[VID]Apache Crew Murders Surrendering Combatants

In their defense, the time in between him putting up his hands and then being fired upon is so small it's likely the chopper was already on it's attack run. Going at that speed and under the circumstances the chances of him recognising that and pulling out are very slim.
 
The whole time I was just mentally egging the gunner on to blow up the car
 
K e r b e r o s said:
... oi vei, I can't wait until Bush is out of office.
Click to expand...

Me either, but I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if McCain wins. Too many damn religious people here. *crosses fingers America isn't that stupid*

I wish Europe weren't so expensive to live in.
 
I didn't see any guns, all I saw was a civilian trying to give himself up. How horrible.
 
things get really interesting if you think that it was you in the car.
seriously, it is way to easy debating about someones death sitting in your chair. i'm not accusing anybody of anything, just thinking out loud.

seriously picture yourself going out to work or whatever and then some military helicopter starts to fire upon you. obviously with no escape you try to surrender, but once you step out of the car you get gunned to pieces.

hasn't anybody ever thought how that would suck if it happened to you?
western society really has it good nowadays. which i can't decide if it is good or bad...i suppose it's the first.
 
Emporius said:
In their defense, the time in between him putting up his hands and then being fired upon is so small it's likely the chopper was already on it's attack run. Going at that speed and under the circumstances the chances of him recognising that and pulling out are very slim.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

In all probability it was an accident.




Also, we don't know why he was being chased; they prolly had good reasons to hunt him.
 
There is a chance that this was already fired before the guy even stepped out of his car. Without more details you can't really judge what happened here. But it just reemphasizes that this war sucks and a lot of people are dying needlessly.
 
im fairly certain approval is needed every time they engage the enemy, so its a safe assumption that this guy was monitored until they felt he was a prime target. Besides the fact that the bullets were already in the air, theres no protocol for accepting prisoners in this situation. Are they supposed to land and take the guy into custody? The alternative is letting him go and set up another IED.
 
The alternative is keeping him in site untill a force arrives that can detain him.
 
Tyguy said:
im fairly certain approval is needed every time they engage the enemy, so its a safe assumption that this guy was monitored until they felt he was a prime target. Besides the fact that the bullets were already in the air, theres no protocol for accepting prisoners in this situation. Are they supposed to land and take the guy into custody? The alternative is letting him go and set up another IED.
Click to expand...

You can't possibly be serious? You actually think that just because they are in a helicopter international law doesn't apply because it's too inconvenient to take a POW?

What the hell is happening to humanity?
 
I don't even know why videos like this get released to the public. Seriously, brass must be desperate to gain spirits for the war effort if they're releasing helicopter clips to the general media.

There's not enough evidence in the video to form an opinion one way or another. I mean, who is he? Why is he a target? I think attack choppers have better things to do than chase civvies around and blow them to shreds. The full story isn't available so no one can make an educated and informed argument for or against whatever the OP implied.

I mean, can anyone even confirm this is current news? Where are the sources. Where's the press release. Where's the demoted pilot or discharged officer?

This video is a bullshit way to stir emotions. You should feel bad about yourself, Kerberos, for such a trollish thread.
 
Looks like he surrendered a second too late.

Shit sucks, but oh well.
 
No Limit said:
You can't possibly be serious? You actually think that just because they are in a helicopter international law doesn't apply because it's too inconvenient to take a POW?

What the hell is happening to humanity?
Click to expand...

It's not inconvenient, its impossible...unless you've figured out a way to add a cost efficient 3rd seat. What do you expect them to do, land and chase the ****ing guy?
 
Tyguy said:
It's not inconvenient, its impossible...unless you've figured out a way to add a cost efficient 3rd seat. What do you expect them to do, land and chase the ****ing guy?
Click to expand...

How is that impossible? Bring in a ground team.

It's the same things cops do in this country. If ghetto bird catches you doing something they will follow you until a cop on the ground can stop you. But I guess cops should just spray you with bullets since bringing in a ground team is a pain in the ass.
 
Somehow I think the rules of engagement in a national conflict don't exactly match local law enforcement, so that comparison is stupid and frankly I didn't expect so much inane heart melting compassion from you folks.

Unless the dude in the video is a civilian (highly unlikely) and had no affiliation with our enemy's combatants, he knew what he was getting into. Our soldiers put their lives on the line and we don't go around calling enemy combatants murderers just because they killed one of our guys. War is a conflict where killing the enemy is an implied strategy- we don't gun down our own criminals because we're not at war with ourselves. "Send in a ground team" into a hostile region where they're more likely to get killed. For one guy. Who probably isn't any more valuable than the gun he carries. Maybe I have different morals than everyone here defending him, but that's just a stupid maneuver.

I don't care if that guy surrendered or not- we can assume the helicopter was on a search and destroy mission. They succeeded. Unless you can provide evidence that proves this man was innocent of all military association, the pilots who carried this task out are not "murderers". Simply soldiers.
 
I can't believe how ****ing brainwashed people in this country have become.

Killing enemy combatants that have surrendered is illegal. It has always been illegal. Just because you are in a ****ing helicopter doesn't change that fact. I don't really know what else to say about this. You people want to revert humanity back to the middle ages. I think it boils down to the fact that we can crush anyone in Iraq so none of you give a shit about those people. I wonder what your attitudes will be if we ever get in a war with Russia or China. Then Im sure you will be crying about international law when it can actually come back and bite you in the ass. I love the hypocrisy.
 
Pesmerga said:
"Send in a ground team" into a hostile region where they're more likely to get killed. For one guy. Who probably isn't any more valuable than the gun he carries. Maybe I have different morals than everyone here defending him, but that's just a stupid maneuver.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

No Limit, I can't filter your point through all your jibber-jabber about China and crushing weaklings 'n shit. Come again? I wouldn't send in a ground team to capture one single enemy combatant regardless of their nationality or ethnicity. And I would fully expect any enemy to return the same practicality.
 
Despite law, there is no guarantee for survival if one surrenders. I, and many people, understand the risk involved with surrendering. If we ever get into a war with another nation, I won't count on the compassion of foreign leaders for my own survival. And I will die with dignity and understanding of my opponent.

And as many people have already noted, the final shots were probably fired before the man had put his hands in the air, or before the gunner had time to react.

I don't see any news of a military investigation involving the incident, so I assume that either 1) no one cares or 2) no law was broken.

I am not in a position to judge which- I think people who claim that the law was broken and the US is comprised of immoral pigs and soldiers are slaughterers are silly little men with nothing better to do than cast judgment on people who risk their lives for their country without trial and without evidence.

It is you, No Limit, who have broadcasted your own middle aged thinking with your inverse rules of innocence before proven guilty in the court of law.
 
Absinthe said:
No Limit, I can't filter your point through all your jibber-jabber about China and crushing weaklings 'n shit. Come again? I wouldn't send in a ground team to capture one single enemy combatant regardless of their nationality or ethnicity. And I would fully expect any enemy to return the same practicality.
Click to expand...

What jibber-jabber? I think the fact that you people don't give a shit has everything to do with the fact that these people can't touch us. But if war ever breaks out with a country that can actually touch us I'm sure all your attitudes will change. In fact we already know this, we were more than happy to hang all those german soldiers after WWII.

Remember, this is a case where you don't know anything. You have no idea what this guy was suspected of doing, yet bomb the shit out of him because we can't be bothered to send in a ground team.
 
No Limit said:
I can't believe how ****ing brainwashed people in this country have become.

Killing enemy combatants that have surrendered is illegal. It has always been illegal. Just because you are in a ****ing helicopter doesn't change that fact. I don't really know what else to say about this. You people want to revert humanity back to the middle ages. I think it boils down to the fact that we can crush anyone in Iraq so none of you give a shit about those people. I wonder what your attitudes will be if we ever get in a war with Russia or China. Then Im sure you will be crying about international law when it can actually come back and bite you in the ass. I love the hypocrisy.
Click to expand...
The attack chopper was definitely not made aware early enough that he was surrendering. Hell, we don't even know for sure if he was. Not to mention we have no idea what he was doing previous to the clip, and don't forget that he was attempting to flee for a good amount of time. I don't really think I'd want to take my chances with this guy. Like Pesh said, sending in a ground team just to take in one PoW is ridiculous. The attack chopper certainly wouldn't want to risk landing in a maybe hostile area, so even if he had attempted to surrender, he'd be left alone and then he'd promptly go run off somewhere and continue to fight his war.
 
Vegeta897 said:
The attack chopper was definitely not made aware early enough that he was surrendering. Hell, we don't even know for sure if he was. Not to mention we have no idea what he was doing previous to the clip, and don't forget that he was attempting to flee for a good amount of time. I don't really think I'd want to take my chances with this guy. Like Pesh said, sending in a ground team just to take in one PoW is ridiculous. The attach chopper certainly wouldn't want to risk landing in a maybe hostile area, so even if he had attempted to surrender, he'd be left alone and then he'd promptly go run off somewhere and continue to fight his war.
Click to expand...

Just a slight point of interest, Apaches don't exactly have room for passengers, do they? So, how were they supposed to take him prisoners? Cause I know for damn sure they wouldn't leave expensive hardware and personell exposed on the ground while they wait for someone to come get this guy. And leave him alone and he'll happily "un-surrender", ie run away.
 
No Limit said:
What jibber-jabber? I think the fact that you people don't give is shit has everything to do with the fact that these people can't touch us. But if war ever breaks out with a country that can actually touch us I'm sure all your attitudes will change. In fact we already know this, we were more than happy to hang all those german soldiers after WWII.

Remember, this is a case where you don't know anything. You have no idea what this guy was suspected of doing, yet bomb the shit out of him because we can't be bothered to send in a ground team.
Click to expand...

Correction: I didn't bomb the shit out of anybody. Those in charge of and running the operation did, and I assume they knew more about the situation than either you or I do.

Sitting from a far, in my comfortable seat, listening to music, dreaming about burning the corpses of Iraqi civilians for weeks on end, I don't see the wisdom behind sending more troops needlessly into a combat zone to pick up one guy who can either escape in the span of time it takes to mobilize infantry or needlessly endanger their lives by drawing further hostile forces. This is a far cry from lining up and executing enemy combatants after they have already been apprehended. You said so yourself that war sucks. Not everything will pan out in squeaky clean fashion, and that is the unfortunate and inevitable reality of warfare.
 
That's exactly what I said, war sucks and people die, refering to this situation. But that's not what I am bitching about now. You are taking it a step further by saying that in a situation where the enemy clearly surrendered we have a right to break international law if it's too inconvenient for us to take them as a pow. But when we hung all those germans for breaking international laws it was justified because they killed us. I love this logic.
 
No Limit said:
That's exactly what I said, war sucks and people die, refering to this situation. But that's not what I am bitching about now. You are taking it a step further by saying that in a situation where the enemy clearly surrendered we have a right to break international law if it's too inconvenient for us to take them as a pow. But when we hung all those germans for breaking international laws it was justified because they killed us. I love this logic.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but what germans?
 
Despite the excuse being brought up, it is illegal to shoot wounded or surrendered enemies, in fact there
was a case not to long ago of a Apache gunner shooting a wounded downed enemy. And the procedure n
this case is to wait until reinforcements come and arrest the individual, and it has been that way ever
since the gulf war where a massive amount of soldiers would surrender to Apache's.

The other thing that might have happened which is him firing before the individual stuck up his hands
which would make it a stupid mistake, the pilot had the opportunity to wait and and see what the
individual was about to do, he exited the car calmly there was no reason to think he was going to
run away.

Regardless capturing even one enemy combatant is not only morally right it's strategically useful since
the individual can tell you info when you torture him in a secret CIA prison.

Pesmerga said:
Despite law, there is no guarantee for survival if one surrenders. I, and many people, understand the risk involved with surrendering. If we ever get into a war with another nation, I won't count on the compassion of foreign leaders for my own survival. And I will die with dignity and understanding of my opponent.

And as many people have already noted, the final shots were probably fired before the man had put his hands in the air, or before the gunner had time to react.

I don't see any news of a military investigation involving the incident, so I assume that either 1) no one cares or 2) no law was broken.

I am not in a position to judge which- I think people who claim that the law was broken and the US is comprised of immoral pigs and soldiers are slaughterers are silly little men with nothing better to do than cast judgment on people who risk their lives for their country without trial and without evidence.

It is you, No Limit, who have broadcasted your own middle aged thinking with your inverse rules of innocence before proven guilty in the court of law.
Click to expand...
You want some straws with that?
 
No Limit said:
How is that impossible? Bring in a ground team.

It's the same things cops do in this country. If ghetto bird catches you doing something they will follow you until a cop on the ground can stop you. But I guess cops should just spray you with bullets since bringing in a ground team is a pain in the ass.
Click to expand...

Enough with the ground teams, it's a stupid and dangerous idea and it makes zero sense.

How can you honestly relate local law enforcement with the military? They are two separate entities with two separate rules of engagement. Most times in the US when we bring in the "ground team", they aren't in danger of being shot at by every single person they run past.
 
No Limit said:
That's exactly what I said, war sucks and people die, refering to this situation. But that's not what I am bitching about now. You are taking it a step further by saying that in a situation where the enemy clearly surrendered we have a right to break international law if it's too inconvenient for us to take them as a pow. But when we hung all those germans for breaking international laws it was justified because they killed us. I love this logic.
Click to expand...

You keep bringing up ze Germans. Not I.

Try less straw men.
 
It's not a strawmen, it's a valid point. We prosecuted enemies for this shit all the time. Now people like you are making excuses for why it's okay for us to do it.

Bottom line is if someone surrenders and you kill them anyway you are breaking international law. Thank you gray fox for bringing in some logic here.
 
He keeps bringing up examples of the US condemning foreign nations of war crimes, which is very
relevant when talking about a potential war crime by a US soldier.

The main point is that you and the rest of the ****s understand that very well, and would use the same
kind of reasoning if it suited you. Which is very good example of why this forum section is joke.
 
No Limit said:
It's not a strawmen, it's a valid point. We prosecuted enemies for this shit all the time. Now people like you are making excuses for why it's okay for us to do it.

Bottom line is if someone surrenders and you kill them anyway you are breaking international law. Thank you gray fox for bringing in some logic here.
Click to expand...

So your saying we should torture him in a CIA prison instead of giving him a quick painless death.

What is wrong with you ffs.
 
Gray Fox said:
Despite the excuse being brought up, it is illegal to shoot wounded or surrendered enemies, in fact there
was a case not to long ago of a Apache gunner shooting a wounded downed enemy. And the procedure n
this case is to wait until reinforcements come and arrest the individual, and it has been that way ever
since the gulf war where a massive amount of soldiers would surrender to Apache's.
Click to expand...

Almost all of that is wrong.

Gray Fox said:
The other thing that might have happened which is him firing before the individual stuck up his hands
which would make it a stupid mistake, the pilot had the opportunity to wait and and see what the
individual was about to do, he exited the car calmly there was no reason to think he was going to
run away.
Click to expand...

He's being chased by a helicopter, I'd say that's reason enough. The main strategy for these missions is to take them by surprise, not to give them an opportunity to fight back.

Gray Fox said:
Regardless capturing even one enemy combatant is not only morally right it's strategically useful since
the individual can tell you info when you torture him in a secret CIA prison.
Click to expand...

;(
 
No Limit said:
It's not a strawmen, it's a valid point. We prosecuted enemies for this shit all the time. Now people like you are making excuses for why it's okay for us to do it.
Click to expand...

You're comparing the execution of what essentially amount to captured hostages to unpredictable combatants that we have no way of apprehending, against enemies known for feigning surrender or death as a ploy to kill troops. I fully sympathize with judgment calls made on the field that spare needless troop casualties. You talk of sending in a "ground team" as if it only requires a quick snap of the fingers.

War ain't what it used to be. If you sign up to kill Coalition troops, this is the shit you should be prepared to get into. We're not talking about a brigade of US soldiers storming a building and slaughtering a mass of insurgents with their hands above their heads. It's a measure of risk. I'm sorry if I don't always support the rule of law, especially in something that gets as dirty and messy as modern warfare. I'd rather the military get its job done as efficiently and practically as possible instead of tying itself down to extract one, lone insurgent that had up to that point spent its time fleeing only to come back another day (if he was indeed an insurgent). Maybe if the chopper in the video hovered around for half an hour before deciding to blow him up, I'd feel differently. Otherwise, I see it as a call fit to be exercised by those in the field.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Dekstar
Counter-Strike: GOing Deep - Part 1
Replies
17
Views
5K
Ennui
Ennui
Back
Top