Why are so many people stupid enough to believe the Wikileaks documents put US troops in physical danger?
Can't anyone see that this is pure fabrication, created just to distract from the hundreds of potential war crimes detailed in these documents?
The last military operation detailed in the Wikileaks documents ended 7 months ago. This makes them essentially useless to anyone who may want to target US troops in Afghanistan.
And you don't think the thousands of civilians that have been killed by American troops could even be part of the reason for this strained, tenuous relationship? Compared to that, I'm sure the names of a few informants will have rather minimal impact on Afghan opinion of America.
Yes, I think American troops sometimes do kill civilians purposely. Isn't it a little too soon to forget the Iraq war video released by Wikileaks? To me, those troops are terrorists. I don't see how you could take any other view. And I can think of other examples.
@ acidBURN: When one of the journalists was on the ground, the person firing kept saying "Go on, pick up a weapon." He WANTED to shoot the man like an animal. He didn't care whether he was guilty or innocent. That is the reality.
- Anonymous1 decade agoFavorite Answer
So, you think the Wikileaks video is "proof" that Soldiers purposely kill civilians? I guess that's what happens when you depend on propaganda for "news" rather than facts.
The pilots thought the folks on ground were insurgents. You honestly believe that pilots were intentionally aiming for innocents? You have to understand that the edited video leaked from Wikileaks does not tell the whole story.
In the UNEDITED video, starting at the 3:50 mark, one member of this group starts preparing what clearly looks like an RPG launcher, as well as some individuals with AK-47s. The launcher then reappears at the 4:06 mark as the man wielding it sets up a shot for down the street. In 2007 Baghdad, this would be a clear threat to US and Iraqi Army ground forces; in fact, it’s difficult to imagine any other purpose for an RPG launcher at that time and place. That’s exactly the kind of threat that US airborne forces were tasked to detect and destroy, which is why the gunships targeted and shot all of the members of the group.
Another accusation is that US forces fired on and killed rescue workers attempting to carry one of the journalists out of the area. However, the video clearly shows that the vehicle in question bore no markings of a rescue vehicle at all, and the men who ran out of the van to grab the wounded man wore no uniforms identifying themselves as such. Under any rules of engagement, and especially in a terrorist hot zone like Baghdad in 2007, that vehicle would properly be seen as support for the terrorists that had just been engaged and a legitimate target for US forces. While they didn’t grab weapons before getting shot, the truth is that the gunships didn’t give them the chance to try, either — which is exactly what they’re trained to do. They don’t need to wait until someone gets hold of the RPG launcher and fires it at the gunship or at the reinforcements that had already begun to approach the scene. The gunships acted to protect the approaching patrol, which is again the very reason we had them in the air over Baghdad.
War correspondents take huge risks to bring news of a war to readers far away. What this shows is just how risky it is to embed with terrorists, especially when their enemy controls the air. War is not the same thing as law enforcement; the US forces had no responsibility for identifying each member of the group and determining their mens rea. Legitimate rescue operations would have included markings on the vehicle and on uniforms to let hostile forces know to hold fire, and in the absence of that, the hostile forces have every reason to consider the second support group as a legitimate target as well. It’s heartbreaking for the families of these journalists, but this isn’t “collateral murder” — it’s war.
If you want to be truly informed about our Soldier's activities in the Middle East, I suggest not relying solely on propaganda machines like Wikileaks because they do NOT tell you the entire story, nor put things into context for a fuller understanding of what actually occured. They are out to make a buck just off of unsuspecting people, just like any other corporate media.
EDIT: Soldiers are anxious to take out the bad guys...very true. You assume these Soldiers knew those guys were jounalists. The FACT and REALITY is that combat engagements were taking place in that area that day. This is what those Soldiers were faced with. Why journalists chose to embed with terrorists in a hostile area, and without some sort of identifying marker so that they wouldn't be targeted, only they know.
Sure seems like you don't like the Troops. Your choice.
- 1 decade ago
Why are you stupid enough to believe that those documents, even though they adress past events, won't have an effect on future relations between US Military and the Afghans? It has been difficult enough to get them to trust and then help us. Now that some of the Afghan informants have been publicly identified via those documents, what makes you think they would be willing to help us know since we couldn't protect their identity like we promised we would?
This further strains an already tenuous relationship we have with them.
EDIT: So, you think that American troops kill those civilians purposely? It isn't their fault that the bad guys hide amongst civilians. The ROE are such that troops make significant efforts to limit or avoid civilian casualties. But when the bad guys hiding amongst civilians are firing toward troops, you expect the troops to just stand there and take it? You have no idea what it is like over there.
Way to sympathize with terrorists. I guess that makes you feel better about yourself.
EDIT #2: Have you even bothered to look at the UNEDITED video? And do you even know what the situation was loke for the pilots in that video? My guess is you don't, and that you are reaching out for any evidence to support your hatred of the US Military.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
Okay 5 star General. (rolling eyes) Go make me a breakfast sandwich.
B. Hussein Obama probably released these sensitive documents himself. The point is that they're "Classified!"
- Miss KittyLv 61 decade ago
It put Afghanistan informers in danger. Does your question mean you don't care about them?Source(s): You don't have your burka on, that is a sin.