Not exactly the best publicity - Video

  • Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.

DarkBls

Inf Ex-admin
Mar 5, 2000
4,551
0
36
France
Exactly what I reproach to the US army: Total lack of seriousness and professionalism ! :mad:

I know this can be an isolated behavior, In this case I hope the reponsable officer have done something.
 
Last edited:

ninjin

The Franco-Japanese Carrot
Feb 24, 2001
388
0
0
Dalhousie Univ., NS, Canada
IIRC, the last discussion ended with the general idea that the small video clip isnt enough to make a wide opinion since someone brought up something about those iraqis having weapons and were in the making of a road trap
 

DarkBls

Inf Ex-admin
Mar 5, 2000
4,551
0
36
France
ninjin said:
IIRC, the last discussion ended with the general idea that the small video clip isnt enough to make a wide opinion since someone brought up something about those iraqis having weapons and were in the making of a road trap

It is not about killing an ennemy. It is about the way it was done.
 

novak

New Member
Oct 22, 2003
1,539
0
0
41
Visit site
That's disgusting.

I know it's war but I don't see what's so glorious about killing a wounded soldier who is lying on the ground. The US soldiers cheering after their buddy killed him and the short interview made me want to vomit.
 

})FA|Snake

New Member
Aug 5, 2000
1,661
0
0
Visit site
its physcological conditioning, soldiers are trained to dehumanize the enemy. In there mind they didn't just kill someone, they landed a shot on a target, its how soldiers get through a war without going insane. Lots of them have problems when they get back to society and think back on it though
 

5eleven

I don't give a f**k, call the Chaplain
Mar 23, 2003
787
0
0
Ohio
Visit site
Yes, posted awhile ago. And I thought the commentator said US Marines, not US Army.

Nonetheless, I'm not going to get into an extravagant debate here. Put yourself in the position of kill or be killed, and you'd be pretty pumped about having lived and/or triumphed. Interviewing someone immediately after something like that isn't always the best, and I'm sure those guys feel a bit differently now about what happened and how they commented on it at the time.

They aren't sick fux, they are kids, trained to do a job and put there to do it.

What would you like them to do? If as inferred, the Iraqi was building an IED, or had already fired on them, and they returned fire, the area still wasn't cleared. What would you like, for them to call up a medic to go expose himself in a gunfight and patch the guy up? I agree, the cheering sounds harsh, but try looking at it from another point of view. :D
 
Feb 16, 2004
117
0
0
In a hostile environment, a wounded adversary is an extremely dangerous unknown; the sooner the danger is eliminated the better.

When pulling the trigger a soldier does so with the intent to kill. Anything less could endanger him or his fellow soldiers.
If on the first pull the results where not entirely satisfactory, it is no surprise the soldier would pull it again.

When machine-gunning a hostile soldier, at what point do you stop?

When the bullets hit close enough to him to get his attention?
“When he says owe! You hit me”?

Real war is not as simple as a paintball game where, when a player shouts they where hit they suddenly cease to exist as a factor.

History is replete with accounts of wounded combatants wrecking devastating havoc.

How many INF games have you played where your character got wounded yet you escaped and where still able to cause some havoc latter?

Examples of the dangers of approaching or leaving a wounded soldier could pose...

They use a concealed blade weapon
They use a concealed firearm
They detonate an explosive device

Worrying about the above creates a distraction that could be utilized by other hostiles.

From what I saw in the extremely short video, the wounded soldier in question appears to be headed towards the cover of the wall, he was not surrendering or showing open hands held out.

The Marines maintained a professional demeanor during the incident; even the letting out the few tension-easing shouts is really no cause for criticism, psychologically the shouts where a group affirmation of the groups’ integrity, affirming the majority of them where still alive.
And when they shouted at the sight of the last visible threat fall, they remained alert for further possible threats (rifle shouldered with finger off trigger, while scanning area), hardly ragtag rednecks running amuck.
Strange that when a southerner shouts while fighting, they are considered a redneck, while if an Asian shouts while fighting, they are considered an enlightened martial arts master.

In the chopped up interview afterwards, the Marine expressed a feeling that it was regrettable the “guys” (his word choice shows he comprehended the fact they where soldiers like himself) where dead, but he was extremely happy to still be alive and victorious.

Anyone care to refute the points I have made???
 
Last edited:

OpFor

Feeling suicide, thats O.K.
Apr 26, 2001
1,198
0
0
Visit site
I would also like to enforce the fact the the interview was chopped up and edited. He could have been talking about anything. Speeding through the desert in a humvee, jumping out of a plane...who knows.

EDIT: Also, during the firing, you can see the video was also edited. The iraqi shifts positions on the ground. Who knows what was cut out?
 
Last edited:

Meplat

Chock full-o-useless information
Dec 7, 2003
482
0
0
Phoenix,Arizona
The only point at which you stop shooting is when the enemy is no longer a threat. One, or one hundred rounds.
Personally, I'd have called for some lowcap via A-10. A single 5.56MM might not be enough. And he might have friends.

Meplat
 

5eleven

I don't give a f**k, call the Chaplain
Mar 23, 2003
787
0
0
Ohio
Visit site
Holy $hite! Someone agrees w/meh? :lol:

MM, what exactly IS alright to you? I wasn't around then, but were you this vocal during US actions in Kosovo, or is this just directed at this particular war, or even better, the entire United States as a whole? Not a joke, a serious question, with all due respect.
 
Last edited:

5eleven

I don't give a f**k, call the Chaplain
Mar 23, 2003
787
0
0
Ohio
Visit site
CK, you obviously aren't in the US. :lol: CNN = liberal, always critical of conservative politicians, policy and administrations. MSNBC = half and half, dependent upon the host/show. FOX = conservative, not quite liberal bashers, but super heavy on the conservative slant, masking it with giant American flags pasted all over the screen. :lol:

Fair and balanced, my a$$. None of them are fair and balanced, as far as I'm concerned.

I haven't seen a reporter on CNN yet that I like, well except for that Art Harris guy, and he isn't covering anything on the war. Christiane Amanpour blows camel cockola.

Dr. Bob Arnot, from MSNBC, I thought either quit or had a falling out because he couldn't get them to air any positive stories from Iraq. They also have some other pretty good correspondents, but most of their anchors/hosts are dip$hits.

FOX is just plain nutty, with the exception of a couple of their Iraq embed correspondents, i.e. Greg Kelly (who was a former Marine pilot and whose father is the NYC Police Commissioner) and Rick Leventhal.
 

MetalMickey

Banned
Jul 30, 2000
2,151
0
0
Dublin
If you think CNN is liberal, then liberal means something different in americanese. CNN is the same as the other networks in that it reports the words of the Government as fact, often without question, particularly around times when the nationalist machine is cranked up full blast. Go watch the BBCs handling of covering its government if you want to see how a real news organisation tackles politicians. I can never get over the fact that I have never seen a high-up whitehouse official asked a paxman-style hard question. Never.

I supported the US role in Kosovo, if not all of its actions. I think that it was a good example of military force applied for good. Bombing civilian TV stations and the chinese embassy wasnt too bright though. I thought the EU was disgraceful for allowing genocide to happen on its doorstep.

Unfortunatley, I find it impossible to attribute the same motivation for the war in Iraq. I simply dont believe that the American right currently in power is capable of acting in anything other than self interest, and Ive seen nothing to prove otherwise. The fact that they operated a policy of lies and deception in order to prosecute their war bears out this theory. If they had the same motivation as Clinton did in Kosovo, why all the spin about Iraq being a threat? Why not just say, we are doing it for humanitarian reasons?