More killing of wounded Iraqis by US forces

I agree that the last few seconds of the footage were disturbing. It was pretty clear to me the third combatant was wounded to a point that he was not a threat to anyone. That seemed like an unnecessary act.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

You have no way of knowing what the status of those three men was. You don't know what they were carrying. Neither did the men in the Apache - neither did their COs. How could they tell what was in the wrapped bundle from a kilometre away? As such, they could not identify who they were firing upon, or their status. And as such, firing on them was an utterly unconsciencable act.

Besides that rather obvious fact, there is the context to consider. The Apache is an armoured anti-tank gunship with 30mm cannon, sidewinders and hellfire/TOW missiles and unguided rocket pods. During the gulf war in '91, whole divisions of Iraqi soldiers surrendered to them and were marched back to US ground troops escorted by the gunships.

So why is it that three farmers in a field with no weapons were too threatening to at least challange, if not capture? Are you saying that Iraqi farmers are suchimpressive fighting supermen that they can sprint across fifty yards of ploughed earth, get to a hypothetical RPG, unwrap it, aim it at an apache and kill the gunship - all before the apache gunner can hit him with the 30mm cannon and it's helmet-tracking aiming system where you look at your target and fire to hit it?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

15, if you watch carefully when the first man is killed, (apart from noting that he's unarmed), you'll note that the third man crumples up, catches his side and falls to the ground. Which strongly suggests that he's been hit by shrapnel from the 30mmHE shells that have just gone off less than eight yards from him. So he was down and wounded even before he hid behind the truck.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Sparks, I have to say that you surprise me at times. You're so good at using reason, logic, and plain ole common sense on some threads, but on others you seem to deny what's in plain sight. You focus on one part of the video and try to characterize it as farmers in a field, while at the same time completely disregarding the beginning of the video. We see two men meet up on a deserted road, discuss something, one of them looks around much like a drug dealer on a street corner before pulling the crack out of his pocket, and then proceeds to take something that could easily be a Stinger wrapped in a blanket out of the vehicle and furtively runs out into the field and ditches it and then runs back.

Now if these are farmers minding their own business, why is he acting like that? Why is he looking over his shoulder? Do you know anything about the context of this situation besides what you have seen and heard in the video?

It's safe to say that you watched this clip with a bias.

 

Thing is, it couldn't be. A stinger weighs 15 kg, it's not something you jog across a field holding in one hand without any difficulty. It's also bigger than whatever he's got:

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

See? It's a lot bulkier.

The other common SAM over there is the classic RPG-7 - but that's even heavier at 25kg. It's also as bulky.

When does he do that? He turns around and looks towards the apache at one point, to be sure, but he's not acting furtively. Hell, if I had to pick a word, I'd pick giddy - the guy's acting like some 15-year-old kid bouncing about the place. (And since it's a FLIR camera, we can't tell how old he is reliably.)

And 15, I didn't know what was on the clip the first time I watched it - I got an email, a URL and a "take a look at this" message.

 

Okay, some captures from the full video to show what I mean. Given that they're captured from an .avi file and that was of an infrared camera, you'll have to go and watch the full thing to see what I mean for much of this because you see more in moving video than on stills.

But anyway, screenshot 1:

This is the two lads talking by the pickup. The one on the right has the unknown object in his right hand. You'll note it's not that heavy, and not that long.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

This is the first lad running across the field with the unknown object. If you look at the back of it or the front, you'll see that there's, well, dangly bits. Watching the video, you'll see that it's cloth (as it moves as he moves and sways about). So whatever that thing is, it's wrapped up and there's no way to tell what it is from a metre away - let alone a kilometer away from a helicopter gunship.
So noone other than those two men knew what was in it.
Plus you'll note it's so light he can carry it easily in one hand while running - can anyone here do that with a 15kg or 25kg weight?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

And this is after he's laid whatever it was on the ground and is running back to the pickup.
This is the best look at the object that the apache crew gets.
Also note that it's in plain sight, not hidden. That's a flat field, not a ditch.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

This is when the two men are talking at the tractor initially. Note please that the tractor is a simple ride-on type without a cab and it's not pulling a trailer, it's pulling a plowshare (see the texture of the earth behind it as opposed to in front of it?). There's nowhere to hide any kind of weapon or load anything bigger than a lunchbox.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

This is the first man being killed (he's in the middle of the explosion from the 30mmHE shells, you can't actually see him).
What I'm pointing out here is something I missed till now - the other man (highlighted here) staggers a bit after the initial explosion (there are several, one from each of the 30mmHE rounds) and slumps to the groun, grabbing at his side with one arm and putting out his other to stop himself falling. (It's far clearer in the video).
So he's already wounded by shrapnel. Before the truck he later hides behind is shot up.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

And to show how badly the third man must have been wounded, this is what happened to the truck he was hiding behind.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

And here's the now severely wounded man, just before he's shot the second time. As you can see, he's down. Out of the fight, if not mortally wounded. Decidedly not a threat, if in fact he ever was.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

whilst i still don't agree with what happened this topic also got posted in an Airsoft forum so i linked to this post and someone pointed out in response to the comments about the size of the launchers

can anyone confirm?
Personally i'm still not sure they would of been right taking the kill based on such an assumption like that and they had better options but what do i know.

 

Seems the first link I checked for the weight was incorrect, it's not 25kg but 10kg.

However, given that the apache was a kilometre away and the max range of the RPG-7 against a moving target is ~300m, the Apache was never in danger even if that's an RPG-7 he's carrying. Which, I'll point out again, is a very long way from certain.

Has anyone seen an after-action report yet?

 

its was farmers, as EL sparks said earlier check the tracks infront and to the left of the tractor and compare it to behind and to the rigth.

To me it looks and sounds like some soldier shooting people for the "fun" of it, imo they can shoot redneck in there own country.

Lets say these soldiers are found guilty, what will happen to them, same as all the other cases, nothing?.

 

In the farming I've been involved in, we never plowed at night. I would plow at night if I had a reason to, though. So maybe there is an explanation for night plowing, possibly involving the hardships of living under occupation. Especially in the wake of war, I've had friends who lived very frantic lives, some times for years, just trying to feed and protect their families.

I have very often set out stakes along a field for the purpose of measurement or payment. I might tie stakes in small bundles, but would not also wrap them in tarps. If I was going to pray soon, I might put my rug where there will still be sod when I'm praying. This could soon become the accepted popular interpretation if our young martyr became a local icon in the struggle against American occupation.

I'm often taken aback that many Americans don't understand these emotions, the results, and how to deal. Rewind barely more than the span of 2 lifetimes, and the United States was emerging from the horror and devastation wreaked by intense fear, lust for revenge, hate, murder, etc. that had 360,000 KIA and 630,000 casualties in 3 years in our own farm fields and streeets, and that had left nearly the entire nation effectively destitute.

And then what: We got over it! (well, most uf us)

In spite of this, many Americans a) can't identify with those directly involved. b) don't understand that the US government can easily end most mideast tension and c) don't think a solution is possible, and d) won't lift a finger to make something better happen.

 

If you listen to the recorded radio and interphone dialogue, as well as watching the beginning of the clip (which we didn't see until you ferreted out the longer version) you can see the IFF process in action.

The Apache was sortied to the area after reports of insurgent activity were founded. During patrol, they came across some guys stopped on the side of the road talking. Innocent enough. But then one of the guys jogs across the field with what was probably an RPG-7 (they're fairly lightweight, about 1.5 kg heavier than a Vietnam-era American 66mm LAW, half of which is the RPG itself). At this point, (and note the brief dialogue) the targets are redesignated - from unknown to hostile - using a combination of deductive reasoning and real-time observation. If this seems simplistic and cursory to you I assure you it is standard procedure for every modern, western military on earth. Warfare of any sort does not afford one the chronological freedom to discern the disposition of contacts at leisure.

You are not only interpreting what you see in the context in which you want to see it, but you are also ascribing your own moral/ethical/legal/tactical ethos to it. Neither of which are accurate.

Law enforcement agencies around the world grovel before your exemplary forensic competency.

 

Fine, Stokes, if this were a combat situation, those are reasonable tactics. But in reality, you're full of shit.

If, on the other hand you are trying to pacify a country my friend, then you have another think coming, like you fucking well better have someone get a Hummer or Kiowa near enough to fucking challenge them with a goddam loudspeaker, concussion grenades, and searchlight first. If Flying Yellowhair is so afraid of the Indians that he's gotta wipe them out with an Apache, and can't take the risk of losing a Kiowa, he and his commanders are failing to understand the irony of the situation, which means today just like it did in Vietnam, that You Lose, G.I.

Truth is, these pussies are afraid to hover off autopilot, and they are afraid of stupidly flying into a cold, dead high-tension wire in the dark. They don't know the neighborhood and they are scared.

You go home now or we kill more. Take away oil in Saudi. No honey, no money. Ditty Mau. Understand?

 

This took place on the day after the bloodiest day for US troops in Iraq since Bush originally declared the war over, and in the same area, and following a month (Nov.), where the US had lost several helos to hostile fire. According to the dialogue, the Apache had been tracking the truck before it stopped. The pilot radios the guy runs into the field carrying a weapon and drops it, and you can here his voice raise as he reports it (not the casual conversation you might expect if this was just some sport, i.e. shooting farmers for fun). He radios to control; you hear the question 'are you certain it's a weapon', the reply 'positive', and then the order to 'smoke them'. At that point, they engage. And those pilots are able to see what is going on much better than the limited feedback we get from the video.

It's irrelevant if the helo was in immediate danger. It only matters that the pilots were certain that these guys had a weapon(s), and could present a danger to other US forces if not taken out. The pilots obviously weren't going to come closer to get 100% confirmation - that could indeed have put them in range of an RPG. The whole point of weapons platforms like the Apache is its standoff capabilities.

According to those commenting in the ABC article, there were no US ground forces in the immediate area to call in to engage the three men. The pilots had every right to engage at that point.

Hype, I agree, except for the fact that if you bring that Hummer close enough to challenge them with a loudspeaker, you're liable to get that RPG launched up your ass. The pilots saw suspicious acting characters carrying what they felt certain was a weapon. They engaged. We can agree on the larger implications on how not to pacify a country, but on the narrower issue that Sparks introduced with this thread - murder - this wasn't it.

 

"if you bring that Hummer close enough to challenge them with a loudspeaker, you're liable to get that RPG launched up your ass"

If you persist in making messy and counterproductive kills, you will have every kind of portable and improvized weapon waiting to shred you behind that tree ahead, and around the next corner, until it seems like every tree and every corner. The USA has not sustained such a casualty figure or rate as we are now since 1972. Guess where it was last time. US intervention in Iraq will end exactly in the same way as it did in Vietman. The USA can decide how long, bloody, and counterproductive the conflict will be, but the outcome is already a foregone conclusion among Arabs and Muslims.

 

I suggest you do so. The IFF consists of :
"He's got a weapon"
"You sure?"
"Uh-huh"
"You're positive it's a weapon?"
"Yup"
"Okay, smoke 'em".

At no point did they ever actually know what it was because it's wrapped up.
Had they been two metres from it, they couldn't have told what it was. And they were a thousand metres off.
So there was no IFF procedure and they didn't know who they were firing at or what their status was.

Prove it.

And about this "chronological leisure", this is an Apache gunship. Designed to take on tanks. Equipped with Hellfire/TOW missiles, sidewinders, 70mm FFAR unguided rocket pods and 30mm cannon. Capable of flying faster than any of the vehicles in the field and equipped with an infrared camera.

So the three men in the field couldn't run, couldn't fight back and weren't a threat.
The Apache crew could have flown up, challanged them, and killed them had they tried to resist before they could get two feet in any direction. That's just the way it is, Stokes, even you can't deny it. That's the point of having the bigger gun.

But instead, they stood off and killed three people with no justification of any kind and without knowing who they were shooting.

And yet I'm looking at the same data the Apache crew had. Which means that you're arguing that they didn't care about the lives they just destroyed. Which makes them sociopaths by our standards.

The RPG-7 has a serious drawback. If you drop one and run a hundred yards away, you have to run a hundred yards back, pick it up and point it at the helicopter before you can fire it - and when that helicopter has a 30mm cannon slaved to a helmet-mounted aiming system, that's a difficult task...

So why didn't the apaches taking prisoners in '91 just kill the hundreds of men that surrendered to them? After all, those were trained, uniformed soldiers. These weren't. Are Iraqi farmers that dangerous?

So there's a humvee charging across a field at you and an apache gunship hovering over your head with a 30mm cannon aimed at your head. Are you going to run a hundred yards, unwrap an RPG-7 launcher, run back a hundred yards, open a box, take out a grenade and load it, then turn and aim at the humvee?
Yeah, right...

Their feeling certain is sufficent?
What is this, South Park? "He's coming right for us!"
Pah.

This was a case of "well-trained VC" if I ever saw one.

See the overlaid display on the video Hype? Up in the top left-hand corner under the word "TADS"? Where it says 10:27?
The tape was taken during the morning.