Obviously you are. You just won’t say it.[/quote]
How dare you say that?[/quote]
Me? You said it. Perhaps you should not have said such a discraceful thing.
My advice to you is not to make every other post in a forumn something critical of the US military. It makes you look like a schmuck.
Edited to correct a typo.
Do you mean envolving the British in any way?
The first friendly fire killing of the British soldier Sergeant Steven Roberts in Iraq2 was by another British soldier, who shot one of his own in the stomach with a pistol! With a pistol? In fact, he was the 1st British soldier to die in the war… and died by the pistol of a comrade.
The British had not been providing sufficient equipment, and a hothead British soldier whipped out his pistola and plugged a buddy in the gut, with appearently unaimed, werckless fire. It seems the riot was dying down, but he pulled out his pistol and started shooting unaimingly anyway.
Here’s the article:
"SCOTLAND YARD is investigating the “friendly fire” shooting of a tank commander who was the first British soldier to die in the Iraq war.
The murder squad inquiry into the death two years ago of Sergeant Steven Roberts has been ordered by Lord Goldsmith, the attorney- general.
The incident is already an embarrassment to the Ministry of Defence (MoD) because Roberts had not been wearing body armour that might have saved his life.
Geoff Hoon, the defence secretary, apologised to Roberts’s widow, Samantha, after it emerged that the soldier had been ordered to give his armour to a colleague because of an equipment shortage.
Roberts, 33, from Shipley, Yorkshire, was serving as a tank commander with the 2nd Royal Tank Regiment, near Basra when he was shot in the stomach and chest in March 2003. At the time he was trying to fend off an Iraqi who had attacked him during a riot.
Detectives have been told that although the riot seemed to be dying down, another soldier is said to have pulled out a pistol and fired at the Iraqi.
The Iraqi was killed but a stray shot apparently hit Roberts by mistake. The soldier is alleged to have ignored the army’s rules of engagement.
Soldiers in two tanks near the incident, including an officer, allegedly failed to take appropriate action. The body armour that Roberts should have been wearing was allegedly burnt after the shooting.
The case took on a political dimension when Samantha Roberts accused Hoon of failing to ensure British troops had sufficient body armour. In an audiotape made the evening before he died and which his widow later released, Roberts described the lack of equipment as a “joke”.
Police inquiries have so far established that 11 of Roberts’s colleagues were in the area at al-Zubayr, near Basra, at the time of the shooting. They have all been questioned by military police.
Sources close to the investigation say four soldiers could face manslaughter charges. Senior police officers are to visit Samantha Roberts shortly to get her side of the story.
Geraldine McCool, Samantha Roberts’s lawyer, said she was due to meet MoD lawyers to discuss compensation. The department has accepted liability in a case which could see compensation being paid to the families of other soldiers who died in Iraq. McCool said her client could be entitled to as much as £500,000 in lieu of salary her husband would have earned.
The Roberts case is the latest involving British soldiers in Iraq. Up to 50 are believed to be facing possible prosecution for offences ranging from murder and manslaughter to assault and other crimes.."
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1512586,00.html
Staff Sgt. Charged With Murder
Associated Press
June 17, 2005
BAGHDAD, Iraq - The U.S. military charged a Staff Sergeant from the New York National Guard with murdering his two commanders at a base outside Baghdad, in what is believed to be the first case of an American soldier in Iraq accused of killing his superiors.
The military initially concluded that the June 7 deaths of Capt. Phillip T. Esposito, of Suffern, N.Y., and 1st Lt. Louis E. Allen, of Milford, Pa., were caused by a mortar round.
But this week the military charged Staff Sgt. Alberto B. Martinez of Troy, N.Y., with two counts of premeditated murder, according to a statement issued in Baghdad on Thursday.
Martinez, 37, is a supply specialist with the Headquarters Company of the 42nd Infantry Division, New York Army National Guard. Esposito, 30 and the father of a 1-year-old girl, was company commander and Allen, 34 and a father of four, was a company operations officer.
The “fragging” incident occurred near Tikrit - Saddam Hussein’s hometown 80 miles north of Baghdad - at Forward Operating Base Danger in what used to be one of the ousted Iraqi leader’s palace on the banks of the Tigris River.
Fragging is a term used to refer to soldiers killing their superiors.
The military initially concluded the commanders were killed by “indirect fire” on the base - a mortar round that struck a window on the side of the building where Esposito and Allen were.
A criminal investigation was launched after it was determined that the “blast pattern” at the scene was inconsistent with a mortar attack.
Martinez is believed to have allegedly used some kind of explosive device, possibly a grenade, in the attack, military officials said on condition of anonymity because the matter was still under investigation.
He was charged with two counts of premeditated murder, said a statement by the Multinational Task Force in Iraq. He currently is at a military detention facility in Kuwait.
http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,FL_murder_061705,00.html
Well, there have been quite a few, but I think this is the one I meant.
“Muhammad 'Aisa, 26, became an English teacher in a Basra secondary school in 2000.(10) According to his family, he had to join the Ba’ath Party in order to work in the teaching profession. On the morning of 31 December 2003, Muhammad 'Aisa dropped his wife, who is also a teacher, at her school. He then drove towards Basra University to drop off his sister and another young woman. As he was driving through al-Tuweisah area, a white Land Cruiser with two men in it drove in front of his car and blocked the road. One of the men got out and fired five bullets into Muhammad 'Aisa’s chest with a pistol, killing him instantly. The family does not know who killed him or why. One possibility is that he was killed because he was a Ba’ath Party member.”
http://www.amnestyusa.org/news/document.do?id=42C1E8D46E7223DF80256E5C00479F27
Yea, like I said, chit happens in war. Both the British and the US soldiers make mistakes. What is so ridiculous however, is that some here seem to love to mention the American mistakes and claim the US soldiers are the only ones who make them. 38 pages of that trash so far and growing. I don’t understand why someone would want to be so hypocritical and constantly nag at the US and say US soldiers are to wreckless when British soldiers have been plenty wreckless in Iraq as well. All that I can conclude is that it’s disdain for the US.
Well, there have been quite a few, but I think this is the one I meant.
“Muhammad 'Aisa, 26, became an English teacher in a Basra secondary school in 2000.(10) According to his family, he had to join the Ba’ath Party in order to work in the teaching profession. On the morning of 31 December 2003, Muhammad 'Aisa dropped his wife, who is also a teacher, at her school. He then drove towards Basra University to drop off his sister and another young woman. As he was driving through al-Tuweisah area, a white Land Cruiser with two men in it drove in front of his car and blocked the road. One of the men got out and fired five bullets into Muhammad 'Aisa’s chest with a pistol, killing him instantly. The family does not know who killed him or why. One possibility is that he was killed because he was a Ba’ath Party member.”[/quote]
This article nowhere states or implies that the man was shot by British troops, in fact it is listed separately from cases where this is believed to be so.
Exactly what do you see as it’s relevance?
http://www.amnestyusa.org/news/document.do?id=42C1E8D46E7223DF80256E5C00479F27
Unproven? Which one? :lol:
He died. Is that proof enough?
It would be interesting to see a ratio of these incidents to number of troops from each country.
[quote=“IRONMAN”]
Unproven? Which one? :lol:
He died. Is that proof enough?[/quote]
Note the difference.
Cuts said “unprovoked”.
You changed this to “unproven”.
Again, since the item by Amnesty makes no reference to this attack involving British troops, or indeed any troops whatsoever, what do you see as its relevance?
Maybe I misread it. The men who did the killing were in a Land Rover. However, this might have been the one I was referring to:
"Wa’el Rahim Jabar
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."
http://www.amnestyusa.org/news/document.do?id=42C1E8D46E7223DF80256E5C00479F27
It would be interesting if you and a few other putz had something to discuss other than US war mistakes. Then you would not look like a hatemonger.
So then this:
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 well as completing his education, Wa’el Rahim Jabar had been working as a baker to support his mother, wife and two children.[/i]
http://www.amnestyusa.org/news/document.do?id=42C1E8D46E7223DF80256E5C00479F27
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.[/quote]
Damn. That wasn’t the right one either. Here it is. This is the one I was refering to originally. Sorry.
"Hazam Jumah Kati’ and 'Abed 'Abd al-Karim Hassan
On the evening of 4 August 2003, soldiers from the B Company of the First Battalion the King’s Regiment opened fire in Hay al-Shuhada, al-Majdiyeh, killing Hazam Jumah Kati’, an unemployed man aged about 25, and 'Abed ‘Abd al-Karim Hassan, an unemployed man aged about 60. According to both men’s families, gunfire was heard in the area at about 11pm. Hazam Jumah Kati’ and 'Abed 'Abd al-Karim Hassan left their houses, which are close to each other on the same street, to find out what was happening. It later emerged that Iraqis nearby had fired into the air to mark the death of a local sheikh.
It was very dark that evening as there was no electricity. Both men were reportedly unarmed. Jumah Kati’, Hazam’s father, also went outside to see what was happening and stood near 'Abed ‘Abd al-Karim Hassan’s home. About 15 minutes after the gunfire, a UK military patrol arrived and parked near where he was standing. By that stage Hazam Jumah Kati’ and 'Abed ‘Abd al-Karim Hassan were both walking back home along the narrow road. The patrol opened fire. Jumah Kati’ told Amnesty International: “Then a man came and told me: ‘There are people dead on the road. They killed two people’. A group of us went to the patrol. One of us spoke English a bit. He asked: ‘Whom did you kill?’ The soldier told him to accompany him [to the bodies]. I said to Captain Tai: ‘Why did you kill?’ He said: ‘I am sorry. There was a mistake. I apologize.’ I repeated the question: ‘Why did you kill them?’ He said: ‘It was dark. One colleague was in a hurry. I am sorry. I don’t accept such behaviour.’”
Hazam Jumah Kati’ was hit by seven bullets in his chest and stomach. He died immediately. 'Abed 'Abd al-Karim Hassan was hit by five bullets in the right arm, the right leg, the chest and lower body and died later from his injuries."
http://www.amnestyusa.org/news/document.do?id=42C1E8D46E7223DF80256E5C00479F27
It would be interesting if you and a few other putz had something to discuss other than US war mistakes. Then you would not look like a hatemonger.[/quote]
Hmm, a trolling response to a perfectly reasonable statement.
Why this obsession with calling everyone “hatemongers”?
http://members.aol.com/amerwar/ff/ffg.htm
During the Gulf Campaign (1990-91) approximately 367 Americans lost their lives. Of those deads, approximately 165 American casualties, or 45% (official Dept of Defense estimate), were due to “friendly fire”. Of all Allied deaths during the Gulf campaign approximately 51% (UN estimate) were due to friendly fire.
Simple statement - no “hatemongering”
It would be interesting if you and a few other putz had something to discuss other than US war mistakes. Then you would not look like a hatemonger.[/quote]
Hmm, a trolling response to a perfectly reasonable statement.
Why this obsession with calling everyone “hatemongers”?[/quote]
Why the obsession with badmouthing the US military?
It would be interesting if you and a few other putz had something to discuss other than US war mistakes. Then you would not look like a hatemonger.[/quote]
Hmm, a trolling response to a perfectly reasonable statement.
Why this obsession with calling everyone “hatemongers”?[/quote]
Why the obsession with badmouthing the US military?[/quote]
Why this obsession with defending them when they do something indefensible?
Why respond to questions with other questions?
Obviously you are. You just won’t say it.[/quote]
How dare you say that?[/quote]
Me? You said it. Perhaps you should not have said such a discraceful thing.[/quote]
As I have said before, your comprehension level seems to be very low.
I said that I was not ashamed of my Grandfather, but your behaviour as an apparent American is disgraceful and if you are, indeed, from the USA you pour shame upon your country.
About further spurious “logic” of yours:
So, how is a white Land Cruiser the same as a desert camouflage Land Rover?
How silly it is that you are complining about not being shot at.[/quote]
Who’s complaining? Actually I was quite relieved not to be attacked by our allies, merely pointing out something that has become a fact of life when operating alongside certain elements of the US forces. We pre-empted the problem by giving a demonstration to the people who would be sat on the other end of the radio to the pilots and to some of the pilots, thereby covering our own arses. We would not have considered doing this if we knew that anyone apart from the USAF (USMC pilots seem to be somewhat better trained) were in the air because as a rule this problem only occurs with US pilots. Not a bit of hate merely pointing out that there may be areas of training that are lacking in elements of US forces and that these deficits can lead to more blue on blue casualties than would be normally expected.
ps Eisentunte you’re an arse, but like I said that’s personal.