http://cnn.com/video/?/video/world/2010/04/06/vo.apache.reuters.journalists.cnn

Here we see footage from the perspective of a helicopter "patrolling" in Afghanistan. The pilot lies to his commander about "subjects" being armed and murders about a half dozen innocent civilians.

Don't watch if you are sensitive to extreme violence.

It's unfortunate that so many turn their eyes from the truth.

i saw that the other day... a couple did have guns, but the others were cameras

two guys had "cameras"...what did the other two men have in their hands? looked like an AK47 and rpg launcher to me. don't say anything unless you've been there!!!

i saw the rpg... ruters was trying to start trouble because their guys were in the middle of it... and either way, its war... they can't fight a war with their hands tied...some people just like to gripe.
the military has a hard job, and it doesn't get any easier with people trying to say stupid things like this... if those men didn't want to die, they should have not been walking around with insurgents, with rpg's in broad daylight...

A couple of them had guns and a couple had camera's...they were probably off to capture an american and torture em on camera....If you're not there you don't know what goes on!!

seems more like a set up... to get people like heavenly going... they do that all the time, to get support for their causes... see how it's being reported, we killed innocent reporter....he should have been reporting from somewhere else

Thanks for agreeing, I was afraid of being attacked for my views. I deployed to Afghanistan in 08 and, thank God, I didn't see combat but we lost more than one from our brigade during that time. It just pisses me off when people smash the military. I mean, I have my gripes about some things but I don't post it for everyone to see.

well thank you for your service... and glad you came home... it is people like you that make this country great!

You say you were afraid you'd be attacked for your views - well if you truly believe that people shouldn't say anything unless they've been there, then you ought to be criticized. Personally, I think you were venting emotion and didn't mean that literally.

What kind of position is that to have? That the whole world ought to be silent, and to not participate in any kind of dialog on the appropriateness of a military action unless they are personally involved or present for that action?

Only combatants and their victims ought to express an opinion?



Delightfully self-referential! You were also 'not there' for this particular event, yet you don't hesitate to speculate on how evil these people 'probably' were, with their 'probable' plans to torture an american. Or do you think that being 'there' at some other time and place does qualify you to speculate on this?

If you are prone to being pissed off when you think people are smashing the military, maybe you are also prone to mistaking constructive criticism with 'smashing'.

Our military isn't perfect and the administrations we've had in my lifetime were far from perfect. I applaud every honest effort to bring the realities of war into the light of day.



If your gripes are potentially constructive for our society, maybe you should post them for people to see.

Why are you "pissed" when "people smash the military". The greatest minds of American political thought have been doing this for 200+ years. (read the anti-federalist papers, especially Patrick Henry for a taste of disdain for standing armies)

well, i'm glad the AMERICAN military is here... we wouldn't even have a county without them, or we would be speaking german right now...and thats the good thing about america, we can speak our minds... most of the time. a lot of good americans gave up their lives for us to sit here and "bash" what they gave up their lives for... so you guys have a heart...

to all thats served

It's a good thing I got out when I did, because I have a bad feeling I would be on one or more of those types of videos.

I get calls from recruiters all the time asking if I want to re enlist and I tell every one of them that I won't abide by the rules of engagement and unless you want an international incident stop calling me..

Actually, we would have a country and all that stuff without the military. It would just be reduced to its constitutional limits-militia (aka the National Guard). The "we would all be speaking German now..." spiel is a tired old myth.

Pat Buchanan correctly writes,

"But if Hitler was out to conquer the world – Britain, Africa, the Middle East, the United States, Canada, South America, India, Asia, Australia – why did he spend three years building that hugely expensive Siegfried Line to protect Germany from France? Why did he start the war with no surface fleet, no troop transports and only 29 oceangoing submarines? How do you conquer the world with a navy that can't get out of the Baltic Sea?

If Hitler wanted the world, why did he not build strategic bombers, instead of two-engine Dorniers and Heinkels that could not even reach Britain from Germany?

Why did he let the British army go at Dunkirk?

Why did he offer the British peace, twice, after Poland fell, and again after France fell?

Why, when Paris fell, did Hitler not demand the French fleet, as the Allies demanded and got the Kaiser's fleet? Why did he not demand bases in French-controlled Syria to attack Suez? Why did he beg Benito Mussolini not to attack Greece?

Because Hitler wanted to end the war in 1940, almost two years before the trains began to roll to the camps.

Hitler had never wanted war with Poland, but an alliance with Poland such as he had with Francisco Franco's Spain, Mussolini's Italy, Miklos Horthy's Hungary and Father Jozef Tiso's Slovakia.

Indeed, why would he want war when, by 1939, he was surrounded by allied, friendly or neutral neighbors, save France. And he had written off Alsace, because reconquering Alsace meant war with France, and that meant war with Britain, whose empire he admired and whom he had always sought as an ally.

As of March 1939, Hitler did not even have a border with Russia. How then could he invade Russia?

Winston Churchill was right when he called it "The Unnecessary War" – the war that may yet prove the mortal blow to our civilization."

They had WMD under their shirts and were going to eat my fellow Americans.

The private who leaked this CLASSIFIED video is under court martial now. Who could imagine the clip will burst so much patriotism.

[I am typing it from Baghdad. So I am qualified.]

Yes, that private was indeed a great patriot in exposing the regime's lies. I know a number of anti-war vets who feel the same way.

the guy is a spec 4 not a private. maybe while you are in baghdad you can ask someone what the difference is.

I will NOT automatically start trashmouthing troops in a war zone who have every reason to take whatever action is needed to protect themselves and their buds ... this is a non-issue. This is NOT a Sunday school playground ... what you may THINK you see probably isn't what you THOUGHT it was. There's 'civilian eyes' and 'military eyes'. I'll put my money on the troops on the ground.