Subject:
|
Re: Hotel Palestine
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 8 Apr 2003 20:50:26 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
246 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Kyle McDonald writes:
> The leadership of the army knew that the hotel was full
> of journalists, and avoided making it an explicit target.
I won't dispute that the leadership knew of the hotel, not that it did not
want reporters killed.
I ask you though, "to avoid making it an explicit target", isn't it implying
it can very well be an "implicit" one, whatever that may be?
> However I don't think that every front line soldier is given
> a map of every building and told which to shoot and which not to.
I understand the impracticability of attempting to do so; but this was *one*
very specific building, not small at all, and relatively isolated from other
major buildings. Wasn't this particular one worth a "heads up" notice to the
troops? Everyone else can look for shelter during street fights, but
reporters can only film the fight "in presentia", and that's what was
happening from the hotel's balconies!
> They are trained to react according to rules, one of which goes
> like this:
>
> If you are fired upon, you are free to return fire.
>
> There's no qualifiers in there. It doesn't say check for journalists
> and only shoot back if no one is in the way.
I understand that rule.
However, I'd point this out: how come that *dozens* of reporters on the site
have *not* heard any shot fired from the hotel? They were closer to the
building than the tank, they'd see or hear anything first.
That "sniper" excuse is as lame as one gets...
> I don't think it's reasonable to ask someone who is being fired
> at (yes they may be in a tank, but most of the time the tank
> commander and driver's heads are out of the tank) to check a
> map, try to figure out which building is which, and only then
> return fire.
Tank crew was on the inside, as seen on the TV footage. The tank was not
isolated. The crew had time to look at that large buiding with "hotel"
written somewhere in it! It doesn't require to look for it on the map - it
required better observation skills!
What about the DOZENS of reporters? Were they suddenly invisible?
> Sure in the relaxed quiet atmosphere of the planning room
> targets are given some thought, and targets like this would
> be avoided. On the front lines in the heat of a battle while
> taking incoming fire, the soldiers are trained not to think.
I understand it may be difficult to properly identify every single target
and non-target; but this one? The place was screaming "media is here" from
all over!
> They are practically 'programmed' to immediately fall back
> on their training without thinking. That is what saves their
> lives.
It's sad to describe a human being as "programmed". Robots are programmed.
Humans THINK - or they should at least. :-/
In this case, I think the split second it takes to look around the balcony
where the sniper supposedly was would have saved 2 more lives. Instead, what
happened was like "Oh, what's that over there? BOOOM! Oh, I think that may
be a hotel..."
Rush is the enemy of perfection, wouldn't you say?
> The journalists knew when they decided to stay in Baghdad that
> they were choosing to stay in a *war zone*. They weren't
> tricked or duped or forced to stay. Bad things happen to
> people ion war zones.
Yeah, I also knew of what the Pentagon had to say...
Again, this was uncalled for. It was not an accident - it was stupidity in
action. Lack of reasoning. Too much adrenaline, perhaps?
> I feel bad for the people killed and injured (and their
> families and friends) through no fault of their own. But
> I also don't see anyway to blame this on the front-line
> soldier.
I do.
His eagerness to shoot without knowing what at, that's what is to blame.
Sure, in the (unpopulated) battlefield that can save his life; but this
place is a city, there are more than just friends and foes. He should have
taken the extra second - is it better to kill an innocent, or to die
attempting to save one?
It's ironic that 15 years ago everyone joked at the Cuban soldiers who were
in Angola, 'cause "they shot first and asked questions later". It's
frightening to see the (bad) example has caught on with the US military.
Pedro
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Hotel Palestine
|
| (...) As I pointed out in another post, people on the 11th floor didn't hear the actual explosion loudly enough to find it suspicious, so the failure to hear rifle fire is hardly incredible. I work in a conventional office building--if someone fired (...) (21 years ago, 8-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: Hotel Palestine
|
| (...) I'll agree they probably didn't give an order that the building should never be shot at. I think that order would be just as idiotic. I don't think they shot at it just to shoot at reporters though either. Which some news reports have (...) (21 years ago, 8-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Hotel Palestine
|
| (...) The leadership of the army knew that the hotel was full of journalists, and avoided making it an explicit target. However I don't think that every front line soldier is given a map of every building and told which to shoot and which not to. (...) (21 years ago, 8-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
49 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
