|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grubble Grubble
|
|
|
|
|
|
Monday, September 01, 2003 :::
I received an e-mail in response to my rant, dated Aug. 21st, concerning the accidental killing of journalist Mazen Dana. While I do not necessarily agree with every point made, they are cogent and well thought out. I am a believer in equal time, so with the author's permission, I am publishing the e-mail.
Just a couple of points.
The bad guys in Iraq (as everywhere else in the MId-East) who fire RPGs at the good guys, NEVER wear helmets, flak jackets, and stand in the middle of a road in front of advancing armor or any other vehicle to mount an attack. An RPG is not a suicide weapon. They shoot from concealment.
A frigging RPG launcher doesn't look ANYTHING like a TV camera, from any angle, or vice versa. The TV camera has a big, bright, eye.
The tank commander would presumably have given the order to fire, unless the rules of engagement are such now that the gunner can fire at anything the gunner thinks is a threat, without verification. If that's the case, we're in bigger trouble than I thought. The TC SHOULD have been able to identify the target as a TV cameraman because the cameraman got out of an (apparently marked TV) vehicle, had to hoist the camera onto his shoulder, and would have been seen
in profile while doing all this. In addition, there would have been a sound man.
Yes, combat correspondents -- whether embedded or not is immaterial here -- take chances, accept the risks, and often are hurt or die.
No, they don't do it for love of bang-bang, money, fame, or glory. They do it because it's a profession, and their job is to show us what's happening.
It may have been a little silly for Mazen to stand in front of a tank with ANYTHING on his shoulder -- but in a war zone where reporters are known to be operating, the journalist kind of assumes that a TV camera is a relatively large badge of identity.
I think what happened here is that a gunner goofed, or maybe his TC goofed. But somebody goofed, and it got a guy dead who was on his way home to his wife and kids. He wasn't even supposed to be there that day, but he did it because it needed him.
In my experience in Vietnam, troops would go out of their way to protect a correspondent, and experienced correspondents could be counted on not to expose troops to danger or to require having their asses removed from a sling. Sure, there were cowboys. They didn't stay that way long.
War is hell, good people get killed all the time by accident. Let's just call this an accident, or perhaps a stupidity of the moment by (in my opinion) the gunner, not the TV guy, and let it go at that. The guy's dead. There ain't gonna be no recriminations, nor any touchy-feely training for tank gunners to learn how to identify TV cameras at 250 meters before they shoot at what they perceive is a threat.
Rules of engagement should be refined. But that don't happen in war. In war, rules of engagement erode from what they were at the start, instead of improving.
Lets just hope we don't kill too many TV guys or too many ordinary Iraqis before we get the job done -- or we'll never live this one down, either, though we're winning it.s,
Michael Kopp
Wellington, New Zealand
US Army 1967-71
Vietnam 68-70
Pacific Stars and Stripes
Vietnam Bureau
Combat Correspondent
Former TV cameraman, USA
|
|
|
|
