Are journalists legitamate war targets?

[Guest]

According to the report I read, RPGs were being fired. The RPG is a very potent weapon, especially in the hands of somebody with a good aim. The warhead wouldn't penetrate the armor on an Abrams, but if it blew a track off the tank, it would disabled it almost as effectively as killing it. The RPG can also turn an Armored Personnel Carrier like an M113 into a buring coffin as well as tearing up most any soft target like a Humvee or automobile.

So when there's somebody shooting an RPG at you, there isn't time to play hide-and-seek. That's why the Abrams on the scene spoke about the situation it its 120mm smoothbore voice.

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

[wmw999 2,123]

Quote

Any trouble-maker perpetrating as a journalist, taunting the soldiers with guns and shouting obscenities deserves to have a tank round fired at them

While I understand the sentiment behind that, does that mean that the police can just shoot anyone who pisses them off? I hope not. But how someone reacts when arrested for legitimate reasons can have a definite impact on the gentleness of their treatment.

Here's quote I pulled from CNN:

Quote

Though Al-Jazeera had earlier accused the United States of deliberately targeting its bureau, al Issawi said, that was only the opinion of a correspondent in the "heat of the moment."

"However, the official viewpoint of Al-Jazeera is that we expect an investigation into what happened, and we're not prejudging anything," al Issawi said. "If it was a mistake, we'd like the U.S. military to come out and say, 'It was a mistake, and we're sorry.'"

To me, this sounds reasonable; both the first angry reaction, and the more considered official one.

Even what Fox had on its website (an AP newsfeed) indicated that the most aggressive thing likely to have been seen from the hotel was binoculars and cameras. The Al-Jazeera network gave the coordinates of its building to the US State Department just so that they could avoid it if possible.

But I've never been directly in a war. Walked by machine guns, but never shot at.

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)

[Guest]

I was several blocks from the attempted coup in Seoul in '79, and trust me, that was more than close enough

According to the reports I've read, it appeared that somebody was spotting for mortar rounds from within the hotel.

Don't forget that there was chaos. War is nothing if not chaos.

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

[Gawain 0]

This is no different than the "inherent" risk of skydiving. We readily accept that. The press think their sh*t doesn't stink? Who the hell do they think they are? Diplomats? They were given no special quarter by Iraq, the US or anyone.

These a**holes are holed up in a hotel, with planes, tanks, bullets, missiles, bombs flying and moving all around. Cry me a river, what the f**k did these people think? That their press passes are "force fields"?

One of the parties involved in the conflict uses non-combatants as shields and has donned civilian clothing to blend in. The press is complaining that the US intentionally shot at them. That *itch Chistiane Ammanpour whining and moaning, "yes, it is a serious question....blah blah..." No it isn't. If you are in an environment where planes, tanks, bullets, missiles, bombs flying and moving all around, the risks of being shot, bombed, struck, squashed increase exponentially.

I call mega-bullsh*t on all of them. Even the embedded journalists know that their safety is secondary to the military missions they are accompanying.

I'll trust the word of what a tank-gunner see through his crosshairs over what a reporter thinks they didn't hear from three floor up/down in a hotel without much reservation.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[PhillyKev 0]

Quote

I call mega-bullsh*t on all of them. Even the embedded journalists know that their safety is secondary to the military missions they are accompanying.

I thought the blue vests and helmets gave them some kind of special protection.

[GrumpySmurf 0]

Bullets don't care who they occupy.
If you willingly put yourself in a situation where a bullet might occupy you - well, accept that one might want to take up residency - regardless who you are or what you do.

If journalists want immunity from getting killed in a warzone - they should avoid said war zone.

[Guest]

Quote

Quote

I call mega-bullsh*t on all of them. Even the embedded journalists know that their safety is secondary to the military missions they are accompanying.

I thought the blue vests and helmets gave them some kind of special protection.

Yes - immunity from lead poisoning...

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

[cgross 1]

I was just having this dicussion at work with some friends. I have no sympathy for those journalists. But I didn't wish that journalist would die, but I found it interesting that most other journalist (not embedded) were in Jordan or Qatar. So, these ones that chose to stay in Baghdad had to have know that their lives were in Jeopardy.

I am not trying to be a hard ass about this, but if you are going to eat dinner with the devil, you better bring a long spoon. ie don't stay in downtown Baghdad while it is being invaded.

[Guest]

They weren't deliberately targeted - that much is certain and here's why: because of the shit-storm that has occured as a result.

The coalition also said they wouldn't deliberately target civilians or human shields, but some civilians were killed/maimed anyway.

I'll say this though: It warms my heart to think of ol' UBL, squatting in his cave, tearing his hair out.

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

[billvon 2,400]

>I call mega-bullsh*t on all of them . . . These a**holes are holed up in a hotel . . .

I admire the people who willingly put their lives on the line for their jobs. I wouldn't call them assholes, any more than I'd think less of a Marine truck mechanic (or a civilian one supporting the war effort, for that matter) for not being on the front line. I'm sorry they have to endure being called assholes for doing their jobs.

>I'll trust the word of what a tank-gunner see through his crosshairs
> over what a reporter thinks they didn't hear from three floor
> up/down in a hotel without much reservation.

I'd trust a tank gunner over a reporter any day when it came to identifying targets. I'd trust a journalist over a soldier in a firefight any day when it comes to reporting news. They both are trained for different jobs.

[jfields 0]

Quote

I'd trust a tank gunner over a reporter any day when it came to identifying targets. I'd trust a journalist over a soldier in a firefight any day when it comes to reporting news. They both are trained for different jobs.

And those of us that were military journalists blur the lines. However, regardless of the fact that you are a journalist, you are a soldier/sailor/airman/marine first. There are situations where things can get fuzzy though.

[bodypilot90 0]

Quote

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.

slightly off what you are saying, but you'll have to admit the the military has gone to great efforts to keep civilian deaths to the lowest number possible. I believe when or if you get a death count the SH gang killed most if the Iraqi's

[trigger 0]

I wouldn't use the word legitamate or even targets regarding journalists in the same way you wouldn't clasify civilians as legitamate targets .However,regarding warzones.Warzones are [can't stress this enough]very dangerous places inwhich to be conducting your buisness.And i believe the men and women who cover such events must accept and be aware of the risks that come with it.When it comes down to it ,my sympathys lie with the civilians who have little or no choice when they tragically get caught up in such situations.

.CHOP WOOD COLLECT WATER.

[Guest]

I feel sorry for people who were injured or killed just because they were unlucky enough to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

As for the journalists - that's a shame, but--



"You knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Fred!"

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

[Gawain 0]

Quote

>I call mega-bullsh*t on all of them . . . These a**holes are holed up in a hotel . . .

I wouldn't call them assholes, any more than

Dude, I don't have a problem with them reporting and doing their jobs. What I have problem with is that they're complaining that they were being deliberately targeted by the US military. I say, they're full of sh*t and that it is a**hol-ish to even lend credence to such a claim...

Quote

>I'll trust the word of what a tank-gunner see through his crosshairs
> over what a reporter thinks they didn't hear from three floor
> up/down in a hotel without much reservation.

I'd trust a tank gunner over a reporter any day when it came to identifying targets. I'd trust a journalist over a soldier in a firefight any day when it comes to reporting news. They both are trained for different jobs.

Granted...however your point really doesn't address the subject at hand. A reporter whining about being shot at, during a war, in a city that is being invaded is not reporting...

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[billvon 2,400]

>Dude, I don't have a problem with them reporting and doing their
>jobs. What I have problem with is that they're complaining that they
>were being deliberately targeted by the US military. I say, they're full
>of sh*t and that it is a**hol-ish to even lend credence to such a
>claim...

Ah, OK. I thought you were talking about the article Prephect posted. The first lines were "The rights of journalists in law are unambiguous. Journalists have no special rights, and any journalists who enter a combat zone — like all other civilians — have no right to special protection." It continues like that.

>A reporter whining about being shot at, during a war, in a city that is
>being invaded is not reporting...

I think it is. It would be poor wartime reporting indeed if he was being shot at - and did not mention it. I agree that claiming he should have special protection is unrealistic.

[riggerrob 558]

Play with fire and sooner or later you will get burned.
Neither the Geneva Convention nor similar passages in the Koran nor similar passages in the Ten Commandments can protect everyone who goes in harm's way.

For Hollywood's take on this subject: watch the scary movie "Harrison's Flowers."