Wikileak'd video shows eager-to-kill troops firing on Reuters reporters and children

[geauxtohell]

I've been discredited? You whiny ****. You laughed when I said they could have fired warning shots because you didn't think that could be done with the apache. Then you try to ignore a link with a typo that said the gun was a 33mm when I said it is a 30mm. Then you miss the point of my last link.....which was to show warning shots couple be fired from the apache.

You could fire "warning shots" with a mortar round on air burst if you wanted to. It's just a ******* stupid idea and not supported by any of our doctrine.

That means our pilots don't train to do so and it's not something they would consider doing.

Nor would they in this instance, they perceived a hostile threat by these guys.

I have no idea what you are talking about with the link.

You tried to claim some sort of special dispensation on this matter because you had been in similar situations like this. It turns out you were REMF that has never been in anything remotely close to this.

You are completely ignorant of the ROE and the way things operate outside the wire. You've tried to make some bizarre claims that the pilots needed to be engaged or wait until the the infantry was engaged before they fired, which is pure bullshit.

You apparently want to advocate for some dumb-assed ROE that would further hinder our aviation advantages and get soldiers killed.

And then you have the moxy to call us dumb-asses.

You are pissed off that innocent people got killed here (the children were innocent at the very least). I get that. You have no workable alternative that could have prevented this. The pilots were acting on good faith and doing their best to protect the guys on the ground. That's why the 15-6 found it was "no foul".

You bitches are pure *****. Period. When the facts are in your face you ignore them. I'm calling you names because you deserve it for your cowardice, hypocrisy, and arrogance. The civilians made no threatening moves and after the apache fired nobody shot at the apaches or the ground unit but you keep on ignoring those facts you useless fuxxing ****.

To the contrary. The guy crouched around the corner with a cylinder like object that he aimed at the infantry unit. That's what got them killed. Maybe it was a camera lens, maybe it was an RPG. It's irrelevant. The pilot perceived it to be an RPG. Shit happens in combat.

You should know it.

Other than that, your names mean nothing to me. You can join the ranks of the others who think they know something, but know jack shit.

It's probably a good thing for all involved parties that you were never in charge of any tactical decisions.

BTW, you can type "*******" on this board. You don't have to continue to look like a 13 year old girl with new and inventive ways to try and get around a non-existent filter.

 

[CurveLight]

Why in hell would anyone want to fire a warning shot at people who appear to be preparing an ambush for advancing ground troops. Want to even up the odds by allowing them to get under cover?

Some people make no sense.

They wouldn't. I was just pointing out that, the fact that the pilots assessed these guys to be hostile aside, CL's "alternate plan" is stupid.

I knew it was a waste of time to prove the apache can fire warning shots. The civilians presented no immediate threat but your dum **** punk ass wants to advocate the false dilemma of slaughtering them or letting our troops get slaughtered. There were other options but you go on and keep your eyes closed. *****.

 

[geauxtohell]

I knew it was a waste of time to prove the apache can fire warning shots. The civilians presented no immediate threat but your dum **** punk ass wants to advocate the false dilemma of slaughtering them or letting our troops get slaughtered. There were other options but you go on and keep your eyes closed. *****.

Whaa ******* whaa. Go find an Apache pilot and ask them if they train to fire warning shots with their 30 mm cannon.

You with your all powerful hindsite (which the pilots didn't have) want to castigate pilots for doing their best to keep soldiers on the battlefield alive. They didn't act with any criminal intent, their intent was completely mission oriented and they followed the ROE (per the 15-6).

Once the pilots perceived hostile intent by the guys on the ground, there was no more dilemma.

So pout all you want. It doesn't change a damn thing.

 

[CurveLight]

You know what is disturbing? All the people who defend what happened have not paused for one second to ask:

"is there a way to learn from this to prevent civilians from getting killed in the future?"

No. They keep their eyes shut and regurgitate cliches and make claims they cannot support.

 

[geauxtohell]

You know what is disturbing? All the people who defend what happened have not paused for one second to ask:

"is there a way to learn from this to prevent civilians from getting killed in the future?"

No. They keep their eyes shut and regurgitate cliches and make claims they cannot support.

It's just because you are such a noble former warrior, CL.

The rest of us collected scalps and ears and gleefully raped and pillaged our way across the combat zone.

That or we see no reason to over-analyze the actions of pilots who made a decision that 99% of all other pilots would have also made (yes, I made that number up. You get the point). We certainly see no reason to add even more restrictions to the guys in the air that will result in soldiers getting killed (i.e. "wait for them to fire and RPG first before you engage them!")

One of those two realities.

FWIW, USMC AH-1s flew CAS for us in Afghanistan and we loved those guys. They were every bit as aggressive as the Apache pilots in this video.

 

[Tom Clancy]

Yeah, you should get exposure to all of the branches. Just don't make the mistake that a lot of ROTC cadets make and interpret the infantry tactics and experiences you have as an ROTC student with life in an actual infantry unit. It's much different.

Must less stupidity.

Different how?

All of you leadership evaluations and training in ROTC land is based on leading infantry small unit missions (ambush, recon, react to contact, etc). Your ROTC instructors are going to come from a lot of different branches and backgrounds and there is just a lot of stupidity in ROTC land in the field that is not going to be the norm in an actual infantry unit when you are dealing with professionals and an infantry unit.

A lot of people assume because they spent their time in ROTC-land doing a lot of hokey and idiotic stuff that some Quartermaster Corps officer dreamed up for an FTX, that that is what it's like to be in an infantry unit.

It's a lot different.

Interesting...

Thanks for the heads up, much appreciated.

 

[geauxtohell]

Different how?

All of you leadership evaluations and training in ROTC land is based on leading infantry small unit missions (ambush, recon, react to contact, etc). Your ROTC instructors are going to come from a lot of different branches and backgrounds and there is just a lot of stupidity in ROTC land in the field that is not going to be the norm in an actual infantry unit when you are dealing with professionals and an infantry unit.

A lot of people assume because they spent their time in ROTC-land doing a lot of hokey and idiotic stuff that some Quartermaster Corps officer dreamed up for an FTX, that that is what it's like to be in an infantry unit.

It's a lot different.

Interesting...

Thanks for the heads up, much appreciated.

No problem. It's hard to quantify, but you'll see what I mean when you get there. Also, observe how the officers from various branches conduct themselves in the day to day stuff in ROTC land. See how the demeanor of the Infantry guys is versus other branches. One of the things that made me branch infantry is that I was so impressed with out cadre that were Infantry officers. They were always calm, used common sense, weren't afraid to be personable while still maintaining proper military bearing, and were, all in all, great role models.

I'll never forget when one of my favorite ROTC instructors, who was an Infantry Officer, dropped by to visit me at the end of the first phase of Ranger School. It turns out, one of his college ROTC buddies was my company commander and he'd been keeping dibs on me. It was a small act on his part, but it meant the world to me (and still does obviously).

Of course, every branch has it's share of good and bad officers.

My suggestion is to to the program (can't remember what it is called now) after camp where you get to go shadow an actual unit for a couple of weeks. Pick one of your top two (aviation probably wouldn't be a good choice, since you wouldn't get any fly time, but you'd have a good time in an Infantry unit. We always made sure our visiting cadets were taken care of) and see how it works in the real Army. I was conflicted between Armor and Infantry and went to Ft. Knox for Armor. I had a good time, but realized that I didn't want to deal with a bunch of machinery so I picked light infantry and got it. In my day, anyone that picked infantry basically got it, I understand that it's a little more competitive now.

Infantry branch also affords you some good options for schooling, you'll be expected to do Ranger School and Airborne School and Air Assault School if you are in an Air assault unit. I also picked up the mortar course when I was at Benning (which was really challenging) and some other schools. Then if you want to transition into SF, you'll have a lot to bring to the table for selection (though SF takes from all branches and I was never SF so I can't speak much about this). You can also transfer into the 75th Ranger Regiment from a regular infantry unit if you want to do that.

The only branch I'd advise against, and I don't want to offend any of them, is Field Artillery. That is because the FA branch is really struggling to find their relevance on the modern battlefield. Most of my friends who were FA officers got grabbed away from their guns and were made special staff officers.

If you have any other questions, feel free to PM me.

 

[eots]

Shitscreens

 

[Liability]

Shitscreens

^ shit head.

 

[CrimsonWhite]

So were ground crew and you have been in these types of situations? You want to fire warning shots with a 30MM cannon? And you call us stupid?

Yes you are stoopid and arrogant. You assume being part of the ground crew meant we simply sat in the rear. We had forward contact teams for emergency response to a downed chopper. Basically, you're an immature ***** that is saturated in hypocrisy.

How many downed choppers did you deploy to?

Still waiting on an answer.

 

[Samson]

BTW, you can type "*******" on this board. You don't have to continue to look like a 13 year old girl with new and inventive ways to try and get around a non-existent filter.

***Curvey is Not a 13 year old gurl?***

 

[CurveLight]

Yes you are stoopid and arrogant. You assume being part of the ground crew meant we simply sat in the rear. We had forward contact teams for emergency response to a downed chopper. Basically, you're an immature ***** that is saturated in hypocrisy.

How many downed choppers did you deploy to?

Still waiting on an answer.

Still waiting on that unedited video.....

Still waiting for your punk ass to admit you fuxxed up....

Not holding my breath.

I personally did not have to deploy to any downed aircraft. Now you can focus on that as deflection for the next three pages you whiny ****.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Hmmmmm.....

"The Defense Department can't locate its copy of the video of a July 2007 air strike that killed two Reuters employees in Iraq, a military official told The Associated Press."
Http://www.aolnews.com/nation/article/military-cant-find-its-video-showing-newsmens-deaths/19429850


I looked for an update and couldn't find any so is the DOD still claiming they can't find the video?

I don't doubt that they lack an extensive and organized library of all footage ever shot in case something pops up a few years later or something.

This shooting was investigated so yes it should be archived in those files.

I don't doubt that the 'archives' are little more than a disorganized pile in a basement somewhere.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

has anyone said what transpired to make the van seem like a threat?

Per the 15-6 it was legitimate engagement because it was perceived as trying to remove weapons from the scene.

We saw them pick up a man. Please give me the time in the video where they approach or attempt to retrieve any weapons.

 

[CurveLight]

I don't doubt that they lack an extensive and organized library of all footage ever shot in case something pops up a few years later or something.

This shooting was investigated so yes it should be archived in those files.

I don't doubt that the 'archives' are little more than a disorganized pile in a basement somewhere.

The video was leaked from inside the Pentagon.

 

[CrimsonWhite]

How many downed choppers did you deploy to?

Still waiting on an answer.

Still waiting on that unedited video.....

Still waiting for your punk ass to admit you fuxxed up....

Not holding my breath.

I personally did not have to deploy to any downed aircraft. Now you can focus on that as deflection for the next three pages you whiny ****.

You dumbass. I never said anytihng about seeing the video or producing it. I just pointed out that the one that we saw in the OP was highly edited. You really are a ******* idiot.

And if you never had to forward deploy, then what the **** are you talking about? Admit it. You don't know what zippers sound like. Dismissed.

 

[CurveLight]

Still waiting on an answer.

Still waiting on that unedited video.....

Still waiting for your punk ass to admit you fuxxed up....

Not holding my breath.

I personally did not have to deploy to any downed aircraft. Now you can focus on that as deflection for the next three pages you whiny ****.

You dumbass. I never said anytihng about seeing the video or producing it. I just pointed out that the one that we saw in the OP was highly edited. You really are a ******* idiot.

And if you never had to forward deploy, then what the **** are you talking about? Admit it. You don't know what zippers sound like. Dismissed.

I never said I never had to forward deploy you whiny skank. Face it. You're so fuxxing immature you desperately keep searching for some minutia to ***** about. You're so fuxxing arrogant you want to accuse me of lying simply because I pwn you on a regular basis and there isn't a damn thing you can do but ***** and moan like the dyed in the wool skank you keep proving to be. Do you really think you are informed or wise enough to use divine powers to know my experiences in iraq? (rhetorical as your arrogance has already answered)

 

[CrimsonWhite]

Still waiting on that unedited video.....

Still waiting for your punk ass to admit you fuxxed up....

Not holding my breath.

I personally did not have to deploy to any downed aircraft. Now you can focus on that as deflection for the next three pages you whiny ****.

You dumbass. I never said anytihng about seeing the video or producing it. I just pointed out that the one that we saw in the OP was highly edited. You really are a ******* idiot.

And if you never had to forward deploy, then what the **** are you talking about? Admit it. You don't know what zippers sound like. Dismissed.

I never said I never had to forward deploy you whiny skank. Face it. You're so fuxxing immature you desperately keep searching for some minutia to ***** about. You're so fuxxing arrogant you want to accuse me of lying simply because I pwn you on a regular basis and there isn't a damn thing you can do but ***** and moan like the dyed in the wool skank you keep proving to be. Do you really think you are informed or wise enough to use divine powers to know my experiences in iraq? (rhetorical as your arrogance has already answered)

Jesus Christ you are retarded.

 

[CurveLight]

You dumbass. I never said anytihng about seeing the video or producing it. I just pointed out that the one that we saw in the OP was highly edited. You really are a ******* idiot.

And if you never had to forward deploy, then what the **** are you talking about? Admit it. You don't know what zippers sound like. Dismissed.

I never said I never had to forward deploy you whiny skank. Face it. You're so fuxxing immature you desperately keep searching for some minutia to ***** about. You're so fuxxing arrogant you want to accuse me of lying simply because I pwn you on a regular basis and there isn't a damn thing you can do but ***** and moan like the dyed in the wool skank you keep proving to be. Do you really think you are informed or wise enough to use divine powers to know my experiences in iraq? (rhetorical as your arrogance has already answered)

Jesus Christ you are retarded.

Thass light years ahead of being CrimsonWhite. Which reminds me....did you ever prove the claim about the longer version radioasswipe spoke of? Or are you such a hypocrite you accept a source as fuxxed up as gawker when it suits your needs?

Since you whined so much about the edited video in the op will you please show us what is found in the 39 minute version that changes anything?

 

[geauxtohell]

has anyone said what transpired to make the van seem like a threat?

Per the 15-6 it was legitimate engagement because it was perceived as trying to remove weapons from the scene.

We saw them pick up a man. Please give me the time in the video where they approach or attempt to retrieve any weapons.

Again, it's what the pilots perceived. Other than that, you can read the 15-6 to see their feelings on the matter.