Wikileaks obtains a copy of Iraqi Journalists being murdered by US forces.

[Harleyman]

Hmmm interesting legal defence, save your wife from drawing a widows pension till someone bigger comes along to take your wife off you.

 

Have you ever been involved in a fight with a bloke who looked at you a bit funny? Been in the army by any chance Harlyman?

 

I served in the US Marine Corps 1966 -1969 with a year in Vietnam. I rode around in enough choppers to know something on the subject of their vulnerability from ground fire. I've got no time for blowhards who see a news clip and right away become experts on what should have and should have not been done.

That doesn't make me a bloodthirsty kind of person either but if someone came into my house and pointed a gun at me and I had mine handy I wouldn't waste much time in trying to find out what his intentions were

 

That's all I've got to say on the above off thread subjects and no further discussion of same invited or responded to

[NoddyHolder]

I served in the US Marine Corps 1966 -1969 with a year in Vietnam. I rode around in enough choppers to know something on the subject of their vulnerability from ground fire. I've got no time for blowhards who see a news clip and right away become experts on what should have and should have not been done.

That doesn't make me a bloodthirsty kind of person either but if someone came into my house and pointed a gun at me and I had mine handy I wouldn't waste much time in trying to find out what his intentions were

 

That's all I've got to say on the above off thread subjects and no further discussion of same invited or responded to

Well I think that should end the squabbling and in tab1's case the anti american name calling

[Fivetide]

You haven't seen the video have you? There was no split second decision, they were overheard for several minutes, they weren't being fired on before opening fire

 

it isn't always the best idea to let the other side get a decent shot in first. you might get killed before you found out they weren't 'just' civilians carrying guns and rpgs.

 

lol @ noddy

 

[Agent Orange]

You can't demand they be strung up, the poor boys need councelling for having seen the terribly threatening sight of a man with a camera lense that they took to be an RPG, just imagine the nightmares they must be suffering thinking about how that could have been a real RPG. Just as well they dealt with the situation the only way they have been taught to, kill any civilian they deem a threat and let people like our Harley make excuses for their stupidity.

 

Oh you haven't been in a Chaaaper so you have no right to say they did wrong. Getting into a chaaper apparently involves a section of the brain being removed rendering the moron occupants of a chaaper incapable of making rational decisions and presume everything a threat. The drugs induced highs go a long way towards helping that situation but that is another topic.

 

It must be hard sitting 1000's of metres away from the battle whilst having so much fire power at your disposal

 

Seriously, how can anyone justify the actions of the helicopter crew. The choppers were a considerable distance from their target and therefore not in any immediate threat. I mean, the so-called insurgents, were apparently armed with nothing more than AK47s and a RPG. All the while, the Apaches were about 1km away. The AK47 is designed for close quarter combat and you'd have to be bloody lucky to hit something as fast as an Apache gunship at such a distance. Same can be said for the RPG, not overly accurate at long distance.

 

Furthermore, the fact remains that the victims of this crime did not seem to be acting in a threatening manner towards any coalition forces. If the only evidence they have to go on is the fact that they were armed, which is highly inconclusive from the images, then they should have no engaged their target. Were any weapons found at the scene?

[[Matt]]

GET DOWN..... RPG!!!

 

http://i.imgur.com/hGxj7.jpg

[Halibut]

Well I think that should end the squabbling and in tab1's case the anti american name calling

 

What should? The fact that Harleyman served in Vietnam or that he sounds offf about shooting burglars?

 

No, sorry it takes more than to convince people that blowing away unarmed civilians for no good reason is alright.

[Halibut]

Posted in error.

[tab1]

I served in the US Marine Corps 1966 -1969 with a year in Vietnam. I rode around in enough choppers to know something on the subject of their vulnerability from ground fire. I've got no time for blowhards who see a news clip and right away become experts on what should have and should have not been done.

That doesn't make me a bloodthirsty kind of person either but if someone came into my house and pointed a gun at me and I had mine handy I wouldn't waste much time in trying to find out what his intentions were

 

That's all I've got to say on the above off thread subjects and no further discussion of same invited or responded to

Correct me if I'm wrong but the incident took place not in your house but their house that your Yanks invaded and using your rule of thumb the Iraqis are the ones who would have been justified in taking a pop at the invading scum, except in this case they weren't even doing that. They were a group of Iraquis standing about in a street in Iraq, why did the Yanks have a problem with that, except for simple blood lust?

 

Yes it does make you a blood thirsty kind of a person unless you can accept the same thing happening on street of Britain. Would it be OK in your books for Iraquis to seek retribution on streets of New York, and would you still say bad things happen?

 

Anyone justifying murder of innocent civillians is bloodthirsty scum.

[NoddyHolder]

What should? The fact that Harleyman served in Vietnam or that he sounds offf about shooting burglars?

 

No, sorry it takes more than to convince people that blowing away unarmed civilians for no good reason is alright.

But the point is they were shot for what the pilot thought was a legitimate reason

[NoddyHolder]

Correct me if I'm wrong but the incident took place not in your house but their house that your Yanks invaded and using your rule of thumb the Iraqis are the ones who would have been justified in taking a pop at the invading scum, except in this case they weren't even doing that. They were a group of Iraquis standing about in a street in Iraq, why did the Yanks have a problem with that, except for simple blood lust?

 

Yes it does make you a blood thirsty kind of a person unless you can accept the same thing happening on street of Britain. Would it be OK in your books for Iraquis to seek retribution on streets of New York, and would you still say bad things happen?

 

Anyone justifying murder of innocent civillians is bloodthirsty scum.

Ooo dear the hatred towards the allies is unbelievable,maybe you should join the iraqis and go and fight for their freedom,or for the chance that another genocidal dictator can take charge of them.