If US troops had been standing right there on the ground at the time, able to approach and disarm the guy, then it would have been proper to take him prisoner and give him immediate medical aid, if he'd have been willing to surrender. If he had continued to resist then it would have been proper to try again to kill or disable him.

But there were no US troops on the ground there at the time to do any of that. That's why the point is moot. The helicopter crew's mission was to clear a safe path for the follow-on ground forces. Leaving hostile combatants alive so that they could later attack the follow-on forces would have been against their orders, and it would have gone against simple common sense.

Even approaching a supposedly docile (or wounded) enemy combatant on the battlefield is a very, very risky business. Many times they will wait until the opposing soldiers draw near and then detonate a grenade to try to take out a few more of their opponents, along with themselves. In fact, just last week four US soldiers stopped to help a civilian taxi driver who appeared to have been injured in some way on the highway to Baghdad. When they approached him to ask him if he needed help he detonated a bomb he had in his vehicle and killed them all, including himself. In Vietnam the NVA and the VC used to love to place armed grenades under the bodies of their dead (and our own dead as well) so that when you tried to check or move them you got blown to bits.

No, I don't have any problem with it. I feel reasonably sure that if any of those guys on the ground had survived they'd probably still be fighting us today, more likely than not.

War is harsh. Nobody has ever claimed otherwise. It's the breakdown of all the normal rules of civility. Survival and winning take precedence over just about anything else, including compassion. That's just the way it is. Everywhere. That's life. It's just a fundamental part of our basic human nature.

It wouldn´t be all that difficult to send over a med-evac chopper, and treat the guy, if they wanted. They could have even interrogated the guy, maybe find out important stuff. And besides, if this incident took place before the opening of full hostilities, then it would be safe to assume that Apache chopper wasn´t deep inside enemy territory, right? And thus close to support units.
The thing is, there are a bunch of unwritten rules of engagement and rules of warfare, that the US often accuses everybody else of breaking. But when it´s them on the accused chair, they dismiss it as "casualties of war".
Yes, war is brutal. But actions like these make it even worst, and dificult to break the cicle of violence. It proves the US didn´t want to win "hearts and minds" at all. It´s incidents like these that have pushed the iraqis over the edge and caused them to rebel.
Do you think the iraqis who have seen this footage (and others like this) will think twice the next time they are faced with an injured US soldier? I doubt it.
They will remember this video, and put a bullit between the eyes of the next wounded man they lay their eyes on. It´s barbaric acts like these that cause more barbaric acts, like burning the bodies of the fallen and hang them from a bridge. And can we blame them? If the "leader nation of the free world" does things like these, what´s there to stop other less civilized nations from following suit?
Had the iraqis who took Ryan into custody had seen this footage, she would be probably dead. I say probably, because there´s a good chance they wouldn´t, even after seeing such a thing, and even when the man in front of them is part of an invading force. And that kind of throws down the theory that they are cold blooded animals, doesn´t it? Infact, after watching such an immensitude of situations, i´m prepared to affirm that the iraqis have been slightly more "humane" with their enemies than the US. Just taking a look at that photo of the dead iraqis bearing a white flag, tells quite a tale, doesn´t it?

I think you were "robbed" of your romantic ideals, by your first hand warfare experience. And if i saw war first hand, i would probably loose my own aswell.
Maybe that´s why i still have this idea that just because war is brutal, it doesn´t mean we can´t be a little "chivalric" and correct about it aswell. I guess i still have that notion that being at war doesn´t excuse everything, and that some lines should not and cannot be crossed. Killing POWs and the wounded is one of those lines. Just like killing civilians.Even in the hellish of battlefields you can still find compassion.You just need to know where to look and what to look for.
We are not animals.But sometimes we are capable of behaviour suited for the foulest of beasts.

The US should be the first to make good examples for others to follow, if it expects to be treated as the "beacon of human rights" that it thinks it is.
But if even the world´s self apointed flag bearer acts like a barbarian, to whom will the other nations look up to? Is this the role model they wish to pass along to all the other less "enlightened" nations?

__________________
"Quincitilius Varus, give me back my legions!"
Emperor Augustus of Rome.

What I'm really wondering is why they recorded that (may be because of some rules, I'm hoping Ranger will tell us) and why they let it out into the public?

__________________

Bleah! Just watched those pictures. That was no 5.56 hit. More likely a .50, the guy has no head left. Oh, btw, hello, Swamp-Thing, I see you're still up to no good.

Up to no good?? Little ol´me? Naaaah...
Hey, glad you found us! Are you here to stay, or is this just a social visit?


PS:
The .50 cal wouldn´t make such small holes in the windshields. Check photo one.

__________________
"Quincitilius Varus, give me back my legions!"
Emperor Augustus of Rome.

That video was taken during the initial invasion. During the first few days, as I recall. That helicopter was very likely hundreds of kilometers out in front of the advancing ground forces. And no unarmed dustoff (medivac) pilot is going to fly into the middle of an active high-intensity battlefield just to help some wounded Iraqi soldiers, I don't think. Especially if they're just as likely to shoot him as thank him once he got there. What you were watching was one little action in a very large, very high-intensity war, it was not some humanitarian aid or relief effort.

If it's "unwritten" then it really does not exist at all, for all practical, legal, moral or ethical purposes. The "written" stuff we do follow to the letter, situation permitting. I think we have a better record of compliance on that subject than any other military force in the world.

First you have to actually take the terrain itself, and only then can you begin to worry about winning hearts and minds. Those pilots were trying to clear ground that had not even been taken by US forces yet. It still belonged to Saddam Hussein and his army. Maybe they should have sent an ambulance or a medivac to help those guys?

Given what they did to those four contractors (civilians) that they ambushed, killed, mutilated, and hung from a bridge, I don't think some Iraqi's would hesitate one second to kill any injured American soldier they could, any way they could. When they set off roadside bombs and kill their own people and ours, military and civilian alike, I don't doubt for a single second that they'd be willing to commit any kind of atrocity at all -- they seem to be quite proud of such behavior, in fact.

BTW: Ryan = Pfc. Jessica Lynch? Just wondering. The reason she lived is because some civilian doctors and nurses at the Iraqi hospital where she was brought risked their lives to protect her. Read the news accounts. Watch her own media interview. They actually talked to the Iraqi doctors and nurses that kept her safe from the Iraqi military guys. You should keep up with the news.

As much as I dislike Bush, he is certainly not on the ground over there himself, giving orders, and you can't claim that he has ever authorized any illegal actions on the part of his troops. What an individual soldier does on the battlefield is his own personal responsibility - legally, ethically and morally.

Looking at this all from another angle, please at least consider this. The Iraqi's have proven time and again that they respect power and strength far more than kind words. If you act nice they believe you are weak. If you kick their asses good they respect you for it.

I was just reading a very recent analysis of the Falluja/Najaf situation. The Mayor of Falluja himself told the American military commanders there that one of the reasons that they are having so much trouble there right now is because the US recently pulled the 82nd Airborne Division out of Falluja and replaced them with the Marines. The new Marine commander's plan for Falluja was based on a set of military doctrines called the "Small Wars" doctrine, that was developed during our deployments to South America some years ago. The "Small Wars" doctrine is basically a "Hearts and Minds" type of doctrine. It's definitely a humanitarian approach to a military situation. The Mayor of Falluja said this was " A big mistake trying to be nice around these insurgents". He said, and I quote: "The militants were scared to death of the 82nd's paratroopers; that's why they laid low and caused little trouble while they were still here. They have seen the Marines take a much softer approach, which they do not respect, and this is why we have all these problems now."

Maybe he's right. Maybe all they really respect over there is sheer force or outright brutality. Decades under Saddam may have made that tendency worse, but it seems to be a fairly standard attitude all across the Arab world. They respect strength, and they respect anyone having the "will" to use their strength. They seem to have no respect at all for what they see as weakness.

I understand your points on being humane in the conduct of hostilities. I think we are. Far more than any other nation I've ever seen on the battlefield, anyway.

Look at your own country for instance -- there are certainly plenty of examples that I could point to of truly terrible, unbelievable atrocities that you guys committed down in South America and elsewhere over the years, aren't there? You destroyed whole cultures and obliterated entire indigenous races without so much as a thought, in your day. How do you explain or justify that? I'm not trying to insult you; I'm just pointing out that every country has done things that were not necessarily considered to be very nice (morally or ethically) by many other countries, at some point in time or another.

I think we do as well as we possibly can, given the situations we find ourselves in, and the types of people that we have to deal with. If you guys think you can do better, then by all means, go over there and try. I don't think we (the US) should be over there at all. I really don't. Not in Iraq, anyway. Why don't you guys go over there, if you really care about the poor Iraqi people as much as you claim? Then you could say that you really give a shit, and you might actually be believed.

My own hunch is that each and every war is totally unique; each is totally different. Not only does technology evolve over time, but tactics do as well. A little over a century ago armies lined up in neat ranks, marched toward each other and then slashed or blasted away at each other until one side finally lost their nerve, broke ranks and retreated. The English were totally horrified and disgusted when early American patriots (or revolutionary terrorists, depending on which side you were on) began to hide behind trees and rocks and fences and shoot at them. It was considered "ungentlemanly" in the extreme. Revolutionary American troops were looked upon as being no better than the savage, heathen Indians were. Barbaric! But they were not idiots, and their style of fighting was an inevitable tactical evolution in warfare that definitely proved it's worth over time, and now nobody fights on an open field in tidy little ranks any more, not even the English themselves.

Maybe the Iraqi's (and also to some extent the Afghans) are forcing us to evolve and to change our tactics, just as we forced the English (and everybody that came after them) to evolve, and to change theirs? Maybe it's simply inevitable. The warfare of the future is bound to be much different than the warfare of the present, just as the warfare of the present is vastly different from the warfare of the past. Maybe we all have to learn to just accept this evolution as a universal inevitability if we're going to continue to allow ourselves to indulge in war at all.

I have to say, Swamp-Thing, you do sound a little naive. Alright, we all know you disagreed with this war, but aren't you overdoing it a bit? I can understand if you argue over strategic choices, such as the massive bombings of cities and subsequent civilian casualties that took place in Vietnam, but you'll have to admit that the US Army did try to minimize civilian casualties in Iraq. In fact, I think its a first in their military history...On the other hand, might have been a bit optimistic to pose as liberators after flattening Baghdad. (Or maybe not, France was quite thoroughly bombed during the Liberation in 1944, for which we french are grateful, not kidding Ranger my man, hold your horses ).

My point was, Swamp-Thing, what do you think war is, a tea party? An army is not a police force, they don't come shouting at you to drop your weapons. Anyway, the US Army likely don't speak arabic too well...

BTW, the flyboys on the video do sound a little...overexcited, for want of a better term. I read somewhere that the Us Airforce gave Dexedrin to its pilots...Do you think its true, Ranger, and could it not be somewhat problematic?

afaik the helicoptervideo was taped in 12/01 2003, at least ABC news claimed that, but what do they know. http://abcnews.go.com/sections/WNT/U..._040109-1.html

with about $2000/h that the apache costs to fly it is reasonable to assume, that the men were under observation for a reason and that they had not just been locked on and fired upon deliberately.
as for rules of engagement, any combatant, who is not wearing a uniform, can be treated as a spy and executed stante pedem, even if he is wounded or surrenders.
and sending in a medevac helicopter is risky, remember, about one month after this video was made, these 'freedom fighters' shot down such a helicopter with a big red cross on it, killing 9, among them that one daredevil, who had already survived the 'black hawk down' thing in africa and defeated cancer.

has anybody bothered reading the comments on that ogrish.com site?
http://www.ogrish.com/index2.php?inc...ment=&from=480
they nearly make me more sick than the pictures.

__________________

Didn't look at the comments before, so had to go back and check them out. And I have to agree with bob_m. Such ignorance and stupidity of human beings is a sad thing.

__________________