Okay…
Let me ask this…
Do ANY of you SERIOUSLY believe that these guys “targeted” this car because (as Sgrena said publically):
“… the United States opposes Italy’s policy of negotiating with kidnappers”…"
???
Mufasa
Here is a different twist. It wasn’t a mistake. A car approached a roadblock, at night, at a high rate of speed. Rather then taking a chance the soldiers followed thier training and put the occupants at risk instead of themselves. The troops did the right thing. End of story. The arm chair generals can argue this all day long.
You act foolish around soldiers with guns and on edge. Ours or anyones else…you are going to get shot.
from interview w/ naomi klein:
She told me a lot about the incident that I had not fully understood from the reports in the press. One of the most - and at first, the other thing I want to be really clear about is that Giuliana is not saying that she’s certain in any way that the attack on the car was intentional. She is simply saying that she has many, many unanswered questions, and there are many parts of her direct experience that simply don’t coincide with the official U.S. version of the story. One of the things that we keep hearing is that she was fired on on the road to the airport, which is a notoriously dangerous road. In fact, it’s often described as the most dangerous road in the world. So this is treated as a fairly common and understandable incident that there would be a shooting like this on that road. And I was on that road myself, and it is a really treacherous place with explosions going off all the time and a lot of checkpoints. What Giuliana told me that I had not realized before is that she wasn’t on that road at all. She was on a completely different road that I actually didn’t know existed. It’s a secured road that you can only enter through the Green Zone and is reserved exclusively for ambassadors and top military officials. So, when Calipari, the Italian security intelligence officer, released her from captivity, they drove directly to the Green Zone, went through the elaborate checkpoint process which everyone must go through to enter the Green Zone, which involves checking in obviously with U.S. forces, and then they drove onto this secured road. And the other thing that Giuliana told me that she’s quite frustrated about is the description of the vehicle that fired on her as being part of a checkpoint. She says it wasn’t a checkpoint at all. It was simply a tank that was parked on the side of the road that opened fire on them. There was no process of trying to stop the car, she said, or any signals. From her perspective, they were just – it was just opening fire by a tank. The other thing she told me that was surprising to me was that they were fired on from behind. Because I think part of what we’re hearing is that the U.S. soldiers opened fire on their car, because they didn’t know who they were, and they were afraid. It was self-defense, they were afraid. The fear, of course, is that their car might blow up or that they might come under attack themselves. And what Giuliana Sgrena really stressed with me was that she – the bullet that injured her so badly and that killed Calipari, came from behind, entered the back seat of the car. And the only person who was not severely injured in the car was the driver, and she said that this is because the shots weren’t coming from the front or even from the side. They were coming from behind, i.e. they were driving away. So, the idea that this was an act of self-defense, I think becomes much more questionable. And that detail may explain why there’s some reticence to give up the vehicle for inspection. Because if indeed the majority of the gunfire is coming from behind, then clearly, they were firing from – they were firing at a car that was driving away from them.
What Giuliana was talking about was what she was – the only thing she could figure out is that the people who they checked in with in the Green Zone, the U.S. soldiers they checked in with in the Green Zone in order to get in, didn’t radio ahead to these mobile checkpoints and warn them that they were coming. And from her perspective, that could have either been a mistake, or it could have been some sort of act of vengeance and anger, you know, and we know that there’s a lot of anger at the idea that Italians may be paying very large ransoms for the release of prisoners. She’s not alleging some grand conspiracy. There could have just been a broken down communication. But the idea that they didn’t know, I think, is impossible, if she was on this secured road, because it emerged out of the Green Zone and you cannot get into the grown zone without passing through a checkpoint.
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/03/25/1516242
the military’s version:
The U.S. military said that the vehicle was speeding and refused to stop, and that a U.S. patrol tried to warn the driver with hand and arm signals, by flashing white lights and firing shots in front of the car and into the car?s engine block.
Berlusconi said the car was traveling slowly at night and stopped immediately when a light was flashed at it, shortly before U.S. troops fired on the car. Foreign Minister Gianfranco Fini said the fire appeared to have hit the right side of the car.
http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-740304.php
looking at the car, it’s clear to me (assuming this is the real car) that this wasn’t a self-defense type of (holy cow this car’s not stopping better open up!) shooting. You can see the back windshield has been shot out. But they aren’t really letting you see the back or the right side. On the other hand “tank” seems fishy as you’d think rounds would have pierced through the front, perhaps armored humvee?
“…She’s not alleging some grand conspiracy. There could have just been a broken…”
Then she turns around publically and alleges all KINDS of conspiracies???
Another thing…what is the “shooting from behind” supposed to prove?
If there was not a proper stop at a checkpoint…and someone continues to speed on…they will open fire as they speed away…
Anyway…I’ll reiterate this again…we probably will never “know” the truth of something a) done in a matter of a few seconds and b) during the chaos of war.
Mufasa
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Okay…let’s hear it…I’m sure there is at least one of you with an “American Conspiracy” theory…
Bring it on…please…
[/quote]
I believe she was returning from Fallujah, which is a complete wasteland thanks to the American invasion. Maybe the Empire didn’t want some of her reporting to get out into the mainstream. That’s the “American conspiracy” side of the story as I first heard it.
I’ve read that too, Al…
But as many have pointed out here…if for some reason (WAY beyond me!) we wanted her dead…she would be dead…and she’s not…
It was a regrettable event that occurs in the chaos of War…
Mufasa
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
if for some reason (WAY beyond me!) we wanted her dead…she would be dead…and she’s not…[/quote]
Can’t necessarily agree with that. Not enough faith in the abilities of the U.S. government.
C’mon, Al…
Now THAT was a stretch, Brother!
Mufasa
The Pentagon, White House, and mass media says that the car was fired upon while it was speeding towards a checkpoint, yet in the photo on a previous post the front windshield and what’s visible of the front of the car looks intact.
Interesting.
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
C’mon, Al…
Now THAT was a stretch, Brother!
[/quote]
How so? Government doesn’t work. It fails in everything it attempts, be it education, social security, reducing crime, eliminating drugs, “improving” health care, delivering the mail on time, forecasting the weather, etc… The list simply doesn’t end. So why is it a stretch to assume that the government will fail just as miserably in it’s self-appointed task of waging war? It doesn’t seem like a stretch to me at all. The people who are in charge of this war aren’t going to incur any personal consequences from their actions, so they have no incentive to do a good job.
There’s a lot of reaching in here…
If the rest of the post containing this was correct, and soldiers followed proper protocol, then nobody should take any blame. If required, the protocol may have to be examined, but you don’t blame people for doing the right things.
It is still way to early to say. Those of you taking sides before the facts come out would have been great in the wild west. Your brand of vigilante justice would have fit in very well.
[quote]Al Shades wrote:
Mufasa wrote:
C’mon, Al…
Now THAT was a stretch, Brother!
How so? Government doesn’t work. It fails in everything it attempts, be it education, social security, reducing crime, eliminating drugs, “improving” health care, delivering the mail on time, forecasting the weather, etc… The list simply doesn’t end. So why is it a stretch to assume that the government will fail just as miserably in it’s self-appointed task of waging war? It doesn’t seem like a stretch to me at all. The people who are in charge of this war aren’t going to incur any personal consequences from their actions, so they have no incentive to do a good job.[/quote]
They were firing at the engine block to stop the vehicle. The round penetrated and went into the cab.
Every fired a mounted machine gun Al?
What do you think a .50cal. does to a car? Take a look around you. A .50cal. will go thru every structure you can see. Houses. Bldgs. Your sandbox. Everything. If they wanted to kill the occupants they could have. Easily.
You don’t know enough to say what works or not. Don’t even expose your ignorance further discussing military matters.
I give up…I really do…
So…let me sum it all up and move on:
-
We shot up the car because we oppose Italy’s policy of negotiating with terrorist.
-
The need to shoot up the car became more pressing because there was a Communist Journalist in the car.
-
We are so inept that we did a half-assed job in killing off the journalist anyway.
By the way, Al…my comment was directed ONLY at our abililty to assasinate this one particular jounalist (as some of the conspiracy theorist are implying) IF that was our goal (which I don’t think it was)…this was NOT a comment on the U.S. execution of the entire Iraq War.
How in the world did you make THAT jump? (“Straw Man”?)
Anyway…I’m done…
Now…if we can get Oliver Stone to make the movie…the “truth” will be complete…
Unbelievable…
Mufasa
[quote]Al Shades wrote:
How so? Government doesn’t work. It fails in everything it attempts, be it education, social security, reducing crime, eliminating drugs, “improving” health care, delivering the mail on time, forecasting the weather, etc… The list simply doesn’t end. So why is it a stretch to assume that the government will fail just as miserably in it’s self-appointed task of waging war? It doesn’t seem like a stretch to me at all. The people who are in charge of this war aren’t going to incur any personal consequences from their actions, so they have no incentive to do a good job.[/quote]
It has certainly failed to educate Al.
[quote]Al Shades wrote:
Mufasa wrote:
C’mon, Al…
Now THAT was a stretch, Brother!
How so? Government doesn’t work. It fails in everything it attempts, be it education, social security, reducing crime, eliminating drugs, “improving” health care, delivering the mail on time, forecasting the weather, etc… The list simply doesn’t end. So why is it a stretch to assume that the government will fail just as miserably in it’s self-appointed task of waging war? It doesn’t seem like a stretch to me at all. The people who are in charge of this war aren’t going to incur any personal consequences from their actions, so they have no incentive to do a good job.[/quote]
Al,
Your analogy is ridiculous. You’re comparing the success (or lack thereof) of huge, society-wide (at least) long-term programs with the probability of success of killing a person when the car containing that person was fired on. That’s worse than apples-to-oranges – that’s more like apples-to-lugnuts…
If the ultimate goal was to kill her, why not fire on the car with something like a bazooka or grenade launcher – or even a machine-gun mounted on an armored vehicle – or a tank? Why not staff more people and have a large number of people open fire on the car?
The ultimate theory – that a conspiracy to silence this journalist was set in motion in which the plan called for one (I think it was one – if it were two or three it’s still a small number compared to what they could have done) person to fire on the car with his assault rifle – seems too preposterous to bother pursuing any further.