141–150 of 273 posts
Don't waste your time, this video doesn't show anything about killing accidentally. War sucks and civilian casualties do happen but this says nothing. Taliban were known for dressing as females to get out of situations and using children as "cover".
Imagine being this indoctrinated that 20 years of occupation is ok, and that these people (who live in that country btw) should be ok with their family members aimlessly dying
Having watched a few documentaries on the war, from multiple periods, my first thought was “who did they target with these drone strikes?” seeing as they usually had no idea who or where the enemy was. The answer is much worse than I could imagine: “a guy with a radio … which is reasonable grounds for suspicion”. Nothing accidental about it. These should be considered war crimes.
nothing new, there's a well known quote from a former NSA/CIA director: "We kill people based on metadata" [1]
[1] https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2014/05/10/we-kill-people-base...
I wonder if Facebook Twitter etc. banning violent and bloody content has prevented the public from protesting these things more widely. It is well known that TV broadcasts of Vietnam led to outrage growing against that war.
The 9/11 attacks were awful, but I think part of the reason there was such a strong emotional response was simply because for the most part the media showed us exactly what happened. We saw people dead and others desperately trying to escape. We saw the sacrifices emergency responders had to make. We heard from the heartbroken parents who would never see their child again... So yeah, I think you're right, and I'd even go further to say I think it's probably a duty to watch content like this and does us a disservice when the media sanitises terror attacks (such as the ones which have happened in Europe more recently) when they report on them. As awful as it sounds you need to see parents looking at their now deceased and blooded child to even begin to understand the unbelievable suffering involved in these events. Whenever someone says to me something like "terror attacks aren't a big problems, it's just x number of deaths" you know they're saying that because they're getting sanitised information from the media because that isn't a possible any feeling human could have if they saw the suffering involved. I know a similar unemotional rationales are used in support of drone strikes, and I accept the arguments for against their use are complex, but at the very least there needs to be far more caution and accountability. If there is one thing videos of drone strikes have shown me is that there is currently a total disregard for the loss of innocent human lives by people who know there will be zero consequences for their actions.
Having watched a few documentaries on the war, from multiple periods, my first thought was “who did they target with these drone strikes?” seeing as they usually had no idea who or where the enemy was. The answer is much worse than I could imagine: “a guy with a radio … which is reasonable grounds for suspicion”. Nothing accidental about it. These should be considered war crimes.
Checkout Ben Anderson's 2 part ~30 minute report from Afghanistan for Vice from around 10 years ago [0][1]. He was embedded with British troops and ANA during a patrol with a lot of gun fights. The British strafed an empty field, almost bombed themselves twice and once an Apache launched a Hellfire missile into a compound with British and ANA troops in it and hit a building where a family with small children were hid…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This site isn't currently available in the EU Do you happen to know another source or archived version? Edit: thanks for the updated links!
I always think it's interesting when Americans try to hide their news from foreigners. So much for being proud of your country, I guess?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This site isn't currently available in the EU Do you happen to know another source or archived version? Edit: thanks for the updated links!
I always think it's interesting when Americans try to hide their news from foreigners. So much for being proud of your country, I guess?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Checkout Ben Anderson's 2 part ~30 minute report from Afghanistan for Vice from around 10 years ago [0][1]. He was embedded with British troops and ANA during a patrol with a lot of gun fights. The British strafed an empty field, almost bombed themselves twice and once an Apache launched a Hellfire missile into a compound with British and ANA troops in it and hit a building where a family with small children were hid…
It's never malice. Nobody goes, "hey, this compound is 100% only women and children, let's bomb it." Reality: "A patrol nearby said they took fire from the compound at such and such grid coordinates" It gets bombed. Turns out the unit on the ground was mistaken. War is hell. War criminals should be punished. But it's not a war crime to make a mistake. I love seeing these posts because it's clear that almost nobody he…
Given that it's apparently OK to launch one of these at a single suspected enemy informant, couldn't we have saved a lot of time, money and lives by just bribing the entire population of Afghanistan to not do things that the West doesn't like?
> accidental killing of children On purpose is a war crime now, so it has to be accidental. Starting/continuing a war is not accidental though. It sure can be baseless (imho most if not all recent US wars were baseless).
The war on ISIS? I heard Raqqa was lovely under their control.
You heard something does not make it a good reason to go to war.
Some neighbourhoods of the US are "said to be lovely /s" but does that warrant an invasion?
ISIS took hold of places in Syria because Assad was facing an "attempt to replace" by the US.
Can someone explain the origins of the slang for 'charger'? That one would not occur to me.
We didn't use this term in Iraq, so I wouldn't call it "military jargon for child" like the article does. It is common for units to come up with code words for various things, especially when the topic is emotionally charged or could be used for propaganda or intel. For example, almost nobody would use the term "FKIA" over the radio, even on a secure channel; they might say "flowers" instead.