Thursday, April 8, 2010

About That Wiki Leaks Iraq War Video

The web site Wiki Leaks, run out of Scandinavia, has released a videotape of an American operation in Iraq in 2007 in which several people were killed by an Apache gun ship. It is entitled, "Collateral Murder". The theme of the video and narration is that troops carelessly attacked and killed some 25 people including two Reuters photographers. Fox News this morning has called into question the analysis of the tape and pointed out that the attack was justified. The Fox article is below:


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/07/military-raises-questions-credibility-leaked-iraq-shooting-video/?test=latestnews


Here is the actual video. Pay close attention to the radio transmissions (also in captions).



As Fox News (Megyn Kelly) pointed out this morning, in the opening scenes, four men can be seen walking behind one of the photographers. The troops ascertain that they are carrying automatic weeapons, which can be seen (but ignored by Wiki Leaks). The transmissions also show that the troops reported their observations and requested authority to shoot, which was approved. After the initial attack, you can see a wounded suspect crawling on the sidewalk. The attackers, rather than immediately shoot at him, try to determine if he is carrying a weapon. Eventually, they request and receive authorization to take out the van that comes to rescue him. (It was later determined that there were two children in the van, who were removed to a hospital. Wiki Leaks even criticizes the decision of which hospital they were sent to.)

The intent of Wiki Leaks is to claim that the attack was wanton. They point out "casual" comments picked up from the transmissions to support their assertion.

Well, it is refreshing to see that someone far removed from Iraq is able to see through the fog of war and second guess the actions of these troops. While it is fairly certain that some innocent people were killed or injured, the troops correctly identified enemy fighters with automatic weapons gathered together on the street. Sadly, it happens in war, but if you pay attention to the transmissions, it is also clear the troops did everything they could to identify weapons before they were authorized to shoot. Is Wiki Leaks condemning them because one soldier was heard to comment, "Nice"? Isn't that what those on U-Boats used to say when they had struck and sunk an enemy ship?

Maybe this outfit should try and dig up old transmissions from World War II, when Americans were storming the beaches at Normandy or crossing the Rhine or bombing Berlin. What a scandal that would make.

13 comments:

  1. Firstly, it's well known that openly carrying firearms in Iraq is not an unusual sight. It's perfectly legal, too, from what I understand. So the fact that these men were carrying weapons was not even close to being enough to justify attacking them in such a manner.

    Secondly, setting all of that aside and ignoring our own interpretations of the video, the more outrageous controversy is the cover-up and blatant lies that followed what took place. That's a major part of it that you're ignoring.

    You also seem perfectly content to be spoon-fed whatever interpretation the spinsters at Fox News come up with, yet seem insulted that the WikiLeaks people have their own interpretation.

    Guess what: the military can and does make mistakes! Shocking, I know, that they're not infallible as you seem to believe. The most outrageous part is the cover-up afterwards.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous,

    I believe the weapons identified were AK 47 and grenade launcher if I'm not mistaken.

    You call it a cover up. If I were investigating, based on what I saw, I would clear them too.

    Glad you admitted that mistakes are made in war. Clearly, some innocent people were victims, but I think the attack was justified. You would prefer to think the worst of our military. I choose to support them (unless you're talking about a My Lai or something like that. I didn't support those soldiers when they happened.)

    ReplyDelete
  3. "Kind-hearted people might of course thing there was some ingenious way to disarm or defeat an enemy without too much bloodshed, and might imagine this is the true goal of the art of war. Pleasant as that sounds, it is a fallacy that must be exposed: war is such a dangerous business that the mistakes which come from kindness are the very worst."
    Carl Von Clausewitz, On War, nineteenth century.

    ReplyDelete
  4. There are no penalties for holding in war.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Again, you're ignoring the fact that the video shows that those in charge BLATANTLY LIED about the incident. (And then conveniently "lost" the video.) That's called a cover-up, not an investigation.

    And there's a difference between support and blind support.

    ReplyDelete
  6. What's the lie? That the troops were in a legitimate combat operation against insurgents? Was that a lie? That no innocents were killed or injured deliberately-was that a lie? Key word "deliberately".

    What do YOU think the military findings should have been? That the troops committed deliberate murder against innocent unarmed civilans? Is that what you believe? Or is it what you want to believe. Are you ignoring the transmissions about identifying weapons-AK 47s and grenade launchers? Are you ignoring the repeated requests for authoriztion to engage? What is it you want-the prosecution of these soldiers?

    ReplyDelete
  7. So they lied. Obama lied about being a law professor (His office and class was bought for him.), he lied about his associations with Ayers, Wright and Farahkan, and he lied when he said he was a friend to Israel.

    So some Iraqis died. That happens in war. Get over it. It will happen again.

    And post your name or at least a pseudonym. Not to do so reveals you to be a coward.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Findalis,

    I usually note that the most obnoxious disagreers don't use their name.

    Smart move.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous,
    I do not think Gary is saying
    what you are accusing him of
    saying. It is quite clear
    from watching and listening
    to this that these soldiers
    in question
    asked repeatedly for
    authorization to engage
    after the weapons had
    been identified.

    As to Fox News, if you want
    to talk spin lets talk about
    PMSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS and we
    spin this all day on both sides.
    If Fox News is so horrible why
    are their vieweing numbers
    thrashing all others? I would
    rather listen to Fox than the
    other options any day. No, I
    do not agree with all that Fox
    News tells us.

    Where is Gary saying the military
    is infallible? He is saying
    in his opinion, he agrees with
    Fox on this. So do I. Tell us
    a war that was fought without
    civilian casualties? I did read
    Gary saying there were innocent
    victims, and that is sadly the
    case of what happens in war.
    These soldiers were justified
    in their actions, especially
    when so many in Iraq carry
    weapons and can be an enemy
    or not. What would have them
    do, wait until these guys are
    up close and personal in range
    and conduct a
    personal interview of
    each person that may be
    an enemy/terrorist?

    I refuse to condemn these
    guys and our military which
    is so popular these days.
    Cover up? Lets talk about
    the cover up and lies
    coming out of D.C. and
    Obama? The sad thing is
    he probably would
    be right in lock
    step with you, Anonymous.
    Ready to line these
    soldiers up against the
    wall or put the hangmans
    noose around their necks.

    Gary, please CP to PC if
    you have time.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Patriot,

    Thanks for your support. It's sad that there are people out there who would take this tape and condemn our troops for the decision they made. This was no My Lai.

    ReplyDelete
  11. No, it was not. I am sickened
    by those who villify our
    military so callously and
    without merit. It is pretty
    clear what went down in this
    fight. Maybe they 'covered
    this up' becuase of the
    reaction to it that some
    will have like Anonymous.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Thanks Donald. I urge readers to check out the attachment. It goes into much more detail of the incident as well as the motivations of Wiki Leaks.

    ReplyDelete