Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Commandos and Special Operations Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: SAS soldier quits Army in disgust at 'illegal' American tactics in Iraq
angryjohn    3/13/2006 10:52:12 AM
This is not meant to be an anti US (thugs) pro Brit (hero) thread, let me make this clear. I am certain the US and UK troops use a variety of different tactics, some conventional, some closer to the bone. However this paints a worrying picture in Iraq to the people at home. My question to SP readers is. Did this trooper make a valid decision? When is it right to disobey orders on moral grounds? Are SF more likely to use unconventional methods and therefore be slightly more relaxed on moral grounds. This is a cross nation SF question, not SAS, Delta, GSG9 thing. http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/03/12/nsas12.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/03/12/ixhome.html
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18   NEXT
EW3    RE:Blue on Blue   3/20/2006 11:48:48 PM
philosophical question for everone....... overwhelming firepower can defeat an enemy quickly. but is it better to have say 12 blue on blue dead, or reduce the firepower and losing 100 blue to the red forces that were not beaten back by the overwhelming firepower. I know which side the MSM would be on.... but what are your opinions?
 
Quote    Reply

TheBigBadWolf    Drop short   3/21/2006 10:50:41 AM
America invented friendly fire. Newsflash for you boys, IT'S NOT FRIENDLY! Looks like you boys should have been doing your vehicle recognition courses instead of reading your cam-corder instructions. ============================================= There does seem to be a lot of anecdotal "evidence" circulating in the press and among the servicemen of various (mostly western) countries concerning the preponderance of friendly fire causalities resulting from joint operations with the U.S. However, there is no statistical evidence to support this contention in relation to the order of magnitude of military power applied in any given operation. Presumably you’re not suggesting that unfortunate synergies achieved by “the fog of war” and adrenaline is a uniquely American phenomenon.
 
Quote    Reply

TheBigBadWolf    RE:Blue on Blue   3/21/2006 11:05:40 AM
"philosophical question for everone....... overwhelming firepower can defeat an enemy quickly. but is it better to have say 12 blue on blue dead, or reduce the firepower and losing 100 blue to the red forces that were not beaten back by the overwhelming firepower." ================================= There is obviously a positive correlation between the intensity and scale of miltary operations and the likelihood of murphy's law or blue-on-blue coming into play.
 
Quote    Reply

Ehran    RE: Horsesoldier   3/21/2006 12:06:00 PM
My recollection is that it was one of those bad plans/bad senior leadership situations that wound up hanging an otherwise competent and proficient field army out to dry . . . ah i see you are familiar with british military history then ;) funny bout the british in that they seem to produce either pretty good generals or pretty bad generals with not a lot of middle ground.
 
Quote    Reply

Ehran    RE:Drop short   3/21/2006 12:25:44 PM
i watched a news report on one incident back in gulf 1. friendly fire incident where an apache hit a pair of british warriors and what i found so interesting was that you got to see the weapon sight video and listen to the pilots talking. basically they found two ifv somewhere they didn't expect to find vehicles and called in for confirmation they were not friendlies. oh 20 seconds later the ifv drop their gates and men start to exit. at this point the gunner puts a missile into one or both of the ifv and then says "geez i hope they weren't friendlies" and a few seconds later it comes over the radio that they are british pickets. had they reined in their enthusiasm for just 20 seconds the whole incident could have been avoided. it certainly didn't help appearances that the apache crew carried on like kids playing a vid game.
 
Quote    Reply

joe6pack    Ehran   3/21/2006 12:42:14 PM
"drop their gates and men start to exit" Not being familiar with the incident, but playing devils advocate: One of those unidentified dismounts could have been packing an SA-7 or the like. Hence the decision to shoot. One of the problems with warfare is that the person that shoot's first usually wins and the loser is dead. It's also hindsight on how long it took to get confirmation back from higher. The pilots had no idea if it was going to take 20 seconds or 20 minutes. However, like I said, I'm not very familiar with the incident so I'm not really defending it. I'm just pointing out that things are often more complicated than they appear in print after the fact.
 
Quote    Reply

displacedjim    RE:Ehran   3/21/2006 1:35:39 PM
I, going to go out on a limb, risking fott-in-mouth disease, and "correct" you, Ehran. While I seem to recall at least one major friendly fire incident of an American A-10 detroying two Brit Warriors using Maverick missiles and killing a whoile squad of Brits, I really think the incident you're descrining sounds more like the one where the Apache unit's DO or S-3 or 2IC or whatever the heck he was called used two Hellfires to take out two Bradleys. The M-2s (maybe they were M-3s considering what they were doing) were sitting well ahead of the foward line of our own troops. The LtCol repeatedly asked for clearence to fire and was in fact urged to "take them out" even against his reluctance. He finally launched and said "I sure hope they arenb't our guys." Within seconds of being hit came the call to knock it off and the controller calling the LtCol to say they were friendly, with his respose being something like "I was afraid of that." Among the things I've heard was something about operator error in determining his and the target's positions, and that supposedly for some reason he shouldn't have been out in the field. I have no idea whose fault it is. Friendly fire is obviously a tradegy. Friendly fire is a subject that gets massive scrutiny. Friendly fire among American forces is something that is **RARE** today compared to 35 or 60 or 90 years ago. I think it's quite obvious that if any other nation conducted operations on the same scale we do, they'd experience **at least** an equivalent level of friendly fire casualties, at in most cases significantly higher. Displacedjim
 
Quote    Reply

shek    RE:Ehran   3/21/2006 2:10:57 PM
The incident that Ehran is speaking about involved the battalion commander, who was given a direct order by the brigade commander (to my knowledge, it was given to all battalion commanders in this brigade) that their job was to command their battalions and not to fly an Apache in combat. So, that was the first thing that went wrong. Next, when the Apache called the ground commander to clear their fire, they read the wrong the grid coordinate, meaning that the ground commander cleared the wrong area. Mistake #2. What I don't know is what the weapons status was - whether it required that the target be positively IDed as enemy, positively IDed as not being friendly, or weapons free depending on location. In any event, while this status has a direct impact on actions, it still is clear that the target identification was wrong. In the end, human error was the overriding factor in this incident. However, I take issue with the characterization that the pilots were too quick to shoot, as they worked through the proper clearance procedures (although human error made this check irrelevant since this wrong grid was cleared). Additionally, I'm curious about the video game comment, as that is how modern combat is fought in many instances - you use optics and weapons ranges to produce standoff capabilities that requires video feed and enhanced imaging to assist the gunners in target identification. This effect is compounded when all you have is the audio and video tracks broadcast, producing an even great "video game" effect. However, keep in my that watching this broadcast on a 27" TV while sitting in a comfortable chair is much different than looking at a much smaller video feed in helicopter while worrying about potential surface-to-air threats, flying through a sandstorm in the dark, and having to make sure that you are paying attention to all the other instruments in the aircraft to make sure you don't crash. Bottomline, there was definitely human error in this incident that resulted in fratricide. However, once again, I think incidents are being taken out of context to fit a stereotype that there is a video game approach to warfare by the US. For those interested in reading the text of a GAO report on the incident, here is a link: http://www.flight-level.com/dogfight/gunfightersix.doc?bcsi_scan_0957343BD9EB263B=0&bcsi_scan_filename=gunfightersix.doc
 
Quote    Reply

Yimmy    RE:Ehran   3/21/2006 7:42:21 PM
I have seen this video a number of times, and it shows a complete mockery in action. "I'm curious about the video game comment, as that is how modern combat is fought in many instances - you use optics and weapons ranges to produce standoff capabilities that requires video feed and enhanced imaging to assist the gunners in target identification" I think you missed the point shek. It does not come across (to me at least) as a vide game due to the technology, but because of the pilots voice communication. They seem to be lacking in any and all radio procedure, they really do sound like a group of friends gossiping, and seemed to have no uderstanding of the consequences of their actions. As for what actually happend, I believe it was decided that the pilots forgot to calculate the wind drift, and so got lost.
 
Quote    Reply

shek    RE:Ehran   3/21/2006 8:48:05 PM
Yimmy, That's how pilots talk. In fact, that's how most internal command nets are that I've ever listened to. Heck, if you've ever heard an AC-130 conversation, you'd think that they were just out fishing . .
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics