Collateral Murder

[Icarus27k]

Yes...that is what they decided to do...get in Apaches and kill a bunch of people.

Yeah, they did decide. I get the feeling you guys want make some case dealing with chains of command or immediate intentions of the pilots and commanders. This is all peripheral to the point I'm making.

The pilots and commanders put themselves in this situation. This decision was made, perhaps long ago, in their cases when they made the decision to volunteer and become Apache pilots. Commanding and pilot a flying death machine means you're going to use it, and being the responsible adults they are, they get called out when they, say, shoot up a van with kids in it.

My point still stands. The US military is untrustworthy and as of right now, the ethical equivalent, let's say, some mafia.

 

[lone wolf]

Yeah, they did decide. I get the feeling you guys want make some case dealing with chains of command or immediate intentions of the pilots and commanders. This is all peripheral to the point I'm making.

The pilots and commanders put themselves in this situation. This decision was made, perhaps long ago, in their cases when they made the decision to volunteer and become Apache pilots. Commanding and pilot a flying death machine means you're going to use it, and being the responsible adults they are, they get called out when they, say, shoot up a van with kids in it.

My point still stands. The US military is untrustworthy and as of right now, the ethical equivalent, let's say, some mafia.

Whether there has been a cover-up or not is immaterial. You are propagandizing. Those choppers aren't toys. No military aircraft is. For that reason, one must seek permission to fire just the same as one must fly where one is told and do as one is ordered. Where do you get these ideas?

 

[CDNBear]

Yeah, they did decide.

Please provide proof.

I get the feeling you guys want make some case dealing with chains of command or immediate intentions of the pilots and commanders. This is all peripheral to the point I'm making.

But of course it is. Because if you have to admit or acknowledge it, your point is proven wrong.

That's why you get treated the way you do here.

The pilots and commanders put themselves in this situation.

Under penalty of incarceration, if they attempt to leave their post..?

This decision was made, perhaps long ago, in their cases when they made the decision to volunteer and become Apache pilots.

Please provide proof.

Commanding and pilot a flying death machine means you're going to use it, and being the responsible adults they are, they get called out when they, say, shoot up a van with kids in it.

Do they get called out when they run SAR ops on home soil?

My point still stands. The US military is untrustworthy and as of right now, the ethical equivalent, let's say, some mafia.

And my point still stands, you have a limited grasp on reality.

Whether there has been a cover-up or not is immaterial. You are propagandizing. Those choppers aren't toys. No military aircraft is. Where do you get these ideas?

The same place he keeps his hat. I'll give you three guesses where that is.

 

[Icarus27k]

Following orders, seeking permission. They pulled the trigger. In fact, they agreed to put in the situation where they would pull the trigger. Innocent people were killed by them.

The buck has got to stop there. That's adult responsibility for adult decisions made.

 

[CDNBear]

Following orders, seeking permission. They pulled the trigger. In fact, they agreed to put in the situation where they would pull the trigger. Innocent people were killed by them.

The buck has got to stop there. That's adult responsibility for adult decisions made.

C'mon, you really can not be as stupid as this post would depict?

 

[lone wolf]

Following orders, seeking permission. They pulled the trigger. In fact, they agreed to put in the situation where they would pull the trigger. Innocent people were killed by them.

The buck has got to stop there. That's adult responsibility for adult decisions made.

Try listening to the conversations between pilot and Command. Controllers are seeing, in real time, exactly the same thing as the cameras see. Command has to authorize the shoot. The system is in place to minimize friendly fire. Innocent people sometimes get hit. It happens. Nothing is ever perfect. They pulled the trigger ONLY after the guy on the ground saw their cause for suspicion. Second guesses make expensive holes in the ground.

 

[Icarus27k]

Proof that they made the decision? Sure. How about when they said, "Yeah, I'll train to fly that Apache that could possibly, in the realth of possibility, shoot up a minivan in North Baghdad with kids in it."

 

[CDNBear]

Proof that they made the decision? Sure. How about when they said, "Yeah, I'll train to fly that Apache that could possibly, in the realth of possibility, shoot up a minivan in North Baghdad with kids in it."

Please provide a link to your proof.

Or are you making this up?

 

[Icarus27k]

Please provide a link to your proof.

Or are you making this up?

You're not hearing me. My proof is when they decided to train to fly the Apache. When one does that, one is bound to all the possibilites of using that Apache. In this case, the specific possibility of shooting up some kids in N. Baghdad came true.

 

[gerryh]

Yep, the helo's were flying cover for "Bushwacker 26", and did exactly what they are supposed to do. Neutralize any threat before they can mount an ambush or otherwise offensive action. That is how operations like that work.

You don't know that. That's pure conjecture.

Sorry Bear, but there is no way you could say that that Van was a threat. I will give that the group of men who were carrying the AK47's were a potential threat, but that Van was not.

As for my statements being conjecture, then the statements that the Van was a potential threat to the Blackhawks or the Bradleys are also conjecture only.

 

[Tonington]

They pulled the trigger ONLY after the guy on the ground saw their cause for suspicion. Second guesses make expensive holes in the ground.

And the van? I didn't see anything ambiguous at all about what was happening at that time...wounded were being attended to. I didn't see anyone grabbing weapons strewn about on the ground. Of course earlier someone brought up how the mind can transfer images it has stored inside from past memories in place of what another would see (not exactly in those words, but that's what is happening when the "mind sees what it wants to see")... So maybe they thought they saw a man grabbing weapons rather than a body. They were itching to fire some more.

Expensive holes in the ground have many causes. It's precisely incidents like this that will be used to recruit more young men to give their lives needlessly. Possibly producing expensive holes in the ground of their own in the process.

 

[lone wolf]

You're not hearing me. My proof is when they decided to train to fly the Apache. When one does that, one is bound to all the possibilites of using that Apache. In this case, the specific possibility of shooting up some kids in N. Baghdad came true.

How are you at lottery tickets? Do you pick a winner every time?

 

[DaSleeper]

It wouldn't surprise me if Icarus is one of those that cheers on Fred Phelps-led Westboro Baptist Church :roll:

 

[Tonington]

Also, I'm pretty sure it's perfectly legal to carry an AK-47 around in Iraq. I know I've seen similar photos at rallies in the US as well...

 

[lone wolf]

And the van? I didn't see anything ambiguous at all about what was happening at that time...wounded were being attended to. I didn't see anyone grabbing weapons strewn about on the ground. Of course earlier someone brought up how the mind can transfer images it has stored inside from past memories in place of what another would see (not exactly in those words, but that's what is happening when the "mind sees what it wants to see")... So maybe they thought they saw a man grabbing weapons rather than a body. They were itching to fire some more.

Expensive holes in the ground have many causes. It's precisely incidents like this that will be used to recruit more young men to give their lives needlessly. Possibly producing expensive holes in the ground of their own in the process.

I'm not defending shooting up the van. Even the aircrew commented on picking up the wounded.

 

[CDNBear]

You're not hearing me.

I hear you loud and clear, you can't provide any supporting documentation, you're just making this up. Your credibility just disappeared.

My proof is when they decided to train to fly the Apache.

Which can also be used in defense of the Continental United States, as well as SAR ops.

Are you apposed to self defense and rescue operations?

When one does that, one is bound to all the possibilites of using that Apache.

I don't think you've put much thought into all the possibilities.

In this case, the specific possibility of shooting up some kids in N. Baghdad came true.

So now you're saying these Officers joined the military, became Helo pilots, just so they could go to Iraq and kill kids?

Sorry Bear, but there is no way you could say that that Van was a threat.

I don't have to. It has become SOP to terminate all manner of egress.

I will give that the group of men who were carrying the AK47's were a potential threat, but that Van was not.

Not my problem. War is ugly and ugly **** happens. I know you hate that, but that is the reality of it. I, thousands of miles away from said conflict know and understand this procedure. You would think people working with insurgents would try and keep up with such policy, so they could keep alive.

Besides that, who the f!ck brings kids to pick up wounded people, c'mon?

As for my statements being conjecture, then the statements that the Van was a potential threat to the Blackhawks or the Bradleys are also conjecture only.

Fair enough, i don't care what you do or do not believe. I'm not going to change your mind if I post a paper explaining this policy.

 

[CDNBear]

And the van?

This has been explained.

It wouldn't surprise me if Icarus is one of those that cheers on Fred Phelps-led Westboro Baptist Church :roll:

:lol:

Also, I'm pretty sure it's perfectly legal to carry an AK-47 around in Iraq

If you are Iraqi Police, yes, un-uniformed civilians, no.

 

[wulfie68]

Proof that they made the decision? Sure. How about when they said, "Yeah, I'll train to fly that Apache that could possibly, in the realth of possibility, shoot up a minivan in North Baghdad with kids in it."

Or just maybe it was something like "since I wasn't born with a silver spoon in my mouth, and Uncle Sam is willing to pay for college if I sign a contract..."

I'll give you a little leeway and agree that yes, they did make an adult decision to join the military, but once they did that, ALL their wishes become secondary to the needs of the service they enlist in. Maybe they wanted to learn to fly for SAR or so they could join the forest service once their hitch is up. Maybe their recruiter told them they'd be trained to fly jets and could get into NASA and train to be an astronaut, but they got sent to helicopter school instead. All we know is they are doing a job they were trained and ordered to do, we know NOTHING about their motivations. Everything you claim is a "maybe" and this is where your entire claim to be logical and factual falls apart.

Hell, I'll throw you a bone and agree that President Bush screwed up and never should have gone after Iraq in the first place, but thats immaterial to these guys and their reality (as others have pointed out): they have to do what they are ordered to do or face charges that could and probably would mean ruination of career, dishonorable discharge (with all the baggage that carries) and possibly incarceration.

 

[Icarus27k]

How are you at lottery tickets? Do you pick a winner every time?

That's not a rational comparison at all. Everyone knows what the possibility is of commanding and piloting an Apache. And one is responsible for using that Apache. That sounds like a simple, undeniable, proposition.

 

[lone wolf]

That's not a rational comparison at all. Everyone knows what the possibility is of commanding and piloting an Apache. And one is responsible for using that Apache. That sounds like a simple, undeniable, proposition.

The comparison is in these guys NOT being able to predict the future either. It's okay for you to be ridiculous and nobody else?