Obama is Renewing the American Sense of Identity. Unbelievable to Watch

[BridgeTroll]

You guys?   Your generalizations and stereotypes are beneath you.  I am no more a "you guys" than you are "one of them libs".

Talk about "getting it wrong"... there seems to a VERY large disillusioned segment of the electorate lately don't you think?

[ChriswUfGator]

Talk about "getting it wrong"... there seems to a VERY large disillusioned segment of the electorate lately don't you think?

Yeah, people like me who actually voted for him.

He's behaving in ways that should thrill you and NotAgain since you both tirelessly defended the stuff you complain about Obama doing when Bush did it. Stephen is pointing out how funny the contradiction is. What possible reason would you have to be disillusioned? Not like you voted for him. He's turned out to be a solid moderate or a moderate conservative rather than the Karl Marx you made him out to be. You should be happy. But naturally, you're not.

[ChriswUfGator]

Like a remake of The Manchurian Candidate without the plot, talent, or decent camerawork. Produced by FoxNews. Lol

[JC]

Well I did not vote for the but I did, not so secretly hope (LOL) that when he got into office he would be everything I wanted him to be.   Sadly he is not...  Although brilliant, which I can appreciate, he is not what I want.

[BridgeTroll]

    Thanks Stephen... as always... you bring a smile to my face...

[NotNow]

Moderate conservative???   Put the pipe DOWN, Chris!  Obama has performed well in only one area, prosecution of the war in disputed areas.  Reality struck him as he took office and he had to renege on his promises of closing Gitmo and "ending the war".  His domestic efforts remain squarely in the realm of "left", "liberal", "socialist", or whatever you (or Fox News in your world) want to call it.  I'm not sure I understand how you guys think, and I have no idea how you are coming up with the analysis of a "conservative" President Obama, but it is funny to watch.

Chris, I don't see "jollies" in the Wikileaks edited and "unencrypted" version of the video that you posted and I would advise you that the language used by men in combat is often misunderstood by the public.  The behaviors effected by men in combat is often a coping tool and should not be judged in the same terms as common polite society.  As for the operators target definition skills, I would first state that we don't know the tactical situation on the ground (are US troops in the area, is there active combat, what activity has occurred at that location), we should recognize that the operators don't have the luxury of sitting in a safe room with all of the analytical tools and replays that Wikileaks and the rest of us have at our disposal, and I am unaware of the status of the investigation into this incident.  That said, I'll give you a "your right, I'm wrong" on the video because the tragic result is unacceptable in any case.  All of the factors that I quote only alleviate any criminal wrongdoing, and do not mitigate the horrible results in any case.

As for the "secret prison" postings...pretty vague, pretty unsubstantiated.  It is no secret that we waterboarded three individuals.  President Bush has even stated that he would do it again under the same circumstances.  Secret prisons?  It is also well known that individuals were flown to differrent countries and questioned along with cooperating non US intelligence agencies.  I don't know of and haven't heard of any "prisons" being built.  Some security modifications yes, but that is a long way from the claims. 

The next two years of this administration will be fun to watch.

[ChriswUfGator]

NotNow, normal people don't laugh or kid around after wrongfully killing a journalist. How is that just military jargon? It also doesn't take any military expert to recognize that the air crew was aware of its actions, since as soon as they were contacted by base they started making up a story about the unarmed civilians having fired Rocket-Propelled Grenades and AK-47's at them, which the video conclusively shows was an obvious lie designed to cover up their actions. It was clearly just unarmed civilians standing around talking to each other, and they opened fire for no apparent reason and then made up a bunch of B.S. about them having fired RPG's and AK-47's at them. Gimme a break!

And it doesn't seem like we need a lot of interpretations for their conversations about 6 minutes into the video either;

Gunner:
"look at those dead bastards"

Pilot:
"Nice!"

And regarding Obama, what has he actually done domestically that backs up your ludicrous assertions that he's a liberal socialist? He has ordered the justice department to defend Don't ask Don't Tell, he just agreed to extend the tax cuts to your precious top 2% of earners, together with the rest of the Bush tax cuts, seriously WTF are you talking about here?

You supported Bush in these same decisions you're criticizing Obama for! Other than healthcare reform, which was/is sorely needed (and even then he agreed to ditch the public option so it's hardly "socialist"), what is your possible claim to him being a leftwing liberal or a socialist? Specifically?

And regarding the secret prisons, something like 6 foreign governments have admitted they existed within their countries, I just posted you a bunch of links. I'm sure as between you and the governments of Thailand and Germany, you're the more reliable source? LMFAO! Not to mention of course Bush admitted the same thing, which you also denied and to which I also gave you a link. Or is amnesty international lying too? I'm sure again NotNow is more credible as a source than sovereign governments who had these on their territory and amnesty international?

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

I normally congratulate someone when they do their job well, don't you? 

Soldiering is a job.  They weren't out to kill journalists.  They witnessed a group of people in a hostile environment and made a mistake.  Or maybe they didn't, there was a reason they were patrolling that area to begin with, so if it looks like a duck (middle eastern journalist) and walks like a duck (in a pack with other middle easterners that were being surveilled), then why shouldn't you suspect that those were RPGs slung over their shoulders instead of cameras with long lenses?  You don't.  You expect it to quack like a duck.

The comments they made to each other are the same comments that me, you or anyone else would make to someone else doing a good job. 

[ChriswUfGator]

I normally congratulate someone when they do their job well, don't you? 

Soldiering is a job.  They weren't out to kill journalists.  They witnessed a group of people in a hostile environment and made a mistake.  Or maybe they didn't, there was a reason they were patrolling that area to begin with, so if it looks like a duck (middle eastern journalist) and walks like a duck (in a pack with other middle easterners that were being surveilled), then why shouldn't you suspect that those were RPGs slung over their shoulders instead of cameras with long lenses?  You don't.  You expect it to quack like a duck.

The comments they made to each other are the same comments that me, you or anyone else would make to someone else doing a good job. 

Since when does opening fire on a few unarmed civilians who were standard around talking, and then making up a lie about them having fired nonexistent AK-47s and RPG's at you to cover up your actions qualify as "just doing your job"? Seriously? You can tell from the video they were unarmed and were minding their own business, the air crew has access to infared and other tech, plus their own eyes that have a lot more definition than the video.

And of course, the real clincher here is that most people don't make up a lie to cover up something they did, when they don't think they did anything wrong. Do you find that explanation you just posited to actually make sense?

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

They weren't all unarmed.  There were assault rifles in the group, but the journalists were not carrying RPGs.

I saw the same thing that you saw, and it appeared that it was just a bunch of people milling around until the heli fired into them, but it looked like every drug bust surveillance video that I've seen (a few dozen).  It appears from the video that nothing is going on, so why did the pilot say shots were fired?  Why were they patrolling that area to begin with?

I don't think (obviously, you think otherwise) that this was an accident.  These people were apparantly targeted for a lot more than just being a bunch of casual civilians milling around, and the journalists got caught in the line of fire.

[ChriswUfGator]

So just to get this straight, how do you possibly mistake one of these as a camera? LMAO



Gimme a break. They made up a lie to cover their actions. It's as clear as day. Regarding whether it was accidental or not, who knows. It's certainly possible that this group of people was misidentified as another, but that doesn't change the fact that this situation was wrongful, or that you don't shoot until you've properly identified what you're shooting. So even then this still wasn't "just doing their job." If they weren't certain of the target then they shouldn't have fired.

And I still come back to that people don't make up lies to cover up actions they don't know are wrong...

[BridgeTroll]

The two helicopters were being tasked by ground forces who had been fired upon earlier.  Based on the transcripts the crews CLEARLY thought they were shooting at combatants...  The reporters were in the middle of a large scale operation and american forces had been fired on all day.  There WERE RPGs and AKs...

 

[ChriswUfGator]

The two helicopters were being tasked by ground forces who had been fired upon earlier.  Based on the transcripts the crews CLEARLY thought they were shooting at combatants...  The reporters were in the middle of a large scale operation and american forces had been fired on all day.  There WERE RPGs and AKs...

Yes, BT, I'm sure there were RPG's somewhere in Iraq, just not unfortunately on the people that they actually killed. Again, if you haven't fully identified the target, you don't open fire. Much less claim that they had opened fire on you first, when the truth is clearly the opposite.

Regarding why a group of reporters would decide to be out and about in the middle of a large scale military operation, that certainly does seem rather risky, I can't argue with you there. But that doesn't change the fact that this air crew shot the wrong people and then lied to cover it up. The left the "mistake" territory when they concocted the story about having RPG's fired at them to justify opening fire, when that plainly was not the case.

[BridgeTroll]

I read the FULL transcript of the event and saw UNEDITED video... they clearly saw RPGs and they were subsequently found by the ground forces that directed them to fire.  The targets were identified... by the ground forces directing the fire.  The only mistake made was the reporters being in a combat zone surrounded by insurgents.  I still do not see any lies to cover anything up.

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

go to 3:41-3:47 and you can see the RPG in the hands of the guy in the white shirt (second from the top) as he turns around.  Also, notice the lag from the time you hear the shots fired to when they actually hit the group.