Are journalists legitamate war targets?

[prepheckt 0]

I just read an article online that discuss this. What does everybody think? Some say no, because they are non combatants, but thte article does bring up some good points.

http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/world/DailyNews/iraq_journalists030409.html

"Dancing Argentine Tango is like doing calculus with your feet."
-9 toes

[QuickDraw 0]

Anyone who earns a living following peoples suffering or reactions to life situations,
are legitimate targets in my opinion... remember these people get paid to do this.

-- Hope you don't die. --

I'm fucking winning

[meatmissile 0]

I don't think that they should be specifically targeted, so the term target may be misleading.

But, as a wise man once said: If you behave like a toffee, don't complain if you get chewed.

--
ZZZzzzz....

[billvon 2,400]

Depends on your definition of 'legitimate.' If you are on the side that's going to win there is some adherence to Geneva protocols, calls for fair treatment of prisoners etc. If you're on the losing side, generally anything that helps your side is legitimate.

War really isn't about adherence to rules of civilized people. It's sorta the opposite - it's what people do when the rules of civilization fail. During a war it's OK to use weapons of mass destruction. It's OK to put people in concentration camps, and it's OK to kill civilians. It's a time when the normal rules of legitimacy and basic civil rights are suspended.

[Guest]

No (except for Peter Arnett - BWAHAHAA!)

Seriously, if troops are taking fire from a building, do you really think some NCO or commander is going to say - "Don't shoot! Al-Jazeera is in there!")?

Did the newsies in Baghdad really, really believe that Saddam's goons were going to protect them?

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[Guest]

Quote

Anyone who earns a living following peoples suffering or reactions to life situations,
are legitimate targets in my opinion... remember these people get paid to do this.

Being a part-time reporter covering the skydiving beat, I have been in situations where I could have been perceived as a "vulture" were I not to tread carefully and be sensitive to people's feelings.

I have never shoved a microphone into anybody's face and hollered "Your (significant other here) just turned into street pizza when his parachute failed to open (heh)! HOW DOES THAT MAKE YOU FEEL!?"

A reporter has an obligation (willingly undertaken, and for pay, it's true) to get the story, but there must be balance, and objectivity. Peter "Tailwind" Arnett totally lost his.

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[AggieDave 6]

That's great that you're very careful about people.

My experience with reporters is very very bad. They were absolute vultures when Bonfire fell. Infact, one cameraguy was being a total ass about himself in the Memorial Student Center, right before we were going to meet with Scott's parents. I almost kicked his ass. I think he saw a big guy with a high'n tight haircut, in uniform, VERY pissed off and decided to leave.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[beavdog 0]

Im trying to picture you with at high and tight....I met you in Eloy this year and I remember you to have quite a lot of hair.

Here's to the Breezes that blows through the Trezzez.....

[QuickDraw 0]

If reporters/journalists made a differance to a situation, (i.e. were not just there to sensationalize a story and document the suffering)
i would have no problem.
Don't get me wrong, i admire good investigative journalism that highlights the plight of the victims, and informs the public how they can help.
But in a war situation...they know the risks and the rewards.

As for 'legitimate' i mean in the sense that i would not stop firing at a target if i was told a reporter was in that position.

-- Hope you don't die. --

I'm fucking winning

[prepheckt 0]

Quote

Im trying to picture you with at high and tight....I met you in Eloy this year and I remember you to have quite a lot of hair.

I'm with him dave, I can't see it either..HUAH

"Dancing Argentine Tango is like doing calculus with your feet."
-9 toes

[AggieDave 6]

Here ya go!

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[JackC 0]

Quote

During a war it's OK to use weapons of mass destruction. It's OK to put people in concentration camps, and it's OK to kill civilians. It's a time when the normal rules of legitimacy and basic civil rights are suspended.

Ahh, so that's how they can justify this. I did wonder.

[QuickDraw 0]

Quote

American military officials acknowledged yesterday that two prisoners captured in Afghanistan in December had been killed while under interrogation at Bagram air base north of Kabul – reviving concerns that the US is resorting to torture in its treatment of Taliban fighters and suspected al-Qa'ida operatives.

A spokesman for the air base confirmed that the official cause of death of the two men was "homicide", contradicting earlier accounts that one had died of a heart attack and the other from a pulmonary embolism.

The men's death certificates, made public earlier this week, showed that one captive, known only as Dilawar, 22, from the Khost region, died from "blunt force injuries to lower extremities complicating coronary artery disease" while another captive, Mullah Habibullah, 30, suffered from blood clot in the lung that was exacerbated by a "blunt force injury".

I think that deserves a thread of its own.

-- Hope you don't die. --

I'm fucking winning

[Guest]

Quote

Quote

During a war it's OK to use weapons of mass destruction. It's OK to put people in concentration camps, and it's OK to kill civilians. It's a time when the normal rules of legitimacy and basic civil rights are suspended.

Ahh, so that's how they can justify this. I did wonder.

If I was one of the family members of those who died at the hands of those cowards, it wouldn't bother me a whole lot, but that still doesn't make it right.

The implication in the article is that US personnel committed these atrocities. I doubt it. I believe it was done by locals. Despite US efforts for moderation, they couldn't have been everywhere.

We're still responsible for those deaths, because it happened on our watch.

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[prepheckt 0]

Damn...one word for that...HARDCORE!

"Dancing Argentine Tango is like doing calculus with your feet."
-9 toes

[wmw999 2,123]

I'm hoping that the fact they were reclassified as homicides is a sign that we're doing exactly what we should -- accept that nothing is perfect, and make sure it doesn't happen again.

All the crowing about people "no longer being a problem" makes me wonder if there's a feeling that it's OK as long as you don't get caught. I sure hope not.

No matter how humane the system, there will be folks who let their emotions, strenght, or bad-assness take over. A humane system will recognize that, try to prevent it, and make sure that it isn't repeated when it does happen.

I'm sure hoping we still have us one of those...

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[QuickDraw 0]

Quote

No matter how humane the system, there will be folks who let their emotions, strength, or bad-assness take over. A humane system will recognize that

Quote

President Bush appeared to encourage extra-judicial solutions in his State of the Union address in January when he talked of al-Qa'ida members being arrested or meeting "a different fate". "Let's put it this way," he said in a tone that appalled many, "they are no longer a problem to the United States and our friends and allies."

Oh dear.....

-- Hope you don't die. --

I'm fucking winning

[Guest]

Those who committed these acts MUST be prosecuted, if for negligence in allowing the mistreatment to take place, if nothing else.

If an American was actually doing the inflicting, then Leavenworth should be the ultimate destination. The rules apply to EVERYONE, even in wartime.

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[QuickDraw 0]

Quote

If an American was actually doing the inflicting, then Leavenworth should be the ultimate destination. The rules apply to EVERYONE, even in wartime.

What if the 'inflicting' was sub-contracted out like the artical suggests ?
Wouldn't that make the administration guilty of torture ?

-- Hope you don't die. --

I'm fucking winning

[Guest]

Quote

Quote

If an American was actually doing the inflicting, then Leavenworth should be the ultimate destination. The rules apply to EVERYONE, even in wartime.

What if the 'inflicting' was sub-contracted out like the artical suggests ?
Wouldn't that make the administration guilty of torture ?

Uh, no. If a police officer commits an illegal act, and Internal Affairs finds out about it, reports it and presses charges, does that make the Chief of Police an accessory (rhetorical question, one each )?

And despite it all, Wendy rightly pointed out that we have a system that hasn't just swept these injustices into an unmarked grave - it has found and reported wrongdoing.

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[wmw999 2,123]

Yes, that quote is why I put the part about people crowing. I call that "crowing," frankly. And it says a lot about the person doing it. Kind of like thinking it makes you look good to call someone else a loser.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[QuickDraw 0]

Quote

And despite it all, Wendy rightly pointed out that we have a system that hasn't just swept these injustices into an unmarked grave - it has found and reported wrongdoing.

Ok dude....i'll stick with the 1 - 1.

-- Hope you don't die. --

I'm fucking winning

[PhillyKev 0]

Quote

Those who committed these acts MUST be prosecuted, if for negligence in allowing the mistreatment to take place, if nothing else.

If an American was actually doing the inflicting, then Leavenworth should be the ultimate destination. The rules apply to EVERYONE, even in wartime.

No, the GC rules don't apply. They aren't soldiers, they're illegal combatants. And they're not on US soil so US rules don't apply. Geez, haven't you listened to anything that the president has been telling us?

[SkymonkeyONE 3]

Quote

I just read an article online that discuss this. What does everybody think?

Any trouble-maker perpetrating as a journalist, taunting the soldiers with guns and shouting obscenities deserves to have a tank round fired at them. Oh wait, the tank crew was only aiming at their equipment; firing anything above 7.62mm at a "person" is against the rules.

Chuck

[Guest]

Quote

Quote

Those who committed these acts MUST be prosecuted, if for negligence in allowing the mistreatment to take place, if nothing else.

If an American was actually doing the inflicting, then Leavenworth should be the ultimate destination. The rules apply to EVERYONE, even in wartime.

No, the GC rules don't apply. They aren't soldiers, they're illegal combatants. And they're not on US soil so US rules don't apply. Geez, haven't you listened to anything that the president has been telling us?

The GC rules may not apply, but basic human rights still do. And before you go off about Gitmo, those being held there have been issued foods they've asked for, copies of the Koran, prayer mats, etc., in fact a lot of captives in Afghanistan BEGGED to be sent to Gitmo.

Yes, they're in limbo, but it's their own damned fault. They chose to bear arms without wearing a uniform. They could be lawfully shot without trial (as happened to 13 unlucky Germans during the Battle of the Bulge [shot while still wearing US uniforms!]). Those were shot by US firing squads in full compliance with the Geneva Convention. To wit - anybody caught bearing arms in a war zone and not wearing a uniform CAN BE SUMMARILY EXECUTED ON THE SPOT.

I think what happened was that some of the Afghans got a bit too medieval when Americans weren't looking. We're still responsible for the deaths, and ultimately, dead men tell no tales, meaning that if those prisoners had anything of value to tell us, they can't now. That was as good a reason for keeping them alive as any.

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."