BF2S Forums Unbelievable Massacre

JohnG@lt wrote:

mafia996630 wrote:

SO you agree that it was an illegal war ? so you agree it was something to do with Oil ? So if a civil war does break out then it was all for nothing?

Hatred and idealism? not at all.

Nope, never said that I agreed that it was an illegal war. It certainly wasn't illegal by any means. It was just a continuation of the first Gulf War because Saddam thumbed his nose at the UN and kicked out the weapons inspectors. It also wasn't illegal here in the US because both houses of Congress voted in favor of the invasion. We're a sovereign nation beholden to no one and can do as we please. The UN is not a government in itself and has zero power over US citizens. So all this 'Bush needs to hang for war crimes' garbage that keeps being spewed by leftists is nothing more than impotent rage on their part.

We attacked sovereign nation under false pre-tenses. Not too sure about the US, but here in Great Britain that shit is wrong and illegal.

ATG wrote:

ruisleipa wrote:

The helicopter was maybe looking for suspicious activity. But there were NO certified combatants. there were a few guys with what the pilots thought were guns. That does NOT equal certified enemy combatants, does it?

Do me a favor bud; go to a war zone and get those pesky native to fill out their official combatant certification card.


Are you actually that stupid, or is this just the usual pointless shit talking?

Certainly some of the men were combatants, but not all, personally i would have tried to pick out individual targets, but of course you are under a lot of pressure and mistakes can be made, however the Van i find completely unacceptable and war crimes should be accounted for.

JohnG@lt wrote:

mafia996630 wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Nope, never said that I agreed that it was an illegal war. It certainly wasn't illegal by any means. It was just a continuation of the first Gulf War because Saddam thumbed his nose at the UN and kicked out the weapons inspectors. It also wasn't illegal here in the US because both houses of Congress voted in favor of the invasion. We're a sovereign nation beholden to no one and can do as we please. The UN is not a government in itself and has zero power over US citizens. So all this 'Bush needs to hang for war crimes' garbage that keeps being spewed by leftists is nothing more than impotent rage on their part.

We attacked sovereign nation under false pre-tenses. Not too sure about the US, but here in Great Britain that shit is wrong and illegal.

Oh yeah? GB made up excuses to invade sovereign nations for centuries. Ready to get off your high horse yet? At least we're not playing for keeps and building an empire.

High horse ?Dude, its simple expectations. Just like the whole controversy around torturing.

I just watched it and I have only one qualm:

Why were the Iraqis sauntering around so casually while a US attack helicopter had their sights trained on them? I find that odd.

Other than that, and given that I have no experience of warfare, the footage was very enlightening and thought provoking in the following ways:

- Modern warfare as perpetrated by modern westernised nations against undeveloped nations is, in the context of the match-up, quite cowardly. They are obviously more powerful and it would be illogical to suggest they should fight them 'at their level', but I never realised how much of a mismatch and how unfair/cowardly it is (certainly in terms of non-infantry warfare - the helicopter can just rattle off at anyone and tear them to shreds). You kind of wonder (civilians aside) why the modern western nations complain so grievously about IEDs and suicide bombings - pretty much the solitary means of getting at the enemy given the imbalance between the sides. Western troops rolling around under inches of protective armour or flying around picking off whomsoever they deem to be a combatant in dusty backward nations they have no right or reason to be in, where they aren't popularly wanted and never were, thousands of miles from home, doesn't exactly hark back to the Omaha beach landing in terms of bravery, moral courage, justice and righteousness. If this were Afghanistan I might have a different opinion on the righteousness front but not in Iraq. And as for the 'Yay! We killed em.' attitude some showed and the tone of apathy/self-justification in comments about 'they shouldn't bring kids into battle', well I'd say those soldiers need a good dose of remorse (which they probably in hindsight expressed but whatever). I would imagine battle would obviously be quite stressful no matter how much armour you have between you and the enemy and that things you do in the heat of the battle you will live with for the rest of your life. I'm not calling individual soldiers cowards, anyone who puts their life at any level of risk is not a coward. The means of warfare is cowardly however. One side can easily raze an entire area of land at the hint of the presence of so much as one combatant, sitting well outside of the range of their enemy or with an almost impenetrable wall of armour between them and the enemy. To get a few combatants it seems the west are content to take down a few scores of whoever is standing in the vicinity if it means the paintwork on their Apache doesn't get scratched. I can imagine this comment will be treated with disdain and contempt, but like I say I've never been in combat and don't know what it's like - I'm just calling it as I see it in that movie.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2010-04-06 11:37:47)

CameronPoe wrote:

I just watched it and I have only one qualm:

Why were the Iraqis sauntering around so casually while a US attack helicopter had their sights trained on them? I find that odd.

Other than that, and given that I have no experience of warfare, the footage was very enlightening and thought provoking in the following ways:

- Modern warfare as perpetrated by modern westernised nations against undeveloped nations is, in the context of the match-up, quite cowardly. They are obviously more powerful and it would be illogical to suggest they should fight them 'at their level', but I never realised how much of a mismatch and how unfair/cowardly it is (certainly in terms of non-infantry warfare - the helicopter can just rattle off at anyone and tear them to shreds). You kind of wonder (civilians aside) why the modern western nations complain so grievously about IEDs and suicide bombings - pretty much the solitary means of getting at the enemy given the imbalance between the sides. Western troops rolling around under inches of protective armour or flying around picking off whomsoever they deem to be a combatant in dusty backward nations they have no right or reason to be in, where they aren't popularly wanted and never were, thousands of miles from home, doesn't exactly hark back to the Omaha beach landing in terms of bravery, moral courage, justice and righteousness. If this were Afghanistan I might have a different opinion on the righteousness front but not in Iraq. And as for the 'Yay! We killed em.' attitude some showed and the tone of apathy/self-justification in comments about 'they shouldn't bring kids into battle', well I'd say those soldiers need a good dose of remorse (which they probably in hindsight expressed but whatever). I would imagine battle would obviously be quite stressful no matter how much armour you have between you and the enemy and that things you do in the heat of the battle you will live with for the rest of your life. I'm not calling individual soldiers cowards, anyone who puts their life at any level of risk is not a coward. The means of warfare is cowardly however. One side can easily raze an entire area of land at the hint of the presence of so much as one combatant, sitting well outside of the range of their enemy or with an almost impenetrable wall of armour between them and the enemy. To get a few combatants it seems the west are content to take down a few scores of whoever is standing in the vicinity if it means the paintwork on their apache might get scratched. I can imagine this comment will be treated with disdain and contempt, but like I say I've never been in combat and don't know what it's like - I'm just calling it as I see it in that movie.

Cowardly?  I call it compassionate.  The US could easily exterminate these people.  The fact that we haven't speaks volumes.

*edit:  I highly doubt these particular enemies would hesitate to nuke the US if given the means or opportunity.

Last edited by DBBrinson1 (2010-04-06 11:39:33)

JohnG@lt wrote:

Oh yeah? GB made up excuses to invade sovereign nations for centuries. Ready to get off your high horse yet? At least we're not playing for keeps and building an empire.

galt i love it how you ALWAYS bring up the 'oh yeah well you/they have done as bad/worse shit so I don't care' card. It's such a non sequitur it's embarassing.

As for not building an empire....lol.

CameronPoe wrote:

I just watched it and I have only one qualm:

Why were the Iraqis sauntering around so casually while a US attack helicopter had their sights trained on them? I find that odd.

Other than that, and given that I have no experience of warfare, the footage was very enlightening and thought provoking in the following ways:

Attack helicopters are equipped with long range camera gear. They can see and shoot at targets while appearing as only a spec on the horizon to them. They don't hover directly over the target.

ruisleipa wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Oh yeah? GB made up excuses to invade sovereign nations for centuries. Ready to get off your high horse yet? At least we're not playing for keeps and building an empire.

galt i love it how you ALWAYS bring up the 'oh yeah well you/they have done as bad/worse shit so I don't care' card. It's such a non sequitur it's embarassing.

As for not building an empire....lol.

Shrug, no one gives a rats ass what you have to say on any subject so you being embarrassed for me when I bring up the British Empire has no bearing on either me or my arguments. You're like a gnat buzzing around that just won't go away or die. Please do either.

CameronPoe wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Cowardly?  I call it compassionate.  The US could easily exterminate these people.  The fact that we haven't speaks volumes.

Why would you exterminate them? What have they done to deserve it?

We haven't.  We recognize that genocide isn't the answer.  Our foes haven't.  That is what makes us compassionate... But Cam, after watching this video -do you find that the pilots acted irresponsible?

JohnG@lt wrote:

Attack helicopters are equipped with long range camera gear. They can see and shoot at targets while appearing as only a spec on the horizon to them. They don't hover directly over the target.

Which is surely unreachable or nearly unreachable in terms of the RPG the crew expressed concern about?

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

It's not fair, but then life isn't fair. To do anything but roll over in the face of a vastly technologically superior enemy and then claim the enemy is a coward for using the weapons at their disposal is pretty ridiculous. Bringing a knife to a gun fight and then calling the guy a coward for using the gun is stupid.

Life is not fair. Correct. It doesn't make the school bully who beats the cripple for his lunch money any less of a coward. You are basically saying 'might conquers all and you can't do anything about it so fuck off and roll over for me'.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2010-04-06 11:45:08)

CameronPoe wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Attack helicopters are equipped with long range camera gear. They can see and shoot at targets while appearing as only a spec on the horizon to them. They don't hover directly over the target.

Which is surely unreachable or nearly unreachable in terms of the RPG the crew expressed concern about?

Again, the Apache was clearing the way for an armored convoy, which the RPG would have most certainly presented a threat to.

CameronPoe wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

It's not fair, but then life isn't fair. To do anything but roll over in the face of a vastly technologically superior enemy and then claim the enemy is a coward for using the weapons at their disposal is pretty ridiculous. Bringing a knife to a gun fight and then calling the guy a coward for using the gun is stupid.

Life is not fair. Correct. It doesn't make the school bully who beats the cripple for his lunch money any less of a coward. You are basically saying 'might conquers all and you can't do anything about it so fuck off and roll over for me'.

You really can't compare the two.