Cameraman Killed by US Troops

[Manu]

BAGHDAD, Iraq -- Reuters news agency is calling for a "comprehensive investigation" after one of its cameramen was shot and killed by U.S. troops near Baghdad in an apparent case of mistaken identity.

Coalition officials say soldiers mistook Mazen Dana's camera for a shoulder-launched weapon and have described the incident as a "tragic mistake."

The shooting took place in daylight Sunday afternoon outside the U.S.-run Abu Ghraib prison near Baghdad, scene of an attack Saturday night that killed six Iraqis and wounded nearly 60 others.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/...man/index.html

[Cd.]

Originally posted by Manu
BAGHDAD, Iraq -- Reuters news agency is calling for a "comprehensive investigation" after one of its cameramen was shot and killed by U.S. troops near Baghdad in an apparent case of mistaken identity.

Coalition officials say soldiers mistook Mazen Dana's camera for a shoulder-launched weapon and have described the incident as a "tragic mistake."

The shooting took place in daylight Sunday afternoon outside the U.S.-run Abu Ghraib prison near Baghdad, scene of an attack Saturday night that killed six Iraqis and wounded nearly 60 others.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/...man/index.html

I am not so sure it was an accident. Maybe the US does not want to have camera's recording their deeds.

[Shawn]

Originally posted by Criminal
I am not so sure it was an accident. Maybe the US does not want to have camera's recording their deeds.

Crim --- c'mon.

What deeds? Driving in a convoy of armored vehicles to secure the site of an enemy mortar attack?

How many of your friends have been killed by somebody who pops up/jumps out of a car/comes around a corner with a shoulder fired weapon like the RPG-7?

At what distance would you risk not only your own life, but the life of your brothers to hesitate in eliminating what appears to be a threat?

An independent Palestinian journalist pointed his shoulder mounted camera at an American tank in an area where American soldiers had just been attacked - in a theatre that has seen significant damage from shoulder fired weapons.

Self-preservation kicked in - and now that soldier has to live with the fact that he was wrong.

What if he'd been right, and hesitated?

If that were the case - he wouldn't have to live with it. He'd be a statistic.

Give me a break on the conspiracy theories. I know what the American soldiers there are faced with, and I know how we are trained.

[ATBlythe2000]

Originally posted by Shawn
Self-preservation kicked in - and now that soldier has to live with the fact that he was wrong.

What if he'd been right, and hesitated?

If that were the case - he wouldn't have to live with it. He'd be a statistic.

If he hesitated, he wouldn't have to live with it. he'd be dead.

[Hannibal]

If you can’t control yourself in a fashionably matter during the heat of battle then you in should not be there in the first place. The American occupation of Iraq will no doubt turn into a quagmire if American troops continue to behave like this. Killing civilian families and journalists is not my idea of winning the "hearts and minds" of the Iraqi people.

[Shawn]

Originally posted by Hannibal
If you can’t control yourself in a fashionably matter during the heat of battle then you in should not be there in the first place. The American occupation of Iraq will no doubt turn into a quagmire if American troops continue to behave like this. Killing civilian families and journalists is not my idea of winning the "hearts and minds" of the Iraqi people.

What exactly is "fashionable" in the heat of battle???

If you are regularly fired upon by shoulder fired weapons, what is the "fashionable" standard when seeing yet another individual stand up and point a shoulder mounted device at you???

Would you be so cavalier if the lives of your soldiers/friends/brothers were on the line?

American soldiers do not deliberately TARGET civilians, journalists, or any other brand of noncombatant.

[whoswho]

I just came to realize just how much against the USA and for the arabs the Reuters are,imo.
The camaraman was;nt drafted to go into a war zone, an it may come as a damn supprize to some of you who hate or country and troops, but war zones are DANGEROUS!!
I know it was a mistake of war and no fault of our troops. But since the camamraman was working for Reuters, maybe it was one less American hater to spread lies about the war.
Anyone who tries to frame this soldier dose'nt deserve to be in this country. And the rest of you arab sympathizers can kiss off,imo. who

[RightWingZealot]

If you can’t control yourself in a fashionably matter during the heat of battle then you in should not be there in the first place.

So when you were in a combat situation, how did you maintain a "fashionable manner"?
And what exactly IS a "fashionable" manner in which to behave when your friends are being ambushed on a daily basis?

Perhaps before americans fire on a potential threat they should first send the potential attacker a note saying "DO YOU WANT TO KILL ME? IF YOU DO CHECK HERE"

that sort of note what quite fashionable when I was younger. and MAYBE the iraqi's would be smart enough to understand something like that?

[whoswho]

This is the same commy bunch of stuff they did to our troops n VietNam! If everyone is so worried about it why not go overthere in the hot,dusty,desert where our troops are and fight against them on the iraqi side.
I will warn you that you will be fighting against the best military in this world, equiped with the best men.

[JoeyNormal]

How many journalists have your troops killed now? Those heroic soldiers who, ye sez, never, ever, absolutely positively of a basis of never kill civilians...

[RightWingZealot]

Uhhh joey... time to stop tokin that crack pipe buddy.

noone says we dont kill civilians from time to time.
we say we dont do it deliberatly.
There is a difference.

The only reason your country doesnt accidentaly kill civilians from time to time is becuase your military is laughable. They are so busy dressing up in costumes and grunting for Peter Jackson, that they cant seem to find a good conflict to get into.

[Geoffrey]

Originally posted by whoswho
war zones are DANGEROUS!!

exactly. They know the risk when they go into the war zone to get "exclusive footage"

Sometimes, I just can't stand the media

[Hannibal]

How stupid is your military when they can’t tell the difference between



this



and this

[RightWingZealot]

depends.. how far away were they?
you seem to have been there, so why dont you tell us?

[Geoffrey]

Originally posted by RightWingZealot
depends.. how far away were they?
you seem to have been there, so why dont you tell us?

ZING!


I imagine if I was there, and had seen what, 50 people die since major combat stopped, and some do0d with something on his shoulder popped up and pointed it at me, I would shoot first too

[Xenodamus]

Originally posted by whoswho
The camaraman was;nt drafted to go into a war zone, an it may come as a damn supprize to some of you who hate or country and troops, but war zones are DANGEROUS!!

What war zone? I thought Bush already declared the end of the war in Iraq ...yet this journalist was killed in a war zone?

[ATBlythe2000]

Originally posted by Xenodamus
What war zone? I thought Bush already declared the end of the war in Iraq ...yet this journalist was killed in a war zone?

No, Bush declared an end to the major fighting in the war with Iraq. Not really the War itself. It's still hostile territory, like the rest of the middle east. It's hard to tell which terrorist group is attacking this hours bus full of kids.

[Shawn]

Originally posted by Xenodamus


What war zone? I thought Bush already declared the end of the war in Iraq ...yet this journalist was killed in a war zone?

You know very well that Bush declared the end of major offensive combat operations, not the end of the conflict. Iraq is still a "war zone", "hostile theatre", or "unsecured station".

Just because the force-on-force ground war is over - (as Bush declared) doesn't mean that all hostilities cease.

But you knew that. Apparently you'd rather play on semantics. I'll agree with your insinuation that Bush's declaration was incorrect right after we see the next Iraqi Mechanized Division conduct a counteroffensive to drive the Americans back to the Kuwaiti border.

[Shawn]

Originally posted by Hannibal
How stupid is your military when they can’t tell the difference between



this



and this

Those are nice little flashcards. Now rotate each so that all you can see is the 3"x 5" front profile, put yourself 50 -150 meters away from it, and then give yourself a generous 2-5 seconds to decide whether it is a camera, or an RPG. (Don't forget to consider that you're wearing sand and sweat-caked goggles if you're in profile atop the tank, or looking through a "6 x 2" mirrored observation type porthole if you're buttoned up)

If you thought it was a camera rather than an RPG and held your fire -- nobody will ever know how much of a hero you were, and a dumb**** journalist dodged a bullet.

If you thought it was a camera rather than an RPG, and you were wrong, you (and probably two to five of your brothers in arms) just died.

It's already been said, but if you can't relate to the tension that those guys are under in making those snap decisions, than you probably can't be convinced that it was anything but deliberate.

[Patrician]

Originally posted by Shawn


Those are nice little flashcards. Now rotate each so that all you can see is the 3"x 5" front profile, put yourself 50 -150 meters away from it, and then give yourself a generous 2-5 seconds to decide whether it is a camera, or an RPG. (Don't forget to consider that you're wearing sand and sweat-caked goggles if you're in profile atop the tank, or looking through a "6 x 2" mirrored observation type porthole if you're buttoned up)

pwned!