Leaked video showing US helicopter shooting journalists and civilians

[Fate]

When civvies get killed because combatants are not clearly identifying themselves as non-civilian, the fault does not lie with whomever pulls the trigger, but with those combatants who are using civilian dress to hide their status.

Apaches don't kill people. Military aged (brown) males kill people!

Were they really civilians though? The US ground forces recovered the two cameras. The investigative report states that the Reuters guys were taking photographs of an American Humvee only 100 feet away from the scene. Nothing of value was lost.

[CountDeMoney]

On the other hand the journalists were from Reuters, so maybe it wasn't accidental.

Well, they did have names like Namir and Saeed.  I mean, really now.  It's not like they were bona fide Reuters employees named Daphne and Adair.

Freelance contractors that get paid on a per diem for work submitted take their lives in their own hands hanging with insurgents for the big scoop.

[Alcibiades]

Apaches don't kill people. Military aged (brown) males kill people!

Brown?

[Razgovory]

Apaches don't kill people. Military aged (brown) males kill people!

Brown?

That's the name of my cat.

[Alcibiades]

Went all martinus on the situation and thought he meant the military was brown.   

I see now he's just saying dark people kill other people.   

[Neil]

Burn those fuckers down.

[Ed Anger]

Pat is going to give you all such a lecture.

I'm sure he might give you POW fucking tips also.

[Neil]

Pat is going to give you all such a lecture.

Why?  Is he pro-terrorist or something?

[Ed Anger]

Pat is going to give you all such a lecture.

Why?  Is he pro-terrorist or something?

This is a classic smug Euro drive by thread. He'll pop back on to lecture. He can't help himself.

[grumbler]

Apaches don't kill people. Military aged (brown) males kill people!

Brown?

You keep biting, so he keeps trolling.

[Ed Anger]

Apaches don't kill people. Military aged (brown) males kill people!

Brown?

You keep biting, so he keeps trolling.

[DGuller]

I finally watched the video.  It's obviously packaged as an anti-American piece, which is unfortunate, but a lot of the content just can't be exaggerated.  The first engagement I can understand, I don't think that the potential enemy's state of relaxation should figure into rules of engagement.  However, when they blow the van apart, it starts looking like senseless violence. 

Is there any reason that's not obvious to a layman like me why there was a need to blow up that van?  It looks like the people from the van were unarmed, and picked up the one guy who was wounded, and also appeared unarmed.  It looked completely unnecessary as far as I could see.  It also doesn't help that the guys in the helicopter sound like complete sadistic psychos.  Maybe making comments like that is how you deal with the stress of being in combat, but it still sounds extremely bad.

[Alcibiades]

Yeah, from my standpoint blowing up the bongo truck looked suspect, and authorization was given hastily and without knowing the full extent of the situation by the commander on the ground.

And about the sadistic stuff, these guys are together all day every day, and not only when they are locked in the cockpit for two 6 hour stints above Baghdad every day for 12+ months.  This is how guys talk to each other, for better or worse.  These things are only reviewed and looked at when something goes 'wrong' or someone makes a big deal about something.  But yes, they were a little vocal and outspoken instead of being precise and cold like many of the apache feeds I have seen.

[Alcibiades]

Apaches don't kill people. Military aged (brown) males kill people!

Brown?

You keep biting, so he keeps trolling.

[Berkut]

I finally watched the video.  It's obviously packaged as an anti-American piece, which is unfortunate, but a lot of the content just can't be exaggerated.  The first engagement I can understand, I don't think that the potential enemy's state of relaxation should figure into rules of engagement.  However, when they blow the van apart, it starts looking like senseless violence. 

Is there any reason that's not obvious to a layman like me why there was a need to blow up that van? 

I cannot (obviously) speak for what they were thinking, but I would guess that there may not be any reason at all.

But combat is like that - when you start killing people, I would guess it becomes pretty easy to just keep on killing people, even when the obvious "need" to do so no longer really exists.

So, to play devils advocate, lets assume there was no good reason to blow away that van. Does that mean doing so was an error? Probably in hindsight.

My problem is that I cannot in good conscience sit back in my comfy chair and judge the decisions made by those who are in such radically dis-functional circumstances (from the standards of what any of us consider "normal", anyway). That doesn't mean I think it is ok, but it does mean I am not going to be very quick to assume that their actions are necessarily criminal or even sadistic. Just unfortunate - but then, war IS unfortunate, by definition.

I am sure now that this is leaked, there will be an investigation - however, I am pretty sure once it was clear a couple journos got themselves killed, there was already an investigation. I would like to know what the Army concluded from that, even if I am not sure it would be very good for the Army to release those findings.