is irrelevant, as you well know. Stop playing stupid. I saw what could have been 5 AKs when i watched it, which I believe is how many the pilot said.
The pilots did not lie to their command.
Last edited by Ilocano (2010-04-05 15:08:00)