No that wasn't sarcasm, you guys can spend your whole lives here and not give a crap about any other countries. You are so successful that it doesn't matter what most of them think about you. Even then most countries look up to america despite what you may think. (That was the "Lack of perspective" I was talking about.)
18 so ya, but like I said I've traveled a lot. My mother's from Wales and her friends have scatered around the world so...
It's ridiculous that you would think that we're the best country in the world. Because we're not in all aspects. So don't use superlatives. The russians were driven out and it's not because of continued, or discontinued in this case, occupation that the afghans attacked. It was because of Radical Islamic schools called madrassa's that were funded by Saudi Arabians that lead to the rise of the Taliban. This is in no way our fault for leaving the country. We never occupied them in the traditional sense. All we did was flood their country with stinger missles to combat the russian Mi 17 attack helicopters. so in all reality those two scenarios are no where near comparable.
TL;DR: US supplied terrorists to fight the commis, then we abandoned them. That is why Osama hates us. There is your reason Silent Death. Source
I wouldn't say they were incompetent. Mistakes happen, this one ended with the killing of two (?) reporters. There doesn't need to be proof. It seems to me you think they need overwhelming evidence in order to decide to shoot on the van. Sometimes you aren't given that evidence, and you have to make a decision. This time it turned out to be the wrong choice. Though it makes them suspicious (especially being near a U.S. convoy I believe). This situation was a lose-lose. There was not enough information (or rather, information that could be spun either way) to determine innocence or guilt. It is their fault (chopper). They will have to live with knowing what they had done. But the reporters also knew hanging around with insurgents was dangerous, and accepted the consequences. The blame is not solely on either of them. ... Not what I said. Given limited time, when you see a few with guns or suspicious behaviors, the whole group becomes suspicious. Thinking one or two of them are not involved is the last thing on my mind. If you see a group of people where one person in that group is selling drugs, does that whole group not come under suspicion? Not necessarily. What if they were waiting? Btw, you misquoted me instead of putting Noklu's name on some of those sentences.
They were not enjoying it. They were shocked and I saw regret. Perhaps I look for the good in a person, but that is what I heard. The blame was an attempt to justify it, a human reaction, one which we all have. Without that humor they may not be able to get through easily. Coyoteboy raises a good point on this. Neither you, nor I can possibly understand what soldiers go through each day. Through their experiences they are different in manner and actions than others. What would be insensitive for a civilian could be a way of coping for soldiers. No, this was not revenge. They were simply more inclined to fire due to their current mindset of dislike and anger at the Iraqi militants. In the situation the man peering round the corner certainly looked like an RPG, so they opened fire. The military aircraft must have been in the area for a reason. They do not just send troops out willy nilly. I think they were supporting an operation in the area and had to ensure this area in particular was safe for troops. If they were passing through they would not have stopped to make the kill. It probably wouldn't have been a patrol, as they use UAVs for that task. From the radio chatter I got the impression that they were attached to the ground troops, reinforcing my idea. Wikileaks removed sections of the video. What happened before the 'start' of the video? In other versions they cut it down to just the killings. This did not allow anyone to confirm my above statement. They couldn't have gotten in closer to gain better confirmation on the target, that would be a risk they did not want to take. The law is the law and that is that. Also, this might hep in understanding the issue, or at least the region. Nerd Paradise
osama himself is not even afghani. Correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure he's not. And you musn't confuse the mujhadeens who could be corrupt in their own way, but stayed independent of the taliban and in truth some fought the taliban.