$5,000 for wife and son as collateral damage?

#1

$5,000 for loss of wife and son: how US prices death

PHIL SANDS
IN RAWAH

HAMEED Hassan sat in the remains of his car, next to his dead wife, and watched his four-year-old son begin to bleed to death.

The family had been on the way to buy clothes in Rawah's small market when the American soldiers opened fire. A helicopter gunship joined in the attack, cutting the car and two of its occupants to pieces.

Hassan's wife, Basima Taha, died almost immediately. His youngest son, Mahmoud Muhsin, was not as lucky. Hit in the torso, his abdomen was torn open, a wound that would prove fatal.

They were outside the main government building in Rawah, a town on the Euphrates River about 90km from the Syrian border, deep in Sunni al-Anbar province, when Hassan turned his car around. He drove down a side street, alongside the civic centre, and found himself heading towards a group of US soldiers - engaged at that time in a major anti-insurgent offensive.

"They started shooting straight away," he said, "I saw no signal, no warning, just the bullets hitting my car. The helicopter joined in. I saw my wife was killed."

The soldiers drove off, leaving the family in the street.

The US military has not apologised for the incident. But it has agreed to pay compensation for the killings, an acceptance that innocent lives were lost.

Under the US "consequence management" system, there is a maximum payout of $2,500 per claim. A dead wife and a dead son are equivalent to two claims; meaning Hassan is in line to receive a total of $5,000 in cash.

Sergeant Jeffery Mubarak, a 37-year-old veteran of four US wars, is one of the soldiers processing compensation in Rawah. "Do I think we're paying the man enough money," he said, "No, I don't. But I just work here. I don't set the rates.(continues...)

Taken from: http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.c ... 2208712005

"Consequence Management System"? this doesn't even ring true.

#2

if they raised the rates, there are people who would willingly try and "lose" *loved* ones in combat situations. In fact, there is no reason to believe this man was trying to prevent "losing" his loved ones. Would you drive your family into the vicinity of a american gunship and soldiers exchanging fire with the enemy? I mean, surely this man has seen that we are not firing with blanks, right? You can hear a chopper firing from 600 yards...

First of all, if you hear gunfire, you make a u-turn, or stop your car and raise a white cloth... That is all, and may not be enough.

Why a man would be trying to make a detour to get to the mall with his family through combat environments is beyond me... just as it is beyond me how the soldiers should know he is not trying to ram them with a car full of explosives.

condolences to a woman and child who lost their lives for having a stupid man behind the wheel.

#3

That's what the fuck I'm thinking...

This sounds like a classic case of "Who's fighting?" and some dude that has nothing involved getting his nose busted for being nosey...This sounds a little too suspicious to be some, innocent bystander shit, you don't just stumble into a gunfight that huge on your way from the mall...

Do you..?

#4

not with my girlfriend in the car,.. and certainly not if i had a wife and kid!

maybe I would after playing Grand Theft Auto full of tequila and coke of a few days nonstop, or something.

#5

so the Consequence Management System is in fact part of the package? man...they thought of EVERYTHING!

#6

yes, but consequence management is not just to pay out to civilians who lose loved ones or are harmed in battle, but to compensate them, and work to preventfurther losses in the fututre. Kinda like if you total your car, and the insurance company seizes it to examine the wreck to see if it was legit if it can prevent others.