Badass Apache Combat Footage!

**Mr_Blonde_OPS** · 06-03-11, 02:11 PM

Just because the video doesn't show it, doesn't mean it didn't happen. Before the video even started recording was when they probably were taking fire. And there were insurgents on the ground with weapons and RPGs. I thought that at the very beginning of the video the apache camera was watching some guy who was hiding behind a street corner looking up at the helicopter? Just because the scene does not look chaotic at the present, does not mean that in a fraction of a second it can turn to madness. We have no idea who was in the surrounding buildings and neighborhood and either did the Apache. And that is what Morningfrost is trying to say I think. You can sit there and wait in an hostile environment. You have to do what you think is right and act.

I don't understand why some people can't just have civil conversations/discussions. Up to the point when you had posted Trigger everyone was stating their own opinions and not attacking anyone. Why do you feel the need to try to pick out someones imperfections in their argument and basically say, "No your wrong"? These are mature forums/discussions, we can all act appropriately.

**deathgodusmc** · 06-03-11, 02:14 PM

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

But we're talking about this incident here and not war in general. This is a case by case basis and in this case there was plenty of time to make the decision and there was no chaos as clearly shown in the video.

This is where having some military experience would help you out. 5 to 10 minutes to ask for permission to fire, situation assessment by command, and active engagement is not a long time what so ever. Movies dont portray the reality very well on this. The reason being is command isn't just dealing with this one call. They're dealing with everything everyone wants or needs. If you've ever been in a command center you would know its a cluster fuck due to the nature of the beast.

**triggerhappy2005** · 06-03-11, 02:14 PM

Originally Posted by Mr_Blonde_OPS

Just because the video doesn't show it, doesn't mean it didn't happen. Before the video even started recording was when they probably were taking fire. And there were insurgents on the ground with weapons and RPGs. I thought that at the very beginning of the video the apache camera was watching some guy who was hiding behind a street corner looking up at the helicopter? Just because the scene does not look chaotic at the present, does not mean that in a fraction of a second it can turn to madness. We have no idea who was in the surrounding buildings and neighborhood and either did the Apache. And that is what Morningfrost is trying to say I think. You can sit there and wait in an hostile environment. You have to do what you think is right and act.

I don't understand why some people can't just have civil conversations/discussions. Up to the point when you had posted Trigger everyone was stating their own opinions and not attacking anyone. Why do you feel the need to try to pick out someones imperfections in their argument and basically say, "No your wrong"? These are mature forums/discussions, we can all act appropriately.

A. The first part of your post is pure speculation.

B. Who did I attack or insult? Quote me, please.

C. Referring to the large text, isn't that the whole point of debate?

**deathgodusmc** · 06-03-11, 02:21 PM

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

That doesn't make it a chaotic situation for the pilots. They had plenty of time to decide what they were going to do.

That being said, if those Iraqis who got fired on were the 'force' involved in the firefight, where were all their weapons. A supposed rocket launcher is not exactly rapid fire. Unless, of course, they were glitching.

Its not a supposed rocket launcher. The rocket launcher is there with out a doubt. Maybe the weapons were in the van seeing as it came from the same direction they came from. How many people do you think would walk around with armed insurgants while you can hear a fire fight going on close by that are anything but more insurgants? What do you think the odds are that only 2 or 3 in the group were insurgants? Why would reporters being walking around with armed insurgants if it was only 2 or 3? It would be pretty much a waste on their part wouldn't it? I know if im wanting to take pictures of active engagements i would distance myself from them because they have these cool cameras that can zoom in from just about anywhere and keep me from getting shot.

**Nuckle** · 06-03-11, 02:21 PM

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

It won't work Nuck. That's why it's called evidence, otherwise crimes would never be solved b/c the jury 'wasn't there'.

Was this one solved or is it still pending?

**triggerhappy2005** · 06-03-11, 02:23 PM

Originally Posted by Nuckle

Was this one solved or is it still pending?

It was covered up. In military jargon it's called 'solved'.

**Mr_Blonde_OPS** · 06-03-11, 02:23 PM

You obviously don't know how to debate like an adult then.

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

No, you tried to imply that these pilots were victims of chaos.

If you say that you were just generalizing then don't do that. We're talking about something specific, so stay on point and be specific yourself.

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

Except there was no chaos leading up to this event. Those pilots were 100% lucid and so was the person that ok'd them to fire.

Nice try, though.

I don't know when you learned that it was ok to talk to someone like this in a debate, but you are wrong in thinking so. No one else has posted these kinds of remarks and this is the kind of stuff that can be left out all together. There was no need for these extra little "jabs".

It's speculation that in a hostile environment, the situation can go from calm to "chaotic" in a fraction of a second? I would bet that this statement is pretty spot on, especially dealing with the guerrilla type enemy we are fighting. We don't know the difference between a civilian and a insurgent, so the soldiers have to be on high alert at all times.

**deathgodusmc** · 06-03-11, 02:25 PM

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

It won't work Nuck. That's why it's called evidence, otherwise crimes would never be solved b/c the jury 'wasn't there'.

In that case then you have no issue because the pilot and gunner were within the REO and never charged with misconduct. So a jury of their peers has already looked at the video and decided that you are wrong. So is that the end of it? I mean it should be going by your stated remarks.

**deathgodusmc** · 06-03-11, 02:29 PM

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

It was covered up. In military jargon it's called 'solved'.

It was covered up well. Its only been on you tube for over 2 years. Of course that only means the people didn't get to see it right away. Those recording are logged and watched by those in the right position to do so in a timely manner.

**triggerhappy2005** · 06-03-11, 02:30 PM

Originally Posted by Mr_Blonde_OPS

You obviously don't know how to debate like an adult then.

I don't know when you learned that it was ok to talk to someone like this in a debate, but you are wrong in thinking so. No one else has posted these kinds of remarks and this is the kind of stuff that can be left out all together. There was no need for these extra little "jabs".

It's speculation that in a hostile environment, the situation can go from calm to "chaotic" in a fraction of a second? I would bet that this statement is pretty spot on, especially dealing with the guerrilla type enemy we are fighting. We don't know the difference between a civilian and a insurgent, so the soldiers have to be on high alert at all times.

You need to grow some thicker skin. No one was insulted there.