NATO kills ex-Guantanamo detainee in Afghanistan.

A terrorist is someone who is trying to kill you.
A good terrorist is one that failed and is dead.
A negotiating terrorist means he is just reloading.

reply to post by beezzer


A 'terrorist' is defined as anybody who glances sideways at the US.
A 'terrorist' is anybody they want out of the way.
A 'terrorist' is a figment of imagination.
One man's 'terrorist' is another man's 'freedom fighter'.

Originally posted by Kryties

Originally posted by Paulioetc15
The United States military works to keep collateral damage to a minimum and reduce civilian casualties as much as possible.

Tell that to these Iraqi journalists just going about their daily business.....only to be chopped to pieces by an AC-130 gunship then run over by tanks.......US of course....

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/9ff5cc743637.jpg[/atsimg]

Let me guess: Have you been over to Iraq in 2007 or just you mouthing off without the head of the battle? It's easy to say you're not going to do it but you haven't been there. The 2007 Iraq was at that time where insurgents. Besides, reporters who embed with a unit in a combat zone know the risks. If a reporter is going to embed themselves with some terrorists, then they should realize that a hellfire may make an appearance on their camera.

Same with Afghanistan too, it not just the US, a lot of civilians were known for sheltering the Taliban, making them targets.

Also i noticed while they were fired upon, some reporter stick it's camera like a gun making it look like they were firing on them.

That said, there are need some serious ROEs need to be done but the there was an investigation and they were clear on wrong-doing. Don't be so quick to call someone a sociopath when you have never had to fight in a war yourself.

Also there was already an apology letters send by the U.S. to those victims of reporter families. I guess modern times nowadays, some reason people care so much about collateral damage but only when it involves the USA.

Those military fight so that people allow you to post these stuff off.

Originally posted by Kryties

Originally posted by Paulioetc15
The United States military works to keep collateral damage to a minimum and reduce civilian casualties as much as possible.

Tell that to these Iraqi journalists just going about their daily business.....only to be chopped to pieces by an AC-130 gunship then run over by tanks.......US of course....

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/9ff5cc743637.jpg[/atsimg]

Thank you for providing a photo that shows 2 terrorists carrying rifles.

Because you have no military training you do not see that these two terrorists have rifles with slings, on their backs. In a war zone, it’s a bad idea for the locals to be running around with rifles slung on their backs. The command is simple. Valkyrie1 weapons are free, engage target.
As for the tanks running them over? The tank drivers probably didn't recognize the splag as bodies. If you would like I have some of those photos as well.
This terrorist is not the first to have been released and returned to combat.
Odds are, he won't be the last. And for those that do, Boeing has their name on one of their products, made just for them.

reply to post by Violater1


Have you been living under a rock for the last year? This made front page news.

They are journo's carrying camera's - that is public knowledge.

articles.cnn.com...:WORLD

Video shows deaths of two Reuters journalists in Iraq in 2007
April 05, 2010|By the CNN Wire Staff

One of two photojournalists killed in a 2007 attack by a U.S. helicopter gunship in Iraq was being rescued when the gunship's crew fired on the van to which he was being carried, according to footage posted online Monday.

Reuters photographer Saeed Cmagh survived an initial strafing by the Apache gunship's 30 mm machine gun, but he apparently died when the gunship opened fire on people attempting to get him off the sidewalk where he lay, according to the video. The aerial footage was posted by the Web site WikiLeaks, which said the video remains classified and "clearly shows the unprovoked slaying of a wounded Reuters employee and his rescuers."

The U.S. investigation into the attack found that the helicopter gunship's crew mistook the journalists' cameras for weapons while seeking out insurgents who had been firing at American troops in the area. The fliers estimated they killed 12 to 15 Iraqis in the attack.

"This tragic incident was investigated at that time by the brigade involved and the investigation found that the forces involved were not aware of the presence of the two reporters, and that all evidence available supported the conclusion by those forces that they were engaging armed insurgents, and not civilians," Maj. Shawn Turner, a U.S. military spokesman, told CNN in a written statement Monday.

The Army's 2007 report on the incident found the crew had "neither reason nor probability to assume that neutral media personnel were embedded with enemy forces," according to a copy of the document released to CNN.

Although I did get one thing wrong, it's was an Apache not an AC130.

Nice try though mate, and I think I just proved you are wearing rose-coloured glasses.

"This tragic incident was investigated at that time by the brigade involved and the investigation found that the forces involved were not aware of the presence of the two reporters, and that all evidence available supported the conclusion by those forces that they were engaging armed insurgents, and not civilians,"

Maj. Shawn Turner, a U.S. military spokesman, told CNN in a written statement Monday. The Army's 2007 report on the incident found the crew had "neither reason nor probability to assume that neutral media personnel were embedded with enemy forces," according to a copy of the document released to CNN.

reply to post by Kryties



So even tho this was stated, and the journalist were casualties, which happens IT IS WAR......

Youre still trying to push the propaganda forward .........youre agenda isnt showing at all....

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask

"This tragic incident was investigated at that time by the brigade involved and the investigation found that the forces involved were not aware of the presence of the two reporters, and that all evidence available supported the conclusion by those forces that they were engaging armed insurgents, and not civilians,"

Maj. Shawn Turner, a U.S. military spokesman, told CNN in a written statement Monday. The Army's 2007 report on the incident found the crew had "neither reason nor probability to assume that neutral media personnel were embedded with enemy forces," according to a copy of the document released to CNN.

reply to post by Kryties

 

So even tho this was stated, and the journalist were casualties, which happens IT IS WAR......

Youre still trying to push the propaganda forward .........youre agenda isnt showing at all....

Agreed, and his ad hominem attacks are proof that he lacks the intellectual capacity to deny ignorance.
I, for one, am quite satisfied with the death of another bad seed terrorist. That's one less to carry a sapper vest into a restaurant.

reply to post by ManBehindTheMask


My 'agenda' is quite simple really. I can't understand why people want to perpetuate war, death and destruction. Call me a 'hippy' or a 'peace freak' or whatever ridiculous insults you want to, I care not. I just think people who enjoy watching and perpetuating death and destruction are nothing more than psychopaths - along with those who talk of 'collateral damage' like it's nothing more than a day at the office.

reply to post by Violater1


I don't hear enough chest beating, MORE CHEST THUMPING!!!!!! Let's get that game of 'Pin the tail on the dead tewwowist' going - oh and maybe lets smear some blood everywhere to satisfy everyone's urges for some more gore!

Originally posted by Violater1
Agreed, and his ad hominem attacks are proof that he lacks the intellectual capacity to deny ignorance.

plover.net...

One of the most widely misused terms on the Net is "ad hominem". It is most often introduced into a discussion by certain delicate types, delicate of personality and mind, whenever their opponents resort to a bit of sarcasm. As soon as the suspicion of an insult appears, they summon the angels of ad hominem to smite down their foes, before ascending to argument heaven in a blaze of sanctimonious glory. They may not have much up top, but by God, they don't need it when they've got ad hominem on their side. It's the secret weapon that delivers them from any argument unscathed.

Let's get off the personal ad hominem merry-go-round and focus on the topic.

He got apprehended on the battlefield, released from Guantanamo in 2007, and was killed in Afghanistan in 2011. Apparently, his luck ran out? In war there will be casualties. He is just another one. As far as I am concerned, he knew the risk by taking up arms yet again after be detained for so long.

The righteousness of his detainment is for another time, but he was among insurgents in Afghanistan in 2011 and was killed. I am supposed to feel outrage and sympathy? I can sympathize if he was among his family raising sheep in some mountain village or making pottery in a bazaar in Kabul and was killed, but he was among armed insurgents. At least according to Boston Globe article and statements made by the military.

Any death is tragic, but this guy knew the risk by joining up with his old buddies. Either prison or death. Afghanistan is not a stable place, and it was unstable long before NATO arrived. Unfortunately, innocent people have been killed or detained. War is war. No pleasantries what so ever in that environment. If he was a freedom fighter as some boast, great! He can be celebrated as a martyr by Afghans in the street. If he was a killer and fanatic, then better him than some civilians being killed as a result of his pursuits of vengeance or NATO Forces suffering his wrath. Just another casualty in the long running war know as Afghanistan. There will be more . . .

Originally posted by Jakes51
He got apprehended on the battlefield, released from Guantanamo in 2007, and was killed in Afghanistan in 2011. Apparently, his luck ran out? In war there will be casualties. He is just another one. As far as I am concerned, he knew the risk by taking up arms yet again after be detained for so long.

The righteousness of his detainment is for another time, but he was among insurgents in Afghanistan in 2011 and was killed. I am supposed to feel outrage and sympathy? I can sympathize if he was among his family raising sheep in some mountain village or making pottery in a bazaar in Kabul and was killed, but he was among armed insurgents. At least according to Boston Globe article and statements made by the military.

Any death is tragic, but this guy knew the risk by joining up with his old buddies. Either prison or death. Afghanistan is not a stable place, and it was unstable long before NATO arrived. Unfortunately, innocent people have been killed or detained. War is war. No pleasantries what so ever in that environment. If he was a freedom fighter as some boast, great! He can be celebrated as a martyr by Afghans in the street. If he was a killer and fanatic, then better him than some civilians being killed as a result of his pursuits of vengeance or NATO Forces suffering his wrath. Just another casualty in the long running war know as Afghanistan. There will be more . . .

Death can be tragic but when it's come to terrorists, they are stripped of being a status of human beings.

I personaly shall be observing a minutes silence for this particular freedom fighter. May his death herald a dawn of victories for all the brave Muslim men, women and children fighting the War On Terror.

reply to post by Kryties


If their stupid enough to believe this religion wants females to wear rags over their faces....

Then arent they already too insane to be out in public?

reply to post by Wertdagf


Id be happy to stop whack job christians and jews from going outside too, but what you gonna do eh!

Sneaky foreigners and there renegade ways!!!!

reply to post by Kryties


This image seems familiar. Weren't there men with rpgs right by them?

Gitmo is a training center for the CIA and al qaeda, why do you think they let these people go????

you cant sell war if theres no war

All this sympathy and claims of freedom fighting doesn't change the fact the guy was a follower of a back water theocratic regime. The same regime that destroyed priceless historic statues because they didn't fit into their world view. Lets not forget the medieval treatment of its women and of westerner's it captures. The Taliban was not a CIA front they are the disposed leadership of the country! Now granted the replacements are not the best, but at least there is potential for equality denied during the last regime is now possible!