Unarmed civilians? The military aviators who were on the scene here had a much better vantage point than the biased author of this article. To say that this is murder only goes to show that the media thinks soldiers make better targets than thinkers. Perhaps they should have let an Improvised Explosive Device be laid for an unsuspecting American convoy the next morning. Then you would have a cheery headline, "Twenty Killed In Roadside Attack". Look at the second person killed (by the tractor), does he appear to be running for his life? No, he is reaching under a tarp or blanket for what appears to be a tubular weapon of some sort (most likely an RPG-7).
Their armement is beside the point, large bore weapons, such as the apache's 30mm cannon (Large bore weapon being defined as anything above .50 calliber) are not to be used on personell. This by order of the geneva convention, and such actions by anyone else would bring UN sanctions. On two the hits they can claim they were aming for equipment, however the second victim was clearly not near any equipment, and the large bore weapon was used against a human target. The 1st victim... he was next to something, who knows what, but it could be defined as an area target, so therefore, he chose a bad spot to stand. The 3rd one wasn't in line of site if they were to aim center mass on the area target (small truck), and infact the audio portion of the video (which may not be admissible in court) reveals that the weapon was retargeted from being aimed center mass on the area target to be fired near the nose of the vehicle, knowing full well that the sweep of the weapon while fired would bring rounds from the large bore weapon in direct contact with the personell.
