Live data from Hacker News

Wikileaks has really misled the public

seminal.firedoglake.com

161–167 of 167 posts

Re: Wikileaks has really misled the public

#161
post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I expect the soldiers in the video are just doing what a lot of people would do in the same situation. They are reacting as they have been trained to react; war is hell, the army build in defense mechanisms like this to ensure soldiers can fight (emotional detachment, jock attitude), they also ingrain absolute discipline to try and avoid scenario's exactly like this. EDIT: supporting evidence - read some military tra…

I agree with you, but I don't see how it goes against what I was saying.

I wasn't disagreeing - just adding something :)

Re: Wikileaks has really misled the public

#162
post #84

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.

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.

"Incidentally, the people who started the war ..."

These are the people who authorized, and continue to authorize, having troops there?

Do you not hold the government ultimately culpable for this? Claiming Bill Kristol et al started the war is just asinine.

Re: Wikileaks has really misled the public

#163
post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

"Incidentally, the people who started the war ..." These are the people who authorized, and continue to authorize, having troops there? Do you not hold the government ultimately culpable for this? Claiming Bill Kristol et al started the war is just asinine.

>These are the people who authorized, and continue to authorize, having troops there?

I didn't say that.

>Do you not hold the government ultimately culpable for this?

Of course the government is ultimately culpable.

> Claiming Bill Kristol et al started the war is just asinine.

Bill Kristol et al created the meme for invading Iraq.

Re: Wikileaks has really misled the public

#164
post #65
post #33

people are focusing on the wrong area of this story...yes killing that first group of people was a dick move, but it might get justified by ROE....killing the people in the van who tried to help was also a dick move...but it can still be justified by calling it a gray area. The actual story here is that the army decided to cover up this whole issue in the first place(i.e. them saying they had no idea how the kids got…

This is the real story, and has been from the beginning. All this discussion is very good, but it's disappointing more people don't care about censorship. On that note... http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/us/20generals.html

italics

Re: Wikileaks has really misled the public

#165
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I was running an insurgency in Iraq, I would keep a guy in the back of an unmarked van with an RPG and I would drive around pretending to pick up bodies. I think I'd probably get a lot of kills that way. I don't think it's fair to say the van was clearly unarmed, especially when you consider the fact that the van could have been called in to make a pickup by a group of people confirmed to have at least one RPG and…

It doesn't surprise me they found an RPG on the ground after the chopper reported there was one. I have it on good authority from people who were actually on the ground that soldiers regularly keep RPG's and AK-47's in the Humvees such that if they do kill an innocent civilian, they just place the AK-47 or RPG on or near the victim to make them look like an insurgent. I don't know if that's what happened in this part…

I don’t know what happened in Iraq. But something like this happened in Argentina (at least once).

In 2001 one policeman killed 3 unarmed guys in a gas station. Then he took the bodies to the street and put a knife near one body. He claimed that it was an assault, but later he was found guilty and sentence to prison.

Article in spanish: http://www.clarin.com/diario/2002/01/07/o-02001.htm

Google translation: http://translate.google.com.ar/translate?js=y&prev=_t&#3...

Re: Wikileaks has really misled the public

#166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hesitated before downvoting you; but I feel I have to because it's very easy (even with the edit) to make these claims online with little or no substance. I feel if this was readily admitted to yourself it would have been admitted to others too and, by now, made it to the mainstream news. Where it would have been a massive, massive story. I also feel all we have is your word and really that's not enough for such a…

You're right, and I hesitated before even posting it. There's a difference in what some people are willing to say to a friend and what people are willing to say to a reporter. Honestly, it's surprising to me that more things like this incident and other like it haven't made it to the mainstream media. Ask any soldier that was on the ground (especially around 2007), and they'll tell you that, maybe, 10% of what is goi…

I mulled over this last night and today; here's my current thinking.

If this is true it is more than a step beyond what we have seen here. In the video we see a tragically mistaken engagement (which I understand) and then a terrible, idiotic, but I feel not malicious, attack on unarmed civilians. Even the restriction of information released by the army, whilst something I don't agree with, is understandable.

However; finding a mistake on the ground then covering it up by planting weapons? That's fraud and a war crime. It's morally and legally reprehensible.

This is why I feel it is probably not true (or a one off you have heard about); if it is a prevalent thing then it surely would have been reported by now (I cannot believe there is not one person in the US army that would be morally outraged by this).

If it is true; it needs to be outed, stopped and prosecuted.

Of everything posted on this subject this idea is the one that sickens me the most :(

Re: Wikileaks has really misled the public

#167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right, and I hesitated before even posting it. There's a difference in what some people are willing to say to a friend and what people are willing to say to a reporter. Honestly, it's surprising to me that more things like this incident and other like it haven't made it to the mainstream media. Ask any soldier that was on the ground (especially around 2007), and they'll tell you that, maybe, 10% of what is goi…

I mulled over this last night and today; here's my current thinking. If this is true it is more than a step beyond what we have seen here. In the video we see a tragically mistaken engagement (which I understand) and then a terrible, idiotic, but I feel not malicious, attack on unarmed civilians. Even the restriction of information released by the army, whilst something I don't agree with, is understandable. However;…

There's several issues at stake here. The first is that these guys are under extreme amounts of stress. The level of stress the average soldier faces in a war zone (and that's what it is) is unimaginable to pretty much anyone that hasn't been there. I've heard stories of some things these guys are faced with, and none of it is pretty. I've had to take a step back from some of it, and I didn't even experience it directly. When you get an RPG shot at you that bounces off the front of your Humvee and by some miracle, it doesn't go off, you don't walk away from that the same. Having to stab someone repeatedly in order to save your own life. Shooting at actual people. Not some representation of people, but actual living, breathing human beings, and seeing the carnage wrought by your bullets. It's hard to even comprehend.

Now, imagine these guys come back and are generally able to continue to carry on some sort of a normal life at home. There's a lot of training involved here, and part of it is that you were simply ordered to do it. The chain of command is a real force, something the average soldier respects enough to go into a situation that very well could end their life. They also fear it. It's a force that's almost worse than death. Would you want to admit mistakes, or would you feel better about simply covering them up? This hypothetical soldier is already hardened enough to take the life of another person without feeling intense amounts of guilt. What is covering up a mistake compared to that?

There's also an insane amount of camaraderie amongst soldiers. These guys are willing to go into the line of fire to get back a piece of their buddy to send back home, because no soldier gets left behind. Would you risk your hide to get back part of your friend's dead body in order to have a proper burial? I don't know if I would, but that's a fairly ubiquitous feeling amongst soldiers. These guys will fight and die for their fellow soldiers, dead or alive. If you would already put your life on the line for someone, why wouldn't you help them cover something up?

Finally, the perception of people (civilians or combatants) from the view of a soldier is horribly skewed from what it is at home. They aren't really humans when they're on the battlefield. They're targets. The guilt doesn't really hit until after these guys get home. When you're in the midst of it, you're worried about your own survival, and the survival of those you care about. They don't seem to be particularly worried about the collateral damage. If they make a few mistakes, oh well. It's better than not pulling the trigger and finding out they were actually the enemy.

I'm not saying it's okay. It's certainly deplorable behavior. I'm just saying it's understandable, from where I sit. If I were put in a similar situation, I'm not sure how I would react. No one does, but the only way to prevent is to simply not go to war.

Post reply on HN