# F-14 over Faliuja engagement video



## belkin81

http://members.cox.net/winston_wolf/CAS.wmv


----------



## tabernac

It looks like the video where an Apache kills an Iraqi farmers thinking they were terrorists. But in this case the victims were probably millitants.


----------



## SFontaine

You're joking right? That video with the Apache? They guys in it are clearly terrorists. That's never been disputed.


----------



## girlfiredup

SFontaine, how do you know they are terrorists?   Where and when was this video shot and where did you find it?   I'm not challenging you in anyway... I'm just interested in more information on the circumstances behind the bombing.


----------



## SFontaine

The US Military confirmed that they were indeed terrorists. That has never been in doubt... I love this 14 year old sitting at home in Edmonton judging people over there who are getting shot at everyday by these terrorist assholes. Bugs the crap outa me.


----------



## Fraser.g

I have been trying to find that original video of the gunship taking out the two veh. I had it and then my PC went for the big sleep. Can anyone send me the link.

 Cheers


----------



## bossi

Hmmm ... all I'm getting is a 404 error message when I try to open the F14 link ... (?)


----------



## sinblox

RN PRN said:
			
		

> I have been trying to find that original video of the gunship taking out the two veh. I had it and then my PC went for the big sleep. Can anyone send me the link.
> 
> Cheers



The apache video is available at http://www.militaryvideos.net/. You need to download "BitTorrent"to download them, but it's a pretty good program anyway.


----------



## Jarnhamar

> The US Military confirmed that they were indeed terrorists. That has never been in doubt.



Make no mistake, there ARE WMD in Iraq, we WILL find them. That has never been in doubt.


----------



## Private Jimbo

SFontaine said:
			
		

> The US Military confirmed that they were indeed terrorists. That has never been in doubt....



The US military also went to war with Iraq because it thought they had weapons of mass destruction.... I for one don't believe everything the US military says anymore.


----------



## SFontaine

They didn't lie about the WMD though.. They had faulty intelligence. Whenever the US accidently kills innocent people they come out with a statement apologizing.. They could have covered up the 9 civilians they accidently bombed in Afghanistan but didn't. The US Military said the targets killed in the video were insurgents, and none of us have any other evidence proving otherwise.


----------



## Jarnhamar

They lied about the intelligence they had.

I havn't seen the helicoper video, can you describe it for me? Links dont work for me for some reason.


----------



## Hawaii Mike

Just curious:  was the US military forthcoming about the incompetent Air Force pilots who bombed your guys in Afghanistan?


----------



## SFontaine

Ghost778 said:
			
		

> They lied about the intelligence they had.



Can you please show me evidence of that? I believe 2 days ago some commision came out with a report stating that there was no manipulation or arm twisting of the intelligence, but that it was faulty due to the collective intelligence of various countries.

[quote author=Hawaii Mike]Just curious:   was the US military forthcoming about the incompetent Air Force pilots who bombed your guys in Afghanistan?[/quote]

Yes. There was an immediate apology, and an immediate investigation. You oughta read Major Schmidts reprimand letter... It's scathing. The man is never going to fly ever again. His career is over and I doubt he's going to have a normal life after this.


----------



## Hawaii Mike

Yeah, I read about the reprimand here and posted a comment on it.  You're absolutely correct.  This loser zoomie will never get near a cockpit again.


----------



## SFontaine

This will be hanging over his head for the rest of his life. I'd like to see him get a good job with "killed 4 Canadian soldiers due to hotheadedness" on his resume


----------



## Jarnhamar

> Can you please show me evidence of that? I believe 2 days ago some commision came out with a report stating that there was no manipulation or arm twisting of the intelligence, but that it was faulty due to the collective intelligence of various countries.



Sure because you asked nicely  
*CIA Failed Miserably on Iraq info*

Washington(AP)

The key U.S. Assertions leading to the 2003 invasion of Iraq - that president saddam hussain had chemical and biological weapons and was working to make nuclear weapons - were wrong and based on false or overstated CIA analyses, a scathing Senate Intelligence Committe report asserted Friday.  

Intelligence analysts fell victim to "group think" assumptions that Iraqw had weapons that it did not, concluded a bipartisan report. Many factors contributing to those failures are ongoing problems within the U.S intelligence communitity.- which cannot be fixed with money alone, it said.

The report did not address a key allegation by Democrats: That Bush and other officals further twisted the evidence to back their calls for war against Iraq. The committee's top Democrat, Senator Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, said he was disipointed that the panel did not look into what he called "Exaggerated" claims of the Iraq threat by top administration officials.

The report repeatedly blasts departing CIA director George Tenet, accusing him of skewing advice to top policy-makers with the CIA's view and elnowing out dissenting views from other intelligence agencies oveseen by the state of defense departments.
END





Personally i think the whole "It was bad information we got from someone else" line doesn't cut it. They went to war on iffy intelligence from other countries? Thats not something i expect from the most powerful country in the world.  The US (or parts of it) wanted to go to war with Iraq. They said find us a reason. People tried to find reasons through shitty intelligence from bad sources and they took what information they had and bent it to support their case.
"wrong and based on false or overstated CIA analyses"  To me that reads the CIA lied.  Governments lie to get what they want thats not something new. They just got caught. I don't want to believe they lied either but they did and if your still not convinced give it a few more months.
This again might be better left to a seperate thread to debate over?


----------



## muskrat89

> This again might be better left to a seperate thread to debate over?



Yes, please. Let's get this one back on topic.....


----------



## Jarnhamar

Heres a question. Is it an F16 that drops the bomb or and F14?


----------



## Hawaii Mike

Ghost,

All US aircraft can be configured for ground attack.  Their designs dictate how much ordnance they can carry and how effective they are.  F-14 is less effective than F-16 is less effective than A-10.  Even S-3 Vikings and P-3 Orions have been carrying Mk82, GBU, JDAM, etc in this war.  Primarily, though, F-14 is limited to CAP and radar suppression.  To unwieldy at low altitudes and speeds.


----------



## Jarnhamar

I agree mike. I ment to say that i've seen this footage in a few places and I have seen the plane dropping the bombs called an F14 and I have also heard it was an F16. I was curious what type of fighter actually dropped the bombs.


----------



## krugan

Here is a link to a page that has some interesting videos and pictures (some very graphic ones also), but the one that shows the Apache killing the 3 men, is that the video you guys are talking about?  How can you tell they're "terrorists"?  Doesn't it look like one guy is getting out of a tank while another gets in?  I don't think these guys are hopping off a tractor doing any farming at night over there.

If these guys are Iraqi soldiers, then would the last guy that was clearly injured and then shot up, would that not be considered "murder" under UN law?

There is another video that says Israeli soldiers shot off the foot of a Palestinian because he didn't have any I.D. and the guy laying there with what does look like his foot severed and three soldiers around him then walking away.   

Many different videos and pictures can be seen by going to the home page and clicking on the "Patriots" link and choosing a different part of the world and then selecting a country.

http://www.thenausea.com/usa-iraq.html


----------



## girlfiredup

Krugan,

The video is not of 3 men.   It's aerial footage of a pilot dropping a bomb on a group of about 30+ men that walked out onto the street.   The pilot radios in and says: "I've got a group of people out here on the street, do you want me to take them out?"   The voice that comes back to him on the radio is: "take them out". The pilot says "in 10 seconds.................. impact!"   It's too bad the link is dead because it's an interesting video.


----------



## krugan

GirlFiredUp,

Thanks for the info, but I think we're mixing things up. I was referring to what cheeky_monkey and SFontaine were discussing (right after the original post) about the Apache and whether it is the same video of the Apache on the link I added.


----------



## girlfiredup

Ah I see.   Well sorry for the mix up.   Carry on.


----------



## sinblox

I was wondering the same thing.

The pilot is clearly instructed "Go forward of the truck and hit him" after he rolled out from under the other truck injured. I thought this was a violation of the Geneva conventions? Unless the US is using the standard"they aren't uniformed soldiers" as an excuse which is sickening. Like it or not, no matter how bad the men killed were, there's rules to follow.


----------



## SFontaine

So let me get this straight. Because they didn't kill him with the first volley the man is allowed to live? So the US is supposed do what? Roll a truck up in there and treat the guy who would likely kill any Western soldier given the chance. Also there were no American ground forces in the area that could have done that anyway. The Army isn't about to let these guys go who could then go on to kill Americans or Brits so they killed them. Simple enough.

These men were terrorists. Besides, the pilots were not getting a sort of blurred picture like we were. They had a combination of intelligence and much better imagery than we can see. They made the right choice.


----------



## sinblox

SFontaine, you completely missed the point. Can someone who knows it well clarify the Geneva convention please? Is it not true that wounded enemy are not to be engaged?


----------



## girlfiredup

krugan said:
			
		

> http://www.thenausea.com/usa-iraq.html



What happened to this link?   It's now dead.   It was working a few days ago.   ARgh!


----------



## bossi

The applicable concept is "hors de combat", as follows:



> hors de combat
> 
> Combatants who are hors de combat are out of the fight are and entitled to respect for their lives and physical and moral integrity. They are to be protected and treated humanely, without adverse discrimination. (Convention I Art. 3; Protocol I, Art. 4)
> 
> Attacking a person who is hors de combat is a grave breach of the Geneva Conventions. (Protocol I, Art. 85, Sec. 3)
> 
> *Persons are hors de combat if they have been captured, if they have surrendered, or if they are unconscious or otherwise incapacitated provided that they do not attempt to fight or escape. (Protocol I, Art. 41, Sec. 2)*
> 
> Parachutists who eject from a damaged aircraft cannot be attacked while they are descending. (Protocol I, Art. 42, Sec. 1)
> 
> Parachuters who have landed in hostile territory must be given a chance to surrender, unless they are clearly acting hostile. (Protocol I, Art. 42, Sec. 2)



I will only politely suggest it's not as black and white as some may say, since the man was not unconscious and it could be interpreted that he was trying to escape ...


----------



## 1feral1

WRT the Apache video...

I have seen the entire video. At first one bad guy takes an armed RPG from the 1/4T truck and walks out to a field and sets it down. Later a tractor pulls up, and then about this time this is where the regular video starts.

After the 1st baddie is hit, the guy by the tractor just before he gets it, tries to deploy the RPG, and then he gets hit too. Watch closely, you can actually seem go to pick it up.

Absolutly 100% bad guys, anythig less is pure BS. Oner must view the entire clip about 5 mind long.

Rest assured they were the bad guys.

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## SFontaine

Hey can someone familiar with internation law help me with this? I heard using 50 cals against baddies is against the law and is only supposed to be used against equipment, which means shirts, belts, hats etc is free game. True or false?


----------



## MJP

You don't need to be familiar with international law....just familiar with the search button.   

We discussed this a few time but the best one was a few months back.   You can check it out here.....http://army.ca/forums/threads/16351.0.html

For anyone to lazy to actually click on the link, the short answer is .50 cal is legal in every aspect, as is tracer, as is 25mm......as everything we use in the forces.

And when you refer to equipment were you joking when you typed shirts, hats, belts?


----------



## SFontaine

That's a big negetory. Someone I spoke to said that using 50 Cals against human beings is illegal however using it against equipment is legal hence why we can shoot people with it (If we shoot their hats, shirts etc). It turns out that guy is a moron.


----------



## Tomas-K

Ghost778 said:
			
		

> The US Military confirmed that they were indeed terrorists. That has never been in doubt.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Make no mistake, there ARE WMD in Iraq, we WILL find them. That has never been in doubt.
Click to expand...


I can hardly believe this post was made in July of the year 2004.

IQ (or lack thereof) is clearly not an issue when joining the US military.


----------



## Tomas-K

SFontaine said:
			
		

> These men were terrorists.



Why were they 'terrorists'?

If another nation invaded Canada under the pretext of 'liberation' and you fought back you would be a 'terrorist'?


----------



## muskrat89

> IQ (or lack thereof) is clearly not an issue when joining the US military.






Tomas - You're going 90 miles per hour down a dead-end street. Show some tact. 

I've met tons of intellectually challenged individuals in the Canadian Forces, also....


----------



## Tomas-K

muskrat89 said:
			
		

> IQ (or lack thereof) is clearly not an issue when joining the US military.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're going 90 miles per hour down a dead-end street. Show some tact.
> 
> I've met tons of intellectually challenged individuals in the Canadian Forces, also....
Click to expand...


Driving in Iraq, American style!

BTW the Canadian forces have a minumum educational requirement.  Enough that in general everyone who joins is good enough to at least make corporal.  Interesting fact.


----------



## Goober

For those who didn't see the Apache video, it was on the site linked a page back. But here is the direct link http://www.thenausea.com/elements/usa/iraq%202003/2004%20january/2004%2001%20iraq%20killing.wmv

Here is the friendly fire incident with the F14 bombing the people on the road

{removed because of the graphic nature Ex-Dragoon]


----------



## QORvanweert

Well, it certainly appeared to me that the guy was trying to drag himself away. BUT, considering that they had what appeared to be an RPG over by the first two guys I don't blame the pilot for shooting him. He might have been going for a weapon. And he had crawled further then was necessary to escape the heat of the fire. IMO they did the right thing.


----------

