From 3:20-3:45 in the video you can see it clearly. First, the video points out the two journalists carrying cameras. Then it pans up, and you see several other people carrying what appear to be AKs. Eh...what? This is not business as usual, you know. It's a warzone. The legality of people walking around brandishing weapons isn't really relevant there, it's the implications this has in a warzone. The fact that they followed protocol and waited for permission to fire is good enough for me. To compare a warzone to the working environment of policemen is pretty odd. Yes, they have to contend with criminals who could use weapons. But they don't have to deal with a group of people trying to kill as many of them as possible. The US military in Iraq does. Did it? Because I've heard that opinions were split on that issue. And I wasn't talking about the realism of the situation. I was talking about the comment 'the_cpl' referred to: that of a Republican politician saying they'll just do as much damage as they can even if they can't win. That's not the objective of the military.