Unlawfully killed? Think what you might of the Americans however they were in a combat situation. No vehicles marked and under fire. What would you do? Personally I think that unfortunately they were right. Take no risks, deal with the unknown as if it were an enemy. Road side bombs, suicide bombers, no easy choices!
2006-10-13 10:42:59 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
I agree with you. Terry Lloyd had no business been there on the front line, feeding back anti American propaganda. I find it incredible that we should have British reporters trying to undermine the war effort, and British reporters focusing on the war from the Iraqi perspective. Can you imagine in the second world war, having our reporters interview, and seek the opinion of, the German people. Particularly, when the TV news media are not reporting facts, but giving us their opinion on the validity of the war effort. Also, in that particular theatre of war, the enemy are dressed like, and operate from, the civilian population. Who do the British media think they are? Sorry, but I have no sympathy.
This was a war zone, and ordinary civilian law should have no place in it. Lloyd should not have been there.
2006-10-13 11:08:20 · answer #1 · answered by Veritas 7 · 3⤊ 5⤋
How could they feel threatened for Christs sake, they were about 50 yards away in heavily armoured tanks. Terry was injured, and was being taken to hospital by a vehicle that stopped to help. The Yanks just opened fire from the safety of their tanks, on an unarmed civilian vehicle. The coroner, after listening to all the available evidence recorded a verdict of "unlawful killing" Look back over history and find out just how many people have been killed in "friendly fire" involving the Americans. It"s so easy to shoot first and ask question later if you have a couldn"t care less attitude. Trying to justify it just shows how chicken livered the American forces really are. How many officers were shot by their own men in Vietnam because they didn"t like the orders that were given to them. Drugged up cowboys, and they need to face the consequences of their actions.
2006-10-13 21:26:06 · answer #2 · answered by researcher 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Terry Lloyd's vehicle had the letters 'TV' in wide black marker tape on the doors. He was initially wounded by Iraqi crossfire but then helped to apparent safety by an Iraqi. He got into an unmarked 4x4 as part of a convoy which then headed back from whence it came. At that point, American tanks opened fire on the whole convoy and Terry Lloyd was shot in the head. I've read that 15 minutes of video tape has disappeared, which would have shown all of the above. Today, the coroner at Oxford returned a verdict of unlawful killing. Now make up your mind.
2006-10-13 17:48:37 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋
i agree in so much as a journalist takes the risk so has personal responsibility for being there in the first place.On the other hand, if such people weren't there ,how many more such incidents would go completely un-reported. it is a typical american military response-- blow it up, then pick through he bits to see who it was. There only defence is that it wasn't done on purpose as history proves they do the same to there own troops aswell
There just not very good at military things- there saving grace is they are a rich country so they can afford to blow there own stuff up.
2006-10-13 22:24:47 · answer #4 · answered by bob 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
"Unlawful Killing" "Friendly Fire" How many times do we have to hear those phrases concerning American military blunders?
In the much publicised case of the 'Murder' of TV journalist Terry Lloyd, There is far to much speculation whether the troops that fired upon his vehicle were acting in self-defence or, as the judge put it, "Trigger happy cowboys"?
This is yet another shoot first ask questions later situation, which is common place throughout Iraq and Afghanistan. I wonder how many thousands of un-publicised incidents have occurred since the invasion of Iraq? How many other Terry Lloyd styled mascaras have there been to date? Where the 'enemy' posed NO threat to the military presence, but still the yanks have continued to slaughter innocent, unarmed people.
2006-10-13 22:09:48 · answer #5 · answered by Bont11 5 · 4⤊ 1⤋
civillian reporters who go out into war zones pay their money and take their chances like anyone else. the troops do their best to look out for them. personally the reporting should be left to the forces and they should have there own jurno's so we can go back to the old propaganda days. troops make snap decisions as to what is a threat, and in a zone where children carry guns and women drive through checkpoints in cars loaded with expolsive, roadside bombs and suicide bombers some innocents are going to be taken out by mistake but this does not make it unlawful. if there is evidence to suggest there could be a threat then it is lawful.
2006-10-13 20:14:37 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
There have been a lot of 'unknown' killings by the Americans!
It's time all the British soldiers and reporters were brought out of the 'hell hole' they are in. It's a non-win situation and it's getting worse.
2006-10-13 18:31:05 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Well if the coroner gave a verdict of unlawful killing I'm sure he knows what he's doing, surely they did not have to fire on people who were not being a threat at the time.
2006-10-13 17:45:23 · answer #8 · answered by Jude 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Its a combat zone!!! pull the TV, Journos out!!! Pull the british soldiers for that matter
2006-10-13 17:55:03 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
Why do people get so shocked when soldiers kill people? That's their job. That's what they get paid for. Kill or be killed. Much to easy to take the moral highground when you're sitting on the sofa.
2006-10-13 17:55:08 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋