Almost Canadian

As you have pointed out, they were in Iraq, not Cheltenham High Street.

As I have said, I wasn't on the ground so I have no idea what the appropriate response was.

I would imagine that video of people being shot by a helicopter gun ship would rarely be rarely described as being anything other than barbaric.

Unfortunately, life is not a John Wayne film where the baddies can be taken out without a scratch upon the goodies.

Without the benefit of hindsight, would you state that what occurred was anything other than what you would expect to occur during armed conflict?

Almost Canadian

We don't know how far away the helicopter was. I would imagine that not all helicopters are armed. I wasn't there, I don't know either.

I was surprised at how little inappropriate behaviour the video showed. I accept that, with the benefit of hindsight, different decisions should have been made but it certainly didn't show the blood lust the reports I read in the media at the time suggested.

The shooters obtained consent to engage twice and could have shot the one crawling away much sooner than he was had murder really been their objective.

caretaker

The wiki page says ground forces recovered 2 rpg's and an akm rifle after, and that the armed men were almost certainly insurgents. One of the helicopters checked fire prior to one of the attacks to allow women and children to leave the group before shooting. It's the lack of visible weapons in the group with the reporters at the time the cannon-fire starts, the attack on the van attempting to evacuate the wounded and the missile attack on the building some people ran into, which contained civillian families that prompts debate worldwide over whether war crimes were commited there or not. The army non-com who's on trial right now for killing 16 sleeping villagers in Afghanistan will supercede this as the new Mai Lai anyway. I talked to M60 door gunners who joked about making 'chop suey' in Vietnam and the tone here in the video is similar. That's what the job is, and I understand it but that's also why they have those cameras now, and why the government refused to declassify it. Every drone strike on a house likely rubs out an extended family whether the target is there or not and they sure don't hand out those details freely either.

Almost Canadian

I accept that the audio is awful.

I wasn't aware of the other information you refer to.

januarymix

+1

And the UK gov recently went after the partner of the Guardian writer on NSA affairs

This world and government approach is becoming sickening, and there are plenty of law toting apologists to man that world

caretaker

When the lady from the CNIB comes to read to you next week just get her to describe the whole thing to you. First you haven't seen this, then you haven't heard of that, and now you say you read reports in the media at the time, but regardless you see no wrongdoing in gun camera footage of unarmed civilians and reporters being shot. You're hard to take seriously. Consent? Recieved consent? It's up to the man behind the trigger who he shoots and nobody else. Wikileaks files from Manning helped confirm that the whole WMD excuse GW Bush used for the 2nd Iraq war was bogus, though we already had the reports from Hans Blix's UN inspection team saying there were none there. Bush was censured by the UN for the unjustified invasion of a soverign nation and Tony Blair got sucked into that coalition and it cost lots of American lives and lots of British lives and more Iraqi lives than you can frickin count and that's part of the hate the US has on for Brad Manning, the whistleblower. And don't tell me you never heard of that either, I won't believe you, so don't be so obtuse.

Almost Canadian

I didn't think we were debating the merits of the Iraq war

I hadn't see the video until earlier this week.

Having seen it, I don't believe it shows anything like the blood lust of the soldiers that was portrayed in the media. That is my belief, I accept you may believe otherwise.

Your own post stated that weapons were found and that some of those killed were insurgents. Perhaps, in your infinite wisdom, you can confirm why anyone would have RPGs other than to shoot at large machinery? You appear to accept that the existence of the RPGs points to being "overarmed".

I didn't read all the media reports at the time, or since. I don't apologize for not doing so. As I have said on numerous occasions in the past, I trust little of what main stream media puts out. They are interested in obtaining viewers, not necessarily of reporting the facts. I have, personally, been involved with situations where what was reported was massively different to what was reported by mainstream media.

You are perfectly entitled to your opinion that what Mr. Manning did was appropriate. I won't resort to attacks upon you in a personal sense as you just have.

Dave n Ailsa

I believe if you join your country's national forces, you have a duty to follow orders and keep your trap shut, point your gun where you are told to, and kill whatever needs killing.

I don't believe in fairly tales of higher beings, so a paedo is just a paedo, and should be put in jail, and a big thanks to whoever tells the cops.

caretaker

No, I never said that some of those killed were insurgents. I quoted the wikipedia page on the incident, and you could re-read the post, or look up the webpage yourself.

Novocastrian

Too hard for a lawyer.

mdizzle

That's a ridiculously stupid belief, tbh.

ExKiwilass

Chelsey (sp) is a heroine in my mind.

bats

You think they give up the right to a conscience then? Just obeying orders?

(stopping short of invoking Godwin here)

Hawk13

I get that war is war, kill or be killed but...

You can maybe justify shooting at the original group (an RPG, seriously) but shooting at the van with people clearly retrieving the wounded, come on.

And the attitude of those involved, just a little sickening.