What would you have done?

[spooky3]

All I said was that it looks alarmingly like some loathsome people waited for a dog to cross an IED and then took great delight in seeing the result. That's all.

 

Whoever is laughing in the video (and they're American) is a bunch of vile human beings.

 

They probably couldn't even see out of the van and protocol would be wiser if they just get on with the job at hand and ignore the fact of the dog.

 

 

As I said earlier, thank goodness it wasn't some local little toddler who triggered it.

 

 

P.S. I'm very sorry for the dog.

[MrSmith]

All I said was that it looks alarmingly like some loathsome people waited for a dog to cross an IED and then took great delight in seeing the result. That's all.

 

Whoever is laughing in the video (and they're American) is a bunch of vile human beings.

 

How do you know they are American?

It’s more likely they waited for the dog to move but it triggered the IED its self, some are designed to blow up when stepped on.

[syne]

"Which side was the dog was on?" -asks a 7 yr old

[Rupert_Baehr]

From the original article:

 

A video has emerged online that appears to show some American troops blowing up a dog-for fun

On the footage, which surfaced two days ago, soldiers can be heard- off camera- laughing as the animal approaches a trap-apparently set up by themselves.

The men chortle as they spot the hapless creature wandering in what appears to be a bombed out street.

 

Long on assumption, short on fact.

 

Why does the street 'appear' to be bombed out? Do Iraqis live exclusively in well-manicured houses in affluent neighbourhoods?

 

Could it be that there are no Iraqis shown on camera because the soldiers were blowing up an IED and had cleared the civilians from the area?

 

I wonder why the reporter said 'in a trap apparently set by themselves?'

 

Where's the evidence that it was a trap?

 

The laughter is inappropriate, but there doesn't appear to be any evidence which would indicate that the dog was the target.

 

The death of the dog is unfortunate. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that a number of explosive-sniffing dogs get killed, too. I doubt they're killed for fun; presumably they cost a lot to train.

 

Of course it's the Daily Mail - so what would you expect? (for some reason the usual condemnation of that newspaper seems to be somewhat muted in this instance.)

 

If it was a more respectable newspaper (like the Daily Mirror) there would be no doubt as to the accuracy of the story. They would never publish a sloppily-researched news article.

 

(Does anybody remember the photographs [subsequently proven to be faked] published by the Mirror (in 2004) which claimed to show members of the Queens Lancashire regiment abusing an 'Iraqi prisoner'?)

[MrSmith]

 

Long on assumption, short on fact.

 

 

 

Of course it's the Daily Mail - so what would you expect? (for some reason the usual condemnation of that newspaper seems to be somewhat muted in this instance.)

 

 

They’ve only seen the same video that we have seen but they have managed to but images into reader’s minds by making wild assumptions on what happened.

 

I also noticed the usual Daily Mail bashing crowd are happy to believe this non story.