# US troops shoot Reuters cameraman **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 17, 2003, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-troops-shoot-reuters-cameraman/195847 "2003-08-17T23:37:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![jjimm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba8739/32.png) [@jjimm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjimm)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2003, 10:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-troops-shoot-reuters-cameraman/195847/61 "2003-08-19T10:48:43Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Diogenes the Cynic_ > **It’s stupid to illegally invade another country and then get bent out of shape if that country fights back.** I agree, and I’ll go one step further: it’s disingenuous to refer to these people as “terrorists”, however much one may dislike them and what they stand for (much as I do). However, > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Andy_ > \*\* I suspect the Iraqis could learn to live with each other a little more easily if there weren’t tens of thousands of foreign troops in their country.\*\* I disagree. Withdrawal now would be catastrophic, leading to fractures and civil war. Now that we’ve put ourselves in this position, it has to be followed through to a proper end. At the moment it looks like they’re just treading water. ---
**Author:** ![Tedster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/4491bb/32.png) [@Tedster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tedster)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2003, 10:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-troops-shoot-reuters-cameraman/195847/62 "2003-08-19T10:56:37Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by TVAA \* > \*\*They weren’t in a combat situation, remember? At least, not officially. \*\* “Officially”, anywhere in Iraq is a combat situation. I presume you mean they weren’t currently in a shooting match, which is true, but is fairly irrelevant. Clearly from the posts made by some here, there’s a lot of political machination or “spin” applied. The truth in situations requires a bit of digging, the incident’s proximate cause appears to be that the cameraman was in a location different from where permission was obtained, and most important of all the tank column was from a different unit altogether - they had no idea who this guy was. It was a tragic mistake. To ascribe anything else is just propaganda. ---
**Author:** ![Andy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/aeb1de/32.png) [@Andy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andy)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2003, 11:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-troops-shoot-reuters-cameraman/195847/63 "2003-08-19T11:04:52Z")
I’m sure withdrawal would lead to one hell of a mess which would likely take years to resolve, but then I suspect it will take years via this route too. My very simple point was that Iraqis would not be attacking US/allied forces if they weren’t there! Of course we cannot know what the situation would be like right now if intervention had not occurred, or if troops had not been used. ---
**Author:** ![jjimm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba8739/32.png) [@jjimm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjimm)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2003, 11:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-troops-shoot-reuters-cameraman/195847/64 "2003-08-19T11:15:03Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Andy \* > **My very simple point was that Iraqis would not be attacking US/allied forces if they weren’t there!** I see what you mean. But - but - maybe they would anyway - remember, Iraq represented clear and present danger, and those WMD were pointing at the UK, and they could be deployed in **45 minutes**! Yes, that’s right! Yes! :smack: ---
**Author:** ![London\_Calling](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@London\_Calling](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/London_Calling)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2003, 11:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-troops-shoot-reuters-cameraman/195847/65 "2003-08-19T11:20:49Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by jjimm \* > However,I disagree. Withdrawal now would be catastrophic, leading to fractures and civil war. Now that we’ve put ourselves in this position, it has to be followed through to a proper end. At the moment it looks like they’re just treading water. A Muslim civil war ? I suppose its possible. Problem is for me, this sounds a little like Tito’s Yugoslavia. As we know, the nation of ‘Iraq’ is a construction of empire, the British Empire. It’s now in reconstruction for the (energy) purposes of, and under the rule of, another empire. In between, it spent its time as a puppet of the British, a tool of US foreign policy and as a demonised dictatorship. Strangers to catastrophe they aren’t. And all this reads to me little so much of Kipling’s ‘white man’s burden’ . . . tell me one thing, if the US left tomorrow, how long would it be before the UN stepped in to ‘nation build’ on an humanitarian basis ? The US is there for it’s own strategic and geo-political ends. Anything else is facade, imho. ---
**Author:** ![Age\_Quod\_Agis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d07c76/32.png) [@Age\_Quod\_Agis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Age_Quod_Agis)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2003, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-troops-shoot-reuters-cameraman/195847/66 "2003-08-19T15:59:52Z")
> [@](#): > > _yojimbo:_ > I’m positive if this was a Brit soldier they would look into it harder than the US will. I’m tempted to respond with the typical call for a cite, followed by rolleyes. Instead, I’ll just ask what makes you positive that this is the case. Every shooting in Iraq is followed by a period of temporary suspension for the soldier involved while the armed forces investigate the incident. Do you have some reason to believe that the US does not conduct an adequate investigation? ---
**Author:** ![Age\_Quod\_Agis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d07c76/32.png) [@Age\_Quod\_Agis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Age_Quod_Agis)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2003, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-troops-shoot-reuters-cameraman/195847/67 "2003-08-19T16:08:20Z")
> [@](#): > > _Diogenes the Cynic:_ > They’re defending their country from hostile invaders. What are they supposed to do, surrender? > > It’s stupid to illegally invade another country and then get bent out of shape if that country fights back. Please. Your attempts to paint those fighting on behalf of Iraq’s former regime as noble resisters is insulting to those that Hussein’s regime tortured and killed. If you think the Hussein regime was in any way representative of the will of the people, or that the people currently shooting at American and British soldiers are in any way fighting for the good of the majority in Iraq, then you are terribly mistaken. ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2003, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-troops-shoot-reuters-cameraman/195847/68 "2003-08-19T16:17:21Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Age Quod Agis \* > Do you have some reason to believe that the US does not conduct an adequate investigation? I do. But first let me state that I do believe this, like most other incidents, are honest mistakes caused by the circumstances and are not the responsibility of the GIs but of who put them there and created the conditions for these things to happen. Having said that, the investigation of the firing on the Hotel Palestine was a coverup and a farce from the get go and lacks all credibility, as several organizations of reporters and the Ukranian Government have said. The initial reports of the US forces were contradicted immediately by lots of witnesses and it has been nothing but backpedal and change the story ever since. The final report lacks all credibility and is just a coverup of whoever gave the order to fire. The guy in the tank just did as he was ordered but it is clear there was no intention of revealing the truth to the world. The USA is not interested in telling the truth but in covering up. ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2003, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-troops-shoot-reuters-cameraman/195847/69 "2003-08-19T16:24:40Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Age Quod Agis \* > Please. Your attempts to paint those fighting on behalf of Iraq’s former regime as noble resisters is insulting to those that Hussein’s regime tortured and killed. If you think the Hussein regime was in any way representative of the will of the people, or that the people currently shooting at American and British soldiers are in any way fighting for the good of the majority in Iraq, then you are terribly mistaken. If you have any evidence that those fighting the occupation forces are fighting for Saddam Hussein (other than the self-serving declarations of the US government) I would like to see them because all the information I have points to the conclusion that the Iraqis hate being occupied. There are incidents and anti-American demonstrations daily and daily Iraqis are being shot. Only the US government with their blinders firmly in place, believe they are welcome in Iraq. They have installed a puppet government which is trying to do the best it can and which is seen as outsiders by the Iraqis. How the Iraqis feel about being occupied is quite evident to me. Now, if you have evidence that the fighters are a few who are trying to reinstate Saddam Hussein and they are hated by the majority of Iraq, well, I’d like to see it. ---
**Author:** ![jjimm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba8739/32.png) [@jjimm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjimm)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2003, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-troops-shoot-reuters-cameraman/195847/70 "2003-08-19T16:33:32Z")
**Age Quod Agis** , I don’t seek to speak on behalf of **yojimbo** , but he’s from Ireland, and therefore is certainly _not_ biased in favour of British soldiers. I suspect he might be referring to the Bloody Sunday enquiry, which is still being conducted, _30 years_ after an incident where British soldiers shot into a crowd of demonstrators in Derry. ---
**Author:** ![yojimbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yojimbo/32/232_2.png) [@yojimbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yojimbo)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2003, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-troops-shoot-reuters-cameraman/195847/71 "2003-08-19T16:45:40Z")
\*\* Age Quod Agis\*\* to be perfectly honest it just am impression I get. There have been many incidents with civilians and journos getting killed. Have any of these soldiers been punished or are all of these incidents “clean kills” or whatever the phrase is. I don’t see the US media been very critical of troops but I do know the UK press are they are like pit bulls when it comes to this shit. BTW don’t get me wrong here the Brits **HAVE** covered up many incidents in the northern part of my country 😉 and let soldiers off after even a court found them guilty. Look up Lee Clegg in goggle sometime for one example. Again my impression only so I shouldn’t have used the phrasing I did especially in GD. ---
**Author:** ![yojimbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yojimbo/32/232_2.png) [@yojimbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yojimbo)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2003, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-troops-shoot-reuters-cameraman/195847/72 "2003-08-19T16:54:56Z")
Well in fairness **jjimm** it’s the 2nd inquiry (the first being a complete whitewash and it took decade for a real one to be set up. [http://www.bloody-sunday-inquiry.org.uk/](http://www.bloody-sunday-inquiry.org.uk/) [http://www.bloodysundaytrust.org/](http://www.bloodysundaytrust.org/) Anyhoo enough of this hijack ---
**Author:** ![jjimm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba8739/32.png) [@jjimm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjimm)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2003, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-troops-shoot-reuters-cameraman/195847/73 "2003-08-19T17:07:21Z")
Yeah. I neglected to mention that. Apologies. But at least there is a second enquiry. ---
**Author:** ![Age\_Quod\_Agis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d07c76/32.png) [@Age\_Quod\_Agis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Age_Quod_Agis)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2003, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-troops-shoot-reuters-cameraman/195847/74 "2003-08-19T17:24:17Z")
> [@](#): > > _sailor:_ > If you have any evidence that those fighting the occupation forces are fighting for Saddam Hussein (other than the self-serving declarations of the US government) I would like to see them because all the information I have points to the conclusion that the Iraqis hate being occupied. So it’s your opinion that the people shooting American and British soldiers are just everyday Iraqi citizens that hate the occupation? Then where do these everyday Iraqis get grenade launchers and surface to air missiles? From the local convenience mart? And why does the resistance appear strongest in Baathist areas? And why would an Iraqi citizen that’s merely trying to fight off an occupation attack energy and water centers, which hurts the Iraqis more than the Americans or British, and prolongs the occupation rather than shortening it? And if the Iraqis hate occupation so much, then why didn’t they similarly resist against Hussein? Surely, his government wasn’t representative of the people. If you are honestly interested in who the attackers are, I thought [this](http://informationclearinghouse.info/article3973.htm) was a good article on the subject. They break the attackers into 3 groups: “Saddam loyalists, foreign fighters and those angry at living conditions since U.S.-led forces routed the Saddam regime.” The foreign fighters “encompass both anti-American al-Qaida-type characters from Syria and Jordan, among other nations, as well as possible agents provocateurs from Iran, who may be fomenting trouble in Shiite Muslim-dominated southern Iraq.” The last group “is a hodgepodge of common criminals and people frustrated with the lack of services. Saddam released large numbers of prisoners last fall during a general amnesty.” Some estimate that Hussein released thousands of prisoners, including murderers and rapists (that didn’t work for him personally). Certainly, some of the people taking shots at American and British soldiers owe no allegiance to Saddam, and are motivated by anger towards the American and British presence in Iraq or their inability to immediately fight off resisters and provide ample water, power, and security instantaneously after ousting Saddam’s regime. Fortunately, such small-minded bigots aren’t in charge of American, British, or Iraqi policy. And thanks for the clarification, **yojimbo**. ---
**Author:** ![Daisy\_Cutter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f6c823/32.png) [@Daisy\_Cutter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Daisy_Cutter)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2003, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-troops-shoot-reuters-cameraman/195847/75 "2003-08-19T17:46:09Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by sailor \* > **And I ask again: what is your point in saying this? What are you trying to say?** Well, my point in saying that the cameraman knew the risks, is that I don’t really see what everybody is making a big fuss about. Accidents and unfortunate incidents are not all that uncommon, especially in a place like Iraq, where there are numerous violent acts taking place all of the time. His death is no different than anybody else who is killed over there, a point made by some earlier posters also. Is the life of a journalist worth anymore than the life of anybody else ? I’d think not. And just because it turns out that it he was fired upon by coalition forces, doesn’t mean that they did not have valid, legiitimate reasons to do so, if they felt he presented an immediate danger. Seems to me, those who should have been alerted of his presence, were not properly conveyed this information. But, I guess this is what an investigation will look into. Some journalists have died in that past, and some will surely die in the future too, when they report from hostile places. ---
**Author:** ![Rashak\_Mani](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ea666f/32.png) [@Rashak\_Mani](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rashak_Mani)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2003, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-troops-shoot-reuters-cameraman/195847/76 "2003-08-19T18:25:55Z")
Hhmm… so if everyone beleives the same you do Daisy Cutter… then GIs there might as well just start shooting everything they feel like ? That journalist was a few yards away from his car… which does say something about GIs power of observation. ``` Even if you dont care about the reporter himself... you should be worried about 20 yr olds that shoot anything in sight without hesitation. Those are americans that are suffering and reacting in a violent manner to any "menace". ``` ---
**Author:** ![Daisy\_Cutter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f6c823/32.png) [@Daisy\_Cutter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Daisy_Cutter)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2003, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-troops-shoot-reuters-cameraman/195847/77 "2003-08-19T18:39:26Z")
Please point out where I have stated that I do not care for the death of that journalist. In my first reply on this thread, I had already stated that his death was unfortunate. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2003, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-troops-shoot-reuters-cameraman/195847/78 "2003-08-19T20:09:59Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Age Quod Agis \* > **If you are honestly interested in who the attackers are, I thought [this](http://informationclearinghouse.info/article3973.htm) was a good article on the subject. They break the attackers into 3 groups…** Of course, according to the article, this is **the opinion of White House sources.** The article provides no evidence to support this opinion. Given the White House’s recent history of taking liberties with the truth when it comes to Iraq, some are disinclined to believe their take on matters. **sailor** asked for evidence the guerrilla attacks are being conducted by Saddam loyalists. The unsupported opinions of unnamed White House sources do not constitute very much evidence. Let’s see real evidence. ---
**Author:** ![Age\_Quod\_Agis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d07c76/32.png) [@Age\_Quod\_Agis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Age_Quod_Agis)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2003, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-troops-shoot-reuters-cameraman/195847/79 "2003-08-19T20:39:51Z")
> [@](#): > > _RickJay:_ > Of course, according to the article, this is the opinion of White House sources. The article provides no evidence to support this opinion. Given the White House’s recent history of taking liberties with the truth when it comes to Iraq, some are disinclined to believe their take on matters. > > sailor asked for evidence the guerrilla attacks are being conducted by Saddam loyalists. The unsupported opinions of unnamed White House sources do not constitute very much evidence. Let’s see real evidence. I’ll ignore your transparent argument that the conclusions of those who disagree with you is not “evidence.” Your statement is just plain false. For example, here are just two quotes from the article (emphasis added): > [@](#): > > Until the past few days, U.S. military officials had insisted that the attacks were merely a product of the final rooting out of the remnants of Saddam’s regime. Now they are beginning to float the idea that U.S. forces face several different opposition forces — _and military experts outside the government concur with that assessment_. . . . > > At the Pentagon and the White House _and among military experts_, there is a growing consensus that there are at least three forces involved in efforts to destabilize the country: Saddam loyalists, foreign fighters and those angry at living conditions since U.S.-led forces routed the Saddam regime. It appears the White House isn’t the only one with a “recent history of taking liberties with the truth.” ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2003, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-troops-shoot-reuters-cameraman/195847/80 "2003-08-19T20:48:26Z")
The idea that only a few Saddam Hussein loyalists are causing all the trouble is just wishful thinking on the part of the US government. The very obvious fact is that there is a very large portion of Iraqis demonstrating daily against the US occupation and it is only natural that many of those are willing to go further. Of course, it is possible that many of those were, indeed, Baathists. So what? They are Iraqis all the same and entitled to join the rest of the iraqis in their defense of their homeland. I cannot see why they should be disqualified. It is the old true Scotsman fallacy. But, returning to the matter of the reporter killed, I think we are missing the point. The only alternatives are not only (a) he was killed on purpose by a bloodthirsty GI or (b) shit happens and nobody is to blame. There is ©: the death could have been avoided if people higher up in the chain of command had planned better and executed better and therefore the responsibility lies further up the chain of command. Before the invasion was launched many of us warned that all these things would happen, that thousands of innocent civilians would be killed or maimed, that maintaining public order in Iraq would be a very difficult task, that reconstruction would not be nearly as easy as the Administration made it sound. The administration said no, it would not happen, the Iraqis qould welcome the American liberators and everything would be easy. Well, it’s not quite happening that way, is it? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-troops-shoot-reuters-cameraman/195847.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-troops-shoot-reuters-cameraman/195847.md?page=5)