Hmm, I thought facepunch had more military fanatics? Maybe they can help?
And aren't they supposed to have ground troops to call in the choppers and not having the choppers to fly in there without permission? Why didn't the guys on the ground confirmed their targets?
And this is why you don't let rednecks join the military
The ground troops came in afterwards, I think that they didn't want to get shot at when the gunners confirmed their own armed insurgents. Would have been needlessly dangerous.
This thread attracts a lot of stupid people... Holy fuck.
Thats really horrible ...
ITT: Human beings never make mistakes or confuse things right guys
Horrible things happen in war all the time. You shouldn't look too deep into this. It was just an awful mistake.
(Not to say the helicopter crew didn't fuck up pretty bady.)
But the US military needs to learn from events like this.
There has been more than one mistake like this because the military didn't identify targets properly.
Why do you think there has been some many cases of friendly fire or civilian deaths.
Hm. I was almost at the point of thinking "well damn, that's fucking bad. I guess those Apache crews have some excuse though because some of the men on the ground were armed" but then they engaged the van.
I'm not saying this stuff is excusable, the military aught to take more care in a warzone where the enemy is very hard to identify, but I'd rather an Apache shoot twenty civilians, some of which were armed, than have a whole city flattened by artillery like Ypres.
Nobody can be right about everything, the military does their best and sometimes mistakes are made. Whether this shooting was really a mistake is not immediately clear. The way the military tried to cover it up (if I'm not mistaken) was pretty fucking stupid and suspicious, but it's not like this is some heinous act of trigger-happy aggression on the part of a group of soldiers.
Edit: I just watched the first shooting, and I think the Apache crew was entirely justified. One man was peeking around a building at a bradley, and one of the men was seen with some sort of anti tank weapon so I doubt anyone wanted to wait and find out. Also, it really looked to me like quite a few of the men had guns.
Van shooting: seems like they were just annoyed that the van was going to be salvaging the weapons and rescuing their targets. Kind of unnecessary, but in a warzone I can see it being reasonable.
I thought that was a perfect description of a red neck
Well, if i'm not completely wrong, U.S soldiers are trained to shoot first and ask later. Which is stupid in my opinion. There's a reason to why they deal damage to more civilians than other countries. Not only because they have more soldiers stationed in the middle-east, but because they have some wacky rules of engagement.
Even if it WAS an odd way to hold a gun, it's an odder way to hold a camera.
HURR LEMME SHOOT LOL HE RAN OVER HIS BODY LOL WHYD HE BRING HIS KIDS TO A WARZONEEE LOL PWNED HURR yeehaw.
Viephemeral, I'm not going to respond to your comment, that was just so biased and completely wrong.
I watched the entire 39 minute video, and I think the military did a fine job for the most part. The one time I was annoyed was when they put multiple hellfire missiles into a building, and a civilian walked past the building after the missile was shot. I can't say the soldiers are entirely at fault, but it was kind of a stupid idea to use such a "large" scale explosive on a building so nearby civilian facilities.
Also, on the subject of the van: the ground soldier made it their priority to evac the child/ren. They weren't at all saying "Hahaha dead kids." like some people in this thread seem to be insinuating or all out exclaiming.
The general conclusion: shooting the first group wasn't necessarily justified but it's understandable if you put yourself in the crew's situation, but the second shooting of the van occupant's was unacceptable.
The van was spotted prior to all this, and I forget exactly why, but they knew about the van before it showed up. It was not just a civilian van that showed up by chance. Or maybe it was, but the soldiers did not believe this as far as I can tell.
Helping targets doesn't make you a target at all. Combat medics aren't targets for example. Lethal force is not authorized until they present a clear immediate threat, and "they might have guns in the truck" is not a clear and immediate threat.
they killed innocent people, and that's just awesome? you fucking horrible person. Is being a military apologist include being a heartless cunt?
you didn't watch the video, did you?
were they going to throw the camera's at the helicopter?
lol, what the fuck is wrong with you?