2

According to Cracked, an ex-intelligence officer claims that US soldiers would throw candy into the streets to have kids check for IEDs. I'm unable to find any evidence for this claim. I could be wrong, but I have some difficulty seeing this happening: would kids be so conveniently available? if they know that there are IEDs nearby, why are they hanging out there? how any sweets do you need to throw to check a road?

There's another video in which Hummers drive down the road and there are kids standing by the side, and they throw candy off to the kids as they pass, or in the road ahead. They do that because if the kids refuse to go pick up the candy from a certain spot, it means there's an IED there. Or if there is one and [the kids] don't know, they run over and set it off -- which minimizes the likelihood that the Hummer and soldiers will sustain any injury, but they are also innocent kids. We don't do that anymore, though." Can't have child blood staining your Humvee, after all.

Gwen continues: "There's another practice we stopped using, they are called...

| improve this question | |
  • 1
    I'm not sure whether this claim is notable. Is cracked user-generated content? Do we have any metrics on how popular the article is? – Andrew Grimm Apr 22 '17 at 3:49
  • 2
    US soldiers are known for giving out candy to locals; it's usually seen as reaffirming common humanity and such ("Why do American soldiers hand out candy?", Quora). So, the "There's another video in which Hummers drive down the road and there are kids standing by the side, and they throw candy off to the kids as they pass, or in the road ahead." part sounds quite plausible. – Nat Apr 22 '17 at 9:26
  • 5
    "Cracked.com", Wikipedia: "Cracked.com is a humor website with over 300 million monthly page views." "Slogan(s) America's Only Humor Site Since 1958". This seems like a rather dark type of "humor", but since the source identifies its articles as "humor", this may not qualify as an actual claim to be skeptical about in the first place. Though, per this Meta question, it may still be on-topic if a lot of people believe it. – Nat Apr 22 '17 at 9:43
  • 4
    While Cracked.com is a humor website, not all of its articles are humorous, and even some of the humorous claim to deliver real facts in a humorous way, this is not the Onion.com. This article is presented as factual on the site and most probably most readers would view the article as such. – SIMEL Apr 23 '17 at 8:15
  • 4
    as mentioned cracked.com reaches a large percentage of individuals, as nat said, but this particular article was presented as a persons real life experiences. The claim, while attempting to do in a humerus manner, was presented as accurate and would be read as a true statement by the readers. As such the claim reaches a large number of individuals and would be read as factual and thus worth verifying. I don't see how this would not be covered under notability? – dsollen Apr 24 '17 at 13:57

Browse other questions tagged .