[CCIP]

Yeah, I'm not sure that we can really call this a "battle". It's a civilian area however you slice it, and as long as the population is there, there's nothing to say they couldn't have been just driving along on their daily business and came across this. I'm willing to buy the "good samaritan" explanation for why the van stopped. All the more, I highly suspect that the people there are not so stupid and would have seen the chopper that shot up the scene. The fact that they did not seem concerned by it being overhead seems to tell me they weren't expecting to be shot at - at least in the case of the would-be rescuers, seems like it was just an error.

I'm also quite willing to buy that there were two guys with AKs and an RPG in the original group. Immediately assuming them to be bad guys is problematic, but again, when there are friendly troops rolling through the sector, it's not like anyone would be willing to risk walking up and asking who they were and what they were up to. It does make sense, though, to bring up the old pro-gun argument about self-defense - armed dudes don't immediately equal bad dudes. In this case, though, it doesn't totally matter. What does bother me though is that again, the effect that the pilots were concerned with was not taking out guys already in possession of a weapon, denying a potential ambush, or otherwise pursuing actual tactical goals - what they were really concerned about is killing the entire group and anyone who assisted it, as quickly as possible. That right there is, well, really messed up and indicates a wider systemic problem with the US military - it's all about efficiency, with dubious effectiveness at best. When the primary effect of engagement being sought is achieving kills, well, there's your problem with stability on the ground right there.