Having access to uncencored and unbiased information here in Europe I have seen several different coments from Journalists (renouned european Journalists) who have said that the area was COMPLETELY calm during the time the tank fired the shell. The US genereal also claimed thats shots were fired from the lobby of the hotel (and not the rooftop!!! nor windows!!! read his statement). The only little problem with that statement is that the lobby is on the other side of the Hotel! How can you hit a tank through a hotel with an AK47? Furthermore, what on earth is an AK47 going to do against a top op the range US tank? Absolutely nothing, and the Iraqi's know this.

I have to say that the US has gone too far on this -execution- style attempt to frighten INDEPENDENT journalist - Journalists who have not been sworn in by the army such as CNN.

I do not believe in news channels, I read newspapers and draw my own conclusions from there. Tv media is bullshit, in every continent, including europe becuase they try to make it entertaining. I don't give a fuck if you try to make this a US against Europe thing, that is fine, I am not a politician. But if you really think we are there to butcher people and the iraqi people really do not want us there, go to the al jazeera website and read the story about Iraqi's chanting in bagdahd "Saddam is an enemy of God", unless of course you think that Al jazeera is also sworn in by the army.

Snoogans, that was the most ignorant thing I have ever heard from you. A warzone does not entitle you to shoot anyone. Within a warzone anarchy (if you would like it or not) does not take place. There is something which is called the geneva convention which defines "rules" of war. If you kill someone which does not threaten you or is a civilian intentionally and not by accident it IS considered a breach in this treaty. The US did so this time and has done so in the past as well. This execution was a definate breach in the geneva convention and falls in the category of war crimes. The international court should investigate this and imprison the ones who gave the command.

BUT ohhh wait. A half a year ago the US boycotted new court which was set up to investigate war crimes. They never signed the agreement and threatened to post sanctions and trade barriers on those who did. And so nothing will happen. Quite a coincident actually that Bush descided to ban something which Clinton was proactively trying to install and a half a year later the US is fighting to gain the last of the untouched oil reserves. According to the Americans they can kill and shoot anyone they wish without having to fear any court action. Must be a nice situation. Finally they can do what they are best at (Michael More - Bowling for Collumbine) - LEAGALLY

shoot first ask questions later

Geneva convention or no Geneva convetion, war is still a dangerous business. The convention is designed to stipulate rules to limit collateral and civilian damages during a war. This is an honorable idea, but in all honesty and practicality is a very difficult objective to achieve.

There are countless soldiers out there who are risking their lives because it is their job. They are working in hostile territory where there are people trying to kill them. If something or someone is seen to engage a friendly unit they are deemed hostile, and are therefore the 'enemy'. By the rules of engagement this means that they must be incapacitated, by whatever means necessary.

Whether this hotel was shot on because the US wanted to scare journalists, or whether it was because hostile fire was seen coming from the building is something which must be examined, but not by us. The journalists themselves know the risks of being in a warzone. Missiles, bombs, even bullets are not 100% accurate.

I agree with most of the points made so far, the journalists should not be mourned or treated any differently than either a US, or an Iraqi soldier that dies in the field. They are all there doing their jobs, and they all know the risks.

With the amount of propaganda surrounding this war, it is impossible for any of us 'uninformed viewers' to make any sort of judgement on this event. For all we know the 'journalists' may have been deliberately firing on the US tanks in order to get a good action shot! Insensitive I know, but none of us can believe anything being spread about this war...

"A warzone does not entitle you to shoot anyone" where did I say that????

I wasn't talking about the geneva convention.... I do understand the rules of war a bit...

"A half a year ago the US boycotted new court" ahhhh war crimes tribunal has been in place since a bit longer than 6 months ago. German Officers where triled at the WCT. I agree the US should have signed the act.The US should also sign the Landmine act or the Kyoto Protocol .... or how about that the US is the only country EVER to have used wepons off mass distruction in a war, they still have the death penalty, in some states your not allowed to be a fag, Ted turner owns land in the US the size of Luxenbourg and has more profit than the GDP of most African Nations WHO CARES

My point was given the situation I don't blame them or can you tell me EXACTLY how one feels in a situation like that one?????? I promise you the last thing in peoples minds when in a hostile enviroment is the Geneva convention.

I agree that what they did was wrong, but I do not blame the soldier that pulled the trigger ( or in this case pushed the button) but the people that put them in this situation

Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War
http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/92.htm not a bad read actully

OK, the lasst thing I would like to say is that:

a) THERE WAS NO SHOOOTING FROM THE HOTEL!

b) The tank turned the torret, aimed for 2 MINUTES and THEN shot. EVEN MY GRANDMOTHER WOULD RECOGNISE A JOURNALIST DURING THAT TIME! Have you ever stoped and wondered how good the binoculars are in a tank??? F*ç*ing good.

This was no accident. It was plain murder/execution

Yes, journalists live dangerously down there and take the risk of being accidentaly hit by an estray dummy bomb. Let me emphasise on the ACCIDENTAL part!

bmacd: Just because its a war of propagande doesnt give you the right to remain ignorant

If it where a "murder/execution" don't you think they would have done it another way?

Strange things happen in war... we all agree it was tragic what happened, I can still only point 1 finger and that is on POTUS

finally a blank discussion that is long enough to print and enjoy in a reading chair!

G

Then again, given the ammount of Brits the US have killed in FF it wouldn't surprise me if they now had to aim at Journalists now due to lack of targets

I would not call it tragic... A girl falling into a well and breaking her back, that is tragick. Certainly not being aimed and shot at by a M1A2 Abrams Main Battle Tank - That is criminal -

Just have a read through it:

Reporters sans frontiers

http://www.rsf.org/rubrique.php3?id_rubrique=20

Ah yes, RSF, renowned for being impartial and reporting only the facts! I'm sorry bastard (love the name, requires no additional abuse) but there is not such thing as impartiality anymore.

Read a couple of their other pieces, they don't even pretend to be on the fence, or even to check into, and report, the other side...

Also to be honest, calling other people ignorant is really not helping your case...

I get all my hard fact from http://www.foxnews.com (hehehehehehe)

Yes it was wrong it should not have happened! I think we all need some liquid bread and a BJ

I wish you lot would all stop worrying and chill its not your problem when this is all over we'll all be able to get into my oldskool red cadillac and drive from gas station to gas station listen to the bee gees, have enough room for a mini bar (petrol powered of course), no catalyst, a few play mates in the back, a drunk gustaf in the boot (or trunk as my fellow american brothers say), throw McDonalds Rappers out on to the street, and a M1A2 turret mounted on the front just for shooting journalists.

I heard the tank shell was fired from a mile away which would put the tank out of harms way from sniper or RPG fire if there was any. Also since when is the response to a sniper a tank shell? Don’t you usually fire back with a little less force than a tank shell?

By the way, why did we drop four 2000lbs bombs on that restaurant? I think 1 or 2 would have been plenty. No matter what you say a lot of civilians have to have been killed in that bombing. I read somewhere that you have to be at least 1 km away from a 2000 lbs bomb not to be affected.

So I say we just forget about the incident, the RPG (which was never fired) and lets go swimming in the oil.

can i still have my cadillac

Yes you may

Sobrero: Check your facts

http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Lakes/3457/chall2.htm

SENSORS

The commander has a gyrostabilised site, model VS 580-10, from SFIM Industries of France. The upper unit of the VS 580, containing the gyrostabilised panoramic sight and electronics, is mounted on the turret roof. A neodinium yttrium aluminium garnet, Nd:YAG, laser rangefinder is incorporated into an intermediate assembly which joins the upper unit to a lower telescope assembly inside the turret.

The TELESCOPE assembly houses the optical viewing system, hand controls, electronics and the sight stabilisation system. The sight provides all round vision without the commander having to move his head. The elevation range is plus or minus 35 degrees. The field of view with x 3.2 magnification optics is 16.5 degrees, and with x 10.5 magnification optics, the field of view is 5 degrees.

ENGAGEMENT PROCEDURE

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The commander aligns the roof mounted panoramic sight on a target and presses the align switch to slew the turret round until the gun is automatically positioned on the target. The gunner then takes over the engagement of the target, and presses the laser rangefinder and the fire buttons to fire the gun. As soon as the gunner has taken over the engagement of the target, the tank commander is able to locate and take range measurement of a second target using the commander's sight. The data for both targets, the first target being engaged by the gunner and the second target, are stored in the digital fire control computer. When the gun has been fired and the kill assessment on the first target completed, the commander presses the align switch which results in the turret slewing round to align the gun on the second target and automatically firing the gun. The operational procedure greatly enhances the firepower of the tank, in that the Challenger can effectively engage targets in rapid succession.

THEREFORE

---------------------------------------------

The Commander must have been able to identify the "target" as non hostile.

Well it is good to know that this wealth of knowledge is available on th internet. Obviously common sense is not as readily available. That entire spiel was about the Challenger 2 main battle tank,a British tank, the shell fired was from an M1A2 battle tank, a US tank, never tell a tanker to check his facts about a tank. Their systems are totally different. And all of this crap is assuming that the target was really non hostile. In the US we get the pro war view, in Europe you get the anti war view, both are equally biased and equally useless. I do not know whatt happened for sure, and niether do you unless you travelled to bahgdad without my knowledge, so these FACTS a you call them are little more than conspiracy theory, internet dork bullshit.