any civilian casualty should be taken in seriously and should be avoided. with that said, shoot the guys with weapons, shooting the journalists were unfortunately but there was no point in killing the people trying to help the injured.

i wish all those terrorist ***** would get killed soon. fighting for what they believe in is one thing and killing innocent people (suicide bombers) is another.

i see no harm in solders having fun with their kills, thats how warriors worked for thousands of years, right?

 

72 virgins?

 

I agree with Paul@dbtuned on alot of his comments. UNLESS you are IN the military or have been in the military you have no idea what combat is like.

 

As a left leaning guy who was against our invasion of Iraq, might I kindly suggest you show some respect or at the very least keep your disrespect to yourself unless you're going to say it to the face of a Marine? If we could actually discuss our differences with some respect, we might ALL learn something.

 

Nope, its fact. Do you know, and have you read any of the Project for a New American Century, US Space Command Vision for 2020??

I live in the heart of the military intelligence community in monterey, DLI/Naval Post Grad.... My uncle was a Captain on the Enterprise, my other uncle was a world war two fighter pilot ace. Actually all on my mothers side were high ups in the Navy, I know a thing or two about the military. I have a degree in Poly sci, with a focus on American Foreign Policy

These are the smartest people in the military, and they are mental midgets. ****in retards that don't know **** from shinola, probably couldn't find half of the countries in the middle east on a map. just like all of you.

 

i volunteered....

 

Does Captain Kirk know you're an elitist hippie douchebag?

 

well clearly the first engagement was reasonable since the cameramen were in the company of armed insurgents.

But Ive never heard of any ROE that call for attacking and killing unarmed people trying to rescue the injured. Hell we didnt even do that to the *****

well, doesnt matter now, they definitely lied to the public about their investigation of the incident and not knowing how the cameramen and children got hurt, theres no denying that. This will get ugly

 

no I just read books, and I dont watch fox news.

 

I lol'd

 

It would be wise for folks to understand more about war crimes and international law before making assertions that are likely untrue and ignorant.

In the context of this particular action - the most directly relevant document to read is Article 57 of the 1977 Additional Protocol I to the 1949 Geneva Convention. Secondary information is within Article 51 of the Protocol I as well as relevant sections of Protocol II.

The important concepts to understand include Civilian Immunity, Collateral Damage, Immunity From Attack, Indiscriminate Attack, Legitimate Military Targets, Protected Persons and Willful Killing.

And before people get up in arms about Law and "**** that" and all the rest.... realize please that there is a VERY good reason why we have Rules of Law that apply to armed conflict. Anyone who has actually been in the service or even had family members who have served will understand what I'm saying. It's to everyone's benefit.

On a side note, while the 1949 Geneva Convention grants exceptional protections to Journalists, it also expressly states that journalists who are "accredited by and accompanying" an army are to be treated as civilian members of that force. Obviously, the question of definition of "army" in this case is critical - as is the question of accreditation.