You are a dullard and troll of the highest order, have you not noticed that none of the other Americans on here have leapt to your defence? In fact most of them have reacted adversely to your opinionated and ill-informed drivel.
Questions have been asked directly to you. You have generally ignored all of these seemingly in the hope that if you ignore something it will go away. I can assure you that this does not happen. I tried to ignore you for ages and yet you are still here!
I can foresee your response to this post and so I will forestall you:
Please could you do us all a favour and fuck off and get a life?
Aaaaah! That hit a nerve I see. So, your goal IS to try to undermine my love of my nation and my admiration for the US military. I told you, it’s frivelous. It cannot happen. So why do you try? The only negative attitude here is that of you and a few other Pistola Petes who want to debate nothing here, and only to post hateful slander. And do not want to discuss anything unless it is critical of the US in some way. How utterly sad.
There is always tomorrow my boy. You can try to redeem yourself if you want to. All it takes is acting decently and discussing things other than your didain for America. I don’t expect apologies, but you can still redeem yourself.
I am far from anti-American, I have a problem with you being a dullard and a troll. The way you behave on this site is both demeaning to yourself and gives a very bad impression of your country as a whole.
If it weren’t for some other Americans on this site, I would be ashamed of the fact that my Grandfather was an American serviceman during WW2!
You are a cad and a bounder and we jump on every post you make because of this.
EDITED TO ADD: You could also try to be less patronising my boy…
If I posted the most recent 40 posts of yours as quotes in one post we would see just how little you dislike America, as every one of them would be on a subject and of a demeanor that criticises American or it’s military.
The issue of blue on blue incidents are always contentious but often unavoidable, given the confusion during sustained combat. However to say shit happens does’nt hold water in all cases and are due to avoidable errors.
During the Korean war two incidents spring to mind. Following the order “every man for himself” at Imjim the retreat of British forces was disorganised they where mistaken for advancing enemy forces by US forces and attacked, regretable but unavoidable. The use of napalm againt the A&SH however was due to the US pilots attacking the wrong hill, reprihensible and avoidable.
The the blue on blue during Op Granby was avoidable. US air elements where using a kill box tactic which is fine when used forward of advancing forces but unsuited to a rapidly advancing front line.
The worriors had been ordered to pull up, had layed out recognition panels and had radioed in their position. During the subsequent enquiry the pilots claimed that the worriors where inside their kill box however their co-odiates differed from the ones given by the attacked worriors ( outside the kill box) The UK forces location was the same used by the team sent to extract casualties and the Vehicle recovery team.
If my memory serves me right UK forces lost more personnel to US-UK blue on blue during Granby than to enemy action.
During Telic 1 the loss of a Tornado to a Patriot unit was regeretable but due to a faulty IFF, however A10’s again attacked a detachment of worriors with visible recognition panels. A scouse stab recieved the GC for his actions, it would’ve been a VC if the incomming fire had been from enemy (Iraqi) forces. Eleven years difference but no lessons learned
Once more you are talking about something I never mentioned, I did not once mention any weapons, bombs included, I neither know nor care with which weapon the pilot intended to “take us out” with, all I know is that we were targetted on at least 8 occasions a fact we discovered after we had finished that particular operation.
I never said we were fired upon and am grateful we weren’t some were not so lucky at around the same time.
Blue on blue is, as others have stated, sometimes unavoidable, but there is a widely held view that those caused by US pilots are often caused by bad training, cowboy attitudes or pure stupidity. I could go on listing incidents in Iraq now, Afghanistan and the 1st Gulf conflict.
OK that’s enough reasoned argument, you are a dick Eisenfrau when you were born they threw the wrong bit into the hospital bin.
In response to the prior post where you accuse me of being anti-American, why don’t you collate all my posts? I know that you will never see that I am not anti-American as you seem to have the comprehension skills of a 5 year old.
If I am so anti-American, why have I not been warned by the moderators?
Why are you the one with official warnings against you for your egregious behaviour?
You, on the other hand, are both blinkered in your outlook and extremely xenophobic. I have not attacked America, I have only ever attacked you over either your specious reasoning or your tendency to post opinion as fact.
I respect your right to free speech. I also respect your right to post on this board.
However
You have constantly never answered a question. You have constantly spouted on in expert terms on subjects that you know nothing about, ranging from ancient Scots history to Jet technology to the conduct of the war in Iraq.
Every time you are given a piece of information you either choose to ignore it, or as seen lately when I pointed out what kinds of bombs are used today, adapt it for your own purpose with no acknowledgement of your change in stance.
Far from being anti-american the posts I have read here have been lucid, well thought out and a lot based on personal experience. You are embarrasing your fellow countrymen and quite frankly have made a fool of yourself. I will give you a free piece of advice now which someone once gave to me - If you have no particular knowledge of any given subject - keep your mouth shut - this avoids embarassment.
I withdraw from this thread now and will make no more comments here as you are really not worth wasting my time on.
OH. That explains the fukup. There’s gotta be some reason to excuse it. They were British! They sht lillies! :roll:[/quote]
Bit of a difference between only being able to see a very small part of a tank and two Warrior APCs flying 10 foot by 6 foot Union Flags though.[/quote]
As you’ve seen, the British are at each other over not doing better at making sure thewy are identifiable. They damned well better. The USAF rarely misses.[/quote]
Clearly the officer in question feels 10 foot by 6 foot flags aren’t identifiable enough to USAF A-10 pilots? Doesn’t really help your point either way, to be honest… what are you going to say? “It’s obvious that when you operate with trigger happy allied forces, it might do to have IFF for everything”?
You still haven’t answered whether US ground vehicles carried IFF in 1991 either. I was hoping as our resident US military expert you’d know.
(given the number of times AH-64’s, A-10’s, M1’s lit up other M1’s and Bradleys… maybe I can already guess the answer)
I believe the first blue-on-blue during Granby/Desert Storm/Dauget/etc was on a US veh from an Apache using a Hellfire.
The pilot was very uneasy about the target, but the ground commander assured him that none of his forces were above the Lat in question and ordered him to take the shot.
It should always be the man on the scene who makes the call - assuming he has some idea about tgt recognition !
The silhouette was unmistakable, with tragic consequences.
I’ve seen the footage and the accompanying R/T convo but it was some years ago, (when FER really was what it says on the box,) so if anyone else recalls the vid please correct me.
A villiage? Good Lord. You mean an insurgent camp kid. Like the USAF looks down on a village of civies with a satelite and a 12,000mm camera zoom lens and sees children playing in the street and an old lady walking with a pale of water on her head and says, “Hey! Let’s bomb those civilian f*cks!”
Go Fuchs yourself kid. You assertions are false and hateful, and the same could be said of UK soldiers. But I’m not a hatemonger like you. I’m not going to post hundreds of reports of UK soldiers killing civilians, which could be done if I wanted.
You are very much an anti-American punkish hatemonger. Go try to make your life matter somewhere else.[/quote]
I don’t see Fuchs66’s post as being ‘hateful’ - he tells something from experience and you see it as hate.
Don’t you find it strange that other Americans on the site haven’t levelled the same accusations of ‘hatemonger’ and anti-Americanism at those whom you accuse of this ?
I can assure you that if the RAF had targetted him he’d have said very similar things - there is NO such thing as ‘friendly’ fire.
Would you please post a link to the story you’ve mentioned a few times where the British soldiers shot a civilian in the chest ?
Then I might be able to see what has happened in the situation since.
I did actually ask for the link earlier in this thread.*
Also could you please give some more information on the “dropping bombs in city streets and killing groups of Iraqi citizensm [sic] like the British did at Basra.” ?
I have answered, in as polite a manner as possible, the questions which you had put to me and would be pleased if you could offer me the same courtesy.
Yea, well, shooting unarmed Iraqis walking down a street, like some Brits did not long abo violates all of the rules I’m sure! [/quote]
If the shooting was negligent then yes, if not then no.
Do you have a link to the story please ?
I doubt it since the weapons fire was into the air like that. They didn’t fire aimlessly at the streets.[/quote]
Rds fired into the air are treated as NDs in the British Army. (Unless during the warfighting phase the soldier(s) are aiming at a/c.)
If this is a reference to the shooting of the Iraqi on the streets you mentioned above I’ll check it out when I have the link.
Neither is dropping bombs in city streets and killing groups of Iraqi citizensm like the British did at Basra.[/quote]
When was this ?
OK, so soldiers in both the US and british military have to account for what they shoot at. So I don’t see the point of bringing it up then. Why were you carrying on about it? Surely you can seem my point.[/quote]
It’s about the unaimed discharge of weapons and the accountability of the allies’ own troops.
Well look, I’m not into trying to make the British look bad. I’m only reacting to this mythical garbage spewed by some that US soldiers are careless wildcats and a british soldier’s sh*t doesn’t stink. It’s simply perposterous. Bad things happen in war, and all armies make bad mistakes, the US, the British, everyone. But it’s simply hypocritical for anyone to carry on about a soldier shooting a weapon out of a window into the dessert to make noise to clear the street when he’s being shot at by grenades in his moving vehicle on a crowded Iraqi boulevard. Surely you can see the attitude of such blather.[/quote]
No, all armies have had occassions when pond life do something stupid or dangerous, and these incidents must always be investigated.
I am not being hypocrytical in the slightest, I have never discharged my weapon into the air nor could I enviseage a scenario in which my troops or I would.
In the video the soldier is firing at about a 35 degree angle or so, off into the clouds. But it’s just silly to complain about that when British soldiers have made far aggregious mistakes (as the US has I am sure). It is hypocritical and hatefull.[/quote]
It is not a ‘tit-for-tat’ arrangement.
That some clown in the British Army may have committed a crime, (for which I sincerely hope he is punished,) does not make unaimed firing ‘to make a noise’ any less reckless.
Personally I have seen no hatred from any of the other posters on this subject, as I said earlier I’d be making the same comments - arguably even more vehemently - had it been a Squaddie.[/quote]
Also could you please give some more information on the “dropping bombs in city streets and killing groups of Iraqi citizensm [sic] like the British did at Basra.” ?
The link Ironman posted to this led to an article regarding an estimated 1200 civilian deaths in Basra, dated Thursday 8 April 2003…during the invasion phase. http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/printer_041003F.shtml
He also included a link to an article dealing, in part, with Ba’ath militia killing Iraqi civilians during this phase, apparently blaming this, in some bizarre way, on the British troops.
I assume that’s what happens when you Google without reading the results before posting.
Neither is dropping bombs in city streets and killing groups of Iraqi citizensm like the British did at Basra.[/quote]
is completely out of context as it did not occur during the PSO period, and therefore to be discarded from the discussion.
I assume that’s what happens when you Google without reading the results before posting.[/quote]
Thanks for the links Reiver, I was unable to get them earlier.
I am interested in getting the link to the story of the troops who are accused of shooting an Iraqi in the chest, presumeably an unprovoked attack.
If it is indeed the case that they have deliberately targeted a bystander then I hope they rot in prison.
Here is something from WW2, but Ironman will probably accuse me of being “anti-American” again:
[quote]
The worst trouble usually began when a group of Airborne lads entered a pub and met up with some coloured Americans. They were friendly lads and we always seemed to get on well with them. The only form of entertainment was normally a battered old piano but the coloured lads were very musical and there was usually one amongst them, or us, who could knock out a few tunes so we would soon be enjoying a sing-song.
All would be enjoyable until some white Americans came in. The coloured lads would tell us that they had to drink up and go. When this first happened we could not believe our ears. We were all in this bloody war together, and would all be dying for the same cause - the right to individual freedom - so what the hell gave the white Yanks the right to expect their coloured countrymen to leave any pub that the whites chose to enter?
After experiencing this inequality we got mad and told the coloured lads “You stay put - you were here first and if they don’t like drinking in the same pub as you they can push off and find another one”
This was easier said than done, for when a pub ran dry it was a case of touring round the city centre to find another one which was still open.
When the colour problem arose the whites would stand just inside the door glaring at the coloured lads, and us, until we told them in no uncertain terms to “Push Off”.
They would then withdraw with shouted threats and when we eventually emerged it was not unusual to find a large mob of them waiting for us… [unquote]
Neither is dropping bombs in city streets and killing groups of Iraqi citizensm like the British did at Basra.[/quote]
is completely out of context as it did not occur during the PSO period, and therefore to be discarded from the discussion.
I assume that’s what happens when you Google without reading the results before posting.[/quote]
Thanks for the links Reiver, I was unable to get them earlier.
I am interested in getting the link to the story of the troops who are accused of shooting an Iraqi in the chest, presumeably an unprovoked attack.
If it is indeed the case that they have deliberately targeted a bystander then I hope they rot in prison.[/quote]
I think this is the story referred to :
Wa’el Rahim Jabar
[i]On 26 May 2003 a UK paratrooper shot and killed Wa’el Rahim Jabar, aged 20, in Hay Abu Romaneh district of al-'Amara. At that time, the security situation had not been stabilized in al-'Amara and it remained common for Iraqis to carry weapons in Hay Abu Romaneh. Wa’el Rahim Jabar was among the men assigned responsibility by the local community for protecting the area. On the day of his death, he was walking along the main street with a Kalashnikov rifle slung over his right shoulder, accompanied by two friends, Majed Jasem and Mu’taz 'Ati, who were unarmed. It was 9.10pm and dark, so they did not realize that there was a UK military foot patrol, consisting of four paratroopers with no interpreter, in the area. One of the paratroopers began shooting from a distance of about six metres, firing two rounds which struck Wa’el Rahim Jabar in the chest and neck, killing him immediately. The paratrooper reportedly fired without warning.
About 10 days later, a group of paratroopers visited the home of Daoud Salman Sajet, the victim’s maternal uncle, and expressed their condolences about his nephew’s death. They stressed, however, that the soldier had opened fire because the victim was carrying a weapon in public even though the British Army had warned Iraqis not to do this. In June 2003, the family’s lawyer gave a CPA representative a complaint about the killing, including a request for compensation. By February 2004, the family had received no response. They were also unaware that an investigation into the killing had been initiated by the RMP.
As with most of the cases listed, with one exception I’ve mentioned before, this appears to have been a mistake, but not in anyway the result of random fire.
Darkness, an approaching armed man,…I’m not military, but it seems a tragic case not dissimilar to the Met shooting incident, except in this instance, the man killed (note, two aimed rounds fired, both of which hit the target, while no fire hit the two unarmed friends accompanying him), was carrying an unquestionable weapon.
