Wikileaks has really misled the public • Hacker News Board

Re: Wikileaks has really misled the public

#81

Post by WalkingDead » Tue, Apr 06, 2010, 5:46 AM UTC

alexgartrell wrote: post #78

jeswin wrote: post #54

I am not American; though I usually side with democratic countries as much as I can. However, if you made a really big mistake and went to war with a country which posed no credible threat to you (at least in hindsight when this shooting took place) I'd imagine people would err on the side of caution when shooting somebody's family and loved ones. At least in this part of the world, what is coming across is that your…

Killing ten Iraqis to save an American soldier is not justifiable, any which way you look at it. As messed up as it may sound to you, I'd rather my friends make it home. As far as I'm concerned, the blood is on the hands of the people who started and continued the war; not the ones who have to actually fight it.

> the blood is on the hands of the people who started and continued the war

> not the ones who have to actually fight it.

The nazis probably said the same.

Re: Wikileaks has really misled the public

#82

Post by defenestrator » Tue, Apr 06, 2010, 5:50 AM UTC

blhack wrote: post #61

:(. A lot of people seem to be completely missing the point of this video. It isn't that some journalists were killed, it's that they were killed in sport . The people speaking while they're shooting them are acting as though they want them dead, not as though they're taking their lives in an effort to protect themselves. Did you see the part where the dying journalist is bleeding out on the curb and trying to crawl…

armchair generals and politicians make the worst conversations ever.

Re: Wikileaks has really misled the public

#83

Post by analyst74 » Tue, Apr 06, 2010, 5:51 AM UTC

alexgartrell wrote: post #78

jeswin wrote: post #54

I am not American; though I usually side with democratic countries as much as I can. However, if you made a really big mistake and went to war with a country which posed no credible threat to you (at least in hindsight when this shooting took place) I'd imagine people would err on the side of caution when shooting somebody's family and loved ones. At least in this part of the world, what is coming across is that your…

Killing ten Iraqis to save an American soldier is not justifiable, any which way you look at it. As messed up as it may sound to you, I'd rather my friends make it home. As far as I'm concerned, the blood is on the hands of the people who started and continued the war; not the ones who have to actually fight it.

If my friend went to Iraq, I'd rather him coming back in one piece too.

Good thing that none of my friends went, your friends do not have to go either.

Re: Wikileaks has really misled the public

#84

Post by rms » Tue, Apr 06, 2010, 5:51 AM UTC

alexgartrell wrote: post #78

jeswin wrote: post #54

I am not American; though I usually side with democratic countries as much as I can. However, if you made a really big mistake and went to war with a country which posed no credible threat to you (at least in hindsight when this shooting took place) I'd imagine people would err on the side of caution when shooting somebody's family and loved ones. At least in this part of the world, what is coming across is that your…

Killing ten Iraqis to save an American soldier is not justifiable, any which way you look at it. As messed up as it may sound to you, I'd rather my friends make it home. As far as I'm concerned, the blood is on the hands of the people who started and continued the war; not the ones who have to actually fight it.

Incidentally, the people who started the war have a think tank. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Ce... Bill Kristol periodically goes on the Daily Show and has smug exchanges with Jon Stewart instead of facing charges before the Hague.

Re: Wikileaks has really misled the public

#85

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Apr 06, 2010, 5:53 AM UTC

WalkingDead wrote: post #81

alexgartrell wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Killing ten Iraqis to save an American soldier is not justifiable, any which way you look at it. As messed up as it may sound to you, I'd rather my friends make it home. As far as I'm concerned, the blood is on the hands of the people who started and continued the war; not the ones who have to actually fight it.

> the blood is on the hands of the people who started and continued the war > not the ones who have to actually fight it. The nazis probably said the same.

[deleted]

Re: Wikileaks has really misled the public

#86

Post by alexgartrell » Tue, Apr 06, 2010, 5:53 AM UTC

WalkingDead wrote: post #81

alexgartrell wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Killing ten Iraqis to save an American soldier is not justifiable, any which way you look at it. As messed up as it may sound to you, I'd rather my friends make it home. As far as I'm concerned, the blood is on the hands of the people who started and continued the war; not the ones who have to actually fight it.

> the blood is on the hands of the people who started and continued the war > not the ones who have to actually fight it. The nazis probably said the same.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwins_law

I think it's laughable to try to draw a comparison between soldiers messing[0] up and causing collateral damage and the Holocaust.

[0] edit: unnecessarily foul language

Re: Wikileaks has really misled the public

#87

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Apr 06, 2010, 5:53 AM UTC

WalkingDead wrote: post #81

alexgartrell wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Killing ten Iraqis to save an American soldier is not justifiable, any which way you look at it. As messed up as it may sound to you, I'd rather my friends make it home. As far as I'm concerned, the blood is on the hands of the people who started and continued the war; not the ones who have to actually fight it.

> the blood is on the hands of the people who started and continued the war > not the ones who have to actually fight it. The nazis probably said the same.

[deleted]

Re: Wikileaks has really misled the public

#88

Post by Maktab » Tue, Apr 06, 2010, 5:57 AM UTC

Uchikoma wrote: post #76

Maktab wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The second-to-last photograph [1] taken by Namir Noor-Eldeen shows an American Humvee and the radio calls make it clear that there is a ground force in the vicinity which was reporting a contact with the individuals on the ground, was able to see the individuals at various points in the action and was close enough that it took only 8 minutes for them to mount up and arrive on the scene. This group (apparently "Bushma…

They need to drive 8 minutes to get to the scene, when they are "near"? Even when halving the time for mounting and going by 20kmh they were 1km around 1.5km away. Near? What does "in the area mean"? Bagdad?

Merely halving the time for mounting and assuming a 20km/h travel speed without any stops (bearing in mind this is a combat zone) seems a bit arbitrary. In any case, the radio calls seem to affirm that the ground element was in visual range of the people before the gunships even opened fire and Namir's photo, if it was indeed taken at the scene as we assume, shows the ground force as being pretty close, perhaps no more than 100-300 m away.

Re: Wikileaks has really misled the public

#89

Post by foldr » Tue, Apr 06, 2010, 5:59 AM UTC

gruseom wrote: post #66

blhack wrote: post #61

:(. A lot of people seem to be completely missing the point of this video. It isn't that some journalists were killed, it's that they were killed in sport . The people speaking while they're shooting them are acting as though they want them dead, not as though they're taking their lives in an effort to protect themselves. Did you see the part where the dying journalist is bleeding out on the curb and trying to crawl…

I find this outrage prissy. I don't know anything about war, but even I know that it's utterly naive to expect that soldiers wouldn't get off on killing people. It is completely to be expected. The fantasy that war would somehow be more acceptable or even possible without it is not serious; it's a head-in-the-sand refusal to consider the ugliness of the thing. Next up: they aren't faithful to their wives while on tou…

> I don't know anything about war, but even I know that it's utterly naive to expect that soldiers wouldn't get off on killing people. It is completely to be expected.

How far are you willing to take this argument? Statistically speaking, it's to be expected that invading armies will rape a substantial portion of the female population. Would it therefore be "prissy" to be outraged if this happens?

>This is part of the don't-ask-don't-tell contract (the real one) that society has with the military: here are the conditions under which you can be a serial killer; we will call you a hero for it; just don't tell us about it.

I think it's still ok to be disturbed by that. It may be true that this incident is just one example of the generally terrible nature of war. But that doesn't make it any less terrible, or make people's reactions to it illegitimate.

I hope that this sort of reaction becomes more and more common, so that we eventually figure out that war is, you know, a bad thing.

Re: Wikileaks has really misled the public

#90

Post by WalkingDead » Tue, Apr 06, 2010, 6:09 AM UTC

alexgartrell wrote: post #86

WalkingDead wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the blood is on the hands of the people who started and continued the war > not the ones who have to actually fight it. The nazis probably said the same.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwins_law I think it's laughable to try to draw a comparison between soldiers messing[0] up and causing collateral damage and the Holocaust. [0] edit: unnecessarily foul language

> I think it's laughable to try to draw a comparison between soldiers fucking up and causing collateral damage and the Holocaust.

That's not what you said. You said...

> the blood is on the hands of the people who started and continued the war > not the ones who have to actually fight it.

I disagree with that statement. With the same argument, one can justify all war killings. Even the act of Nazis. We don't bring in Godwins law when discussing and comparing war and killings.