Anyway just to answer you question, if there are reports "happy sunshine playschool" is actually an enemy stronghold, sure why not? It's a war, kids shouldn't be in school in the first place.
The SAF is an armed force, not a civilian corporation. Its mission is to defeat its enemies, ruthlessly and completely. It is an instrument of controlled fury, designed to visit death and destruction of its foes... soldiers must have steel in their souls... must learn in war to kill and not to flinch, to destroy and not to feel pity, to be a flaming sword in the righteous cause of national survival.
hello!!! there is no mention of killing civilians, innocent lives, and reporters.
why don't you quote him and pose the question to him if it applies to this case. if he says yes, i will be happy to shoot any dang civilian even in war time without feeling pity and flinching and be a flaming sword in the righteous cause of national survival.
the US military had enough time to ask those guys to lay down their "weapons". if they had refused and start shooting, fair enough. shoot them. i am not sure if it is fair to make a parallel but do you see police shooting anyone with a gun without asking them to surrender or being shot at first?
Last edited by pokiemon; 8th April 2010 at 08:05 PM.
there is nothing wrong with taking out military threats without warning in war. there is something vastly wrong in finding it fun and even wishing aloud that a wounded person (obviously half dead and crawling) would somehow reach for something resembling a weapon so you can take him out for good.
collateral damage is a common term used in war, after all. the problem comes when the concept is abused and entire droves of innocent people are executed for the sake of some bunch of soldiers' fun.
as to 9v orion's argument that soldiers are meant to follow orders, i don't think the soldiers were ORDERED to take out the people killed. they were probably ordered to identify threats and remove them. what happened next was that they found all sorts of reasons to open fire on a group of gathered people. granted perhaps a camera could be mistaken for a small arms weapon... but after the first wave, the behaviour after that was apalling. i don't see how you could even justify the van being shot at.
Last edited by night86mare; 8th April 2010 at 08:34 PM.
It is easy to criticise sitting in front of a computer in a county at peace but it is a whole different story watching your buddies getting blown up by IEDs and getting shot at in a war which is totally non of your concern.
War turns people into monsters even innocent civilians that commits unspeakable atrocities. Case in point, four American civilians was ambushed and their bodies was mutilated before being hung from a bridge by a crowd in Falluja, Iraq in 2004 (link).
I've attached a piece of article from todayonline. I agree with 9V-Orion Images that it is easy to condemn the killings when typing on a keyboard sitting behind a computer. The key question is when they open fire, do they believe that they are firing on civilians or militants? Most of us will believe they are not monsters. So the only disagreement is whether sufficient effort was put in to differentiate the level of threat. This is really very subjective.
Should they kill what they believe to be militants with a sombre mood? Read the article.
Psychologists attempt to explain airstrike video
by THE NEW YORK TIMES
05:55 AM Apr 09, 2010
WASHINGTON - The sight of unarmed human beings being gunned down is jarring enough. But for many people who watched the video of a 2007 assault by an Army Apache helicopter in Baghdad, released on Monday by WikiLeaks.org, the most disturbing detail was the cockpit chatter.
The soldiers joked and jeered as they shot people in the street, including a Reuters photographer and a driver, believing them to be insurgents.
"Look at those dead *******s," one said. "Nice," another responded.
In recent days, many veterans have pointed out that fighters cannot do their jobs without creating psychological distance from the enemy. One reason that the soldiers seemed as if they were playing a video game is that, in a morbid but necessary sense, they were.
"You don't want combat soldiers to be foolish or to jump the gun, but their job is to destroy the enemy, and one way they're able to do that is to see it as a game, so that the people don't seem real," said Mr Bret A Moore, a former Army psychologist.
Military training is fundamentally an exercise in overcoming a fear of killing another human, said former Army Ranger, Lieutenant-Colonel Dave Grossman, author of the book On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society.
Fighters in a war zone must think of themselves as predators first - not bait. That frame of mind affects not only how a person thinks, but what he sees and hears.
The fighters in the helicopter say that they are sure they see a "weapon", even though the Reuters photographer Namir Noor-Eldeen is carrying a camera.
Dr David Dunning, a psychologist at Cornell University said: "Take the same image and put it in a bathroom, and you swear it's a hair dryer; put it in a workshop, and you swear it's a power drill."
The video also shows a van stopping to pick up one of the wounded. The soldiers in the helicopter suspect it to be hostile and fire again. Two children in the van are wounded.
Psychologists say that when people are so intensely focused, they may not even see what is obvious to another observer. The soldiers were looking for combatants; experts say they may not have seen children, even if they should have.
Watching the video, the viewer sees a wider tragedy unfolding, but the soldiers are reacting in real time.
Such distance tempts people to overestimate the force of their own professed moral principles.
"We don't express our better angels as much as we'd like to think," Dr Dunning said. "What another person does in that situation should stand as forewarning for what we would do ourselves."
Last edited by Jix; 9th April 2010 at 01:16 PM.
what's next, soldiers claiming that in the heat of the moment babies were the devil and that they could step on them?
video says it all.
wedding photography by john leng
It is killed or be killed in the war zone. If that camera is really a rpgs, there might be chance that the ground soldiers are dead on arrival. Though it is really true that the way the gunner talk is a bit...
Lets put this in everyday life, you are driving (120km/h) on a expressway(M'sia), a car is following you quite closely. Suddenly a dog jump out, will you suddenly hard brake to save the dog while endangering the driver behind? Whats worst is that after you ran over the dog, the driver behind stopped your car and scolded you for running over the dog.
Last edited by wootsk; 12th April 2010 at 09:19 AM.
I think unless one has actually seen war as a combatant, you can't really say whether you will or will not do something. Sure, we're trained to obey orders. As a commander, I expect that of the men too but I expect that it's not so straightfoward in a real combat situation.
I thought a good read is One Bullet Away. There's a part which the author writes about his experience in the invasion of Iraq (liberation to some ), about LOAC/ROE. There was also a HBO Miniseries about it called Generation Kill - excellent watch to see how Recon Marines trained to kill are in such a dilemma when it came to a warzone where you couldn't really tell who the bad guys were.
In situations where there is genuine dilemma where something looks like an RPG that is understandable to shoot, I say understandable, it does not mean ok.. in cases where it is clear as daylight how can we condone such acts?
Yet we see many trying to justify and even to the extent of quoting out of context to try to support their case, it is not about trying to win an argument but what we beileve is right from wrong.
To understand and feel for the people who lost love ones we need to put ourselves in their place, it is our children our husbands fathers that are being targetted at and see if we still feel the same way.
But to each his own, only when it is your own flesh and blood that is being spilled indiscriminately.. then only then can we truly know what we are talking about... I have heard of war stories from my late dad about the Japanese occupation and people who have relatives executed/beheaded by the Japanese army will know how it is like...
Really talk is cheap.