Americans ambushed in Iraq. (no gore)

[Champ]

http://freecache.org/http://www.whiskeytangofoxtrot.net/hosted/ambush.wmv

Video of americans getting ambushed. Apparently 3 SUV's are being escorted by 2 humvees when Iraqi insurgents attack. Not the full clip, but insightful nonetheless!

 

[disruptioN_]

Interesting, but you barely see anything though.

 

[Pressure]

Interesting...

 

[Champ]

Indeed... We don't see much, but that's part of the point. Being a foreign contractor or soldier down there must be hell on earth!

 

[SAJ]

Champ , being an Iraqi at this time must be infinitely worse.

 

[CrazyHarij]

No gore? Damnit..

 

[Champ]

Champ , being an Iraqi at this time must be infinitely worse.

I disagree... A foreign soldier or a civilian contractor is not a thing you would want to be down there. Sure, no one is enjoying themselves in Iraq, but you're worse off being foreign than native!

 

[Raziaar]

I disagree... A foreign soldier or a civilian contractor is not a thing you would want to be down there. Sure, no one is enjoying themselves in Iraq, but you're worse off being foreign than native!

I agree completely.

 

[Shakermaker]

that's quite intense

EDIT Having watched it a couple more times now the 'explosives' don't seem to be more than firecrackers tho. Not to diminish the experience for those guys aboard the truck, but still.

 

[PvtRyan]

What were those explosions? Preplaced bombs or were they shot at?

 

[Raziaar]

What were those explosions? Preplaced bombs or were they shot at?

I have no idea... but they didn't look like they'd cause alot of damage unless you were standing within a 1 foot radius of it. Hrm.

 

[Shakermaker]

What were those explosions? Preplaced bombs or were they shot at?

Two packages explode, one to the right and then one to the left of the truck. The second package seems to be thrown from the right.

 

[Champ]

It was some pretty harmless explosions. pipe bombs would have ripped the car apart, my guess is that they're GP30 grenades, which pretty much means the Insurgent version of the M203 (grenade launcher mounted on M16 and others)

 

[CptStern]

I disagree... A foreign soldier or a civilian contractor is not a thing you would want to be down there. Sure, no one is enjoying themselves in Iraq, but you're worse off being foreign than native!

at least the foreign soldier is armed. For every soldier killed, 10 civilians are killed. There been over 10,000 civilian deaths since the war was "over"

 

[Champ]

That's true, but that statistic shows nothing. There aren't as many soldiers as there are civilians. Furthermore are many of the iraqi people armed with either handguns or rifles. I'm not defending anyone here, other than saying I'd rather be an Iraqi civ than a coalition soldier. (In terms of safety)

 

[Kangy]

Yes, but at least the contractors and soldiers are certain of food, power and water when they go home, unlike the locals.

 

[Champ]

You can all be sad and sorry for the civilians, but I urge you guys not to forget the soldiers down there.

 

[CptStern]

That's true, but that statistic shows nothing. There aren't as many soldiers as there are civilians. Furthermore are many of the iraqi people armed with either handguns or rifles. I'm not defending anyone here, other than saying I'd rather be an Iraqi civ than a coalition soldier. (In terms of safety)

no the iraqi people are not armed to the teeth. The soldiers who are there chose to be there, the civilians didnt ask for their country to be occupied

 

[Champ]

And these soldiers are there to help, do not forget that. And more importantly: The average iraqi did not ask to be liberated, that is true, but that's what they were all hoping for. Suicide and opposing Saddam is two different things, but ultimately ends up in one. Death...

 

[CptStern]

we really dont want to go down this road champ. we've discussed it a dozen times and it really leads nowhere. Sure they're there to help but that's not always the case. For every good deed there are dozens of examples on how it would have been better without the coalition's assistance. And I wont even get into the motivation behind the war. Let's just say "wanting to help" was at the bottom of their list.

 

[Champ]

I was not the one that brought it up...

It's more like for every bad deed there are dozens of good ones. And speaking of their motivation, I can only say that I couldn't care less about what they're saying right now. All that matters atm is actions, not words.

 

[CptStern]

well then you should stop and consider that it was words not actions that brought about the invasion in the first place

words like:

WMD
Evil
support of terrorism
Freedom
Justice


none of those words panned out

 

[Champ]

WMD: That was a lie, misinformation whatever you want to call it. No excuses, that's how it is.

Rest of the words perfectly describes what we're fighting for and against.

And that's the last words you'll hear from me concerning this matter. Now let people watch the vid...

 

[Varg|Hund]

You what champ?
Saddam had NO connection to Al Qaeda or any other terrorist group!
Evil? Yes, Saddam was evil. But Bush is also evil.
Freedom? Well, ok, I'll hand you that one. Oh wait, what about all the innocent people that are currently rotting in the prisons of the invaders? Where's their freedom!?
Justice? Well, if you really want justice, what about sending Bush to Haag to answer for his crimes?

 

[Champ]

I guess I can't keep my word. I'll dive into this one more time :-P

Whether you like it or not, Saddam is a terrorist himself, his brutal minions are terrorists and his supporters are performing terrorism right as we speak (or whats left of them, thankfully they're going down quicker than our guys are)

Bush evil? Define evil, I see no evil in Bush's actions or words!

Innocent people? Those are arrested for a reason, and while they're might be a few "bloopers" (can't be avoided, not in Iraq, nor in the States.) it doesn't even come close to the reasons Saddam arrested people of. Doesn't make it right though, but the average Iraqi is better of without him. That'll be even more obvious when Iraq gets back up on it's feet.

Justice? Once again you're talking about Bush, but lets not forget that Saddam is/was 10x worse than Bush will ever be. I see no actual war crimes, I see alot of arrogance clouding the US Government and their foreign policies, but I don't know of any war crimes.
War crime as in invading Iraq? I already discussed this in earlier points, but that means that my PM, England's, Australia's, Poland's and other coalition countries' Presidents, Prime Ministers or whatever is guilty of war crimes too?

 

[HerzaiMekhtar]

thenk you cptstern

if we. world know the right.. we say down with great satan.

 

[CptStern]

Whether you like it or not, Saddam is a terrorist himself, his brutal minions are terrorists and his supporters are performing terrorism right as we speak (or whats left of them, thankfully they're going down quicker than our guys are)

Saddam is a thug (albeit a petty thug) but that didnt stop the US from selling him chemical weapons when he was committing his worst crimes against humanity. UN members at the time were pushing for the UN to charge him with war crimes but the US vetoed the vote.

Innocent people? Those are arrested for a reason,

no that is absolutely not true ...the coalition performs sweeps, pretty much anyone can and will be arrested and interogated or questioned.

and while they're might be a few "bloopers" (can't be avoided, not in Iraq, nor in the States.)

91 cases is not a "blooper" ...and that's not counting the number of civilians killed in the field under questionable circumstances

it doesn't even come close to the reasons Saddam arrested people of.

that's true

Doesn't make it right though, but the average Iraqi is better of without him. That'll be even more obvious when Iraq gets back up on it's feet.

no the average iraqi was better off with saddam ...saddam arrested mostly his opponents (sure there were indiscrimate arrests if you questioned his regime but by and large the majority of the deaths were of his political opponents)

Justice? Once again you're talking about Bush, but lets not forget that Saddam is/was 10x worse than Bush will ever be.

I see no actual war crimes,

actually there are quite a few that could stand up in the international warcrimes tribunal: torture, banned weapons, illegal invasion etc

War crime as in invading Iraq? I already discussed this in earlier points, but that means that my PM, England's, Australia's, Poland's and other coalition countries' Presidents, Prime Ministers or whatever is guilty of war crimes too?

yes

 

[-TaNaKa-]

Bush and daddy Bush had some personal things to make up with Saddam, and the oil of course. Thats why they attacked Iraq. A illegal war with no aproval of the UN. Silly goverment. Now they pay the prices, soldiers getting killed. Believe me, not all soldiers down there are sane. Im not talking about that prison shit, but i have seen movies were american soldiers, shoot at a armed man, the man fals down and drops the gun, so he is a unarmed wounded person, and then they still shoot him the ****ers and cheer. Or shooting from a helicopter, wounded a man, the man is crawling on the ground, and still they waste him. You can say, " yeah but look what they do to american or other innocent people!" If they are terrorists, why do you have to do the same thing. Some of those soldiers are just as low as those terrorists No offense to anybody this..

 

[Varg|Hund]

CptStern, my hat of to you!
/me bows.

 

[HerzaiMekhtar]

bosh (nothing) is infidel zionist and needs pain

 

[CptStern]

Bush and daddy Bush had some personal things to make up with Saddam, and the oil of course. Thats why they attacked Iraq. A illegal war with no aproval of the UN. Silly goverment. Now they pay the prices, soldiers getting killed. Believe me, not all soldiers down there are sane. Im not talking about that prison shit, but i have seen movies were american soldiers, shoot at a armed man, the man fals down and drops the gun, so he is a unarmed wounded person, and then they still shoot him the ****ers and cheer.

yes but to be fair that soldier was charged with murder. It is against the geneva accords to fire upon a wounded soldier

 

[Champ]

Shite... Read below

 

[Champ]

Saddam is a thug (albeit a petty thug) but that didnt stop the US from selling him chemical weapons when he was committing his worst crimes against humanity. UN members at the time were pushing for the UN to charge him with war crimes but the US vetoed the vote.

What has that to do with anything? That has little to do with Saddam being a terrorist. Osama is a terrorist, the the US also helped him. Does that make him any less of a terrorist? No it does not. It simply proves CIA's plans backfire on themselves.

no that is absolutely not true ...the coalition performs sweeps, pretty much anyone can and will be arrested and interogated or questioned.

But aren't they released again a couple of days after? Sweeps and razzias are a neccesity to counter some of all the rioting and terrorism going on in Iraq. As long as we're saving lives, then I have no problem with innocent iraqis getting arrested for a couple of days or weeks. It's sad, but sometimes needed

91 cases is not a "blooper" ...and that's not counting the number of civilians killed in the field under questionable circumstances

True... I've seen ambulances getting totally wasted by Marines because they we're gathering dead and wounded in Falluja.

no the average iraqi was better off with saddam ...saddam arrested mostly his opponents (sure there were indiscrimate arrests if you questioned his regime but by and large the majority of the deaths were of his political opponents)

Tell that to the kurds he genocided. That statement is über bullshit. Plain and simple. Furthermore, if you lived in a dictatorship, I'll bet both my hands that you'd want a government change. If you said that to anyone though, you'd get your hands cut off.
But when Iraq gets better, you'll see.

actually there are quite a few that could stand up in the international warcrimes tribunal: torture, banned weapons, illegal invasion etc

Is that considered evil?
Torture: don't know the details. If I could save innocent lives by torturing a terrorist I'd do it. So would all of you.
Banned weapons: Which banned weapons? Chemical weapons? Gosh, that wasn't Bush, that was Saddam!
Illegal invasion: You can call it what you want, Iraq is better of without that murdering scum Saddam. It might not be apparent now, but I'm confident it will be clear as freakin daylight in a couple of years.

 

[Champ]

Or shooting from a helicopter, wounded a man, the man is crawling on the ground, and still they waste him.

You're forgetting they already popped around 15 30mm cannon shots under the truck where he was hiding... He was mortally wounded. Did you want them to leave him there with his leg blown off so he could bleed to death?

 

[CptStern]

Saddam is a thug (albeit a petty thug) but that didnt stop the US from selling him chemical weapons when he was committing his worst crimes against humanity. UN members at the time were pushing for the UN to charge him with war crimes but the US vetoed the vote.

What has that to do with anything? That has little to do with Saddam being a terrorist. Osama is a terrorist, the the US also helped him. Does that make him any less of a terrorist? No it does not. It simply proves CIA's plans backfire on themselves.

no that is absolutely not true ...the coalition performs sweeps, pretty much anyone can and will be arrested and interogated or questioned.

But aren't they released again a couple of days after? Sweeps and razzias are a neccesity to counter some of all the rioting and terrorism going on in Iraq. As long as we're saving lives, then I have no problem with innocent iraqis getting arrested for a couple of days or weeks. It's sad, but sometimes needed

91 cases is not a "blooper" ...and that's not counting the number of civilians killed in the field under questionable circumstances

True... I've seen ambulances getting totally wasted by Marines because they we're gathering dead and wounded in Falluja.

no the average iraqi was better off with saddam ...saddam arrested mostly his opponents (sure there were indiscrimate arrests if you questioned his regime but by and large the majority of the deaths were of his political opponents)

Tell that to the kurds he genocided. That statement is über bullshit. Plain and simple. Furthermore, if you lived in a dictatorship, I'll bet both my hands that you'd want a government change. If you said that to anyone though, you'd get your hands cut off.
But when Iraq gets better, you'll see.

actually there are quite a few that could stand up in the international warcrimes tribunal: torture, banned weapons, illegal invasion etc

Is that considered evil?
Torture: don't know the details. If I could save innocent lives by torturing a terrorist I'd do it. So would all of you.
Banned weapons: Which banned weapons? Chemical weapons? Gosh, that wasn't Bush, that was Saddam!
Illegal invasion: You can call it what you want, Iraq is better of without that murdering scum Saddam. It might not be apparent now, but I'm confident it will be clear as freakin daylight in a couple of years.

your post was a mess, I cleaned it up

some points:

torture is a war crime

The US used Cluster bombs and littered the desert with mines: a direct violation of the geneva accords

according to international law the invasion was illegal. The US signed the UN general accords so they are(or should be) held accountable under those laws

the Kurds were killed using weapons supplied by the US

Iraq will never be "better" so long as a foreign government is calling the shots

Saddam is not the true definition of the word terrorist. Tyrant, dictator yes but not terrorist

there are quite a few innocents in US war prisons that still havent been released. There literally hundreds of prisoners that have been in prison for over 2 years without being charged with anything.

You're forgetting they already popped around 15 30mm cannon shots under the truck where he was hiding... He was mortally wounded. Did you want them to leave him there with his leg blown off so he could bleed to death?

it is against the geneva accords to fire upon wounded soldiers ...it is considered a warcrime

 

[Champ]

I have no time... I will adress these issues tommorow. But most of your points are basically repetitions with irrelevant answers that has nothing to do with what I said.

About the chopper thing: They were out on a field, in the desert. 3 guys, 2 were blown into bits. the remaining guy were hit with plenty of fragments from the cannon's rounds. They did their job and finished his life. I'm not gonna wait around for the infantry to arrive if I have a 30mm gun at my disposal and 3 terrorists in sight. No ****ing way

 

[Varg|Hund]

and 3 terrorists in sight.

How do you know they were terrorists? Maybe they were just soldiers, fighting for the freedom of their country?

 

[-TaNaKa-]

You're forgetting they already popped around 15 30mm cannon shots under the truck where he was hiding... He was mortally wounded. Did you want them to leave him there with his leg blown off so he could bleed to death?

Leg blown off? To start with, how the **** could those soldiers know what those guys were doing? Maybe if they didnt kill him, he could have got some help on time and survive it? I mean how lame is that, " oh i think he's bleeding to death , lets waste him" Right........

And CPTStern, im sure there are more of those so called "accidents" , yes he got charged for murder, but most of those soldiers get away with these kinda stuff...

 

[CptStern]

I have no time... I will adress these issues tommorow. But most of your points are basically repetitions with irrelevant answers that has nothing to do with what I said.

About the chopper thing: They were out on a field, in the desert. 3 guys, 2 were blown into bits. the remaining guy were hit with plenty of fragments from the cannon's rounds. They did their job and finished his life. I'm not gonna wait around for the infantry to arrive if I have a 30mm gun at my disposal and 3 terrorists in sight. No ****ing way

really terrorists? this says they were FARMERS

so does this source

it's all a matter of perspective

And CPTStern, im sure there are more of those so called "accidents" , yes he got charged for murder, but most of those soldiers get away with these kinda stuff...

I agree, I just wanted to point out that the US army is making an example of that soldier, but I'm sure it's a common occurance based on the soldiers nonchalant attitude

btw here's the actual part in the geneva accords that forbids killing of wounded soldiers:

"From The Geneva Convention 3-1: 1. Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria "

 

[-TaNaKa-]

A dirty war it is, and the world is not saying anything. No wonder some of those iraqi people go crazy and start to murder. You have to look to the bottom of the case, would you like it if some stranger comes to your country and starts taking over the land with violance.

America has made way more enemies after this illegal war, thats for sure. its only a matter of time when we will see another big attack in the US....

Also i dont see the american people saying anything about this, like big demonstrations or something, or they dont know all this stuff or they think its "justice" to whats happening.. If i would live in America, i would vote on Kerry! Get rid of that childish Bush..

/me votes Kerry for president