Hand grenade, RPG Whatever. Why don’t you show us the grenades before they blow so we can look at them in the video at high resolution and see what kind they are and what country they were made in? :roll:
Jan I would not disagree with what you say but the fill for the L2 (brit) was RDX they also claim that the danger area is slightly larger but experience has shown that they are crap. In the Falklands they used L83s (smk) instead. In this film I would imagine that they are soviet/Chinese and probably slightly larger.
Hand grenade, RPG Whatever. Why don’t you show us the grenades before they blow so we can look at them in the video at high resolution and see what kind they are and what country they were made in? :roll:[/quote]
Whatever, (I will keep that it is brilliant)
you moron, hand grenades are anti personnel and have a small danger area, very inaccurate (hand propelled). And RPG (rocket propelled Grenade) is an anti tank weapon. Very good and very accurate and has a number of different warheads that have been developed over the years to keep up with the changes in armour. If they had used a RPG then they would have stopped the veh not scratched the paint. I do not have to see it to know it is a grenade, I have seen hundreds go bang to know the difference.
RPGs are also very good for taking out helicopters, note latest incident in Afghanistan when a Chinook was hit by one.
edited to add the above
Jan I would not disagree with what you say but the fill for the L2 (brit) was RDX they also claim that the danger area is slightly larger but experience has shown that they are crap. In the Falklands they used L83s (smk) instead. In this film I would imagine that they are soviet/Chinese and probably slightly larger.[/quote]
Probably old Russian F1 or RG 42 grenades of WW2 vintage.
Jan
I don’t believe that myself. They did not have the men to stop that much looting in that many places in a city that large at that time. Do you know how many men it would take to control all of the prominet streets of a city the size of Bahgdad? Thousands!
You carry on about media hype, well there’s some for you.[/quote]
shrug. Whether it’s true or not even I don’t know. But you asked for sources not from liberal rags. You from me got the two quickest to hand, from the BBC and CNN. You choose to ignore them. That’s up to you. But why bother to ask if you dismiss them as hype?
No chit Sherlock. Now don’t start calling people names in here boy.
It doesn’t matter what grenades they used anyway, so WTF.
The fact is, they were attacked in sperate places, as is told by the audio in the video and doesn’t have a flucking thing to do with a soldier returning fire on an insurget in the window of a tall building.
So whutevuh.
It’s just my opinion, going by the number of men that would be needed to patrol the streets of Bahgdad.
They don’t do that? I hear about them doing it all the time. I see video of them doing it on TV twice a week, walking around with weapons, keeping the peace, stopping looters. Humgh.
Just wanted to take a jab at the US eh? I understand. It happens here all the time on this forum, in quite a few threads.[/quote]
They definitely didn’t do it during the first few weeks after the capture. The only building guarded was the oil ministry. About everything that wasn’t welded down got looted from both government buildings and private homes, including the Iraqi national museum, which used to house lots of rare archeological artifacts from Ur and Babylon. Many artifacts have apparently been sold on the colector’s market by now.
http://www.redcross.org/article/0,1072,0_332_632,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/gall/0,8542,932929,00.html
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/fbi_04-17-03.html
http://www.aucegypt.edu/publications/gateway/april04/baghdad.htm
Jan
Yea, it’s a shame about the articatcs. But it simply would have taken too many men in small numbers in too many places to patrol so many streets in a cty the size of Bahgdad. Key locations would have been about all that could be expected of any army. But the coalition forces failed to do enough of it where they could.
No, the faultn lies with Rumsfeld, who, against the advice of his own generals, wanted to run the whole war on the cheap and didn’t want to activate reservists because it might have cost him votes. The US lost lots of support from Iraqis originally friendly with the US, because the American troops let Iraq’s criminal underground (not the political one) go loose.
Jan
Oh so only Rumsfeld is to blame. And what of the other forces there, like the British. Did they post squads at those buildings. Appearently not.
Votes? Cost him votes? Rumsfeld is the Secretary of Defense. He does not get votes. He was appointed. :roll:
You listen to too much liberal media blather. It has effected you.
Yes, the US and the British both lost face a bit at that time, and regained it later, and lost it again. Public opinion in Iraq is largely the result of what has happened in the last few weeks.
Now since you continue to post things condemning the US, I suggest you look for another forum for that, since you arer obviously not interested in discussing things unless they put the US in a bad light. That’a about the jest of your posts in this thread, so why not take that chit elsewhere. The name of this place is not “Come Here to Bash the US and Ignore British or Other Countries Failures”. It’s not “Let’s Bash Britain” either. If you were an email, you would be spam. You just keep coming in with that “Oh let’s not forget this American failure. And we can’t forget about that one. And…”. :roll:
Alrighty then.
Public opinion in Iraq is dependant on the last few weeks?
evidently the after effects of the Western Imperialism Iran-Iraq War, the end of the cold war, Opec prices, fundamentalist Islam can only really be felt in the last fortnight!
Oh so only Rumsfeld is to blame. And what of the other forces there, like the British. Did they post squads at those buildings. Appearently not.
Votes? Cost him votes? Rumsfeld is the Secretary of Defense. He does not get votes. He was appointed. :roll:
You listen to too much liberal media blather. It has effected you.
Yes, the US and the British both lost face a bit at that time, and regained it later, and lost it again. Public opinion in Iraq is largely the result of what has happened in the last few weeks.
Now since you continue to post things condemning the US, I suggest you look for another forum for that, since you arer obviously not interested in discussing things unless they put the US in a bad light. That’a about the jest of your posts in this thread, so why not take that chit elsewhere. The name of this place is not “Come Here to Bash the US and Ignore British or Other Countries Failures”. It’s not “Let’s Bash Britain” either. If you were an email, you would be spam. You just keep coming in with that “Oh let’s not forget this American failure. And we can’t forget about that one. And…”. :roll:
Alrighty then.[/quote]
Funny that large scale looting only happened in the American sector of Iraq… :roll:
Jan
BTW, I’m not anti-American, I have too many American friends to be this, but I think that Bush and his cabinet are idiots.
Jan
Oh! Well that explains the way the Iraqis have been kinda wishy-washy toward the coalition forces for so long!
Yea, I thought so. You really don’t have a clue about what is or has been going on in Iraq. You see Jan, the British forces have occupied a very small portion of Iraq compared to the US troops, and predominantly in areas where the heavy fighting is overwith. So ofcourse the bulk of the looting, like the bulk of the fighting, has taken place in areas occupied by US troops.
Now like I said, if you want to bash America, please do your pisspot chit somewhere else. There’s nothing wrong with debating something, even a mistake that this military or that military has made. But you have proven with the bulk of your posts that that is not what you are interested in. You are interested in simply bashing the US. If this were not so, your posts would be of a different nature. But they aren’t. Each and every one of them is a slight on the US and nothing more. That’s not the purpose of a place to debate. That’s just childishness and hatefulness.
So either debate things rationally, reasonably, and with a free spirit capable of debating anything regardless of who’s nation those guys were from or whatever, or take it somewhere else, ok? This is not the place to do your pissing. Go piss on some anti-american web forum. There are a number of them I am sure where you can have lots of fun with your own kind and get off doing it. You’d have more fun there enjoying the comradery of other misguided individuals.
Funny thing is that nobody in here got any problem with any other of the Americans on this site. The only American, who gets bashed is Ironman, due to the bollocks he posts. Now he declared that critizism of his beloved leader is not permitted.
Ironman, stick to the only topic you have proven that you know something about, photography.
Jan
Ironman UK forces are under the control of the coellition leaders ( that would be the US) and deploy accoringly. If you think that the area that the UK forces control is quiet then make it ( Basra)your next holiday destination( best pack your kevlar trollies).
I haven’t read anything Anti-American in Jans posts just the same comonsense that other posters with access to the same internet info that you have have used , If you piss off the frindly locals you arn’t helping the situation.
Making noise ( firing into the air ) has no effect on the trigger man of an IED or RPG as they will be either out of range or have good cover( You have seen the Mpegs on Ogrish etc ) If it did then we( UK Forces) would have been using this tactic in NI
I havent been to the sand box as I am well past my use by date( 17 yrs out of service) and neither have you ( no service), I however am prepared to accept that posters who have boots on ground experience know more than I do.
I’m sure we would all apreciate input from US posters with relevant experience but as they seem to be busy at the moment we will have to wait.
IMHO the views of a keyboard commando don’t count for FA against a veteran so you are infact a Knob .
I said predominantly, and that is true.
But they were not shooting into the air. It has been discovered in other reports that the convoy was “firing back” at insurgents who were shooting at the convoy from the windows of a multi-story building right next to the road, like convoys do.
Chill out dudey. Soldiering experience has jack shiot to do with this. You don’t have to be a professional photographer to know what you see in a photoraph or to read reports about one either. Get yourself together. Keep your insolent name-calling to yourself. You’d have been wrong if he WERE only shooting into the sky, but he wasn’t. But do keep your potty mouth stuff outta here, ok?
It’s just a pattern of yours Jan, Walther, whoever you are. It’s a pattern. Please break it. This is a place to honestly debate. Not to rant on about “Bla bla bla American forces didn’t bla bla bla” and “Bla bla bla Donald Rumsfeld didn’t bla bla bla” and “Bla bla bla US troops failed to bla bla bla”
See my point? That’s the jest of the majority of your posts, and you make such commentary very concisely and sucinctly. Please just debate things without agendas, ok?