YOU MUST SEE THIS KILL... You'll feel better afterwards!

[crushelits]

OUR TROOPS IN ACTION! YOU MUST SEE THIS!

Click here: to See

 

 

WATCH OUT

Abu Musab (DOG) al-Zarqawi.

[rake]

post #24 has the full video.

awesome!! thanks so much for posting this. i didn't see it before.

[68skylark]

I also prefer the close up video of a guy with a rocket launcher getting taken out with a shot to the head in the middle of the street.

Yeah, that one is a classic. I guess that guy was absent from terrorist school on the day they talked about cover and concealment.

And did you see the "Highway to Hell" video, with the terrorists trying to outrun the gunfire from an AC-130?

Where were those videos posted? I used to have the link to that site, but now I've misplaced it.

[oyez]

Somebody set us up the bomb!

[GOPJ]

Let's offer reward for the death of al-Zarqawi

It's not the size of the reward that matters -- it's who it's given too. If you want results, divide the millions between everyone who lives within one block of where he dies. Then tell everyone how much money they would win. Yeah, win.

The psychological impact will be a passive support of Americans. Then later, self justifications -- they're not traitors to the cause, they really like Americans.

Have American PR firms do lotto type ads -- asking Iraqi women how they would spend their share of the reward. "How would your family spend $3,000?"

Trust me, for many that's more than a years pay, and they'll help. Walkin' around money -- dreams of cold cash, and dead terrorist. As a perk, because no family would receive a huge sum, they would convince themselves they wanted al-Zarqawi caught.

[AndrewC]

One guy behind the bridge abutment tries to surrender.

What are you talking about?

[MindBender26]

>One guy behind the bridge abutment tries to surrender.

He is not trying to surrender. He is removing his identifying scarf so he can try to blend in with civilians again.

[MindBender26]

If it is Apache video, why are we hearing more than two voices?

[steamboat]

I haven't seen that one either. Is there still an active link somewhere?

[TXnMA]

The crew supposedly expended over 100 of these in that engagement.

Not quite as much 'overkill' as 100 rounds from the A-10's Gau-8, but, if you watch the film, you'll note there were not much identifiable remains left.

IMHO, our PsyOps guys should make up a DVD of clips like this -- and sell them in the same Iraq marketplacess where the terrorists sell the DVDs of their beheadings of helpless prisoners. The voiceover should say, "You are next."

[68skylark]

If it is Apache video, why are we hearing more than two voices?

The Apaches don't go out on "freelance" missions. There are communications between the crews, other aircraft (like spotter aircraft) and the overall mission commander who is probably located elsewhere. In addition, there may be communications with a recon team on the ground.

[an italian]

proud to stand with you

[68skylark]

Let's offer reward for the death of al-Zarqawi.

Good idea. That's why we currently offer a $25 million dollar reward for him:

Rewards for Justice

[aruanan]

Anthony Cordesman, an ABCNEWS defense consultant who also viewed the tape, said the Apache pilots would have had a much clearer picture of the scene than what was recorded on the videotape. He also said they would have had intelligence about the identity of the men in the vehicles. "They're not getting a sort of blurred picture. They have a combination of intelligence and much better imagery than we can see."

As to whether the Apache pilots could have called in ground troops to apprehend the men, Cordesman said: "In this kind of war, wherever you find organized resistance among the insurgents, you have to act immediately. If you wait to send in ground troops almost invariably your enemy is going to be gone."

Army officials acknowledged that the 30 mm cannons used by the Apache gunners were far bigger than what was needed to kill the men, but said it is the smallest weapon the Apaches have.

[68skylark]

Your comment is a quote from the snopes.com website. I think their article on this video is quite fair.

[freedomlover]

I've seen this before but it will put things in perspective for me when I try to repair my broken tractor. That tractor ain't goin' anywhere.

[steveeboy]

I seem to remember something from my military days about the geneva conventions.

I seem to remember that they were pretty clear about the fact that you are not supposed to shoot the wounded.

It seems to me that if a tape like that surfaced where some Republican Guards shot a US GI and then said, "he's wounded, get him," and killed the wounded American, there might be just a bit of outrage circulating on this board about the "savagery of the terrorists."

If one wants to claim one has the moral highground, then I think one has to be pretty meticulous about following the "Rules" of war--even if that is an oxymoron.

If one reads Ambrose, one finds all sorts of incidents discussed where German and American GIs didn't shoot wounded, didn't shoot medics, etc.

[MaineRepublic]

So did anyone ever find out what these guys were laying down in the field?

[68skylark]

Good points. Here are my thoughts -- let me know if you have a reaction.

First, our rules of engagement are carefully scrubbed by military lawyers -- guys who do this for a living. I have no desire to second-guess them.

Second, as a soldier who is a non-lawyer, my understanding of the law of land warfare is a little different than yours.

(A) I think you're statement that it's not okay to shoot the wounded is not right at all. For example, if a wounded soldier has a weapon and is engaged in hostilities, the mere fact that he's wounded does not give him any special protections. He can (and should) be shot again.

(B) A wounded enemy soldier (or any enemy soldier) may attempt to surrender by throwing down his weapon or otherwise ceasing hostile acts, and making a signal (like raising his hands). I believe we'd then be obligated to respect his surrender attempt, but ONLY if the surrender could be put into effect. Since it's not practical for an enemy terrorist to surrender to an aircraft (because there's no way to put the surrender into effect) the aircraft is not required to accept the surrender. They can continue to engage in hostilities.

These terrorists took their chances by engaging in hostile actions. As you can see, they have to live (or die) with the consequences of their actions.

Let me know if you don't agree.

[petro45acp]

WE GET SIGNAL!

It's YOU!

[intolerancewillNOTbetolerated]

"The job of the military, any military, is to kill people and blow things up. That it is what we pay, train and equip them for."

Some who were going into the military had forgetten these facts. They were going in because it was the best job they could find, and wanted training for something when they came out and/or money for college. They feel angry that they have to actually do in real life the things they expected to just be hypothetical.