Bombed Iraqi wedding video released

  • News
  • Thread starter Adam
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Video
In summary, there is controversy surrounding a reported bombing at a wedding in Iraq, with different accounts of the events and casualties. Some sources claim that popular wedding singers were among the dead, while others suggest that terrorists may have been present. There is also discussion about the actions of a fighter pilot who called off a strike due to uncertainty about the target. The conversation also touches on the use of terrorist training manuals and the justification for bombing civilian areas in a war zone.
  • #1
Adam
65
1
"There may have been some kind of celebration. Bad people have celebrations, too."

Mark Kimmitt,
US Brigadier General
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/0B044E19-B5FE-48E7-855F-5C86AB522F04.htm

Well, there you have it. They may have blown up forty-odd people, but they were baaad. Right.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #3
Adam said:
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/0B044E19-B5FE-48E7-855F-5C86AB522F04.htm

Well, there you have it. They may have blown up forty-odd people, but they were baaad. Right.

It's a war zone.If it was a legitimate target, that's what you do.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #4
Did you miss my earlier post about Australians serving in combat roles in Iraq?
 
  • #5
Adam said:
Did you miss my earlier post about Australians serving in combat roles in Iraq?
yes...
 
  • #6
Forty-five people killed including the cameraman and the film is miraculously intact. I quess the film must have been store in one of those airplane 'Black Box's'.
 
  • #7
You know, the Al Queada training manual has chapters about blending in with your surroundings. Things like having doctors papers if you live near a hospital, instruments, photos and videos of your family, and all kinds of things that will sway public opinion in your favor.
 
  • #8
At a gas station, an attendant asked Mr. Jabbar about the reporter with him. Mr. Jabbar answered that the reporter worked with a foreign newspaper.

"It's the first time I have seen a mujahid in the same car as the foreign media," the attendant said.




it seems at least possible that both accounts are true. Among the dead, by several accounts, was Nazar al-Khalid, a well-known Iraqi wedding singer who often traveled to Syria.


http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/22/international/middleeast/22IRAQ.html


Among the dead was Hussein Ali, a popular wedding singer.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A43647-2004May20.html

Seems someone didn't get their story straight.
 
  • #9
phatmonky said:
It's a war zone.If it was a legitimate target, that's what you do.

Since you did not actually read the earlier post...

In Iraq, an Australian was leading a fighter strike against a ground target whch US intelligenec had claimed was a valid target. The Australian, upon reaching the target area, could not himself verify that it was a valid target. Against further orders from the US military, he called off the strike. Every soldier has the right, and the duty, to do just this. We were taught to not even put a finger inside the trigger-guard unless we had verified the target. It's a simple rule.
 
  • #10
Robert Zaleski said:
Forty-five people killed including the cameraman and the film is miraculously intact. I quess the film must have been store in one of those airplane 'Black Box's'.

Blow up your house with a brick of C4, and I can still read your hard drive. Ferro-magnetic recording devices are generally quite stable, unless subjected to a strong EMP.
 
  • #11
studentx said:
You know, the Al Queada training manual has chapters about blending in with your surroundings. Things like having doctors papers if you live near a hospital, instruments, photos and videos of your family, and all kinds of things that will sway public opinion in your favor.

You possesses a terrorist training manual?
 
  • #12
kat said:
At a gas station, an attendant asked Mr. Jabbar about the reporter with him. Mr. Jabbar answered that the reporter worked with a foreign newspaper.

"It's the first time I have seen a mujahid in the same car as the foreign media," the attendant said.




it seems at least possible that both accounts are true. Among the dead, by several accounts, was Nazar al-Khalid, a well-known Iraqi wedding singer who often traveled to Syria.


http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/22/international/middleeast/22IRAQ.html


Among the dead was Hussein Ali, a popular wedding singer.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A43647-2004May20.html

Seems someone didn't get their story straight.

Yes, they blew up singers, organ players, guests, and others.
 
  • #13
Adam said:
Since you did not actually read the earlier post...

In Iraq, an Australian was leading a fighter strike against a ground target whch US intelligenec had claimed was a valid target. The Australian, upon reaching the target area, could not himself verify that it was a valid target. Against further orders from the US military, he called off the strike. Every soldier has the right, and the duty, to do just this. We were taught to not even put a finger inside the trigger-guard unless we had verified the target. It's a simple rule.

Nobody flying in a fighter jet can confirm whether the tiny dot is a civilian or a terrorist. The australian pilot could well have let enemy soldiers escape which caused the deaths of hundreds if not thousands of friendlies! :approve:

You possesses a terrorist training manual?

http://www.usdoj.gov/ag/trainingmanual.htm
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #14
studentx said:
Nobody flying in a fighter jet can confirm whether the tiny dot is a civilian or a terrorist. The australian pilot could well have let enemy soldiers escape which caused the deaths of hundreds if not thousands of friendlies! :approve:

Perhaps they shouldn't be firing at dots if they can't decide whether or not they're friend of foe. What a novel concept.
 
  • #15
How did AP obtained the video ?
 
  • #16
don't you people realize? We are at war. It's perfectly ok to drop a bomb into a civilian zone because we just might be able to kill off a terrorist. False positive happens but that's not a problem at all. I mean, the civilians killed could one day become terrorist right? Might as well lower the odds when we fight the next generation of terrorists.

Terrorist shouldn't conceal themselves. They should gather up nicely in an open area so we can carpet bomb the place. They thought they are smart but not as smart as my smart bomb. It's so simple to kill them all and answer questions later. Freedom had never been easier to obtain. We will liberate Iraq from Iraqis.

Iraq is a shining example of what the Arab nations should expect from us. If you don't bent over, we scream UN resolution violations then kick you in the face. If you do bent over, we will violate the useless UN resolutions then walk all over you.

God told me invading Iraq is a good idea. God bless America

:uhh: :uhh: :uhh:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #17
I must say, that is it just a coincidence, or does Al Queada tend to hide their forces and wepond in civilian filled places? Take the examples of when they hid weapons under a school, or the ones in a spare classroom, or the times they hid out in holy places? Hmm...I find that rather coincidental...
 
  • #18
studentx said:
Nobody flying in a fighter jet can confirm whether the tiny dot is a civilian or a terrorist.
Yes, they can. More importantly, they can confirm that there is doubt as to the validity of the army intelligence. You don't need to confirm they're valid targets. You only need to confirm that you can't be certain. Then you back off. This is why Australian troops didn't blow up bus-loads of Iraqi civilians.

The australian pilot could well have let enemy soldiers escape which caused the deaths of hundreds if not thousands of friendlies! :approve:
Or he could have killed a civilian wedding party.

http://www.usdoj.gov/ag/trainingmanual.htm
Thanks. I wonder if it's genuine, or, given Britain's proven capacity to forge documents and lie, something they cooked up for the publicity.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #19
Tassel said:
I must say, that is it just a coincidence, or does Al Queada tend to hide their forces and wepond in civilian filled places? Take the examples of when they hid weapons under a school, or the ones in a spare classroom, or the times they hid out in holy places? Hmm...I find that rather coincidental...

Who told you they hide weapons in such places? Was it by any chance the US military, just after the US military blew up such places?
 
  • #20
phoenixy said:
don't you people realize? We are at war. It's perfectly ok to drop a bomb into a civilian zone because we just might be able to kill off a terrorist. False positive happens but that's not a problem at all. I mean, the civilians killed could one day become terrorist right? Might as well lower the odds when we fight the next generation of terrorists.

Terrorist shouldn't conceal themselves. They should gather up nicely in an open area so we can carpet bomb the place. They thought they are smart but not as smart as my smart bomb. It's so simple to kill them all and answer questions later. Freedom had never been easier to obtain. We will liberate Iraq from Iraqis.

Iraq is a shining example of what the Arab nations should expect from us. If you don't bent over, we scream UN resolution violations then kick you in the face. If you do bent over, we will violate the useless UN resolutions then walk all over you.

God told me invading Iraq is a good idea. God bless America

:uhh: :uhh: :uhh:

Thanks very much. :D
 
  • #21
Adam said:
Who told you they hide weapons in such places? Was it by any chance the US military, just after the US military blew up such places?

There is no doubt that they do just that...
Where else do you think they hide their weapons ? In a warehouse or in a military barrack ?
 
  • #22
studentx said:
You know, the Al Queada training manual has chapters about blending in with your surroundings. Things like having doctors papers if you live near a hospital, instruments, photos and videos of your family, and all kinds of things that will sway public opinion in your favor.
Then why don't you kill aeveryone, those pesky civilians might be blended in terrorists. :rolleyes: Basically, what the US has done is massacre an entire village as in My Lai because they are too incompetent to catch the real insurgents who have popular support. It is savage butchery which makes them no better than the real terrorists.
 
  • #23
Simon666 said:
It is savage butchery which makes them no better than the real terrorists.

If Americans were terrorists, we would be encouraged to empathise with them. If theyd blow up a wedding party with a carbomb, it would escape public attention within a day. If the word America is used, evrybody jumps on the bandwagon.
 
  • #25
Stanley_Smith said:
There is no doubt that they do just that...
Where else do you think they hide their weapons ? In a warehouse or in a military barrack ?

Why is there no doubt? What do you base this belief on?
 

1. What is the "Bombed Iraqi wedding video"?

The "Bombed Iraqi wedding video" refers to a video footage released by the United States military in 2004, which showed a wedding party being attacked by US forces in Iraq. The video sparked controversy and raised questions about the use of force and civilian casualties in the Iraq War.

2. When was the "Bombed Iraqi wedding video" released?

The video was released by the US military on May 5, 2004.

3. Why was the "Bombed Iraqi wedding video" released?

The US military released the video in response to allegations that the wedding party was attacked by US forces. They claimed that the attack was a legitimate strike against a suspected terrorist safe house and that there were no civilians present at the time of the attack.

4. What was the reaction to the release of the "Bombed Iraqi wedding video"?

The video sparked outrage and condemnation from human rights organizations, the Iraqi government, and the international community. Many questioned the US military's justification for the attack and called for further investigations into the incident.

5. Has there been any further developments or investigations regarding the "Bombed Iraqi wedding video"?

In 2006, the US military released a statement saying that they had conducted an investigation into the incident and determined that the attack was justified. However, this statement was met with skepticism and there have been ongoing calls for more transparency and accountability regarding civilian casualties in the Iraq War.

Similar threads

  • General Discussion
3
Replies
81
Views
8K
  • General Discussion
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
43
Views
5K
  • General Discussion
Replies
28
Views
10K
  • General Discussion
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
40
Views
13K
  • Poll
  • General Discussion
Replies
32
Views
4K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
10
Views
2K
Back
Top