Article about airstrike video

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Bryan, Apr 9, 2010.

  1. Bryan

    Bryan ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Posts:
    9,020
    Trophy Points:
    211
    Likes:
    +0
    Good take on the psychology of killing in war--not political except in the sense that it's about war, and what war isn't?

    Experts Explain Psychology of Iraq Airstrike on Video - NYTimes.com

    It's a trip. I mean, I can understand--intellectually--why someone would find the things said in this video, or in ten thousand similar situations, impossibly offensive. But...I mean, in the context, I can't understand why anyone would be offended.
     
  2. Tyrannosaur

    Tyrannosaur 100% Sarcastic Saurian

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    Posts:
    4,110
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Likes:
    +0
    Can't blame them for accidentally gunning down someone who wasn't an enemy. They have to be on their toes at all times, and a single shot from an RPG could kill them in seconds. Plus being up in the air it's easy to misindentify something like a camera for an RPG.

    Someone brought kids into the middle of a battle? What the fuck were they thinking exactly?
     
  3. Bryan

    Bryan ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Posts:
    9,020
    Trophy Points:
    211
    Likes:
    +0
    :lol 

    It's a complicated world, dude. There aren't many "battles" anymore. It's all a little blurry nowadays--and that's an adjective that applies on a great many levels.
     
  4. Gigatron_2005

    Gigatron_2005 President of Calendars

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2002
    Posts:
    7,871
    Trophy Points:
    227
    Likes:
    +1
    They really need to get some nice HD cameras or something to help prevent stuff like this from happening. That said, Im pretty sure that even in context, people could be offended simply because innocent people were killed. You can understand the extraordinary circumstances around it, but still be outraged at the killing of innocents.


    On a related note, I love how Im watching the news and they show the video with no problem, but any time a F-bomb or a bit of nudity is around they have to censor it. Killing is alright, but somehow things I do/see/hear every day are offensive.
     
  5. Bryan

    Bryan ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Posts:
    9,020
    Trophy Points:
    211
    Likes:
    +0
    I'm talking about the banter, not the fact that civilians were killed. I also think it's important that these situations are really all that extraordinary--regrettably, they're all too ordinary. It's just that you--and to be fair, most people in our nation--often don't, or maybe won't, grasp that.

    As far as "really nice HD cameras," things just aren't that simple. We've reduced collateral to unheard of lows. But the fog of war is unavoidable--especially given the nature of contemporary conflicts.
     
  6. mineraljane

    mineraljane Gravity Hugger

    Joined:
    May 12, 2007
    Posts:
    2,600
    News Credits:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    167
    Likes:
    +5
    The psychological impact of "war" is unfortunately poorly understood as, on a superficial level, it is seen as a weakness in a very masculine sub-culture. Frankly, the behavior that the soldiers displayed in this particular video seemed, regrettably, perfectly normal given the unfortunate circumstances in which they found themselves. I doubt very many people in the same situation would have reacted differently when confronted with something similar. That doesn't condone the actions of these soldiers whatsoever, but puts them in a context where using a resource like the military needs to be given a much more serious discussion than the often silly, always casual response so many have to something that deserves more acute attention than simple absolutes that can fit on a bumper sticker. Purely from a psychological stance, it is devastating on these young minds.
     
  7. Harbinger

    Harbinger ecnayonnA

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2002
    Posts:
    1,787
    Trophy Points:
    176
    Likes:
    +0
    i think they where thinking about saving the dude that just got shoot by the helicopter, they definitely where not armed, and if they wanted to hold them up they should have just shot out the engine or wheels and wait for the ground forces to catch up to them.
     
  8. DaggersRage

    DaggersRage Autistic bastard.

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2007
    Posts:
    3,606
    Trophy Points:
    151
    Likes:
    +0
    Yeah, if the soldiers knew those where non combatiants, they probably wouldn't have even said those things. I mean, duh, they're not shooting if they knew that time, but wouldn't have been distant and hard about it. I make any sense?

    I'm a bit slow on the news, but I saw this as a head line and are the news making a big deal about the helicopter crew firing on civilians, or are they making a big deal about what they said as they fired (which at the time they didnt know)?
     
  9. mineraljane

    mineraljane Gravity Hugger

    Joined:
    May 12, 2007
    Posts:
    2,600
    News Credits:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    167
    Likes:
    +5
    Well, I think some were a bit shocked at what was said as it's not something they've normally given any thought toward at all. Still, the problem seems to be that this is unfortunately less unusual than people realize. That's the hidden reality that so many are now forced to confront. (Also, a number of people who have no issue with the events in the video, do see the Pentagon's attempted coverup of information behind the news contained within the video as quite troubling.) Most of the responses I've read don't have a problem with the individual soldiers, but rather their displeasure is directed toward the mechanism that placed these individuals in this situation.
     
  10. Nachtsider

    Nachtsider Banned

    Joined:
    May 10, 2008
    Posts:
    12,544
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    201
    Likes:
    +3
    I'm betting that the ones taking offense with the 'combat chatter' have no military background whatsoever. Black humor is a staple of frontline life. Joking about and trivializing the carnage of war is a stress-relieving, sanity-preserving measure that soldiers everywhere resort to. Nothing should change that.
     
  11. Midnight

    Midnight Nerdicon

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2008
    Posts:
    1,397
    Trophy Points:
    126
    Likes:
    +0
    I didn't know they tried covering it up.

    That's kinda disturbing.

    And as far as black humor goes Nachtsider ^^ I get what you mean. It does seem like something that could help distance yourself from emotional responses and it probably helps a lot of people cope.

    However, personally, this sort of thing is what distances me from ever having any desire to put myself in their shoes.

    I really couldn't brush off something like that and sleep at night. I don't think I could ever forgive myself.

    I know, I know. I'm too soft hearted.
     
  12. VaderPrime1

    VaderPrime1 Prepare for termination!

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2008
    Posts:
    5,194
    News Credits:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    196
    Location:
    Atlanta
    Likes:
    +20
    Instagram:
    Flickr:
    YouTube:
    I agree with this. Soldiers have to find a way to keep their minds sane so they can do their job.

    I'm not saying I don't feel sorry for the 2, unarmed, reporters who got killed, or their families, but this is war and they knew the dangers before they decided to be war photographers. This war along with the first Iraq War have been a new ground for urban warfare. The insurgents do not wear military specific BDUs and our guys know that... it's guerrilla warfare. They have to pick target based on their best assessments, and what they saw were a group of men where most of them were armed. War is not a pretty thing, so people shouldn't expect it to be.

    As for cover ups and someone not releasing the tape, I don't know.
     
  13. Primus

    Primus Beware, the modelers. Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2002
    Posts:
    4,145
    News Credits:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    196
    Likes:
    +12
    This video brought out some odd emotions in me since I work for Reuters and I was previously in the military for 10 years. I see both sides of this.
     
  14. Bryan

    Bryan ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Posts:
    9,020
    Trophy Points:
    211
    Likes:
    +0
    Respectfully, I would disagree. You are correct, there's a stigma about, uh, "feelings" and all that lame stuff.

    But the psychology of war is both simple and well-understood. It's certainly nothing new. The military has to take people who have been told for 18 years by their family, friends, teachers, church, and so on that killing people is wrong, and then teach them to get over that because sometimes, killing people is necessary.

    To that end, soldiers adopt various psychological defense mechanisms to resolve the dissonance between their upbringing and their training: one of the most common is a dehumanization of your enemy. Nicknames (hajji, gook, Johnny Reb) and jokes are a big part of that.

    And I think the situation absolutely condones their behavior--ultimately, how else could they possibly have been expected to act? If you see what you believe--what you have reason to believe--is a RPG, and you don't shoot, you're wrong.

    Holy shit, that's a trip.

    What's the attitude like among reporters as far as the inherent risk? I mean, 100+ have died since 2003--the risk is well-known and undeniable. But there's a reward, right? I mean, as far as professional opportunity and personal prestige? I'm sure there's not a universal stance, of course, but in your experience.

    I guess it's just that I feel like soldiers don't talk about "fairness" when they lose a friend. I know some of the complaints I've read about the incident are from family members, and that's grief talking as much as anything, but for the others who aren't being driven by emotion...it's just, did you think this wasn't a possibility?
     
  15. mineraljane

    mineraljane Gravity Hugger

    Joined:
    May 12, 2007
    Posts:
    2,600
    News Credits:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    167
    Likes:
    +5
    Ah, well I actually think we're on the same page. Reading my post again, I wasn't as clear as I should have been, but I was referencing some of the reaction the public had toward the video, from the outside, and not so much the culture within the military. History is replete, as you noted, with concrete examples of psychological damage due to the incredible stresses of warfare. These, again as you noted correctly, have been thoroughly studied and are well understood. However, public perception, intentionally or not, disregards this aspect; there is no premeditated concern for these consequences when discussing the implementation of force as policy. Then, when a video like this surfaces displaying perfectly understandable behavior in context, it seems strange and horrific to those who never imagined the process and only focused on the end results. (That said, I want to make it clear that I am extremely bothered by the events in the video, but it is not directed toward the soldiers. It's also too much to discuss in a thread on TFW2005.)
     
  16. 03Mach1

    03Mach1 Reason Has No Voice

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2002
    Posts:
    15,265
    News Credits:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    287
    Likes:
    +26
    Ebay:
    Decisions are made in war with the best possible information. Some times that information is good, sometimes not so good. Unfortunately, many soldiers/civilians never have the chance to find out which is which. It's a shame to say but casualties of war are exactly that. It's kill or be killed. Not to mention Monday morning quarterbacks are always better than those Sunday guys.
     
  17. mineraljane

    mineraljane Gravity Hugger

    Joined:
    May 12, 2007
    Posts:
    2,600
    News Credits:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    167
    Likes:
    +5
    Right, but the response to this video isn't really about looking at the decisions made and wishing they would have been different. It is more nuanced and directed toward the entire structure of this particular aspect of foreign policy. To many, this endeavor never was a "war" in that sense at all and was unnecessary from the very beginning. (It certainly cannot be described as such now, unless you're speaking in the most superficial of terms.) Of course, all of that makes the events in the video, and everything they represent, that much more tragic.
     
  18. 03Mach1

    03Mach1 Reason Has No Voice

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2002
    Posts:
    15,265
    News Credits:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    287
    Likes:
    +26
    Ebay:
    So what exactly is the argument here? It's obvious this video is nothing more than a propaganda piece. The soldiers in that video who were responsible for saving their own lives had to make in the moment, tactical decisions with information that, in hindsight, was less than accurate. I still don't see the problem with this. I'm not even sure why we are posting about this as it clearly is entering the 'no-no' zone.
     
  19. Primus

    Primus Beware, the modelers. Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2002
    Posts:
    4,145
    News Credits:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    196
    Likes:
    +12
    Well, I'm not a reporter. It's funny because while most people know Reuters for it's news reporting arm that is actually a very small part of what the company does. I work in their financial software division and there are no reporters on the campus I work at afaik. In fact, nobody has been talking about this so I don't really know the response.
     
  20. Bryan

    Bryan ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Posts:
    9,020
    Trophy Points:
    211
    Likes:
    +0
    I guess what's interesting to me is that while I think there's only one conclusion possible, the reality is that many, many, many people are offended by it.

    It's not about looking for an argument, it's that I'm honestly interested by the fundamental disconnect--how two people can look at the exact same thing and see something so totally different.

    Far as entering the "no-no zone," a fantastically grown-up term, if you think it's political, why post here? Report it and move it--but don't be that guy.
     

Share This Page