Darky! =D, on 08 April 2010 - 04:55 PM, said:
Aaron, on 08 April 2010 - 02:41 PM, said:
Darky! =D, on 08 April 2010 - 03:57 PM, said:
And no, don't, because you're really annoying on MSN.
PMS pl0x?
No, dude, he really, really is. xD
It's pretty true. See the post above mine for proof.
Darky! =D, on 08 April 2010 - 02:57 PM, said:
So Jake, since the identities of the other people down there seem to be unknown, isn't it
possible at least that they were in fact insurgents?
EDIT: Also, it's not as if the guy who was using the weapon whose sight was recorded was the only guy there. There were other guys watching to. As I understand it, there was even another Apache or whatever they're in. So it's not as if what you see is the evidence the people who were actually there had to go off. They were -actually there-. xD They're likely to know a bit more about what's going on than someone watching a recording of part of it from one side of what's going on.
Something tells me that "They could be insurgents lets shoot them" is a bad policy to have in a country full of people that we're supposed to be trying to make like us*. I'd also guess that if there was another, closer, Apache in the area that it would have been the one to fire.
Something also tells me that if that group was hostile and shooting (at the apache?) like was said, then they wouldn't have been dicking around in the street like they were.
*"Oh please, you can't make judgments based on 'well, probably' and 'well I suspect' and half-assed guesses like that. "