Collateral Murder

[mrstickball]

MrBubbles said:

Sqrl said:

MrBubbles said:
i think it is good that armed terrorists died here. the reuters guys hooked up with armed terrorists...whether for a "good story" or for more sinister reasons is irrelevant...if you are hanging out with terrorists then you run the risk of being shot.

This kind of goes back to the point I was making about journalist reporting their locations.

But it is fair to point out that he may have done so and the information may well have been misshandled.  We don't know.

 

I know people like to draw conclusions and bundle things into nice neat piles...but seriously...we don't know so much about this case.

 

Any conclusions are tentative at best.

ive seen some of the BBC things when they go visit some of the taliban.  they are generally blindfolded and agree not to reveal any sort of information about the possible location of the where theyve been taken.  you tell people you are with some terrorists and it can put the journalists lives at risk and any others intending to work in the region.

so it would seem unlikely that they would report their whereabouts.  its dangerous working in a warzone and you take risks to get the story.

That is exactly it. If the helos don't know there are civilians in the area, because the jouranlists may have not notified the proper officials, then your life is in jeopardy.

If you run around with a mob that flashes RPG-like weaponry at a helicopter, chances are, you will get shot at. Unfortunately, that is war. I hope an investigation is done to ensure the right steps were taken by the pilots, but again, we've never had a war to where no friendlies were killed, or there were no friendly fire incedents.