Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Times Investigation: In U.S. Drone Strike, Evidence Suggests No Isis Bomb

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 36 posts

Re: Times Investigation: In U.S. Drone Strike, Evidence Suggests No Isis Bomb

#11

Post by zepto »

samvega_ wrote: post #10

The majority of those who were killed in the actual airport attack were shot by US soldiers, who in confusion and panic fired indiscriminately into the fleeing crowd. This is by the words of several of those who were present and whom investigated the injuries on the bodies afterwards, as interviewed by bbc reporters. The crowd was packed, and bullet wounds were on the top if their bodies (the soldiers shot them from…

> as interviewed by bbc reporters.

Do you have a link to this report? I can’t find one.

Re: Times Investigation: In U.S. Drone Strike, Evidence Suggests No Isis Bomb

#12

Post by samvega_ »

zepto wrote: post #11
samvega_ wrote: post #10

The majority of those who were killed in the actual airport attack were shot by US soldiers, who in confusion and panic fired indiscriminately into the fleeing crowd. This is by the words of several of those who were present and whom investigated the injuries on the bodies afterwards, as interviewed by bbc reporters. The crowd was packed, and bullet wounds were on the top if their bodies (the soldiers shot them from…

> as interviewed by bbc reporters. Do you have a link to this report? I can’t find one.

These are the sources I know of

https://twitter.com/SecKermani/status/1431517279859224579

https://twitter.com/paykhar/status/1431572890521120770

https://twitter.com/laraseligman/status/1430901536456986625

https://twitter.com/Samiyousafzai/status/1431590453355368450

There are probably more, but atrocities such as these are rarely widely publicized.

Re: Times Investigation: In U.S. Drone Strike, Evidence Suggests No Isis Bomb

#13

Post by zepto »

samvega_ wrote: post #12
zepto wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> as interviewed by bbc reporters. Do you have a link to this report? I can’t find one.

These are the sources I know of https://twitter.com/SecKermani/status/1431517279859224579 https://twitter.com/paykhar/status/1431572890521120770 https://twitter.com/laraseligman/status/1430901536456986625 https://twitter.com/Samiyousafzai/status/1431590453355368450 There are probably more, but atrocities such as these are rarely widely publicized.

Ok, so tweets, not ‘the BBC’

Re: Times Investigation: In U.S. Drone Strike, Evidence Suggests No Isis Bomb

#14

Post by dariusj18 »

Aeolun wrote: post #9
qaq wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Move to a small well run country?

I moved to Japan. Well run is a fair stretch, but at least there’s basically zero chance of them dropping a hellfire missile on anyone’s head (even their actual enemies).

That's the role the US plays, we do it so they don't have to.

Re: Times Investigation: In U.S. Drone Strike, Evidence Suggests No Isis Bomb

#15

Post by jjulius »

zepto wrote: post #13
samvega_ wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are the sources I know of https://twitter.com/SecKermani/status/1431517279859224579 https://twitter.com/paykhar/status/1431572890521120770 https://twitter.com/laraseligman/status/1430901536456986625 https://twitter.com/Samiyousafzai/status/1431590453355368450 There are probably more, but atrocities such as these are rarely widely publicized.

Ok, so tweets, not ‘the BBC’

OP said "bbc reporters", not "the BBC", and the first Tweet is from a BBC reporter.

Re: Times Investigation: In U.S. Drone Strike, Evidence Suggests No Isis Bomb

#16

Post by zepto »

jjulius wrote: post #15
zepto wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, so tweets, not ‘the BBC’

OP said "bbc reporters", not "the BBC", and the first Tweet is from a BBC reporter.

Even if they do report for the BBC at other times, they aren’t reporting for the BBC in this tweet. The BBC being mentioned here is misleading.

The fact remains that these are just tweets and there is no fact checked reporting of it by the BBC or any other journalistic outlet that I can find.

Re: Times Investigation: In U.S. Drone Strike, Evidence Suggests No Isis Bomb

#17

Post by reducesuffering »

Honestly a lot of asymmetric war sounds like the trolley problem. You hear rumors of an attack and soon after there it is killing many. You start hearing more rumors and you look for data. There must be a lot of scenarios where you can't be sure of things on the ground, it developing fast and chaotic. Obama has spoken on how most of the decisions you make as president are just weighing probabilities, i.e., there's a 70% chance we stop an attack likely killing hundreds, and 30% chance we just killed a handful of innocents. I don't think we or the NYT knows enough of all the details involved in this incident, but I think this nuance is lost on many.

Re: Times Investigation: In U.S. Drone Strike, Evidence Suggests No Isis Bomb

#18

Post by jjulius »

zepto wrote: post #16
jjulius wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OP said "bbc reporters", not "the BBC", and the first Tweet is from a BBC reporter.

Even if they do report for the BBC at other times, they aren’t reporting for the BBC in this tweet. The BBC being mentioned here is misleading. The fact remains that these are just tweets and there is no fact checked reporting of it by the BBC or any other journalistic outlet that I can find.

>Even if they do report for the BBC at other times, they aren’t reporting for the BBC in this tweet.

Right, hence the use of the phrase, "bbc reporters" and not, "the BBC". Given how common it is for reporters to tweet like this these days, that's a natural assumption one could - and should - be making when they read phrases like that. That was the very assumption that I made when I first read the comment.

>The BBC being mentioned here is misleading.

Not really, it's just saying, "Someone an outlet like the BBC trusts." Which is to say that while a claim hasn't been confirmed, it has a higher likelihood of being true relative to if you, myself, or any old Joe Schmoe had made the claim. That doesn't necessarily mean we should automatically assume it's true, but it also doesn't necessitate a complete write-off.

Re: Times Investigation: In U.S. Drone Strike, Evidence Suggests No Isis Bomb

#19

Post by trasz »

dariusj18 wrote: post #14
Aeolun wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I moved to Japan. Well run is a fair stretch, but at least there’s basically zero chance of them dropping a hellfire missile on anyone’s head (even their actual enemies).

That's the role the US plays, we do it so they don't have to.

It’s not as if it was possible to just not kill random people for petty politics, right?

Re: Times Investigation: In U.S. Drone Strike, Evidence Suggests No Isis Bomb

#20

Post by zepto »

jjulius wrote: post #18
zepto wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if they do report for the BBC at other times, they aren’t reporting for the BBC in this tweet. The BBC being mentioned here is misleading. The fact remains that these are just tweets and there is no fact checked reporting of it by the BBC or any other journalistic outlet that I can find.

>Even if they do report for the BBC at other times, they aren’t reporting for the BBC in this tweet. Right, hence the use of the phrase, "bbc reporters" and not, "the BBC". Given how common it is for reporters to tweet like this these days, that's a natural assumption one could - and should - be making when they read phrases like that. That was the very assumption that I made when I first read the comment. >The BBC b…

> "Someone an outlet like the BBC trusts."

The BBC clearly has not trusted these reports. Nor has any other journalistic outlet.

They are literally just the tweets of any old Joe Schmoe. It doesn’t matter who they work for, since the BBC is not taking any responsibility for the reports.

Journalism has fact checkers and editors for a reason.

Post reply on HN