surely you're aware of the tales that have emerged from falluja?

the US is well and truly proven to kill civilians indiscriminately, in many theatres, in many wars, so while we can wax lyrical about the accuracy of what it is we're each interpreting we are?

Is it possible for this to be a genuine, reasonable, yet catastrophic mistake?

Hardly; this is S.O.P. The real tragedy — apart from the obvious — is that so many people won't realise that this happens all the time in Iraq and Afghanistan.

US special forces soldiers dug bullets out of their victims? bodies in the bloody aftermath of a botched night raid, then washed the wounds with alcohol before lying to their superiors about what happened, Afghan investigators have told The Times.

Two pregnant women, a teenage girl, a police officer?

It's not so much that the RoE needs tightening up (although they?

Must suck for anyone who plays a musical instrument.

Hehe. I'm sorry.

The video is "graphic evidence of the dangers involved in war journalism and the tragedies that can result," said David Schlesinger, editor-in-chief of Reuters news.

I would have thought it was graphic evidence of the dangers involved in being an Iraqi myself.

US Military investogation docs released, if you're prepared to go past they we-will-snoop-on-you warning.

Very interesting to read having seen the video. They lied, didn't they?

I sat there quite sickened watching the video, the poor target identification?

Plenty about Tiger Woods though.

Plenty about Tiger Woods though.

Who flouted the rules of being engaged. See that's not that far off.

You're either deliberately trying to be provocative, or that's the worst call I've ever seen/read you make.

I wonder how many people have seen David Simon's Generation Kill?

I started last night (2 eps.), and then woke up to this. For me, the true horror is that the American people just don't want to know.

For me, the true horror is that the American people just don't want to know.

Two words: Haditha Whitewash

It's not only that they don't want to know, it's that even when someone actually does care, those responsible as often as not get a walk. There is a huge?

The Geneva Conventions relate to, in general,

the treatment and protection of civilians, combatants who are ?hors de?

I was disturbed by it. To me the men were casual in their behaviour, almost to the point of ignoring a Black Apache heliocopter that was so obviously circling.

Which points to the clues?

big, big call keith.

surely you're aware of the tales that have emerged from falluja?

Yes, and that was an attrocity. But that was some serious off-the-reservation shit. My point – the point of this post – is that there are distinctions between a) a deliberate strategy of terrorising the?

Who flouted the rules of being engaged.

The last think I expected on this thread was a rofflenui. Suspect it will be the only one.

I recall Dick Cheney, John Yoo and other repugnant scumbags exempting US forces from the Geneva Conventions, so I suspect they have all developed a?

so I suspect they have all developed a culture of not believing that reasonable standards of conduct apply to them

Look, this didn't start yesterday. And it is not confined to brown people. The US army has immunity from its own prosecutions. Is anybody familiar with what Wikipedia charmingly calls?

When?

Because they don't give a shit about Iraqis?

that gets my vote.

it's not that the US of A is intrinsically bad, or worse that other nations engaged in warfare. the british have a long and bloody history of massacre, rapine, and plunder.

it's that the US likes to pretend?

And of course remember they?

and worse, dudes with AKs are not a clear and present threat in iraq. they're bodyguards.

may think they are playing a video game

Isn't that one way they recruit them these days?

it's not that the US of A is intrinsically bad

big, big call Che.

Glenn Greenwald reminded his readers of Bush's obnoxious phrase: "they hate us for our freedom".

I believe The West Wing basically beat him to that one...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VatPKqTgzh4

atrocities committed by individuals don't automatically equal systematic war crimes, nor the reverse.

Actually, I'm reasonably confident the reverse *is true*: if there are systemic war crimes, there will be atrocities committed by individuals.

Occupation by a combative military force is War.

This one's all about the oil.

Though maybe, like the old, dying empires of old, they're just fighting wars to give their ever more costly armies something to do, to validate the crippling budgets for a few more years.?

Or what about the time that a pilot ejected himself over the skies of Bologna, allowing his plane to crash into a school, killing 12 children?

But were they American children?

Because that seems to be all they care about. Everyone else is a wog to them.

Everyone else is a wog to them.

no such thing as a wog in the US.

"sand nigger" is the phrase you're looking for.

Everyone else is a wog to them.

no such thing as a wog in the US.

"sand nigger" is the phrase you're looking for.

The ejection incident Giovanni referred to took place in Italy.

I'm not going to post the appropriate slur, but I don't think that one above is?

After watching the video, I am starting to feel uneasy that some in the military may think they are playing a video game.

There's a post here (with LOTS of comments) you might like to read;

http://kotaku.com/5510188/us-army-accused-of-video-game+like-behavior-in-disturbing-leaked-iraq-war-video

US fight Taliban with heavy metal and rock music. Thin Lizzy and Metallica.

"Some locals complain but it's a way to push them to choose. It's motivating Marines as well," he added after one deafening round of several hours including tracks from The Offspring,?

Because they don't give a shit about Iraqis?

They care enough for Iraqis to risk their own lives to stop insurgents who might someday blow up apartment blocks with people inside.

The initial coverup and denials are truly damning though. The initial claims were that it was a terror group engaging, which a?

There are going to be fuckups in wars, if we insist on having them.

But it does seem a tad optimistic to expect the lads to just follow the rules in what is otherwise an illegal war.

But were they American children?

Because that seems to be all they care about. Everyone else is a wog to them.

Well, the soldier in the video seemed pretty keen to get help for the young girl he was carrying, and attempted to get her and her brother to a?

I'm not defending the murder at all but "occupation" sounds so sensible on news reports where in reality it's?

Bloody hell, that injured man from the initial shoot-up crawling away on hands and knees, and the crosshairs on him and the chopper crew just aching for him to pick up a weapon so they have a reason to blow him to pieces...

makes sense. it seems to take an awful long time for those chaingun rounds to reach their target. also, the movement of the camera was odd for a chopper?

But it does seem a tad optimistic to expect the lads to just follow the rules in what is otherwise an illegal war.

Not at all.

In the Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal, charges of murder resulted in findings of not guilty precisely because of the distinction between lawful wars (which?

finally, they make reference to "bushmaster" which is probably the 25mm variety of autocannon

Bushmaster

The M242 is not used on aircraft. The AC-130U and the AV-8 Harrier II use a different 25 mm weapon, the 5-barrel GAU-12/U. The sister weapon of the M242, the M230 30 mm chain gun,?

Includes references to video 'from Apache'; I think we can consider that one settled. I do recall seeing another gunsight vid in the countryside where the chopper was so far aways the victims didn't notice it.

Though the AP says the [[http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10636842|US Mil are having trouble?

Not at all.

In the Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal, charges of murder resulted in findings of not guilty precisely because of the distinction between lawful wars (which the Japanese attack on Perl Harbor was not) with the lawful conduct of war (which many of the actions were – you kill?

I can't realistically see Saddam having offered the same invitation had he been in office in 2007, unless of course the country had been ravaged by some other invader.

I can't see how that's relevant.

The Government of Iraq (elected by the Iraqi people) has asked the US to be?

But it does seem a tad optimistic to expect the lads to just follow the rules in what is otherwise an illegal war.

March 20?

My thought, watching the video, was that with all that wonderful technology and information at their disposal they seemed to be missing only a pair of high-powered binoculars.

I think the video was already put through binoculars. The aircraft taking it probably was a km or so back. Whether or?

I thought that the President of Iraq had recently expressed a wish that the USA should leave?

I believe the President of the United States has expressed the same wish...

Bad bloody business. Greenwald's been emphasising just how typical and expected this is, though.

Although I have heard that some of these rounds are so powerful that they only have to pass within a meter of you to kill.

That and some of the pavement being converted into supersonic concrete shards by the impact of the rounds.

Oh well, freedom isn't free!

Is it any wonder people want to fly planes into their buildings?

Also, although the invasion may have been unlawful, such a complaint cannot be leveled at the continued presence of US and other forces in 2007, which by then was at the invitation of the Iraqi Government.

War of aggression was described by the Nuremberg Tribunal as the supreme international crime?

liberal apologists like Keith

I didn't see that. I also didn't see that he approved of the US presence in Iraq. Rather that judging the whole on a part may lead to distortions of vision and that it might be more complicated than that. Seemed like a thoughtful post to?

The answer is no, this is simply an adjunct to the initial illegal act of aggressive war, the supreme war crime.

And shouldn't these rednecks have been asking the opposite question?

How many journalists has the U.S. killed in Iraq now I wonder. Seems to be working out quite well?

It worked in Vietnam

A sentence you don't often see; ) Interesting post.

Do you think this may have been just a terrible mistake too?

The Government of Iraq (elected by the Iraqi people) has asked the US to be there, therefore that the US is there isn't illegal.

Cmon, how can it count if you violently removed the previous government and installed your own puppets – same as Afghanistan. Free elections my arse.

I think your point around assessing exactly what the points of failure are here is?

echo night after day after
evernight and never
while the redeyed warrior
tries to sleep -ever
go away

and we wonder
why lacerated land
her people and all who thought
safe haven here
see daily violence?

For what it's worth this is still an enduring favourite of mine.

So will New Zealand stop supporting US military campaigns?

FWIW, we rather conspicuously refused to join the Alliance of the Willing, or whatever the hell Bush liked to call it (I'm honestly surprised he didn't just go with "The Good Guys".) Afghanistan is another kettle of fish, though, and I?

finally, they make reference to "bushmaster" which is probably the 25mm variety of autocannon (i still need to watch the remainder of the vid)

I think Bushmaster was the callsign for the ground team.

http://collateralmurder.com/en/transcript.html

FWIW, we rather conspicuously refused to join the Alliance of the Willing, or whatever the hell Bush liked to call it

Not quite true, we just made a point of underplaying our involvement.

A list of those in the so-called coalition. Our involvement was small and was not at the?

Isn't that one way they recruit them these days?

They built this for kids to come and get a taste of the army experience

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bM0cR_G6t4c&feature=player_embedded#

Cmon, how can it count if you violently removed the previous government and installed your own puppets – same as Afghanistan. Free elections my arse.

Agreed, but lets not forget that Saddam too, as part of an Iraqi tradition, very violently removed the one he replaced some years back.

Legit?

Agreed, but lets not forget that Saddam too, as part of an Iraqi tradition, very violently removed the one he replaced some years back.

The old two wrongs make a right trick. At least Saddam was an Iraqi.

Legit governance of any sort is not something most Iraqis have had?

FWIW, we rather conspicuously refused to join the Alliance of the Willing, or whatever the hell Bush liked to call it (I'm honestly surprised he didn't just go with "The Good Guys".) Afghanistan is another kettle of fish, though, and I wouldn't expect a pullout there any time soon.

Not?

At least Saddam was an Iraqi.

A Sunni first, an Iraqi second I'd say.

The old two wrongs make a right trick.

Nope but it goes both ways. Saddam's horrors don't justify Bush's, as the Americans and an expat vistor who strolls into this forum every now and then would?

regime change is not a legitimate case for war

Oil, on the other hand..

Just sayin'

And, yes, I feel bad now...

And, yes, I do feel bad now...

It'll pass. Don't let those running dogs of the imperialists get you down.

My purpose in writing this post is that a whole new channel of raw news has just come out of beta. This new form of raw news is rich and complex, and allows us to be nuanced in a way that the MSM?

This is why I only care about the trees.

And that's why you've made the mistake of decontextualising something that should be condemned into something that is, oops, just a mere mistake... move along people.

And that's why you've made the mistake of decontextualising something that should be condemned into something that is, oops, just a mere mistake... move along people.

I think Keith's post was actually pretty open-ended in that regard. Some of the points he's just made in his comment above probably could?

Now this is obviously just a part of your post, but do you realise just how similar it sounds to the zero-middle-ground arguments that helped get the US and the rest of us into this clusterfuck in the first place?

It also sounds to me like not wanting to collude?

(edit : amongst the whole wrongness of the entire rampage )

do you realise just how similar this sounds to the zero-middle-ground arguments that helped get the US and the rest of us into this clusterfuck in the first place?

Actually I think it has more to do with the fact that so many self-described moderates didn't take a stronger view?

It also sounds to me like not wanting to collude with murderers. And frankly I'm okay with that.

Well, when you put it that way, certainly it's hard not to be okay with not wanting to collude with murderers. However to me it doesn't seem to be a very useful?

However to me it doesn't seem to be a very useful starting point for serious questions about how and why modern technowar as practised by the US consistently results in these appalling things happening.

So, where's a good starting point? Looking at the Wikileak video and saying 'hey, what if?

The idea that the Left in the last ten years has been too intransigent is just bloody ridicolous, to the point of being offensive. Try 'not nearly intransigent or principled enough'.

I agree with you. But probably in relation to the current two wars in the Middle East, too small?

Keith, none of that really came across in your original post.

Well as far as I could see, it was there for the interpreting.

Actually I think it has more to do with the fact that so many self-described moderates didn't take a stronger view against Blair, Bush and their fanaticism. They were too busy telling themselves how great Blair and the bombing of Yugoslavia was.

Don't take it out on this blog, then.

I have seen quite a few of these ?gun sight? videos out of Iraq and Afghanistan, but this one is worse because you know there are apparently some non-combatants involved, with the other videos it was very clear that it was insurgents on the receiving end.

Yeah, they don't tend?

However to me it doesn't seem to be a very useful starting point for serious questions about how and why modern technowar as practised by the US consistently results in these appalling things happening.

Everyday somewhere in the world i'm sure a camera would catch unspeakable acts of violence committed?

We can't go on screaming our heads off at kid soldiers because they are set up to fail, and?

I mean could you even imagine being there? What day would your nerves just start shooting?

That clearly wasn't nerves though. Complete detachment from the humanity of it. Joy at how accurate their shooting was.

Thanks for sharing your opinion. I have to take exception to it though.

First off lets start with this....

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/55644/collateral%20damage.gif

Pretty clear and unadulterated murder of a civilian.

I read today that the 17 min video was taken from a 38 min video that made it clearer that?

...and jesus stop with the "liberal" arguement christaan,it's poor, the causes of this war lay predomiantly in circles who haven't had a liberal thought in their lifetime.

Kia ora Jeremy!

The US Govt. has brought a war to their neighborhood for completely made up reasons and yet we can just hand wave it all away as shouldn't have been in a warzone.

What did one of the crew say when he heard there were children in the van? "Their fault?

...and jesus stop with the "liberal" arguement christaan,it's poor, the causes of this war lay predomiantly in circles who haven't had a liberal thought in their lifetime.

Shall we count how many Democrats voted for it? How many members of the UK Labour Party? Shall we pretend the Labour government?

What did one of the crew say when he heard there were children in the van? "Their fault for bringing kids to a battle"?

Yup, that was the reaction to finding out children were in the van that they wasted.

Further on in the video ( the full length version?

Shall we count how many Democrats voted for it? How many members of the UK Labour Party? Shall we pretend the Labour government in NZ didn't send troops? Christopher Hitchens? Hallo?

If you want to lump the whole world into two camps – liberal and not liberal I suppose you're?

Shall we count how many Democrats voted for it? How many members of the UK Labour Party? Shall we pretend the Labour government in NZ didn't send troops? Christopher Hitchens? Hallo?

Liberal really is a useless word in these discussions without definition. I wouldn't consider a bunch of these people?

Also the longer version made it clearer that one of the people was carrying RPG. An RPG is a sure sign someone is up to no good.

I'll need a pretty impeccable source on this before I'm willing to conceed any of the people in that group were carrying RPG's.?

and this:
http://chris-floyd.com/component/content/article/1-latest-news/1949-an-unaccustomed-truth-american-commander-admits-afghan-atrocities.html

That clearly wasn't nerves though. Complete detachment from the humanity of it. Joy at how accurate their shooting was.

Those guys sounded like they were shitting themselves,o.k they weren't screaming but they were convinced shit was about to happen to them.
Maybe you get a detachment from humanity when you?

Shall we count how many Democrats voted for it? How many members of the UK Labour Party? Shall we pretend the Labour government in NZ didn't send troops? Christopher Hitchens? Hallo?

I can't help think you know the answer to this. These parties are just one half of a two?

It is further estimated that there has been a minimum of 92,489 Iraqi civilian deaths up to June 2009.

The Lancet surveys, despite the millions spent by the right to try and demolish their methodology and just about everything else, stands untouched as research into violent deaths in Iraq. It's?

James: They received the green light to engage before an RPG was identified.

are we certain it was even an RPG? looked like a big telescopic lens on a camera to me. not really pointy enough to be an RPG

Still, freedom isn't free, right?

not when it's backrupting america...

are we certain it was even an RPG? looked like a big telescopic lens on a camera to me.

This point has been noted by other commentators.

My opinion, but not my words. Those words were written by Firedoglake, a progressive?

Uncharming compilation of GI stories on the effective ROE here.

How many people would Hussein's regime have killed since 2003 if he was still in power?

A lot less than was killed by the US led sanctions, which were estimated at killing half a million people during the 1990s.

Just for staters: 'unmarked'? I think a uniform for non-combatants raises a number of problems.

I can't resist pointing out?

are we certain it was even an RPG? looked like a big telescopic lens on a camera to me. not really pointy enough to be an RPG

Yes, I think what was identified as an RPG was a camera lens. No, it wasn't pointy enough to be an RPG, but?

How many people would Hussein's regime have killed since 2003 if he was still in power?

^^ Kyle.

And far more have died during the post 2003 American occupation, than the already awful numbers usually given for deaths under the Saddam regime.

Really James, you always seem to go back?

Simon, there may well have been hundreds of suspect incidents, where the US military's ROE were either bent or broken and deaths resulted, but that is out of how many missions? Probably an average of hundreds of missions per day over 7 years and longer in Afghanistan, a hell of?

and everyone freaked out about an "RPG".

When I see a guy with an rpg I know the rule is to stay calm but i always get a bit nervy.

this was further belied by their response. the humane?

You need to kill Iraqi's to give them a future?

Nothing new in that. Anyone remember It became necessary to destroy the town to save it?

Even if having AKs counts as PID (which does seem pretty dubious), that doesn't justify shooting?

yeah, my viewing of the vid suggests that it may well have initially been a mistake. but... the subsequent conduct of the pilots belies that as a factor, and they were instead actively seeking *any* target they could construe as "legitimate".

this was further belied by their response. the humane?

It became necessary to destroy the town to save it

And saving whales requires killing them

starship troopers

Nothing new in that. Anyone remember It became necessary to destroy the town to save it?

Yep and all these decades latter can anyone tell me exactly how the deaths of 2 million Vietnamese in the name of America's freedom / domino war actually advanced that nation?

This bullshit didn't?

yeah, my viewing of the vid suggests that it may well have initially been a mistake. but... the subsequent conduct of the pilots belies that as a factor, and they were instead actively seeking *any* target they could construe as "legitimate".

this was further belied by their response.?

I'm horrified by this video, but lets not kid ourselves that the people pulling the trigger are crazy or monstrous. They're not. They're just like you and just like me and just like the people they killed in every important way.

They may have started out much like any other?

None of it makes it right, but they are real distinctions, and it should make a difference to how we feel about the situation and the people involved.

I really couldn't be arsed commenting in this thread, for the simple reason it seems to me only an idiot could equivocate?

They may have started out much like any other human being, but thanks to the unquestioning obedience instilled by military training, and the circumstances in which they've been placed, they've become, to a degree, dehumanized.

As for the "coping response to a job that involves you killing other human beings",?

"How can we expect righteousness to prevail when there is hardly anyone willing to give himself up individually to a righteous cause. Such a fine, sunny day, and I have to go, but what does my death matter, if through us thousands of people?

Should the soldiers who pulled the trigger carry the blame? Should it be the commanders who gave the green light? The generals who authorised the Rules of Engagement? The politicians who put them there in the first?

You don't care about the commanders who authorised engagement after asking "They're picking up the wounded?", and when it was confirmed, *then* said they could engage?

I feel like I have to add that I don't think the people who pulled the trigger are morally in the clear. There are certainly soldiers who wouldn't have done what these ones did.?

When I watched that video, the words of?

beware the fundamental attribution error

Worth noting that we're wired as observers to explain away problems as being a result of individual behaviour rather than systemic choices.

And that combat training perverts the way soldiers reason and morally experience the world – so that they are capable of killing.

All?

Joe: thanks for making me express myself more clearly, which forced me to think more clearly.

Hey, totally undeserved. Appreciate your insights, thanks for taking the trouble.

Keith, it is all of them.

That's a trite answer, and it contradicts what you said an hour ago:

Oh I just want to be clear where the guilt lies here. It doesn't lie with the US military system – as much as they have lost their moral compass. It?

When I watched that video, the words of Jacob Bronowski came powerfully to me...

Speaking of video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mIfatdNqBA

Should the soldiers who pulled the trigger carry the blame? Should it be the commanders who gave the green light? The generals who authorised the Rules of Engagement? The politicians who put them there in the first place?

The blame lies squarely with the politicians who got us into this?