Downed in Iraq - Aim high 2

Downed in Iraq - Aim high 2 a 11 minute compilation of pic's from both sources ( Iraqi resistance and US) of destroyed aircraft technology ( plane, helicopters) in Iraq:

 

take this bullshit off.

 

Why? Don't you want to see where your tax dollars are. BTW 1 Apache AH-64D is around 30+ million USD, not to mention that C-17 destroyed at belly landing and few A-10's.

 

they've killed there worth of terrorists i presume.

here you go in response.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... &plindex=2

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... &plindex=0

 

Ahh, the joys of bickering. Have fun TISO&Revere.

What exacty is the point of this thread?

 

Revere nothing new on your links, seen better. BTW second one was filmed mostly states side so it doesn't count . I could post a loads of pic's of "collateral damage" ( i.e. dead civilians), but i think forum administrators would kick my arse from the forum for being too gruesome.

 

Tell me, Tiso, do you also revel in pictures and videos of dead American troops as well? Because you do seem to enjoy watching footage of downed US aircraft very much indeed. You are aware, I presume, that some of the crews of those downed aircraft you're enjoying so much were killed when their aircraft crashed. And most of the dead Iraqi civilians who have been killed by US forces died accidentally, unlike those killed by the terrorists. Tragic, yes, but it does happen in war and does not make the US troops a pack of bloody handed butchers.

 

This video reminds me of a sad video about downed Us-Aircraft in Vietnam today, I´ll try to find it again ^^

Regards,
Che.

 

Not appropriate.

 

Strage, this is not the response we got when Revere posted that disgusting viedo abot an enemy soldier being shot for no better reason that to gloat, i imagine... No one seemed to give a damn, Why not? ... Its either hypocracy or the fact that we don't empathise for dead unless they're ours... Which one is worse?

That said, I agree; take it off...We should respect the dead on all sides

 

Am I missing something here?

None of these pictures actually show dead servicemen. All show crashed aerial vehicles, or aerial vehicles being shot at, and I'm sure a fair few resulted in fatalities, but none are shown. Amusingly the entire middle section of the montage is taken up with destroyed UAVs...

No, I lie, there is a dead person on it - it ends with a picture of Saddam (taken while he was in power).

 

Allso there was video how Israely security kill arab on streets,and there was no negative feedback allso. But i dont see how this is diferent from showing destroyed AFV and planes from WW II.

 

No i don't enyoy it. It is a matter of professional curiosity. I'm well aware of the fact that some were killed ( a lot of them acctualy), a sad fact but part of their job description.

There is no accident in war. Take for example a droping a 500pounder or cluster bomb in the middle of the city if you know there are civilians down there. Is that an accident or calculated murder?
Pic's od dead civilians is something every soldier should see before shooting starts. That's why all media coverage ( well most of it anyway) is sanitized. That is also the reason why everbody is pissed about Al Jazeera ( it is not propaganda but rather facts nobody wants to see). War is not just a bomb blasts, pufs of smoke and tracers in the distance. In the cities/towns/villages that are the target is ussualy bunch of civilians at the reciving end.

Wake up. Every soldier (including us in reserves) is a or would be "bloody handed butcher". That is their/our yob description. Every soldier is only a paid killer employed by the state.

 

I belive it is both with a bit of racist propaganda thrown in between. I more or less ignored that post except the fact that Revere was wrong in pronouncing the killed man a suicide terrorist. But it does seems strange that the blood thirsty Revere ( the gloating over a dead man and proudly pronouncing that he would excute Che Guevara without hesitation is suddnely so sensitive about pics of aiplane wrecks. Revere, do you by any chance have split personality disorder or there are two Reveres posting as one?

Why? There are no dead soldiers in those pic's ( quite sanitised). By this rule all pic's showing a destroyed AFV's, planes etc. from all periods should be removed, not to mention combat pic's or films.

 

There is nothing technically wrong with the post per se and don't think these types of pictures should be hidden. I personally find your (and anyones) giddy, Anti-American revelling disgusting, childish and provocative. Death is an ugly thing.

 

no, theres a difference. as ive said che guverea was a terrorist. your pretty much comparing him to all American troops calling americans butchers While the terrorists go and used to set off car bombs that would kill hundreds of there own people on purpose then you defend them?

Tiso, your blaming everything in the world on the US, glorifying Che and dancing when looking at pictures of downed US Planes. I do not have a split personality. You call me bloodthirsty gloating and double sided . Che Guevera terrorized and killed people for because they thought diffrent and invaded anther country, If I were Bolivian i wouldn't feal remorse for such an evil man.

Ignorance? I think so.

also your obviously not proud of the place you come from thats why its a "weird blue planet"

when you make up facts Tiso they blow up in your face.

 

I agree death is a ugly thing, but it is interesting that little of this revulsion was shown in other topcs not dealing with americans on the reciving end.
Comments like: Good shot, Cool on the topic with pic of the guy with his head blown off didn't provoke such reactions (and why on earth would someone like to use that pic as an avatar is beyond me)

My views on this topic are general not anti-US. I belive that is visible from my posts (second one was realy just an answer to Revere and i do apologise about that one to everyone except Revere :smok: ).

 

Its interesting how you seem to like this terrorist propaganda.

I like that the hippies calling me bloodthirsty.

 

How the heck did Che get into this topic? I only referred to that topic as a matter of comaprison of your confusing statments. I don't defend terrorists but a question of who is a terrorist is a matter of perspective. I belive British referred to colonials who were uprising the terrorists ( i belive your namesake was among that crowd), same goes for germans referring to any partisans, maqui as terrorists or bandits. Now they are freedom fighters. It's just a matter of perspective and PR.
BTW i reffered to all soldiers as butchers. That is the job: to KILL, DESTROY and to reach the objective ( and to survive). Everything else is load of BS.

Not dancing. As i said just a professional curiosity (i'm an aviation engeneer working for our MoD). And i'm not blaming everything on the US, i'm just pointing out that US is not a blameless in this mess and is quite comparable with others in making messes around the world ( this is for Che topic but since you brought it here...).

Good for you.

Didn't dispute that, but how is that different to toppling democraticaly elected goverments on just a suspicion that they might think differently or they might think for themselves ( Guatemala, Chile, Iran, Greece, Turkey, Pakistan, Fhilippines, Cambodia, Congo...)

Too much Fox again? Any sane man would call you bloodthirsty if he read your commnets.

 

the bloodthirsty part?

I also agree with you that America isnt perfect (woot. we have something in common )

and any sane man would call you ignorant.

.

wow you really have alot to back yourself up. good job.

what do my comments say?