US troops kill civilians ....

Apparently in a knee-jerk reaction to the suicide bombing attacks ...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/2904911.stm

Interesting piece here:

Quote:

---

n Monday's shooting incident, soldiers opened fire at a vehicle that had reportedly ignored warnings to stop, killing seven women and children and wounding two. The four other occupants of the vehicle were unhurt, according to the Pentagon.

A Western journalist "embedded" with the US Army division involved in the incident gives a different version of events.

William Branigin of the Washington Post says the vehicle contained 15 people, of whom 10 were killed and two seriously injured.

He also reports that soldiers at the checkpoint failed to fire warning shots in time.

"You just [expletive] killed a family because you didn't fire a warning shot soon enough!" the paper quotes Captain Ronny Johnson as telling his platoon leader.

The platoon leader says he did fire warning shots, according to the paper.

---

In another unrelated incident, I just read this in the story on sacking Peter Arnett: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2903503.stm

Quote:

---

His reporting of an allied bombing of a baby milk factory there in 1991 drew criticism from the US military, which said it was a biological weapons plant.

---

Of course, Iraq must be having huge caches of biological weapons :rolleyes:

.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by honeybee
...failed to fire warning shots in time.
...fire a warning shot soon enough
...he did fire warning shots

---

Not only did they fire warning shots, but the first thing they did was try to wave the vehicles driver to stop. Which he didn't.

Next they verbally shouted for him to stop. Which he didn't.

Then they fired warning shots into the air, while shouting for him to stop, Which he didn't.

[EDIT: I just heard that there were even signs in "arabic" {hopefully Iraq's written language} before the checkpoint warning drivers to pull over/EDIT]

So they stopped him. AND, they all have been ordered to shoot on sight everyone who refuses to stop at the checkpoint, due to the suicide attacks.

At least thats what I heard on an AP Radio News update yesterday.

As to wether they were fired "Soon Enough", how can we determine "Soon Enough"?

Also, why were warning shots necessary to begin with? Why didn't the driver pull over? He didn't notice the checkpoint, manned with soldiers, weapons, didn't notice the war?

Nobody knows what led the driver to ignore the checkpoint, but its a sad thing to have those people die due to his misjudgement.

-Lou

hmm if i had to guess who would post something like this... you betcha it was you... get a life already... all you have done for the past 6 months is post only and any negative material about the US.. and anything positive posted you barf all over with your speculation.... get your shlong out of Saddam :rolleyes:

BTW I woulda shot up that van too after knowing that 2 of my fellow soldiers were killed by a car bomb

Quote:

---

Originally posted by honeybee

Interesting piece here:



In another unrelated incident, I just read this in the story on sacking Peter Arnett: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2903503.stm

---

hmm these are from that article

Quote:

---

"I report the truth of what is happening here in Baghdad and will not apologise for it."

---

Quote:

---

"I want to apologise to the American people for clearly making a misjudgement," he said.

---

Irrespective of who's right and who's wrong - the US is still killian civilians.
And its going to get harder and harder as the days go by to convince the Iraqi people that the US are there to help.

All in all a triple A orginizational ****up

Quote:

---

Originally posted by plenderj
Irrespective of who's right and who's wrong - the US is still killian civilians.
And its going to get harder and harder as the days go by to convince the Iraqi people that the US are there to help.

All in all a triple A orginizational ****up

---

so you would not have done the same thing? you would have let the van drive past without stopping?

Shortly after the coup d'etat in Cameroon we were stopped at a big queue for a checkpoint when a mercedes the other side of the checkpoint did a U-turn and made to speed off.
The vehicle was ripped apart by heavy calibre machine gun and the driver - I believe it was Janek Noah's father - was killed instantly.
The high profile of the victim meant that there was a full enquiry and they concluded that he had suffered a panic attack due to the extreme stress of the situation (people not being overly used to close proximity to large weapons) and that he was not responsible for his actions. The soldiers were cleared of any wrongdoing as well, as you would expect.
However the point is that the driver of the van was probably not in a clear state of mind when he ignored the signs and waving soldiers.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by kleinma
so you would not have done the same thing? you would have let the van drive past without stopping?

---

Hey I'm not debating who should have done what.
I'm just saying, the US are going in there to a people that already pretty much so hate them; they're bombing their cities; they're killing their civilians etc.

The US is going to have a mighty hard time convincing the Iraqi people they're the good guys.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by plenderj
Hey I'm not debating who should have done what.
I'm just saying, the US are going in there to a people that already pretty much so hate them; they're bombing their cities; they're killing their civilians etc.

The US is going to have a mighty hard time convincing the Iraqi people they're the good guys.

---

For the last time they are not targeting civilians they are targeting military targets. I think even the Iraqi's know this as people are still roaming around the cities and not hiding in bomb shelters when bombing is going on. Why can't you understand it?

X

Ya know that is a completely typical gung-ho pro-war attitude.
Did I say the americans are targetting civilians ?

I've never said they're targetting civilians.
I said that they're killing civilians. Not on purpose, but civilians are being killed.
And as the Iraqi people aren't entirely fond of the US anyway, all I'm saying is that I think the US is going to have a hard time convincing the Iraqi people that they're not their enemy.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by plenderj
Ya know that is a completely typical gung-ho pro-war attitude.
Did I say the americans are targetting civilians ?

I've never said they're targetting civilians.
I said that they're killing civilians. Not on purpose, but civilians are being killed.
And as the Iraqi people aren't entirely fond of the US anyway, all I'm saying is that I think the US is going to have a hard time convincing the Iraqi people that they're not their enemy.

---

Considering the small number of civilian deaths in this war I think the Iraqi people will understand that the coalition is there for only one reason and that is to get rid of Saddam. While I agree that it will take some time before the Iraqi people trust the coalition forces but I do think after all is said and done and Saddam is gone and humanitarian aide delivered to the country people will begin to see past the obvious Anti-war propaganda that they have been brainwashed with.

Take the Kuwaiti people as an example. They are extremely pro-war and pro-coalition forces, as they themselves fully understand how brutal Saddam really is and how the same forces liberated their country (and didn't hang around to colonize or take their oil fields I might add). The Iraqi people will come around. I don't blame them for not being trusting of coalition forces, I wouldn’t either if all I had to listen to was Saddam's propaganda machine churning in my ear 24-7.

X

Also my point was that the Iraqi people seem to understand that the coalition forces are not targeting civilians because they are still walking the streets while bombing is going on. My point is that despite what the bias Arab media is telling them I think they understand that Saddam is the target and not them.

X

I would have done the same thing. They knew they had to stop, and they didn't. What if it had been a suicide bomber? No one would be bitchin' about that! The fact is the soldiers didn't know who it was, civilians or a bomber, and they did what they had to do to survive.

Here is my take on the situation.

The republican guard or fedayeen saddam ordered the women and children into the van, and told them to drive to the checkpoint, they were told they had an RPG sited on the van, and if they stopped, they would blow the van up killing all of them. They drove, didn't stop, the soldiers opened fire...More Iraqi propoganda bull-**** about how coalition troops are targeting civilians. So, you tell me why would a van of women and children not stop for a checkpoint? WHy would they risk being killed? Why? because they knew they would die if they stopped, but if they didn't stop maybe the soldiers would see it was only women and children..7 of them died, 2 were injured and 4 were unharmed...we'll find out why they did it...and I bet it was because they were threatened into it.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Memnoch1207

The republican guard or fedayeen saddam ordered the women and children into the van, and told them to drive to the checkpoint, they were told they had an RPG sited on the van, and if they stopped, they would blow the van up killing all of them. They drove, didn't stop, the soldiers opened fire...More Iraqi propoganda bull-**** about how coalition troops are targeting civilians. So, you tell me why would a van of women and children not stop for a checkpoint? WHy would they risk being killed? Why? because they knew they would die if they stopped, but if they didn't stop maybe the soldiers would see it was only women and children..7 of them died, 2 were injured and 4 were unharmed...we'll find out why they did it...and I bet it was because they were threatened into it.

---

Thats what I was figuring also.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by plenderj
..........
And as the Iraqi people aren't entirely fond of the US anyway, all I'm saying is that I think the US is going to have a hard time convincing the Iraqi people that they're not their enemy.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

tell the Iraqi people the feeling is mutual.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Memnoch1207
I would have done the same thing. They knew they had to stop, and they didn't. What if it had been a suicide bomber? No one would be bitchin' about that! The fact is the soldiers didn't know who it was, civilians or a bomber, and they did what they had to do to survive.

Here is my take on the situation.

The republican guard or fedayeen saddam ordered the women and children into the van, and told them to drive to the checkpoint, they were told they had an RPG sited on the van, and if they stopped, they would blow the van up killing all of them. They drove, didn't stop, the soldiers opened fire...More Iraqi propoganda bull-**** about how coalition troops are targeting civilians. So, you tell me why would a van of women and children not stop for a checkpoint? WHy would they risk being killed? Why? because they knew they would die if they stopped, but if they didn't stop maybe the soldiers would see it was only women and children..7 of them died, 2 were injured and 4 were unharmed...we'll find out why they did it...and I bet it was because they were threatened into it.

---

I thought of the same thing. Only I think its more likely that they found a family, shot one of the kids, and told the father they would shoot the others if he didnt drive into the checkpoint.

Saddam has some great people working for him.:rolleyes:

The deal with the Van was that it should have stopped. It didn't, therefore the Soldier shot at the PASSENGER side of the van to avoid hitting the driver, however, he did not know the whole back of the van was full of women and children. So don't act as though we purposely killed innocent people just cause they wouldn't stop.

Plus it has been speculated that the driver ran the check point on purpose so as to force the soldiers hand, knowing he would shoot and therefore create some more propaganda to help the Iraqi army.

No one is disputing that the soldiers in question did their job. Although one thing I am wondering is why he didn't shoot the van's tires...

He may not have been able to, but in any case, the driver of the van was either nuts or he was being coerced in some way.

Or like earlier stated, he had a panic attack.
Anyway no-one's going to get the true story out of that lot.

The soldiers will always cover eachother's asses and it'll never be resolved.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Memnoch1207
Here is my take on the situation.

---

So because the family were shot by US soldiers, it must be the republican guard's fault.
It must be Saddam's fault.

It could never be the soldiers' fault.
Jesus christ anything could have happened.
Absolutely anything.


At the end of the day the Americans are still killing civilians, and its going to be harder and harder for the iraqi people to trust the US.
Add to that the fact that the families might want to extract revenge and you could be fuelling a whole wave of terrorist attacks.

What if that van was packed with explosives and killed 7-10 soldiers... would have this thread been started?

The driver should have stoped, he was given warning shots but kept going. Quite frankly most soldiers would precieve that as a threat.

Hey Maven I just noticed yer from TN. I live in La Vergne, about 5 miles outta Nashville :)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Maven
What if that van was packed with explosives and killed 7-10 soldiers... would have this thread been started?

The driver should have stoped, he was given warning shots but kept going. Quite frankly most soldiers would precieve that as a threat.

---

1) But it wasn't.
2) Yes he should have stopped. But the soldiers shouldn't have killed the family either.

Which part of, "He didn't know the back of the van was full of people" don't you understand? You act as if the soldiers did it on purpose.

And if your fellow soldiers had already been car bombed by a psycho islamic suicidle idiot 2 days earlier and you see a speeding van heading right for you, refusing to stop, what would you do?

I would have laid a spike trap, get my men to get away from the checkpoint, and blow the tyres to pieces.


Actually it should have been UK troops manning the checkpoints.
They have far more experience than US troops.

It's easy to say what should or could have been done isn't it.

The UK troops up the north have been dealing with terrorist attacks for decades.
They should have been manning the checkpoints - and they would have known how to handle the situation.

Its fairly obvious.
If you want a checkpoint, you make sure no-one can just go straight through it.
And you also provide cover for the soldiers manning the checkpoint.

Maybe America has taken a leaf out of Sadams book.

Maybe Americas taken a leaf out of the Koran.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by plenderj
Actually it should have been UK troops manning the checkpoints.
They have far more experience than US troops.

---

Hmm.... But the Americans have better weapons, you see :)

And what do the British get in return for their better ability? Friendly fire casualties. I heard about a particularly funny (in a rather sick way) incident where a British armoured vehicle was attacked by a US aircraft, the survivor later said the vehicle carried the British flag and could have been easily identified as one, but the American pilot decided to play cowboy...

As for speculations as to what someone would have done in the situation, I am sure the situation itself wouldn't have arisen if the US forces had not invaded Iraq :rolleyes:

There's a saying in English: Don't start something you can't finish.

.

An interesting reader comment:

Quote:

---

...but what we are getting here is a dose of propaganda war, particularly form the US media. This is evident when one view the coverage of saving a teenage coalition soldier against a family killed at a checkpoint by the coalition forces...loss of life is important. ...

---

Wonder why the US president didn't bother to come out with an apology about the checkpoint firing .....

.

Nothing to apologize for

Quote:

---

Originally posted by run_GMoney
Nothing to apologize for

---

That is the very reason Americans are so hated.
You're doing such 'good' work, that any mistakes or casualties along the way are in the name of good and need not be apologized for :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by plenderj
That is the very reason Americans are so hated.
You're doing such 'good' work, that any mistakes or casualties along the way are in the name of good and need not be apologized for.

---

Its a war. Things like this happen in war. It’s tragic but unavoidable. You make it sound like the soldiers intentionally gunned down some innocent civilians. If they did your right the government should apologize, but not for this. Everything is being done to insure that innocents don’t die in Iraq. No one ever said civilians were not going to be killed, what was said is that every measure was being taken so it doesn't happen.

We are hated for a variety of reasons by many people. I can understand some of the reasoning; it sucks living in a country that used to mean something in the world only to have it dominated by another now. It sucks not having a voice in what happens in the world. It sucks being insignificant and small. No one likes the guy on top whoever that may be.

X

You wouldn't be so hated if you didn't keep telling everyone how great your country was.
And yes it is war, but if you're trying to gain favour with a country that hates you anyway, the least you can do is apologize.

If the Iraqis shot an American family over there by accident there'd be a ****ing nuclear war.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by plenderj
You wouldn't be so hated if you didn't keep telling everyone how great your country was.
And yes it is war, but if you're trying to gain favour with a country that hates you anyway, the least you can do is apologize.

If the Iraqis shot an American family over there by accident there'd be a ****ing nuclear war.

---

No one is saying how great it is only because it is pretty clear to everyone what country has the political, economic, and military power on the planet at this time.

I don’t think my president has to apologize for every tragic event that occurs in a war. IF that were done in WWII the president would be on TV 24-7 just apologizing.

And if military forces from Iraq landed in the US and started killing civilians on purpose then yes that would make me angry. However if they landed and were in control of an area and inadvertently shot some civilians that ran a check point I would likely say how stupid the driver was when all they had to do to stay alive was hit the brakes.

X

Quote:

---

Originally posted by plenderj
If the Iraqis shot an American family over there by accident there'd be a ****ing nuclear war.

---

yeah your right.. us warmongers would launch nukes at iraq for killing an american family.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by kleinma
yeah your right.. us warmongers would launch nukes at iraq for killing an american family.

---

Might as well take out Syria too while we are at it. They looked at us funny. :p

X

It was kill or be killed, at that point. How can we distinguish between friend or foe when Sadaam is intentionally sending out civilians to confuse that very issue. If the Iraqi people can't, or won't understand that, then so be it. Everyone in their right mind knows why that van was shot at.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by run_GMoney
It was kill or be killed, at that point. How can we distinguish between friend or foe when Sadaam is intentionally sending out civilians to confuse that very issue. If the Iraqi people can't, or won't understand that, then so be it. Everyone in their right mind knows why that van was shot at.

---

It still shouldn't have been shot.
You should learn a lesson from the British forces in Northern Ireland on how to setup a checkpoint.

I'm sure the US military will be calling you anytime now for your proper checkpoint guidance. I wasn't aware that Ireland had a fool-proof checkpoint system designed for the exact same situation that we're in right now.

Norther Ireland has had, and still has, a large number of checkpoints.
And the British forces in the north have a lot of experience with dealing with the IRA and other paramilitary organizations.

That is exactly what the US is facing in Iraq.
People trying to smuggle weapons and get through checkpoints.