Collateral Murder (merged)

[Aramike]

Originally Posted by Fader_Berg

WTF?! Are you trying to justify the A-bombs over Hiroshima and Nagasaki in a paranthesis?

It must be nice to live in a world where harsh applications of force are never necessary.

[tater]

Originally Posted by Fader_Berg

WTF?! Are you trying to justify the A-bombs over Hiroshima and Nagasaki in a paranthesis?

I have no problem with either of those attacks, actually. never had, never will. They without question saved more lives—even just Japanese lives—than they took. Had we not used the 2 devices on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, we certainly would have used them in advance of the invasion. Had the war lasted a couple weeks longer, the UK would have invaded Malaya, and there was a standing order for all POWs to then be executed. That totaled about the number killed by the bombs just counting POWs in the Malaya area. Similar orders were followed through with everywhere else, there is no reason to expect they would not have in Malaya on September 1st.

I was, however, actually thinking more of LeMay's firebombing campaign, which killed more people than both atomic weapons combined. The 2d fire raid on Tokyo killed 102,000 alone, for example.

Technically speaking—which is all that matters legally—all men 15-65, and all women 17-47 in Japan were soldiers by Imperial Edict. While that certainly leaves many kids and old people as non-combatants, they were if anything outnumbered by combatants. If you mix combatants and noncombatants intentionally, you cannot complain when the latter are killed.

That's just a statement of reality.

[tater]

Originally Posted by Aramike

It must be nice to live in a world where harsh applications of force are never necessary.

True, it's easier to just sell arms to the bad guys than fight them. When you get paid in gold, just try to ignore that it looks like fillings.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Platapus

We have a professional military not simply because they are paid. Being paid to do something does not make one a professional.

As the joke goes, what do you call a soldier who cashes his paycheck? A mercenary.

[Oberon]

At 3:19 approx, you can see the two reporters with cameras on straps slung over their shoulders, without being told that they were reporters and those were cameras, one could make the mistake that those were possibly SMGs or RPGs in that shot.
At 3:39, the camera slews up and there are three gentlemen with what appear to be weapons of some sort, at least from the altitude and angle of the chopper. They radio in to check that there are no friendlies in the area, and receive the all clear.
At 4:08, one of the camera crew appears to be picking up a long lens camera from the ground, unfortunately all that is visible on the tape is a long black object, which is something an RPG happens to be. Only at 4:13ish can one be sure that it's a camera, but if in advance you did not know that he was a camera man, would this still register so obviously?
4:21 he reports that there was 'a guy shooting', which obviously did not occur. This is the gunners error. You cannot excuse this statement save for words uttered in the grip of the moment which once uttered can never be returned to whence they came.
4:41 it sounds as though there is a US unit in a nearby street, talk of Humvees and Bradleys, and later in the video he talks in a unit. This would make any gunner just that little more jumpy knowing that his or hers countrymen are just a few streets away and the people you have in front of you could be mustering to attack them.
4:51 Yeah...by this point, now that you know who they are, it's obvious that they are a bit too relaxed to be planning an attack, but that's hindsight for you. Something that you only get after the event.
5:09 Primary engagement concluded. Civilians and combatants scatter alike, he who fights and runs away lives to kill you or a friend another day.
5:19 Two random shots at the fleeing reporter, gunner seems to lose track or something. Some humour. Not appropriate for the situation, but one way of relieving tension.
5:53 Ok, a bit overkill now, although probably aimed at the last survivor. Again, if a combatant survives, he can return to the battlefield. This gentleman was not a combatant, however the crew was firmly in the belief that he was and thus acted so.
Asking for the guy to reach for a weapon is perhaps not appropriate, however in an age when SWAT teams cannot use force unless they've already been shot at (and possibly killed or injured) then he has to have what looks like a weapon in his hands before they can open fire.


Let me bring forward another little story from another war.
Malaya, 1950-52.
45 Commando of the Royal Marines, were deployed to Malaya during the crisis, it was in climate conditions probably quite similar to Vietnam, likewise in geography. Isolated villages surrounded by jungles, perfect ambush territory.
As the Commandos patrolled, they would come across villages and the children of the village would run out to meet them, the Commandos would pick the children up, play games with them, share their rations with them, generally the things that you or I would do with children no matter if we were in a war or not.
The enemy, Communist guerrillas, got word of this, probably through local sympathisers, and began to use the children as a weapon against the Commandos. The children were wired up with explosives, to them it was just a game, perhaps a new type of clothing, and when they ran out to greet the Commandos to play their games and get their sweets, the explosives were detonated and the children and Marines killed.
After a time, quite a few Marines had succumbed to this new tactic, so an order was issued from command, any children who ran towards the Marines as they entered a village were to be shot on sight.
Can you imagine that? To the children it was business as usual, some of them might have had a bomb vest, some of them might not have done...but if they ran towards the Marines to greet them...it was the last thing they did. Let me tell you something...it haunted those Marines to their final days, however what choice did they have? It was kill or be killed, for if one of those children with a bomb vest had met my grandfather in Malaya, I would not be typing these words right now. I'm just bloody grateful that I'm not in a position where my judgment is responsible for the life and death of those around me.

[Fader_Berg]

Originally Posted by Aramike

It must be nice to live in a world where harsh applications of force are never necessary.

Well, I can't get closer to a better world than the worst of idiots, obviously.

Originally Posted by tater

I was, however, actually thinking more of LeMay's firebombing campaign, which killed more people than both atomic weapons combined. The 2d fire raid on Tokyo killed 102,000 alone, for example.

The bombs over Hiroshima and Nagasaki, togehter killed almost 200.000 people instantly? The death toll to this day is totaling ~400.000 people who died in the consequence of the bombs because of radiation. Far most of them civilians.

"Imperial Edict", yeah right... That's one sorry excuse.

[Oberon]

You do realise that most of the purple hearts issued today were quite likely from the five hundred thousand that were made in preparation for Operation Downfall? It's hard to tell whether or not the casualties of Operation Downfall would have exceeded that of the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but considering that at least seven nuclear weapons would have been used or available to be used during Operation Downfall, it could be argued that the civilian deaths alone would be three times higher. The devastation would not have been limited to two cities either it would have been distributed equally across the whole continent.
Very much a choice between the devil and the deep blue sea, but an invasion of Japan would have been monstrous for both sides.

[Oberon]

And let me just state for the record, before I retire to bed, that I am not American, I am British, and I am not some hard right wing conservative, in fact I consider myself quite liberal. I wasn't a particularly big fan of George Bush, and expected highly of Obama when he was first inaugurated.
All in all, I tick most of the boxes to be what Americans would call a Democrat, and yet I do not think of things as left or right wing, conservative or liberal, because there is no such thing as black or white, in any situation and in my opinion, and my opinion alone, I think that it is incredibly naive to think that the world exists in Black and White.

That's all I'll say on the subject for now, I'm going to bed before my rambling becomes uncontrollable.

[Raptor1]

Originally Posted by Fader_Berg

The bombs over Hiroshima and Nagasaki, togehter killed almost 200.000 people instantly? The death toll to this day is totaling ~400.000 people who died in the consequence of the bombs because of radiation. Far most of them civilians.

"Imperial Edict", yeah right... That's one sorry excuse.

200,000? I think the highest estimates don't go over 150,000.

Regardless, the bombing saved many more lives than they caused deaths. Estimated casualties for a successful execution of Olympic and Coronet went up to 1 million men for the Allies alone; the fact that the Japanese conscripted most of their population into the army without any proper armament or training and with suicidal orders to resist the invasion at all costs meant that Japanese casualties would far exceed that. All this is combined with the casualties that would've been caused by Operation Zipper in Malaya, Operation Tiderace in Signapore and, most importantly, the impending Soviet invasion of Hokkaido that was to follow the landing in the Kurils.

Not to mention the fact that quite a few nuclear weapons were planned to have been used as tactical nukes to balance out the operational numerical equality that the Japanese have created with their conscription.

EDIT: Bah, shouldn't be writing so late at night.

EDIT 2: There, should be comprehensible now.

[CaptainHaplo]

Oberon has done an excellent job above with his timeline.

I will also say this - to those of you who have never seen combat - never been shot at, and never had to pull a trigger - you have no understanding of the stresses involved.

The comment of 5:53 - encouraging a person to reach for a weapon - is actually a comment that makes note of the ROE - if he DOES reach for a weapon, he confirms his own status as a combatant. Now - you just pulled a trigger - you now have an injured person in your sights - do you want to see him reach for a weapon - proving he is a "bad guy" - or do you want to see him hobble off, passing by a weapon and instead reaching for safety. If there is any doubt in your mind about him actually being a combatant - you know you have already injured him - if he is not a combatant - you have to face the fact that your actions marred for life an innocent person. It is part of the mental rationalization to want that person to reach for a weapon - which absolves you of the wounding and gives you the (somewhat shaky) ethical ground to put him out of his misery.

Now - a comment about what is conspicuously absent in this discussion. You have a "reporter" - often local populace member - in an area of conflict - and around people with weapons. In addition, you have a unit of your own army nearby. The video shows the photographer was going to take a picture of SOMETHING - and being a "war correspondant" - you can bet a doughnut that he wasn't going to take a picture of a little girl playing with her doggy in the park. Something was going down - and the "reporter" knew it. Otherwise he wouldn't have been setting up to capture it. The fact there were armed elements in his immediate vicinity show that there was action about to occur (or in the case of the "sneaking" aroung the corner - already going on). Against whom - is unknown. It might have been the unit entering the area - it might have been another militia group, or any other possibilities. But the reality is $hit was about to get (or already was) hot, and the intervention by the soldiers involved obviously stopped things. Good or bad - we won't ever know.

But to claim that the entire thing was just "indescriminant" killing by US forces is a total croc.

[Castout]

OMG a camera was thought of an RPG...
It must be a combination of poor tracking technology, poor judgment and an appetite for some action after some extended lull.

Some more brain should be put into the brawn especially before engaging from high above.

[CaptainHaplo]

Castout - US land forces are stretched thin, but the reality is that few countries are in a position to do much to the US. Could they use our current state to pursue regional goals? Possibly - but it would be a dangerous decision. Could a country invade the US? Only if its Canada or Mexico - and Mexico has been doing that for decades already. Anyone else has to deal with our navy, and no country on earth has the ability to take on our navy in the open ocean and win right now.

[Fader_Berg]

Originally Posted by Oberon

You do realise that most of the purple hearts issued today were quite likely from the five hundred thousand that were made in preparation for Operation Downfall? It's hard to tell whether or not the casualties of Operation Downfall would have exceeded that of the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but considering that at least seven nuclear weapons would have been used or available to be used during Operation Downfall, it could be argued that the civilian deaths alone would be three times higher. The devastation would not have been limited to two cities either it would have been distributed equally across the whole continent.
Very much a choice between the devil and the deep blue sea, but an invasion of Japan would have been monstrous for both sides.

Nice hypothesis... We'll never know, do we. We could have spare at least 350.000 civilian lives too. And I don't care if you're republican or democrat, by the way. Not the least...

Originally Posted by Rapto1

200,000? I think the highest estimates don't go over 150,000.
Regardless, the bombing saved many more lives than they caused.

I have proved you wrong then, haven't I. We can dispute the numbers, but it is one hell of a impressive detah toll within hours. You've just got to admit that.
I disagree over the necessarity of it all. Japan was already defeated. There wasn't much more for them to do. They didn't pose any direct threat to the US or any surrouning countries since almost the whole country was in ruins. It might had been hard to invade Japan at the time. But they had no fair option other than to surrender in the long run. I think lives could have been spared if they choosed to wait them out.
Now, there is no news that USA makes their vengence and benefit priority number one. We've seen it time after time in history. No human life without a US citizenchip (or their allies) are worth ****. That's pretty much what this video shows.

Have a nice day.

[TLAM Strike]

I noticed these reporters don't ware the blue flack jackets and helmets with "PRESS" written on them.

[Raptor1]

Originally Posted by Fader_Berg

I have proved you wrong then, haven't I. We can dispute the numbers, but it is one hell of a impressive detah toll within hours. You've just got to admit that.
I disagree over the necessarity of it all. Japan was already defeated. There wasn't much more for them to do. They didn't pose any direct threat to the US or any surrouning countries since almost the whole country was in ruins. It might had been hard to invade Japan at the time. But they had no fair option other than to surrender in the long run. I think lives could have been spared if they choosed to wait them out.
Now, there is no news that USA makes their vengence and benefit priority number one. We've seen it time after time in history. No human life without a US citizenchip (or their allies) are worth ****. That's pretty much what this video shows.

Have a nice day.

You have not proven anything wrong. The bombing of Tokyo on the night of March 10th, 1945 caused over 100,000 deaths alone, which is quite a bit more than the highest casualty estimate on either of the atomic bombs.

Waiting it out? You mean staving the Japanese home islands by blockade and continuing the conventional bombing which has killed far more people than the Atomic bombs? This would still have caused more casualties...

Also, don't forget that the Soviets had plans of their own and, had the US not invaded or performed anything to end the war, you can be sure the Soviets would have, likely causing massive casualties as well...