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

[ChriswUfGator]

Unreal...

I find it unreal that nobody on the video had an RPG, but mysteriously they found one under a body. Of course we know the military never lies to save their own ass, right? Sorry, the video speaks for itself.

[BridgeTroll]

Again... unreal...

I did see two RPGs on the scene as well as a few AK-47s.

02:09 Um, hey Bushmaster element...
02:10 He's got an RPG [Rocket Propelled Grenade]?
02:11 All right, we got a guy with an RPG.
02:13 I'm gonna fire.

15:07 They uh had AK-47s and were to our east, so, where we were taking small arms fire. Over.
15:20 Hotel Crazyhorse One-Eight.
15:26 Crazyhorse One-Eight; this is Hotel Two-Six.
15:28 Yeah Two-Six. One-Eight I just also wanted to make sure you knew that we had a guy with an RPG cropping round the corner getting ready to fire on your location

18:44 Bushmaster Six; Hotel Two-Six over.
18:56 Six; this is Four. I got one individual looks like he's got an RPG round laying underneath him. Break.

[ChriswUfGator]

Earlier in the thread, I already told Chris that I acknowledged that he was right, and that I was wrong on the July 2007 incident.  All of my arguments above are NOT to justify the incident, but merely to try to convey the difficulty of acting in war vs. the comfort of a living room in Florida.  If Chris was an experienced lawyer, he would be familiar with the concepts of acting as a "reasonable person" and acting with good intent with the knowledge gained at the time of the incident.  I am trying to convey that NO life and death fighting is done without some loss of humanity.  You do the best you can.  The insurgents in Iraq are not wearing uniforms.  They hide among (a sometimes willing) population.  There is no justification for killing non-combatants or children.  It is a horrible thing and it is a horrible thing to have to live with.  But some men have to.  Keep in mind that these men are fighting for their lives and the lives of their countrymen.  It is hard for you to understand but it is the truth just the same.  

Chris, there are many JSO Officers fighting right now in Afghanistan and Iraq.  They are Armed Forces Reservist.  I have done the same.  I have served in Iraq, but not Afghanistan.  I have been in life and death fights.  I have been in many confrontations and have suffered several injuries.  I have lost some friends along the way.  Qualifications?  I don't claim any.  But I have been in these guys shoes.  Scared to death and promising God anything if he just lets me live through it.  The feeling in the pit of my stomach when I see a friend killed, and the awkwardness of trying to say something, anything to a widow to make it any better.  I've also felt the anger and burning hatred for those that want to kill me.  I have called them names and laughed at their bodies as well.  I hope you never have to do anything like it.  But the greatest people I have ever met were doing and are doing just these things and much, much more.  It has been my honor  to serve with the military and JSO, and I would do it all again.

So it seems that you sure spent a lot of time not answering the question, which for the record, was your own combat experience under the circumstances that this air crew faced at the time they opened fire on civilians. After all, you were lecturing me for not having the requisite capability to watch a video tape and understand what I'm seeing because, according to you, watching a video of someone killing people and then lying about it would somehow require me to be in their shoes in order to understand that what I'm seeing. So naturally, it was only fair that you address your own time spent in their shoes, which from your two paragraphs of equivocation without answering the question I would understand is probably none. And I would certainly hope that is the case, because I'd like to think you would rely on your training rather than blasting away at anything that moves.

So now that that is all dispensed with, I would say that I certainly appreciate the military service of any JSO officers who are serving for our country, and I appreciate the service the rest of JSO provides here at home, and that is meant to include you. However, I'm still not sure what qualification that would give you, or for that matter what qualification I or anyone else would be lacking, to be able to watch a video of someone killing people and then lying about it and then understand that what I just saw was someone killing people and lying about it?

The footage really seems rather clear cut. BridgeTroll already trotted out the "they mistook a camera for a RPG" and "the reporters were in the middle of a combat exercise" and "there were insurgents around" excuses, and that's all fine and dandy, but certainly doesn't make it right. If person A shoots at you on the street, that certainly doesn't entitle you to come and shoot person B, and then lie about it and say person B shot at you when that is clearly not the case. They weren't speaking about RPG's and whatnot in some general sense, the transcript clearly reflects this air crew claiming that this particular group of people had in fact fired on them, and the video just clearly shows that to be a lie, as not only do they plainly not have the weapons the air crew alleged they had, but they were minding their own business up until the point they were wrongfully fired upon. This is really a hard one to defend, the footage just speaks for itself.

It is clear to me that you are set in your view of this incident.  Your take on it is clear.  Your lack of experience is glaring to some of us here, but there is no use in continuing.  

Well the military agrees with Chris.

Don't let the facts get in the way Stephen...

Apparently even the military lacks NotNow's extensive qualifications as an intelligence analyst and thus can't be trusted to interpret its own video either. NotNow's years-long pattern of declaring that anyone with an opposing political view is unqualified to form an opinion on the subject is just too well established and too entertaining to interfere with at this late date. Lol...

Chris, you apparently don't read very well.  Or you just like to hear yourself talk.  I'm not sure what StephenDare!'s statement of "The military agrees with Chris" means, but I have clearly stated over and over that nothing justifies the killing of non-combatants and children.  I have also stated that I am not aware of the stance of any military investigation into the matter.  Over the last few posts I have simply tried to explain that thinking in real time under fire is quite different than sitting in front of your computer in your living room.  Your need to resort to personal insults in every argument says much more about you than the whimsical accusations against me.  

If you are always right, then you are just here to tell the rest of us about it, huh?

LMFAO I have still not insulted you personally, you're the one that always takes it there not me. In fact, you pointed out that I'm unqualified to challenge your interpretation of the video because I lack time in these guys' shoes, except...so do you. Simply pointing out your fallacious and hypocritical tactic isn't a personal attack, especially when you brought it there to begin with.

Regarding liking to hear myself talk, back that projector up! If you agreed I'm right (as you just claimed in your post to Stephen) then wtf are you still arguing about? Or like an infantile 5 year old, do you just want the last word? And yet according to you it's ME who likes to hear myself talk? LMAO

[ChriswUfGator]

Again... unreal...

I did see two RPGs on the scene as well as a few AK-47s.

02:09 Um, hey Bushmaster element...
02:10 He's got an RPG [Rocket Propelled Grenade]?
02:11 All right, we got a guy with an RPG.
02:13 I'm gonna fire.

15:07 They uh had AK-47s and were to our east, so, where we were taking small arms fire. Over.
15:20 Hotel Crazyhorse One-Eight.
15:26 Crazyhorse One-Eight; this is Hotel Two-Six.
15:28 Yeah Two-Six. One-Eight I just also wanted to make sure you knew that we had a guy with an RPG cropping round the corner getting ready to fire on your location

18:44 Bushmaster Six; Hotel Two-Six over.
18:56 Six; this is Four. I got one individual looks like he's got an RPG round laying underneath him. Break.

The unarmed people were killed by 6:00 into the video I posted, BridgeTroll. I couldn't care less that they killed some other unrelated people who had an RPG, that's completely irrelevant. The portion of the video I posted is the relevant part, showing that they gunned down a group of unarmed people who were minding their own business and never fired on them as claimed. You're back to your silly "I drove sober on Monday and sober on Wednesday so I shouldn't be arrested for driving drunk on Tuesday." I don't care if the video was 100 hours long and every other kill on it was legitimate, that in no way excuses gunning down a group of civilians and reporters who were minding their own business. Nothing excuses that

[BridgeTroll]

I couldn't care less that they killed some other unrelated people who had an RPG

I know... unreal!

[ChriswUfGator]

So just watched the video again.  What BridgeTroll is apparently arguing is that the group gunned down earlier in the video, which wound up being civilians and an AP reporter, and which the video shows were minding their own business, had no RPG's, and never fired on the helicopter, is somehow excuseble and that the air crew wasn't lying when they said that group fired on them, because 10 minutes later different people in another location that they encountered and killed actually did have an RPG?

I didn't realize that helicopters could successfully time travel, that's really some feat! Amazing...

So if I kill someone who was not threatening me and was unarmed now, and tomorrow a different person shoots at me, I can claim self defense? Sweet. What's this, BeidgeTroll's patented time travel defense? Like the twinkie defense?

[NotNow]

Earlier in the thread, I already told Chris that I acknowledged that he was right, and that I was wrong on the July 2007 incident.  All of my arguments above are NOT to justify the incident, but merely to try to convey the difficulty of acting in war vs. the comfort of a living room in Florida.  If Chris was an experienced lawyer, he would be familiar with the concepts of acting as a "reasonable person" and acting with good intent with the knowledge gained at the time of the incident.  I am trying to convey that NO life and death fighting is done without some loss of humanity.  You do the best you can.  The insurgents in Iraq are not wearing uniforms.  They hide among (a sometimes willing) population.  There is no justification for killing non-combatants or children.  It is a horrible thing and it is a horrible thing to have to live with.  But some men have to.  Keep in mind that these men are fighting for their lives and the lives of their countrymen.  It is hard for you to understand but it is the truth just the same.  

Chris, there are many JSO Officers fighting right now in Afghanistan and Iraq.  They are Armed Forces Reservist.  I have done the same.  I have served in Iraq, but not Afghanistan.  I have been in life and death fights.  I have been in many confrontations and have suffered several injuries.  I have lost some friends along the way.  Qualifications?  I don't claim any.  But I have been in these guys shoes.  Scared to death and promising God anything if he just lets me live through it.  The feeling in the pit of my stomach when I see a friend killed, and the awkwardness of trying to say something, anything to a widow to make it any better.  I've also felt the anger and burning hatred for those that want to kill me.  I have called them names and laughed at their bodies as well.  I hope you never have to do anything like it.  But the greatest people I have ever met were doing and are doing just these things and much, much more.  It has been my honor  to serve with the military and JSO, and I would do it all again.

So it seems that you sure spent a lot of time not answering the question, which for the record, was your own combat experience under the circumstances that this air crew faced at the time they opened fire on civilians. After all, you were lecturing me for not having the requisite capability to watch a video tape and understand what I'm seeing because, according to you, watching a video of someone killing people and then lying about it would somehow require me to be in their shoes in order to understand that what I'm seeing. So naturally, it was only fair that you address your own time spent in their shoes, which from your two paragraphs of equivocation without answering the question I would understand is probably none. And I would certainly hope that is the case, because I'd like to think you would rely on your training rather than blasting away at anything that moves.

So now that that is all dispensed with, I would say that I certainly appreciate the military service of any JSO officers who are serving for our country, and I appreciate the service the rest of JSO provides here at home, and that is meant to include you. However, I'm still not sure what qualification that would give you, or for that matter what qualification I or anyone else would be lacking, to be able to watch a video of someone killing people and then lying about it and then understand that what I just saw was someone killing people and lying about it?

The footage really seems rather clear cut. BridgeTroll already trotted out the "they mistook a camera for a RPG" and "the reporters were in the middle of a combat exercise" and "there were insurgents around" excuses, and that's all fine and dandy, but certainly doesn't make it right. If person A shoots at you on the street, that certainly doesn't entitle you to come and shoot person B, and then lie about it and say person B shot at you when that is clearly not the case. They weren't speaking about RPG's and whatnot in some general sense, the transcript clearly reflects this air crew claiming that this particular group of people had in fact fired on them, and the video just clearly shows that to be a lie, as not only do they plainly not have the weapons the air crew alleged they had, but they were minding their own business up until the point they were wrongfully fired upon. This is really a hard one to defend, the footage just speaks for itself.

It is clear to me that you are set in your view of this incident.  Your take on it is clear.  Your lack of experience is glaring to some of us here, but there is no use in continuing.  

Well the military agrees with Chris.

Don't let the facts get in the way Stephen...

Apparently even the military lacks NotNow's extensive qualifications as an intelligence analyst and thus can't be trusted to interpret its own video either. NotNow's years-long pattern of declaring that anyone with an opposing political view is unqualified to form an opinion on the subject is just too well established and too entertaining to interfere with at this late date. Lol...

Chris, you apparently don't read very well.  Or you just like to hear yourself talk.  I'm not sure what StephenDare!'s statement of "The military agrees with Chris" means, but I have clearly stated over and over that nothing justifies the killing of non-combatants and children.  I have also stated that I am not aware of the stance of any military investigation into the matter.  Over the last few posts I have simply tried to explain that thinking in real time under fire is quite different than sitting in front of your computer in your living room.  Your need to resort to personal insults in every argument says much more about you than the whimsical accusations against me.  

If you are always right, then you are just here to tell the rest of us about it, huh?

LMFAO I have still not insulted you personally, you're the one that always takes it there not me. In fact, you pointed out that I'm unqualified to challenge your interpretation of the video because I lack time in these guys' shoes, except...so do you. Simply pointing out your fallacious and hypocritical tactic isn't a personal attack, especially when you brought it there to begin with.

Regarding liking to hear myself talk, back that projector up! If you agreed I'm right (as you just claimed in your post to Stephen) then wtf are you still arguing about? Or like an infantile 5 year old, do you just want the last word? And yet according to you it's ME who likes to hear myself talk? LMAO

This is the perfect forum for you.  

[NotNow]

I couldn't care less that they killed some other unrelated people who had an RPG

I know... unreal!

Just as a comment.  Digging in heels is generally where you guys make your most after quotable remarks.  Just sayin....

I think this boils down to a basic disconnect.  You seem to think that your unwillingness to criticise another soldier because of the variables and ambiguity that you personally experienced is a substitute for objective judgement.

Its laudable that you pause to criticize.  But that is the very reason why we do not let people sit on juries who are too close to the elements of the case.

Many of these disussions are really rooted in your and notnow's reminders not to judge the soldier too harshly.  Well thats well and good, but at the end of the day we have to be capable of judgement when these things are being done in all our names collectively.  That is the burden of this democracy.  Bridge Troll, what are you trying to convey?

That the guys might have made a mistake?

ok.

The recordings of their reactions tell the story.

Which your next step is to say that that is a coping mechanism.

well ok...

How  many layers of reasoning does it take to get to what went wrong?

One of the soldiers on the scene spoke out, and he apparently disagrees with you.

Is everyone who doesnt believe in conscienceless killing of civilians with their children wrong?

Or am I not understanding the point you are trying to make?

StephenDare!, would you provide a link to that website where you obtained the soldiers statement?

[ChriswUfGator]

From one of the soldiers on the scene that day;

Yes. Our rules of engagement were changing on an almost daily basis. But we had a pretty gung-ho commander, who decided that because we were getting hit by IEDs a lot, there would be a new battalion SOP [standard operating procedure].

He goes, “If someone in your line gets hit with an IED, 360 rotational fire. You kill every motherfucker on the street.” Myself and Josh and a lot of other soldiers were just sitting there looking at each other like, “Are you kidding me? You want us to kill women and children on the street?”

And you couldn’t just disobey orders to shoot, because they could just make your life hell in Iraq. So like with myself, I would shoot up into the roof of a building instead of down on the ground toward civilians. But I’ve seen it many times, where people are just walking down the street and an IED goes off and the troops open fire and kill them.

That really about sums it up I think.

So BT and NotNow, sure you want to keep arguing this one? Unlike you, this guy was there...

[ChriswUfGator]

I couldn't care less that they killed some other unrelated people who had an RPG

I know... unreal!

Just as a comment.  Digging in heels is generally where you guys make your most after quotable remarks.  Just sayin....

I think this boils down to a basic disconnect.  You seem to think that your unwillingness to criticise another soldier because of the variables and ambiguity that you personally experienced is a substitute for objective judgement.

Its laudable that you pause to criticize.  But that is the very reason why we do not let people sit on juries who are too close to the elements of the case.

Many of these disussions are really rooted in your and notnow's reminders not to judge the soldier too harshly.  Well thats well and good, but at the end of the day we have to be capable of judgement when these things are being done in all our names collectively.  That is the burden of this democracy.  Bridge Troll, what are you trying to convey?

That the guys might have made a mistake?

ok.

The recordings of their reactions tell the story.

Which your next step is to say that that is a coping mechanism.

well ok...

How  many layers of reasoning does it take to get to what went wrong?

One of the soldiers on the scene spoke out, and he apparently disagrees with you.

Is everyone who doesnt believe in conscienceless killing of civilians with their children wrong?

Or am I not understanding the point you are trying to make?

StephenDare!, would you provide a link to that website where you obtained the soldiers statement?

He directly interviewed with multiple news outlets, and the multiple interviews were re-published in multiple news outlets, so take your pick;

Wired.com
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/04/2007-iraq-apache-attack-as-seen-from-the-ground/

Cindy Sheehan;
http://peaceoftheaction.org/2010/08/16/cindy-sheehan-interviews-ethan-mccord-and-jud-newborn-transcript/

Word press;
http://chinarose.wordpress.com/2010/04/28/interview-with-wikileaks-soldier-ethan-mccord/

Current.com
http://current.com/entertainment/comedy/92651656_ethan-mccord-wikileaks-veterans-for-peace-25th-annual-convention.htm

The Examiner also ran the story, and noted that Mccord gave the same talk to the general public at the National Peace Conference this year;

http://www.examiner.com/us-headlines-in-national/wikileaks-posts-video-of-soldier-ethan-mccord-s-eyewitness-account-of-collateral-murder-video

Where were you going with this? Let me guess, you used your impressive military intelligence qualifications (a/k/a Google) and saw that one of the several dozen media outlets that participated in conducting and publishing these interviews was WSWS, so you were going to falsely seize on that to try and call Stephen Dare a socialist like usual?

Too predictable...

[BridgeTroll]

Bridge Troll, what are you trying to convey?

That the guys might have made a mistake?

They performed as they were trained.  The reporters understood the risk being where they were... which was in the middle of a running gun battle between an american patrol and insurgents who were attacking them.  They were directed... by the commander on the ground to fire after having seeing members of this group armed with AKs and RPGs.  The men in the Helos had no way of knowing there were children in the vehicle nor could they know that two of the people on the ground were reporters.

Accidental deaths occured during a gun battle in a war zone.  It sucks... they did not intend to kill innocents.  On their behalf I would ask you and Chris to understand this not condemn them for this incident.

The recordings of their reactions tell the story.

Clearly you have reached conclusions based on those recordings that I do not.

One of the soldiers on the scene spoke out, and he apparently disagrees with you.

In what way?  He expressed remorse for what happened.  I do too... so does NotNow... along with most humans.  He DID disagree with Chris who earlier claimed there were no RPGs or AKs amongst those killed... Ethan clearly said there were.

Is everyone who doesnt believe in conscienceless killing of civilians with their children wrong?

Your the one using the term conscienceless.  Why would you think that?

[BridgeTroll]

For their sakes I hope no one but the military knows...

[BridgeTroll]

Now they are murderers...   Really Stephen?  really?

[BridgeTroll]

Oh no doubt... and no offense taken!  Since it is clear I CAN tell the difference, the military, the government, and most reasonable people can tell the difference and you cannot is revealing...  Enjoy your outrage!

[BridgeTroll]

Since you are calling these two aircrews murderers... please keep going by calling the British and American aircrews bombing Germany in WWII murderers also... or the bomber crews flying over Japan.

Murderers Stephen?  Really?