BF2S Forums Unbelievable Massacre

11 Bravo wrote:

they were not aiding...they were cleaning the scene.

Murderers clean the scene, not relatives of victims.

lowing wrote:

I find the video of insurgents with RPG's and Ak-47s definitive. I call the fact the soliders correctly identified them and asked for permission to fire definitive. I call the fact that the soldiers had no idea (or way to know) that there was little kids in the unmarked car definitive. I also call your lack of acknowledgement of these facts definiitve.

I acknowledge these facts - that some people there had weapons, and there was no way of knowing if they were insurgents. That the pilots asked for permission and recieved it. And they shot at a car blatantly going to pick up wounded. And that the pilots laughed at the dead bodies. All these I acknowledge...it doesn't make it right, does it?

And you still haven't explained why shotting at a car picking up wounded is acceptable. Would you also find it acceptable if someone attacked a US ambulance going to pick up wounded marines?

And you also haven't said anything about the relationship of RoE vis-a-vis the actual morality of the actions.

what is so weird? it shows people getting killed ffs and there are plenty of impressionable kids in fb nowadays

    *  You may post in 5 seconds
    *  You may post 1 second ago

M.O.A.B wrote:

So, are we any further with this or...are we still on the roundabout?

It's the same crap over and over again.

- OMG INNOCENT CIVILIANS

- No...they had weapons.

- OH NO CIVILIAAAAANS

- They had an RPG, AKs, grenades and machine guns (in report).

- CIVILIAAAAAAAAAAAAAANS

doesnt matter anyway. everyone is set in their view

Ottomania wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

they were not aiding...they were cleaning the scene.

Murderers clean the scene, not relatives of victims.

ok..... not true in a warzone where it is also a PR campaign that the insurgents are fighting but you know it all cause you have been there and not seen that right?

Pug wrote:

ruisleipa wrote:

lowing wrote:

I find the video of insurgents with RPG's and Ak-47s definitive. I call the fact the soliders correctly identified them and asked for permission to fire definitive. I call the fact that the soldiers had no idea (or way to know) that there was little kids in the unmarked car definitive. I also call your lack of acknowledgement of these facts definiitve.

I acknowledge these facts - that some people there had weapons, and there was no way of knowing if they were insurgents. That the pilots asked for permission and recieved it. And they shot at a car blatantly going to pick up wounded. And that the pilots laughed at the dead bodies. All these I acknowledge...it doesn't make it right, does it?

And you still haven't explained why shotting at a car picking up wounded is acceptable. Would you also find it acceptable if someone attacked a US ambulance going to pick up wounded marines?

And you also haven't said anything about the relationship of RoE vis-a-vis the actual morality of the actions.

How about this:

1) don't have a weapon in a war zone and you won't be a target
2) don't hang around with people who are armed in a war zone and you won't be a target
3) when picking up wounded, stick to picking up bodies instead of picking up a weapon and you won't be a target

If you can prove that combatants should not be shot, or people who act like combatants should not be shot...great.

Until then, STFU

"errr, Like no".

2. That doesn't justify their deaths which is what some of you are trying to do.
3. I did't see them pick up a gun ? correct me if i'm wrong.

Last edited by mafia996630 (2010-04-07 09:46:51)

11 Bravo wrote:

Ottomania wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

they were not aiding...they were cleaning the scene.

Murderers clean the scene, not relatives of victims.

ok..... not true in a warzone where it is also a PR campaign that the insurgents are fighting but you know it all cause you have been there and not seen that right?

Stop trying to stand behind your bullshit argument. Trying to help a wounded person has nothing to do with cleaning the scene. You dont have a fucking single clue that crawling person was even an insurgent, or people inside that van were different than ordinary civilians trying to help a person on the edge of death.

oh, for fucks sake! this is a fucking war, people, callateral damage does occur during those, you know. shit happens, it's unavoidable. now, the way usa fight this war is certainly wrong, and only an idiot would buy their reasoning (the one present to the public anyway) for fighting it in the first place, but one thing can be said for sure - they do a lot to keep civilian casualties as low as possible. anybody who does not agree with that is a fucking retard.

p.s. and another thing which would be mighty interesting to know is how those people at wikileak got their hands on the video. you do not see that kinda material released to the public every day. is this really a "leak"? or carefully planned provocation? i doubt we'll ever know...

Shahter wrote:

oh, for fucks sake! this is a fucking war, people, callateral damage does occur during those, you know. shit happens, it's unavoidable. now, the way usa fight this war is certainly wrong, and only an idiot would buy their reasoning (the one present to the public anyway) for fighting it in the first place, but one thing can be said for sure - they do a lot to keep civilian casualties as low as possible. anybody who does not agree with that is a fucking retard.

p.s. and another thing which would be mighty interesting to know is how those people at wikileak got their hands on the video. you do not see that kinda material released to the public every day. is this really a "leak"? or carefully planned provocation? i doubt we'll ever know...

Ivan gets it right

we arm our medics too.

Ottomania wrote:

-Sh1fty- wrote:

Ottomania wrote:

Dont pretend to play cool guy.

Oh an insult, I see you can't debate properly. Without having to attack a person's character to make his opinion less valid.

-Sh1fty- wrote:

- OMG INNOCENT CIVILIANS

- No...they had weapons.

- OH NO CIVILIAAAAANS

- They had an RPG, AKs, grenades and machine guns (in report).

- CIVILIAAAAAAAAAAAAAANS

What you have said dont have a bit of value in terms of debating, and it is clear that you have first insulted people with opposite opinion with such a dialogue.

Ottomania wrote:

That report was written by same people who also tried hide those killings.

What do you mean by hide?

There was nothing to hide, and if it was hidden I assume it was to keep it away from people like you who have nothing better to do than try and point out the Americans are ruthless killers.

If they werent really trying to hide they would have published the video before wikileaks discovered it.
I am not pointing out the Americans are ruthless killers, but those pilots are, and why the whole case was tried to be covered up.

So, if they killed some insurgents, what would they be then?

Cybargs wrote:

Ottomania wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

ok..... not true in a warzone where it is also a PR campaign that the insurgents are fighting but you know it all cause you have been there and not seen that right?

Stop trying to stand behind your bullshit argument. Trying to help a wounded person has nothing to do with cleaning the scene. You dont have a fucking single clue that crawling person was even an insurgent, or people inside that van were different than ordinary civilians trying to help a person on the edge of death.

If you got hit by a 30 mike mike... You're dead anyway. They just gave him a quicker death. You'd be bitching if they didn't kill him fast and go "OMG THEY LEFT HIM TO BLEED TO DEATH FUCKING AMEIRCAN CRUEL BASTARDS."

Whens the last time in war its wrong to kill someone who's wounded? It's not exactly a fucking tickling competition now is it?

If they had really intended to kill the wounded they wouldnt have been waiting for saviors to come. They even didnt know that wounded person was a hostile. And your statement of killing a wounded person to end his pain is utter bullshit.

Btw yes it is wrong to kill a defenceless person in any case.