Video Games blamed for US Massacre in Iraq

[FallenJellyDoughnut]

+100 points for every civilian killed!
Go for the high score!

+20 bonus if they're older than 45!

 

[TheSkaAssassin]

The behaviour of the US troopers has been likened to them playing a computer game and aiming for high scores.

That's the only line that mentions video games.
Chill out guys, put the pitchforks and torches away.

 

[FallenJellyDoughnut]

gonna run through a few things here:
If you watch the full video and not just that news snippet (available from wikileaks.org)you can see all the problems the pilot and his gunner were facing at the time.
Im assuming you've watched the full video now, if you listen to the tone of their voices, they're semi-serious about the AK47's as they ask for permission to fire. Their tone changes and becomes a lot more serious and on task as soon as what they believe to be an RPG is sighted. It is at this time that they get permission to fire, though they wait until they have a clear shot before opening up to ensure they gotthe group in question. Notice in the video the amount of collateral damage is fairly minimal, they didn't blow through the house to get to the group, nor when they engage the van do they annihilate the wall the guy falls behind. They do not kill the wounded on the ground once they perceive they pose no more threat and instead wait for ground forces to move in and secure the area. Im not defending their actions but before anyone starts on a rant you need to see things from both perspectives.
The comment made by the journalist in the OP's video is fairly harsh, if you did this day in, day out for a year at a time, i am almost positive you would have a more relaxed attitude to it. If you didn't the stress would drive you crazy and like many, you would come back with ptsd or severe regrets.
The reason i thnk he links it to a computer game is because of COD mainly (obvious example) It looks fairly similar and that isnt the pilots fault, nor is it anyones. Credit to the guys at IW for making something that realistic.
War has been raging for ages, since humans started at the very least, before fire arms, arrows, swords, spears, rocks, take your pick. Certainly there have been plenty of bloodthirsty tyrants over te centuries, but to dismiss all of this and liken it to a video game is pointless, even if it is just to undermine the aircrew in that video... if anything, any war game is like war, shock horror, thats what its based on. Just my 2 cents.

Best first post I've ever seen. Welcome to The Escapist good sir! I would also like to say that the camera does actually look like a weapon.

 

[ActionDan]

Yo, Media. SHUT THE FUCK UP.

 

[vaderaider]

The behaviour of the US troopers has been likened to them playing a computer game and aiming for high scores.

That's the only line that mentions video games.
Chill out guys, put the pitchforks and torches away.

In the video the news reader blames it all on video games.

 

[Iconsting]

Oh whoops. This isn't blaming things on video games, this is comparing the behavior of the pilots to that of a gamer trying to obtain a "High score". False alarm people.

Hell, they even discovered that some of the killed men were armed insurgents.

 

[Del-Toro]

It is indeed tragic to see this sort of thing happen. The loss of innocent life in regrettable, but blaming video games?

The pilot and gunner seem to have gotten too trigger-happy for their own good, and this seems to be a reminder that the ROE should be adhered to more carefully.

I would also imagine that the anxiousness in the pilot and gunner's voices was due to the percieved urgency to fire on what they saw were armed insurgents. Sometimes the process of obtaining permission to fire on targets is long and drawn out, and the target may disappear before permission to fire is given. That easily explains the urgency in their voices. Most people don't realize that there is some bureaucracy involved in firing the weapon(s) on a military aircraft nowadays.

I know a guy who used to work with MQ-9s (formerly the, "Predator B," - Now the, "Reaper,") and he said it sometimes took 10 minutes or more for him to recieve permission to investigate or even fire on a threat. That's not even counting the fact that he then had to relay that back to the drone's pilot!

EDIT: The video also points out (at the end) that some insurgents actually were killed when that AH-64 fired on that group. It's just too bad they took out the innocents as well.

I agree whole heartedly with this statement, except for the pilot and gunner being too trigger happy. Then again, I'm not terribly well versed in the RoE, but I would assume they followed it pretty closely. Percieved target to be carrying a weaspon that could take down their helicopter, confirmed targets on ground, asked permission to open fire, confirmed permission and ultimately neutralized the threat. Seems like the only ball dropped was the intelligence they had gathered, for obvious reasons.

As the quoter poster had mentioned, the urgency was not because they wanted to see how many people they could kill, but the fact that their lives were on the line and they need permission to open fire before they can act, which means they're just hovering there in the open with an RPG ready to shoot them down at any time (or so they thought). Quite hoenstly, from what I've seen of my own friends coming back from tours, they acted pretty damn calm and collected under a potentially life-ending scenario. It's somewhat akin to having a gun pointed to your head and your own gun pointed at your shooter, asking permission from a dude who can't see the situation while your shooter is distracted by something. You're going to want that permission to say "open fire" A.S.A.P. so you aren't shot first!

Then they bring into question about that chatter afterwards, saying "they seemed too gun-happy about what they did". As morbid as it sounds, have you not felt proud about something you accomplished at your work place? You have to remember, this is their job! To say that they should be comdemned to hell for displaying a little pride in their handywork is sickening. I'll take the windshield comment as my example, where he points out that he got a shot placed right in the middle, pretty much confirming kills for anyone in the vehicle. How is that a bad thing knowing that they thought those were "bad guys"? I'd be pretty damn proud myself if I'd worked on firing a highly inaccurate gun to place the perfect shot within a vehicle to ensure the four soldiers inside were dead on impact of the round. If they actually were insurgents and they just took out what potentially could have wiped out a company of troopers, there'd be some sort of commendation and they'd be freakin' heroes! If that was the case, I'd be out of my seat and screaming "God damn! I just made the streets safe to walk again." In their heads, they took out soldiers they were supposed to kill as their job and that's a good thing. It's just regretable that wasn't the case.

Which leads to the point of "where are the thoughts of the soliders that did this?" God forbid we get their views on the situation. They couldn't possibly feel badly for what they did, now knowing what they did was wrong. No, because they're heartless killing machines viewing lives as simple point totals straight out of some arcade shooting game! It boggles my mind how some people don't ever stop to consider who's lives they piss on so long as they can get their point across. That's the true evil here.

In the end, I'm not terribly pleased to hear that a bunch of innocents died because of some misinformation and that is something that clearly needs to be worked on, but to say that the soliders out their are heartless, blood sucking, soul crushing, mindless trigger happy monsters is absolutely unforgivable. They're doing their job and maybe if you think they're bad at it, you should go and show them how it's done Mr. Reporter!

That is basically the point I've argued about this, and I just wish I had worded it all this perfectly.

 

[Void(null)]

The behaviour of the US troopers has been likened to them playing a computer game and aiming for high scores.

That's the only line that mentions video games.
Chill out guys, put the pitchforks and torches away.

In the video the news reader blames it all on video games.

Watching the raw footage on Wiki Leaks its just tragic. Side by side with the News Report VS The wikileaks footage, there is absolutely an anti-gamer spin placed on the footage.

 

[capin Rob]

Uh, they clearly weren't blaming video games in that article, I think the comparison was more that they were treating the people they were shooting at like virtual characters and trying to go for the 'high score.' In this case it seems to be you that's overeacting.

Yes this is clearly us overeacting, why would we think they were blameing video games, they only said the troops were killing civillians because they were part og generation x-box and, were treating the gunship like a computer game. I don't see any way that sentence is blameing video games

 

[Iconsting]

+100 points for every civilian killed!
Go for the high score!

+20 bonus if they're older than 45!

+50 if they're short of a killstreak.

Uh, they clearly weren't blaming video games in that article, I think the comparison was more that they were treating the people they were shooting at like virtual characters and trying to go for the 'high score.' In this case it seems to be you that's overeacting.

Yes this is clearly us overeacting, why would we think they were blameing video games, they only said the troops were killing civillians because they were part og generation x-box and, were treating the gunship like a computer game. I don't see any way that sentence is blameing video games

Except that's not what he said. The reporter was comparing the behavior of the pilots to the behavior of gamers, not outright blaming video games for it.

 

[Gigano]

Oh yeah, bring on the ultimate scapegoat, the thing the generel public doesn't know the first thing about, and thus mistrust.

I guess one shouldn't be surprised: the first victim of any war is always the truth, and the army trying to blame anything else than their own hasty conclusions/brutality isn't new.

Why did they allow psycho "High-score keepers" into the army in the first place though? Aren't there screening processes for who gets to join and get a gun (and access to power over civilians)? Are they incompetent or brutal? Or just incompetent at hiding their brutality?

 

[gamefreakbsp]

The media is "crying video game" again.

 

[SmileMan64]

SARCASM MODE, ACTIVATE!

Yeah, right. Video games must also be responsible for initiating the ethnic/religious conflicts that have plagued the people of the Middle East for CENTURIES! It all makes sense now!

 

[Mcface]

The Story was announced on yahoo news [http://uk.news.yahoo.com/5/20100406/twl-let-us-shoot-us-troops-fire-on-journ-3fd0ae9.html]

A tragic loss of life, innocent civilians die when they are mistaken for insurgents. So whats to blame for this loss of life? Is it lack of conformation? Is it a break in the chain of command giving authorization to fire on innocent?

Nope... Its obviously "Generation X-Box" going for high scores.

Why bother challenging the way the military conducts itself in urban warfare, when we can just blame it all on Video Games?

It's not a massacre of innocent people, again I wish people would read up on things more.
The two camera men were with a group of armed insurgents, there are 2 AK-47s, and one RPG in the video. They even have leaked the pictures of the scene aftermath. The two camera men were filming the group, the group who was only a few hundred meters from a fire fight, and it looked like they were attempting to ambush a Bradley. Does it suck innocent people were killed as well? Yes. But ITS A BATTLEFIELD, collateral damage is going to happen, especially when they are within feet of insurgents, filming or otherwise. It's just shocking to people now that we can actually see it with video.

 

[fanklok]

The implication being that if the man did so he'd be shot again, regardless of the fact that an AK-47 wouldn't be much use against the chopper anyway.

Fun Fact: A single bullet can take down a chopper.

Since I didn't read the article or watch the vidya I'll refrain from posting OT.

 

[Mcface]

The situation is not unexpected when your enemies often dress as civilians. Don't quite get the whole video game thing though.

Had they BEEN actual insurgents with a weapon capable of taking down a chopper, wouldn't it make more sense to take them out as quickly as possible?

The group DID have weapons, watch the video again. The two camera men were caught in the crossfire. you hear "I think those two guys have weapons" "Two more guys in the back have them too." "I see an RPG, requesting permission to fire"

The marines later took pictures of the aftermath, one RPG and two AK-47 were found on the bodies.

 

[Legion]

The implication being that if the man did so he'd be shot again, regardless of the fact that an AK-47 wouldn't be much use against the chopper anyway.

Fun Fact: A single bullet can take down a chopper.

Since I didn't read the article or watch the vidya I'll refrain from posting OT.

Of course they can, within range, but if those men were intending to try you'd have thought they'd take the shots within the 5 minutes the chopper we saw was circling them. If the man had picked up the gun and returned fire it would have been self defence anyway.

 

[Mcface]

They were acting like they were playing a video game, or a sport at least, rather than performing a military operation.

One of them was saying rhetorically "Just pick up a weapon" (The implication being that if the man did so he'd be shot again, regardless of the fact that an AK-47 wouldn't be much use against the chopper anyway.

/Sigh.

Of course the guys in the Apache weren't worried about being shot by him.
BUT, the marines who have to go and take pictures of the aftermath, COULD have been shot by him. Make any sense yet?

And of course they want to act like it's a video game, killing people all day is not good for ones mind, obviously. Making it seem less like they are fighting a war and actual ending life, more like a video game. It makes perfect sense.

 

[Mr.PlanetEater]

Oh for gods sake, it's war. Blaming people dieing in war is like blaming a cow for being a Steak it's just stupid. But thus is the current U.S. mentality it's never the military complex's fault for civilian casualties. No, it's obviously Video Games or Music's fault and not the fact that some people just can't handle fiction and reality..

Furthermore this has happened countless times in the past, I guys Napalming countless Vietnamese civilians was all pac-man's fault... or that damn rock and roll.


And now because I'm so angry here's a stupid joke about the high scores comment in the article.

Look this game has highscores, and guns.. this game cause us to mistake civilians for insurgents dressed as civilians! :O

 

[GrinningManiac]

I used to get angry/upset about this stuff, because it was unfair

Now I laugh. Let them think that, if it puts their stupid little feckless minds at rest. I couldn't give half a damn anymore