Video Games blamed for US Massacre in Iraq

[Void(null)]

He is drawing a metaphorical relationship between two unrelated things (virtual killing and real killing) in order to illustrate his point: that the military react to the violence as if it is virtual, not real - in the manner that a computer gamer might react to virtual violence. He is not saying or inferring any more than that, and to extrapolate from his statement that he somehow is prejudiced against gamers or thinks that gamers are violent or sociopathic is completely incorrect. Using something as a metaphor doesn't necessarily imply a value judgement, and it definitely doesn't in this case.

"The organization that broke the code of the video believes that it shows that the rules of engagement are far to lax and shows the reality of Generation X-Box at war."

How is that drawing a metaphorical relationship? That to me pretty clearly says: "Gamers are jaded sociopaths who lack the ability to make the distinction between fantasy and reality and treat murdering civilians like its a game" with absolutely no metaphorical relationship between two unrelated things.

Once again:

The reporter:
"The organization that broke the code of the video believes that it shows that the rules of engagement are far to lax and shows the reality of Generation X-Box at war."

From the Founder of Wikileaks:
"And the behavior of the pilots is like they are playing a computer game, their desire appears to be that they want to get high scores in that computer game."

I still think you're reading too much into it. Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

I think you're just mistaken, because obviously if you understood what I was saying you would emphatically agree with me. See what I did there?

But yeah... agree to disagree.

 

[ChocoFace]

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.

But if they're acting like they're in a video game, then what's the first thing people look at, to find the culprit? that's right - video games.

 

[asinann]

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

That's not quite what they were saying.

They said the pilots were treating war like a videogame, not that videogames were at fault. I'd be inclined to agree with them actually, it all seems very remote and detached from the cockpit of an Apache however many hundred metres away they were.

You do understand that part of combat training (which those pilots had to go through) is learning to dehumanize the enemy right? Once something is named target or enemy they are no longer human, no because those pilot have played video games, but because that's how the military trains them to be.

 

[Burst6]

After reading the article, it sounds like they're using video games more as an analogy than a scapegoat.

 

[MrFluffy-X]

I dont think they were blaming it on VGs i thot tey were just comparing it to a VG

 

[The Austin]

Really? Video Games?

Because in all fairness, those guys did look like that had AK-47's.


...........Uhhhh, still. Killing people is bad.

 

[andrat]

Jesus fuck.

They should investigate that no games on the xbox have high scores anymore.

Don't blame it on us. In ten years admission to being a gamer will be the same as being a child molester now.

 

[Heeman89]

I don't blame Games. I blame Poor Training. When a Soldier Goes into War he should be at least some what somber and calm but these guys are antsy and Want to shoot. Wanting to take anothers life isn't part of War. Its murder. If 2 soldiers meet on the Battle Field they know that when they Begin this fight they are not doing it out of hate or because their countries dislike each other. They do it because they are Warriors and they know they are at home on the battle field. These Guys are just on a battle field and to them it probably is a game.

I see your argument but its hard for me to just think of it as "the soldiers want to kill". These enemy soldiers don't meet you on the field of battle and fight with honor. These enemy soldiers dress as civilians, strap bombs to women and children, and actually really do HATE the United States. Yes, the soldiers do seem antsy and want to shoot, they saw 12 perceived threats down there and like others have posted because we have RoE usually the enemy can slip away while US Soldiers have to sit on their hands while some commander somewhere has to dig through red tape to get permission to fire. I too have friends and family that have done tours in the military, and they have told me that no one wants to go kill but when you have 12 perceived threats in area where there had just recently been fighting (which is the whole reason the chopper was even there) you want to eliminate these threats before they kill A: You B: Your buddies.

All in all I think what this was more faulty intelligence then soldiers wanting to massacre innocent people. I wouldn't put all the blame on the military myself personally. As far as I know (and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) the media usually (or is supposed to) wear something that signifies "Yo, I'm with the Press" in this video they look like they are dressed up like the civilians which is also what insurgents typically wear so they are harder to identify.

 

[Ralen-Sharr]

I've watched the video
"Bullets pelt the ground as the men scatter, desperate for cover, and at one point some men are seen trying to dodge bullets while rushing small children away." <-- BULLSHIT

Some people were mistaken for insurgents, and fired upon. A van rolls up and they start trying to load what was believed to be an insurgent into the van. Of course they're gonna shoot at the van.

The whole rushing small children away.... only happened at the end when US troops came and got the kids out of there.

 

[Comma-Kazie]

I'm amazed it took them this long to "make" the connection.

 

[poet_lawreate]

Oh, this makes so much sense! The army trains young impetuous prejudiced young men to use weapons, act aggressively and make split-second decisions.

...

But of course they're not responsible for the men making aggressive prejudiced decisions using weapons.

 

[ClockWork]

I swear, I am getting so sick of people blaming video games for everything! If there were a nuclear holocaust and almost all life on Earth was wiped out, I'm sure someone would still manage to blame Fallout 3 or something like that.

 

[the idiot computer]

Here is a question. What were the press doing there? And why weren't they wearing clothes that seperate them? And not only that shouldn't they have protection?

 

[the idiot computer]

Why didn't the press have protection if they did then i'm sorry i's hard to see. But here is my question... Why were they there in the first place?

EDIT:Sorry for sameyness couldn't see my posts.

 

[Robert632]

Whoever blames video games for this is dumber then the people who caused the massacre in the first place.

 

[punkrocker27]

Why am I not surprised.

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.

Way to go but an AK-47 does pretty good damage against people, which is exactly what an insurgent would do were he allowed to escape. Under the info they had they were doing what they thought was correct. That doesn't take the blame off them for acting callously though to say that I would play a game or a sport and then do the same thing is just generalizing, which is what the OP is trying to say is wrong. Basically, everyone's overstating the obvious here.

 

[Grounogeos]

It all seems very remote and detached from the cockpit of an Apache however many hundred metres away they were.

They seem to have forgotten that the same "remote and detached" nature would have also applied back when they were just starting to use aircraft designed for military purposes (okay, maybe not quite as much considering all the dogfights, but I think you get the point), which was back before we were anywhere near having games as advanced as fucking Pong.

 

[Void(null)]

I dont think they were blaming it on VGs i thot tey were just comparing it to a VG

But here is the thing.

Lets say you're average sheeple is watching that news footage, what are they going to think?

a) The Military needs to take greater precautions in verifying their information before firing and the rules of engagement need to be readdressed.

or

b) OMG! These kids have no humanity or emotion because they played violent videya games!!!11! Videya games is bad!!!111!

 

[Liquid Paradox]

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?

I have to agree with you on this one; I may not have the training of these men, but I watched the video a couple of times now, and every time I made out several "assault rifles" and at least one "rpg"... I hate to say, but I probably would have made the same mistake. Ad Dead yellow suggested, many insurgents are wearing civilian clothes, and this was a war zone. Clearly this will send a message that it's quite frankly, dangerous to go walking around carrying something that could be mistaken for a weapon.


The part that really bothered me, however, was the way the soldiers tried to justify harming children by saying "Well, it's their fault for bringing their kids to a battle". Seriously... If I had just realized my actions had just resulted in the deaths or injuries of children... War is Hell or not, that would bother me. a lot. just saying.

 

[punkrocker27]

oops double post sorry