This just made me very sad

[ParraCida]

http://home.attbi.com/~zotter/ac130_gunshipmed.wmv

I suppose the US military was afraid the little crawling figures might pick up a rock and throw it at the airplane.


I want to cry.

[mens]

I am absolutely without words for this sh|t.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally posted by ParraCida
http://home.attbi.com/~zotter/ac130_gunshipmed.wmv

I suppose the US military was afraid the little crawling figures might pick up a rock and throw it at the airplane.


I want to cry.

Why do you think they went to Afganistan?

[Embroglio]

That was ****ing appauling, I would enjoy hearing the US Military's excuses if (hopefully when) this becomes more well known; ie: Brittish media getting hold of it.

[Kurashima]

Nobody who means anything actually gives a **** if this hits the media. If the media cant get the war called off with protests , anti-war crusades, and near enough all out Anti Americanism, then the words of a few people on an internet forum arent worth the piss i just took a few minutes ago.

America will attack and destroy Iraq. Then theyll take the Oil, and 6 months after it ends, nobody in America will give a **** because their Petrol prices havent risen.

[Tactitus]

Originally posted by Embroglio
That was ****ing appauling, I would enjoy hearing the US Military's excuses if (hopefully when) this becomes more well known; ie: Brittish media getting hold of it.

Well, I hate to burst whatever bubble you're living in, but it is well known. The footage was released by the US military and was shown on US TV. The buildings were described as part of an al Qaida training camp.

[Scoot951]

I don't see why you're automatically assuming this is an atrocity...from the gun camera you don't have a clue who they are, they could be average joes, they could be guys running around in camo with automatic rifles as well.

They've just gotta be directed by their intel, and most of the time (we would've never gotten anywhere otherwise) it's not that far off.

[Muslim]

they are soon having blinding lasers and fighting bots
like the ones in judge dred

[Snurx]

I hate that ****.
Nobdy deserves to die.

[Texan]

Originally posted by Snurx
I hate that ****.
Nobdy deserves to die.

Tell that to the Aussies who were killed in Bali.

[Dante Hicks]

Originally posted by Kurashima
If the media cant get the war called off with protests , anti-war crusades, and near enough all out Anti Americanism, then the words of a few people on an internet forum arent worth the piss i just took a few minutes ago.

Is this a joke?

1) thats REALLY old

2) er, thats what happens in wars.. people die.. those people were the enemy and bamo they are dead.

[LHC]

My soundcard's broken, and without sound it's hard to tell what's going on. Anybody care to explain?

[Deffeh]

im without words. i cant tell you how depressed, disgusted, and moreover embarrased that made me.

[Texan]

Originally posted by LHC
My soundcard's broken, and without sound it's hard to tell what's going on. Anybody care to explain?

A bunch of people died. They were probably terrorists who are hoping to kill you because you own a PC and are not actively using it to plan attacks against women and children. On the other hand, if you are planning to kill innocent women and children, you should call the leader of your local cell and ask him to send you money for a new soundcard. I understand that they still have plenty of money.

[iain50]

Originally posted by Deffeh
im without words. i cant tell you how depressed, disgusted, and moreover embarrased that made me.

How do you know those guys that were hit wernt getting trained to come to your house and plant noxious gasses in your local church/pub/shopping centre? There was a war, and by wars very nature, people get killed, and usually by the guys with the best fire-power, ie gunships.

How could you live atall having a blurry sight of probable (at least claimed) terrorist getting killed, when however many people died in WW I / WW II / the gulf / the faulklands/ korea / vietnam / angola / rwanda / blah blah.

if that little vid leaves you as you say, then what does the combination of the rest do?

[Dante Hicks]

Originally posted by iain50
How do you know those guys that were hit wernt getting trained to come to your house and plant noxious gasses in your local church/pub/shopping centre?

Well, I don't know that they weren't planning to come and gang bang my mum, or whether they were on their way to do some charity work with small children. Watching people being killed is generally an emotional experience for any normal person, and the fact that those persons may have "deserved" it doesn't make it a happy experience.

Obviously, yes, in war **** happens. But do we have any evidence as to the exact nature of the building/persons who were killed in this particular video? (I presume it's genuine from other comments in this thread) If we do, then fair enough but the idea we're just trusting in the government is slightly...worrying.

[Nodrog]

Surely its the responsibility of the people doing the killing to provide evidence what they were killing for? Saying "LOL U CANT PROOVE THERE INOCENT THE GUVERMENT IS ALWAYS RIGHT UNTILL EXPLICITLY PROOVEN RONG!!!" is stupid.

[Deffeh]

Originally posted by iain50
How do you know those guys that were hit wernt getting trained to come to your house and plant noxious gasses in your local church/pub/shopping centre? There was a war, and by wars very nature, people get killed, and usually by the guys with the best fire-power, ie gunships.

How could you live atall having a blurry sight of probable (at least claimed) terrorist getting killed, when however many people died in WW I / WW II / the gulf / the faulklands/ korea / vietnam / angola / rwanda / blah blah.

if that little vid leaves you as you say, then what does the combination of the rest do?

As a human, i push these to the back of my mind, as you do, as we all do. As yet, scotland or indeed the UK has had a sum total of the ricin thing, and even that has been overdone.

They dropped bombs, on people climbing out of the burning buildings.
They made sure "dont hit the mosque" was heard so the US couldnt be claimed of having a religious war.

my words are sticking. this is unjustifyable

[Texan]

Originally posted by Deffeh
As a human, i push these to the back of my mind, as you do, as we all do. As yet, scotland or indeed the UK has had a sum total of the ricin thing, and even that has been overdone.

They dropped bombs, on people climbing out of the burning buildings.
They made sure "dont hit the mosque" was heard so the US couldnt be claimed of having a religious war.

my words are sticking. this is unjustifyable

I believe the reason they said "don't hit the mosque" is because a mosque is an illegal target according to the international laws of warfare. Of course, the guy running into the mosque -- why do you suppose he ran in there? Using a mosque as a defensive position for a soldier is illegal. If we assume that guy was a soldier, do you think he knows or cares about the international laws of war? Maybe he wasn't a soldier. Maybe he was a guy who was planning to kill your mother while she rode the bus home from work.

He could also have been a guy who was only there to pick up a load of veggies to take to the nearest town so he could support his family.

Most governments are not interested in sending multiple million dollar weapons to kill veggie sellers. You have to make up your own mind whether the United States would spend 5 million dollars in missiles to kill one vegetable merchant somewhere in the Middle East.

[Dante Hicks]

Originally posted by Texan
You have to make up your own mind whether the United States would spend 5 million dollars in missiles to kill one vegetable merchant somewhere in the Middle East.

That's not exactly hard evidence now is it?

I've no doubt that they believed the targets in the video were terrorists (or whatever they were hitting). They wouldn't waste the time otherwise. But that doesn't mean they were right. Perhaps they were right, perhaps they weren't. But without evidence either way I'd be dubious of any argument which said they were definitely innocent or guilty.

Perhaps you place the evidence on the victims of this attack and their families to clear their "name" (not that they have name). Others simply place that burden of proof on the state which should be well equipped to show any reasoning behind an attack.

[Deffeh]

Originally posted by Texan
Maybe
Maybe
I assume
Maybe
Probably
In all likelyhood

They dropped bombs on those running away from a bomb scene.

Lower than low.

[Scoot951]

I'd bet you 90% of all bombing runs in the past 10-15 years have probably looked something like that. (And the ones earlier would've only been less clear)

Are you saying the only way a war should be fought is if a guy goes up to them and checks out their ID before he shoots them?
I'm not a hawk by any means, but the way some of you guys are reacting to this is nonsensical to me.

[Vaio]

great video. Got any more ?

Vaio

[Vaio]

Originally posted by Deffeh
They dropped bombs on those running away from a bomb scene.

Lower than low.

Not even remotely as low as flying airliners into buildings.....

Vaio

[Tactitus]

Originally posted by Dante Hicks
Obviously, yes, in war **** happens. But do we have any evidence as to the exact nature of the building/persons who were killed in this particular video? (I presume it's genuine from other comments in this thread) If we do, then fair enough but the idea we're just trusting in the government is slightly...worrying.

The fact that the US military released this video suggests that they're reasonably confident that it's a terrorist camp and not just some local vegetable stand. That's not to suggest the military wouldn't be capable of blowing up a local vegetable stand, but wouldn't they have to be really, really stupid to release that video to the public?

But if you want to distrust the government then you also have to consider the possibility that the entire thing was faked and that no one was killed. They could be just a bunch of actors running around with fake explosions; done to help convince the American public that we're winning the war on terrorism.

[Texan]

Originally posted by Dante Hicks
That's not exactly hard evidence now is it?

I've no doubt that they believed the targets in the video were terrorists (or whatever they were hitting). They wouldn't waste the time otherwise. But that doesn't mean they were right. Perhaps they were right, perhaps they weren't. But without evidence either way I'd be dubious of any argument which said they were definitely innocent or guilty.

Perhaps you place the evidence on the victims of this attack and their families to clear their "name" (not that they have name). Others simply place that burden of proof on the state which should be well equipped to show any reasoning behind an attack.

I have not seen any evidence that this is not a computer game.

If we assume this is not a video game, what was the targetted country?

The only proof I can offer you is that the guys seemed very good at avoiding the attacks of professional warriors. They were hiding in caves. Using terrain features to avoid being hit. Using illegal targets to avoid being hit. Notice that no one ran into the legal target. Trying to escape in vehicles when most of you would not consider that as an option.

They reacted as if they were soldiers. Do you think they are soldiers are civilians?

I'm not saying the attack was right. I'm saying that it looks to me like soldiers are attacking soldiers in that video.

There also seemed to be one ground-based soldier who attacked with a SAM missile, but I could be wrong.

[Texan]

Originally posted by Deffeh
They dropped bombs on those running away from a bomb scene.

Lower than low.

I also forgot to mention that there appeared to be a secondary explosion towards the beginning which would indicate that the car involved was carrying explosives.

How do you consider soldiers killing soldiers lower than low? If those guys running away had killed some soldiers from their enemy, would that also be lower than low? Or would that be justified because their weapons are low-tech?

Also their targets would prbably be noncombattants. I guess that does not matter.

[iain50]

Originally posted by Deffeh
As a human, i push these to the back of my mind, as you do, as we all do. As yet, scotland or indeed the UK has had a sum total of the ricin thing, and even that has been overdone.

They dropped bombs, on people climbing out of the burning buildings.
They made sure "dont hit the mosque" was heard so the US couldnt be claimed of having a religious war.

my words are sticking. this is unjustifyable

I take it you were there to know that the dont hit the mosque bit was to make it look good?


someone said something about burden of truth on the aggressor to prove the targets were valid, well, i guess we need to dig up every argentinian that was shot in the falklands war, jut to prove he was a serviceman.

Why do a fair number of people automatically assume that anything the americans do is wrong, evil, cruel etc? Sure, they are famously gung-ho, and are not know for putting others ahead of themseves, but i assure you, being scottish, and british, if any terrorist had blown up say big ben, or another suitable target, i would want them hunted down, i would want those who feed them weapons hunted down, and i would probably want anyone who shook their hands hunted down.

in any war there is a thing called colateral damage, there is also a history of some awful things happening, christ, we bombed berlin, for no strategic reason other than to provoke the luftwaffe into bombing london, and therefore leaving the airfields free from attack. To critisise that single and certainly not damning video, is to deny the americans the right to have retribution for sept 11, and to try and rid the world of some truy evil assholes.

regards

[Deffeh]

Originally posted by iain50
I take it you were there to know that the dont hit the mosque bit was to make it look good?


someone said something about burden of truth on the aggressor to prove the targets were valid, well, i guess we need to dig up every argentinian that was shot in the falklands war, jut to prove he was a serviceman.

Why do a fair number of people automatically assume that anything the americans do is wrong, evil, cruel etc? Sure, they are famously gung-ho, and are not know for putting others ahead of themseves, but i assure you, being scottish, and british, if any terrorist had blown up say big ben, or another suitable target, i would want them hunted down, i would want those who feed them weapons hunted down, and i would probably want anyone who shook their hands hunted down.

in any war there is a thing called colateral damage, there is also a history of some awful things happening, christ, we bombed berlin, for no strategic reason other than to provoke the luftwaffe into bombing london, and therefore leaving the airfields free from attack. To critisise that single and certainly not damning video, is to deny the americans the right to have retribution for sept 11, and to try and rid the world of some truy evil assholes.

regards

What possibly makes you think i support my countries actions during the falklands war? We were despicable, truly. Nothing anyone can say can change that.

You see, im not an anti-american. Im anti-aggression.

I wouldnt go into the "who supplied their weapons" thing btw.


You have to understand, i try and keep myself prejudice free. I deplore death, as the thought of it terrifies me, and unneccesary death depresses me. I do not think dropping bombs on wounded Afgans was the only way to deal with that situation. And i dont thinkat any rate all of them were terrorists. It was after all, a mosque, which has religious men inside it etc. Or did.

[iain50]

The mosque wasnt hit, we have to assume that the people involved were soldiers at best, terrorist in training at worst.

imo, you seem to want to shut the world out, as it is in essence, a place filled with war and vilence, you just got to live your life.
you can sit at your comp and look at pictures of nuddy ladies, leaving only to get food, water and to relieve yourself, all in the hope you never see a nasty thing again, or you can hate it, while realising there aint a damn thing that can be done about it, and just get on with it without whining.

also, within 2 seconds of the clip starting it was obvious what it was, so i presume it was for you too, there fore, as such a pacifist, why did you let it run until the part where they bombe the injured men? surely your sensibilities would have made you turn it off? or does it just help a crappy arguement to claim angelicism?

also, on the 'dont go into who supplied them weapons' im no arms expert, but most of the vidoes i see of afgans, or iraquis, or any other terrorist show them holding ak47's, now, correct me if im wrong, but you were implying that the states, or britain supplied the weapons, well, i dont think we, or the yanks produce aks. they are, i BELEIVE, from communist states, but my point was they are armed by the people who provide the money to buy the weapons, ie mr hussain. (that last bit could be bs, but it is my take on the situation)

[Nodrog]

Originally posted by iain50
The mosque wasnt hit, we have to assume that the people involved were soldiers at best, terrorist in training at worst.

Why do we have to assume that? I dont see why we should assume they were guilty, or that they were innocent. It is up to the people killing them to prove their guilt - it is not up to them to prove their innocent.

Originally posted by iain50

imo, you seem to want to shut the world out, as it is in essence, a place filled with war and vilence, you just got to live your life.
you can sit at your comp and look at pictures of nuddy ladies, leaving only to get food, water and to relieve yourself, all in the hope you never see a nasty thing again, or you can hate it, while realising there aint a damn thing that can be done about it, and just get on with it without whining.

What if I dont recognise that evil is a necessary component of existence, and go one step further by saying that people like you who choose to shut your eyes and block it out are the reason why it is able to continue existing? If everyone stopped thinking like you did (that theres nothing that can be done about 'bad things', so its best to ignore them and stop complaining), do you think the world would be a better place? I strongly suspect it would.

Originally posted by iain50

also, within 2 seconds of the clip starting it was obvious what it was, so i presume it was for you too, there fore, as such a pacifist, why did you let it run until the part where they bombe the injured men? surely your sensibilities would have made you turn it off? or does it just help a crappy arguement to claim angelicism?.

Because putting your head under the blankets doesnt make the bogeyman go away. Turning a blind eye to wrongful acts does not help anybody.

Originally posted by iain50

also, on the 'dont go into who supplied them weapons' im no arms expert, but most of the vidoes i see of afgans, or iraquis, or any other terrorist show them holding ak47's, now, correct me if im wrong, but you were implying that the states, or britain supplied the weapons, well, i dont think we, or the yanks produce aks. they are, i BELEIVE, from communist states, but my point was they are armed by the people who provide the money to buy the weapons, ie mr hussain. (that last bit could be bs, but it is my take on the situation)

What are your beliefs here based on? What evidence do you have to support them, and to justify believing in them?

[JonnyBGood]

Originally posted by Nodrog
What if I dont recognise that evil is a necessary component of existence

Evil was spontaneously created by socialists once they started caring about people eh?

[iain50]

1, you say that the americans need to prove their innocence, but not the afgans? is that not a double standard? until you have the tiniest reason to think they were civilians, then you have to beleive that the americans were hitting the target they claimed to be.


2, I didnt say ignore it, in fact, i said the opposite, DONT ignore it by sitting in your room. The human race has proved that there will always be conflict, from the youngest child in a playground, to adults with guns, someone will ALWAYS piss someone else off, and provoke a reaction, it is part of our build as humans (not a negotiable point, is there nothing that would make you hit me? rape your mum? etc? sorry to be vulgar) simple, and to think otherwise is the true ignoring of facts, not accepting it and moving on, while holding my own values.

3, Deffeh claimed to deplore death, therefore, the knowledge of what was coming on his screen should have been enough to make him aware of it, without turning a blind eye. I would choose not to watch something which i claimed affected me so, and because i would be aware of it, without actually seeing it, i woulod not be turning a blind eye.

4, The point is one i raised a few posts back, that i would want those who supplied terrorists with weapons that were used on my country wasted. Deffeh made a post that implied that the allies supplied the weapons, and i was pointing out i beleive differently. My evidence is the untold amount of pictures of terrorist holding aks.

that cover it for ya?


regards

[IncubusGod]

Originally posted by Tactitus

But if you want to distrust the government then you also have to consider the possibility that the entire thing was faked and that no one was killed. They could be just a bunch of actors running around with fake explosions; done to help convince the American public that we're winning the war on terrorism.

Well if that was the case they must have been expendible actors as you see two get blown to pieces.

Anyway,they were being directed by ground forces no doubt,it was probably a strike to support some ground enagment. They didn't have to be terrorists y'know,they could just have been taliban or a rebel faction.

To be honest the fact that this was released is probably the best evidence that it would stand upto scrutiny.

Btw,I dont like war in general and violence should only be used as a last resort but Im not going to shed a tear for soldiers of a brutal regime or for terrorists.

If they were civilians then it is totally unnacceptable.But as I said before,that doesnt seem likley.

[Tactitus]

Originally posted by IncubusGod
Well if that was the case they must have been expendible actors as you see two get blown to pieces.

No offense, but I've seen better effects in Arnold Schwartzenegger movies. The video is blurry, in black and white, and you can't really see much detail.

The video is compelling, but only because we believe it to be true and not because it's particularly explicit or realistic.

[IncubusGod]

Originally posted by Tactitus
No offense, but I've seen better effects in Arnold Schwartzenegger movies. The video is blurry, in black and white, and you can't really see much detail.

The video is compelling, but only because we believe it to be true and not because it's particularly explicit or realistic.

I made that comment more in jest than anything.
I put a 'heh' after the sentace but it seemed to maybe be making light of the video and I didnt really want to do that.

I wasn't really being serious about it.

Sweet footage, that! You see how some of them were pretty tough? Took a couple of dead-on artillery shells from that Spooky to take some of those little buggers out. If we're all lucky, some of those guys were involved with training the "martyrs" who killed 3,000 people from around the world in the trade center attack.

I'm assuming a few of you saw that little tidbit of footage, huh? Did you say the same thing as you are saying about this clip? I hope so. I suppose things would be different if they struck Trafalgar Square or the Queen's Residence.

Death meets death, and retaliation is the only way to prevent the same thing from happening again.

I respect the Americans and their desire to take on world terrorism. They seem to be doing a fair job of it.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally posted by eyehateeuros
They seem to be doing a fair job of it.

This is so stupid it's beyond parody. Even if it's an attempt at.

[Knight Theamion]

'm-m-m-monsterkill'

and

'killingspree'

and

'dominating'

[MrL_JaKiri]

The Redeemer would be the perfect weapon for the US military.

Enormous destructive potential.
Hi-tech.
'Smart'.

And some idiot can get it wrong, fly it into a wall and kill 1/2 his own side.

[Knight Theamion]

Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri
The Redeemer would be the perfect weapon for the US military.

Enormous destructive potential.
Hi-tech.
'Smart'.

And some idiot can get it wrong, fly it into a wall and kill 1/2 his own side.

excellent.

Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri
This is so stupid it's beyond parody. Even if it's an attempt at.

Really? That's interesting. Please tell us, oh great one, how is America NOT doing a good job of eradicating the scum who perpetrated evil, not just on the US, but on the people of many nationalities who died in the trade center attacks?

How are the Americans NOT handling the spread of international terrorism? How many major terrorist attacks have there been on US soil? How many have been thwarted?

Say what you want, the Americans definitely have their act together compared to any European country. They have taken the lead in fighting terrorism, not just for them, but for every free country around the world, while the rest of the world's leaders cringe at the thought of fighting fire with fire - which is the only way to deter these lowlifes.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally posted by eyehateeuros

Realising of course that America caused the terrorists in the first place by its heavy-handed policy in the middle east in the 80's and 90's, and are growing support for them by their heavy handed policy now.

As for terrorism in europe, the only major terrorist organisation over the last 30 years or so operating in western europe has been the IRA, which is/was funded almost exclusively by Americans.

Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri
Realising of course that America caused the terrorists in the first place by its heavy-handed policy in the middle east in the 80's and 90's, and are growing support for them by their heavy handed policy now.

As for terrorism in europe, the only major terrorist organisation over the last 30 years or so operating in western europe has been the IRA, which is/was funded almost exclusively by Americans.

Well, I'm sorry you feel that way. The Americans seem to be the only ones who even give a damn what happens to other countries.

You can argue about middle east policies all day long, but that is not the reason they blew-up 3000 people (many were not American). Newsflash for you - it was a religious zealot thing.

Sorry if that's too heavy for you to deal with, but it's true.

Also, you might want to rethink that IRA thing, because there have been a great deal of terrorist cells linked to al Quaida and numerous other terrorist organizations busted in Western Europe, and many many more are under observation right now.

Are you foolish enough to believe that terrorists are staying in the camps in Afghanistan, Libya, and other nations already targeted as major breeding grounds for terrorists?

I'm hoping you have no real say in your government.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally posted by eyehateeuros

I'm a lucky prospector, I've hit a comedy goldmine.

Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri
I'm a lucky prospector, I've hit a comedy goldmine.

No, you've hit someone who is well informed and has an opinion that differs from yours. If that brings you humor, then wonderful, and I'm glad to bring a smile to yuour face.

Now, would you like to discuss this issue, or are you intent on glib one-liners that show how absolutely uninformed you are about what is really happening in the war on terror?

Never mind, I can already guess the answer. One-liners are easy, frank discussion backed-up with facts are too much like work. Sorry to accuse you of NOT being a slacker, my bad.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally posted by eyehateeuros

I'm just going on empirical evidence m'dear, as is my wont.

And I do believe in free discourse, so opinion doesn't enter into it.

Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri
I'm just going on empirical evidence m'dear, as is my wont.

And I do believe in free discourse, so opinion doesn't enter into it.

Empirical evidence? okey-dokey,...mind sharing the source of this evidence? Or, are you going to continue to just sling generalities and US bashing rhetoric.

Step into America's shoes for a while.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally posted by eyehateeuros
Empirical evidence? okey-dokey,...mind sharing the source of this evidence? Or, are you going to continue to just sling generalities and US bashing rhetoric.

Step into America's shoes for a while.

I'm bashing the US to state that its policy in the middle east might have somewhat provoked the local populace?

I'm bashing the US when I say that its citizens have put a rather staggeringly large amount of funds into the IRA?

If I were to step into America's shoes for a while I would start to attack people who had resources I wanted, whilst relying on deceit and rhetoric to support my cause.

America aint exactly clean, global politics wise.

As for evidence, the IRA support rallies have been well documented, and you'll get a good view of the US's foreign policy if you read any independent news source.