![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticsThis came up on my friend's page this morning.
followed by this .
When Rupert Hamer, the British journalist who served as the Sunday Mirror's war correspondent, was embedded with US forces in Afghanistan and was killed when an IED took out the MRAP he was traveling in, nobody seemed to give much of a shit. No general outcry, no "Those murderers!", no wailing and gnashing of teeth from blogs as different as Balko and BoingBoing.
But when a Reuters journalist is embedded with insurgents in Iraq who are approaching US armored vehicles while armed with weapons specifically designed to destroy such vehicles, and is engaged and killed in their company by a gunship crew who follows rules of engagement and directly asks for permission first, a whole bunch of people just about wet themselves in their eagerness to decry those who killed him.
Why is this?
-"Phanatic"
I have my own take behind the cut but I'm curious about what others have to say.
There is no discernible difference in my eyes, both were killed in action.
The responses to this incident reminds me of the Joker's monologue from "Dark Knight".
Nobody panics when things go "according to plan." Even if the plan is horrifying! If, tomorrow, I tell the press that a gang banger will get shot, or a truckload of soldiers will be blown up, nobody panics, it's all "part of the plan"...
...But if one of our Soldiers "The Good Guys", blows up a journalist everyone loses their freaking minds.
An american helicopter crew spotted a group of men gathering near an american convoy.
Weapons are clearly visible, 2 RPGs and a Light Machine-Gun. The standard AQ fire-team everywhere from Afghanistan to Chechnya for the last 15-20 years. Since the insurgents don't wear uniforms this armament and organization is the single best identifier.
They reported the situation and waited for permission to engage.
The enemy was defeated. Additional Insurgents attempted to extract the wounded before they could be captured but in doing so exposed themselves to American forces and were defeated as well.
This is war.
Support it, or oppose it, I won't judge.
All I ask is that you be intellectually honest about it.
Disclamer:
I am an Iraq War vet, and a helicopter crewman to boot, so this story hits a little close-to-home for me.
Edit:
In the interests of "citing sources" here is CENTCOM's official report on the incident.
followed by this .
When Rupert Hamer, the British journalist who served as the Sunday Mirror's war correspondent, was embedded with US forces in Afghanistan and was killed when an IED took out the MRAP he was traveling in, nobody seemed to give much of a shit. No general outcry, no "Those murderers!", no wailing and gnashing of teeth from blogs as different as Balko and BoingBoing.
But when a Reuters journalist is embedded with insurgents in Iraq who are approaching US armored vehicles while armed with weapons specifically designed to destroy such vehicles, and is engaged and killed in their company by a gunship crew who follows rules of engagement and directly asks for permission first, a whole bunch of people just about wet themselves in their eagerness to decry those who killed him.
Why is this?
-"Phanatic"
I have my own take behind the cut but I'm curious about what others have to say.
There is no discernible difference in my eyes, both were killed in action.
The responses to this incident reminds me of the Joker's monologue from "Dark Knight".
Nobody panics when things go "according to plan." Even if the plan is horrifying! If, tomorrow, I tell the press that a gang banger will get shot, or a truckload of soldiers will be blown up, nobody panics, it's all "part of the plan"...
...But if one of our Soldiers "The Good Guys", blows up a journalist everyone loses their freaking minds.
An american helicopter crew spotted a group of men gathering near an american convoy.
Weapons are clearly visible, 2 RPGs and a Light Machine-Gun. The standard AQ fire-team everywhere from Afghanistan to Chechnya for the last 15-20 years. Since the insurgents don't wear uniforms this armament and organization is the single best identifier.
They reported the situation and waited for permission to engage.
The enemy was defeated. Additional Insurgents attempted to extract the wounded before they could be captured but in doing so exposed themselves to American forces and were defeated as well.
This is war.
Support it, or oppose it, I won't judge.
All I ask is that you be intellectually honest about it.
Disclamer:
I am an Iraq War vet, and a helicopter crewman to boot, so this story hits a little close-to-home for me.
Edit:
In the interests of "citing sources" here is CENTCOM's official report on the incident.
(no subject)
Date: 11/4/10 01:29 (UTC)e: It's remarkably practical, though.
So is genocide.
PFT: This is not a game. These people are not merely little images on a screen.
e: No, they aren't. These people are instead real-life people that are probably trying to kill you.
My god. It must be awful to live in such constant bowel-emptying terror of everyone, including two children sitting in a van and a badly wounded, overweight and unarmed man trying to crawl to safety.
Godwin violation.
Date: 11/4/10 06:35 (UTC)Paft loses.
Re: Godwin violation.
Date: 11/4/10 07:10 (UTC)Your invocation of "Godwin's Law" here is why the man who originally formulated it complained that it was being abused.
Re: Godwin violation.
Date: 11/4/10 08:25 (UTC)Re: Godwin violation.
Date: 11/4/10 23:07 (UTC)I suppose not.
Date: 12/4/10 03:04 (UTC)So. Show me where someone said that in this discussion.
Re: I suppose not.
Date: 13/4/10 19:24 (UTC)http://community.livejournal.com/talk_politics/483182.html?thread=34468462#t34468462
The same poster offered this little personal tidbit:
"But then, I'm probably biased; after all, one of my relatives on coming across an impromptu Japanese field hospital in WW2 promptly annihilated it with his squad using Willie Petes. The soldiers you seem to know are obviously of a kinder, gentler sort."
Lovely isn't it? He thinks dumping white phosphorus on a field hospital is a fine idea.
Re: I suppose not.
Date: 13/4/10 20:45 (UTC)Comparing past to present methodology is not the same as endorsing past methodology.
By your own logic here, you bringing up genocide is the same as you endorsing it. Which you clearly did not do.
The fact that we even care or hear about it nowadays is an improvement over every prior conflict in human history.
(no subject)
Date: 11/4/10 14:08 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 11/4/10 23:24 (UTC)