Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AH-64 video on Wikileaks

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • AH-64 video on Wikileaks

    Just been wikileaks and they have released a video of an AH-64 engagment in iraq.

    The video itself is quite graphic, however, the reason it was released was to highlight what can be seen a morally questionable engagment, in which two Reuters personell were killed.

    Now, from my own viewing of the video as a civilian, so i dont have a full understanding of the ROE with regards US forces, but the first half of the video does seem to show a legitimate, if tragic use of force. However, the later engagement of a van attempting to pick up wounded, starts to border on illegitimate and immoral use of force.

    It was obvious (especially at the moment they opened fire), that the civilians were not there to gather weapons

    While i have heard several accounts and stories of what can be seen as the "agression culture" of US troops, this is the first time i have seen it shown on camera.

    I do think however, that the reporters should not have been there, especially as a video-camera looks so much like an RPG. But the use of force against those picking up wounded, i see as inexcusable.

    BBC report

    Wikileaks: WARNING VIDEO ON THE FRONT PAGE IS HIGHLY GRAPHIC. NSFW
    Last edited by Admiral; 05 Apr 10, 18:58.
    Who we are is but a stepping stone to what we may become.

  • #2
    Just came across this myself and if this is the US Army's definition of a "firefight" then I need to update my dictionary

    "5 to 6 individuals with AK-47s", even though they only identified 2.

    "Yeah we had a guy shooting and now he's behind the building"

    Are US Army aviators so desperate to waste anything that moves that they miss-report what they see to get permission to open fire?

    Not the US Military's proudest moment.

    Comment


    • #3
      Is this real or fake?

      Just saw this

      If the video isn't appropriate to watch, a mod can feel free to delete the thread.

      ACG Staff Edit: On-site link removed as content is graphically violent & potentially not suitable for children
      - in that children are welcome & present within these forums, our benchmark is generally PG13 for such things.
      Last edited by Admiral; 05 Apr 10, 18:56.

      Comment


      • #4
        There is a thread on this on the Iraq War subforum. Reuters (who lost two reporters in there) had been taking legal action to gain access to this video, so it is real as far as I know.

        Comment


        • #5
          Horrible. For all the great things the US military has done and does to this day, I still can't make myself even remotely confortable with this video.
          The true face of "war".

          Comment


          • #6
            This is not Politics, Vita...

            Moved to War In Iraq Forum & Merged.

            Vid deleted due to link at off-site location.

            The video is not suitable for a child (PG13) to be watching here.

            ACG Staff
            Last edited by Admiral; 05 Apr 10, 18:53.
            On the Plains of Hesitation lie the blackened bones of countless millions who, at the dawn of victory, sat down to rest-and resting... died. Adlai E. Stevenson

            ACG History Today

            BoRG

            Comment


            • #7
              The key question I ask myself is if they were bad guys did they do the right thing. Right now I am thinking they did.

              I do have a question though what the hell was the guy who kneeled and was peeking around the corner at the helicopters doing. It almost like pointing a toy gun at cops in a bad neighborhood.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by craven View Post
                The key question I ask myself is if they were bad guys did they do the right thing. Right now I am thinking they did.
                Really? The guy he identified as having an RPG actually had a telephoto lense. Fair enough, it looks suss when he's peeking round the corner but when he states that the photographer had taken a shot with the non existent RPG that's just good old fashioned BS. He was just itching to pull the trigger and I'm willing to bet the RoE wouldn't let him unless they had incoming fire.

                It all reminded me of an episode of South Park only a damned sight less funny.

                Jimbo: Boys, looky there. That there's a Rocky Moutain black bear …one of the few remaining of its kind. Isn't it beautiful… By God, it's coming right for us! [Shoots it. It is hit and flips off the mound it was on.]
                Stan: Hey, it wasn't coming right for us. It was just sitting there.
                Jimbo: Shhh, not so loud. Now that there's just a technicality.
                Kyle: What do yo mean?
                Jimbo: You see boys, the Democrats have passed a lot of laws trying to stop us from hunting.
                Cartman: Democrats **** me off!
                Jimbo: They say we can't shoot certain animals anymore, unless they're posing an immediate threat. Therefore, before we shoot somethin', we have to say 'It's coming right for us.'

                Comment


                • #9
                  This is what happens when you embed with terrorists. You're producing terrorist propaganda at that point, so you've got no room to bitch when you get capped by the good guys because it looks like you're armed.
                  Go is to chess as philosophy is to double-entry bookkeeping. - Nicholaď Hel in Shibumi

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Fodder76 View Post
                    Just came across this myself and if this is the US Army's definition of a "firefight" then I need to update my dictionary

                    "5 to 6 individuals with AK-47s", even though they only identified 2.

                    "Yeah we had a guy shooting and now he's behind the building"

                    Are US Army aviators so desperate to waste anything that moves that they miss-report what they see to get permission to open fire?

                    Not the US Military's proudest moment.
                    Gee, "only" two of the terrorists had guns.

                    I guess we should have dropped teddy bears for the others.

                    See weeklystandard.com for a pretty good analysis.
                    Last edited by trebuchet; 05 Apr 10, 21:31.
                    Go is to chess as philosophy is to double-entry bookkeeping. - Nicholaď Hel in Shibumi

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I think Hot Air has a good blog on this:

                      http://hotair.com/archives/2010/04/0...-of-war-zones/

                      A good point that was made:

                      Another accusation is that US forces fired on and killed rescue workers attempting to carry one of the journalists out of the area. However, the video clearly shows that the vehicle in question bore no markings of a rescue vehicle at all, and the men who ran out of the van to grab the wounded man wore no uniforms identifying themselves as such. Under any rules of engagement, and especially in a terrorist hot zone like Baghdad in 2007, that vehicle would properly be seen as support for the terrorists that had just been engaged and a legitimate target for US forces. While they didn’t grab weapons before getting shot, the truth is that the gunships didn’t give them the chance to try, either — which is exactly what they’re trained to do. They don’t need to wait until someone gets hold of the RPG launcher and fires it at the gunship or at the reinforcements that had already begun to approach the scene. The gunships acted to protect the approaching patrol, which is again the very reason we had them in the air over Baghdad.
                      The video itself made it quite clear - first, the group consisted of insurgents preparing to attack American forces. Second, it was not at all clear that the 'rescue vehicle' is indeed such a thing. Even from the video, it is not clear what exactly these men were doing. In fact, they looked as if they're picking up the weapons, not rescuing anyone.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Fodder76 View Post
                        Really? The guy he identified as having an RPG actually had a telephoto lense. Fair enough, it looks suss when he's peeking round the corner but when he states that the photographer had taken a shot with the non existent RPG that's just good old fashioned BS. He was just itching to pull the trigger and I'm willing to bet the RoE wouldn't let him unless they had incoming fire.

                        It all reminded me of an episode of South Park only a damned sight less funny.
                        Actually when the guy says shots are being fired there is a flash from the guy peaking around the corner. It probally was just light off the lens but i do not know how much of a difference there is since i never been shot at while flying.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Here we go with a true "Armchair General" situation when you can pick the action out the day after while sitting in your lazyboy sipping tea or bitters.

                          Guess those who have commented so far have never been shot at by bad guys. It rattles your thinking my laddies let me clue you. It tends to make you paranoid and you actually think that there are people out there trying to kill you. Can you imagine that?

                          Oh, a van without a red cross or a red crescent on it in the middle of a combat situation. What? We expect a soccer Mom to get out and let her kiddies go play on the neighborhood soccer field? Now, that I think that idea would really stretch the realms of reality, but you never know. I mean if a guy with a foot long lens peeks behind a van and we are to take it for what? Surely not a RPG which could put us out of the sky, make a widow of the wife and orphans of the kids.

                          Let's see now, terrorists don't normally wear uniforms as I understand it. Or at least that's what I was told when I came to Iraq. So, a bunch of guys running around trying to help enemy soldiers while bullets are still flying means what? That they're volunteer EMS workers who took time off their factory job to help their neighbors, or maybe they're Al Queda doing what they've been trained to do and get their wounded terrorist buddies out of harm's way. Gosh, which do you think is more likely?

                          Fellas, let me tell you this. If you're anywhere near a fire fight and you see a helicopter overhead you have 2 realistic options. 1. Start waving the flag of a coalition forces as hard as you can or 2. get undercover and stay there until no bullets have been heard for at least 15 minutes.

                          A year back I was out on a mission with some US Army guys, all with uniforms on and we were walking through cropfields with some MRAPs and Humvees not very far away when an "Apache" started paying attention to us, first just circling then coming in closer & closer so I could get a couple of good photos of the pilot in it. It made me pretty dang nervous let me clue you. Found out when I got back that an American patrol had been ambushed a few miles away earlier that day and this guy was just 'taking care' of us. Well, glad he was 'cause I sure didn't want to be on his bad side.
                          "If you are right, then you are right even if everyone says you are wrong. If you are wrong then you are wrong even if everyone says you are right." William Penn.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Questions that must be asked:

                            1. What differentiated the reporters as such?

                            A guy with a camera, even if it wasn't mistakenly identified as a weapon could very well be a legit target in an insurgency battlefield, either for intelligence gathering purposes or to record an upcoming attack.

                            If you are an INNOCENT reporter and don't wish to be mistakingly identified as an insurgent you HAVE to wear bright color cloths with "reporter" or "news" printed largely on the front and back, if you CHOOSE not to do so your'e knwingly risking your life.

                            2. WHY did the reporters (and other "innocent civilians") fraternized with clearly armed men?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Things happen and people get killed in warzones. I can't see the big deal. If you want to sanitise war give 'em all water pistols and if you get squirted you have to stand in the corner and watch that way accidents can be fixed with a blow dryer.
                              Matthew 5:9 Blessed are the cheesemakers

                              That's right bitches. I'm blessed!

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              • casanova
                                Berlin.1945
                                by casanova
                                The Sowjet T-34 tank against a German Tiger tank in Berlin in the II World War in 1945. ...
                                Yesterday, 23:41
                              • casanova
                                AW 169M
                                by casanova
                                The Austrian minister of defence Klaudia Tanner declared the buy of 18 Italian military helicopters of the type AW 169M for the Austrian army, the Bundesheer....
                                Yesterday, 23:26
                              • JBark
                                What changed?
                                by JBark
                                There was a time not too long ago when this forum was full of discussion, multiple posts, votes and involved discussions on the best of the war, etc.,...
                                Yesterday, 18:54
                              Working...
                              X