![[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: 10/4/10 21:48 (UTC)Correction: An american helicopter crew spooted a group of men gathering 200 meters away from an american army and iraqi police convoy which is engaged in firefight, during a day long operation of clearing a sector of Baghdad from insurgents.
P.S.#1 Get ready for "evul baby killers make inappropriate comments to each other which clearly indicates how much they enjoy killing little children"
P.S.#2 Fix link.
It can't be that
Date: 10/4/10 22:07 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 10/4/10 22:19 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 10/4/10 22:22 (UTC)Ooh and
(no subject)
Date: 10/4/10 22:35 (UTC)Get ready for "evul baby killers make inappropriate comments to each other which clearly indicates how much they enjoy killing little children"
I am.
(no subject)
Date: 10/4/10 22:35 (UTC)Oh you poor poor baby.
(no subject)
Date: 10/4/10 22:49 (UTC)First of all, yes, when an unarmed and injured man is blown away along with the people trying to assist him, it's an issue. Because you see, we are supposed to be "The Good Guys" and that is supposed to mean more than merely the fact that our soldiers wear American uniforms and speak English.
Second, the killing of unarmed journalists has been an issue since this war began and the Palestine Hotel, (which American forces had been told was filled with journalists), was deliberately fired on by an American tank, killing a couple of reporters. And then there was that Al Jazeera reporter we killed when we dropped a bomb on their radio station.
You know. -- little things like that that make the term "The Good Guys" sound like a mockery.
(no subject)
Date: 10/4/10 22:52 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 10/4/10 22:53 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 10/4/10 22:54 (UTC)srs dude maybe if you don't want to look like a crazy moron maybe you shouldn't link to conspiracy-theory videos created by racist websites as some kind of awesome master burn. While I'm sure their superior white intellects extend to incredible abilities in the field of amateur stillframe analysis of eight fuzzy gray pixels their idea that no non-terrorist reporter would ever photograph soldiers in a warzone is a lil' bit shaky, y'know? Gonna, like, need a bit of citation, maybe you can find something on Stormfront to back that up for me.
(no subject)
Date: 10/4/10 22:55 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 10/4/10 22:58 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 10/4/10 23:06 (UTC)So while I agree that these soldiers had reason to do what they did, I also think that there is nothing wrong with investigating and questioning this kind of stuff.
I would much rather a public that is horrified at what the military has to do then one that could care less.
(no subject)
Date: 10/4/10 23:08 (UTC)The guys fighting "to bring civilization" on the other hand.....
(no subject)
Date: 10/4/10 23:11 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 10/4/10 23:16 (UTC)I have a question. I know you can't have a direct answer to it but still interested in your opinion. I'm wondering why to release a 3 year old pretty much non-story since the video was shown to Reuters representatives, Washington Post journalist published a book in which he describes the incident almost by a second, there was army investigation and investigation of army investigation and overall as you said these soldiers had reason to do what they did. Why not instead release or draw attention to videos (they are out there even on youtube) of clear violations by our troops. Is it just because this one is a "high profile"?
(no subject)
Date: 10/4/10 23:23 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 10/4/10 23:24 (UTC)That was one of the reasons offered, along with the claim that the tank had been fired on from the hotel and that they'd seen an Iraqi "spotter" at the hotel. The problem with this is that the American military had, in fact, been told that there were reporters in the hotel. Firing on it because a war correspondent was doing his job (taking pictures of the war) indicates either a deliberate attack on journalists (doubtful) or a criminally negligent failure to inform the tank gunner that the Palestine Hotel was not a valid target.
m: As in this case with reuters reporter, pointing long tube-ish objects without warning and identification at tanks, humvees, gunships and people with weapons in general - not the smartest idea.
Where in this video does the reporter do this? In particular while, badly wounded, he's desperately crawling on his belly in an attempt to get away?
(no subject)
Date: 10/4/10 23:25 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 10/4/10 23:25 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 10/4/10 23:30 (UTC)Who do you think was crouching around the corner of the building? If you read the reports (and I guess you didn't) there's a picture that was found on the reporter's camera - of the humvee several blocks away.
They didn't shoot while he was on the ground, they wanted to hence asking him to pick up a weapon, but they didn't. They shot when the van showed up, which by all accounts is a legitimate target. Since it's also wasn't marked and was assisting to what they thought was insurgent.
(no subject)
Date: 10/4/10 23:30 (UTC)But, but, but.......
Date: 10/4/10 23:31 (UTC)Re: But, but, but.......
Date: 10/4/10 23:34 (UTC)Re: But, but, but.......
Date: 10/4/10 23:46 (UTC)"Rules of engagement" are what get a lot of "our guys" killed, going at least back to Viet Nam. I'm not sure that there was such a thing before, altho I've heard stories about Korea. Maybe we should just stop "police actions" and make everything war....more "collateral damage" but fewer casualties I would think.