I don't think it's the fine detail that's the issue here. Apart from the points in your summary, I see a psychological issue.Originally Posted by Cecil Turner
After a few days thought about this, I was reminded of Judge Dredd, an old Science Fiction "street cop empowered to act as judge, jury, and executioner". I see the four Apache crew in exactly that role. (Unlike the kind of operations that Anthony Martinez described, where somebody on the ground reviews the video feeds and decides on the use of deadly force (but the crews would still play a large part in the decision-making process), it seemed to me that in this case, the Apache crews were on their own, with "Bushmaster" merely clearing them to fire in the sense of "we're out of the way".)
I've read the Apache crew's witness statements which the DoD has released. It confirms the impression that the video has left me with: that they've consistently overestimated the actual threat; their witness statements speak of 15 people on the street when there were 8, and 5-6 people in the van episode when there were clearly 3. Since I expect people who are allowed to handle helicopters to be able to count, I get the distinct impression that on that day, they were not in the frame of mind that I would wish somebody who acts as in the abovementioned triple role to be in when assessing matters of life and death. (Maybe battle fatigue?) A system that put these people on that day in this role seems broken to me. Has it been fixed?
I've read numerous forum posts on this issue that thank the Apache crews for "saving their bacon"; imagine the number of Iraqis that blame them for killing their sons, husbands or fathers, and it's clear that this is a sensitive issue if we've got a conscience. The question is not, "can these people be legally convicted for this", but rather "do we want things to keep on happening this way"? What has been done to change this, and what still needs to be done?
Bookmarks