 |
|
My Wife Hates CIV
|
|
Michigan
Jan 1970
time: 05:18
|
|
Now I'm at work and unable to read the entire thread but...
the world is always dogging out the US when it comes to double standards. and yeah, the world is probably more correct than wrong.
so, if the enemy we're fighting can kill CAPTURED US fighters how would the world react IF the US just kills all the fighters we have captured in Cuba - when we're done with them.
It would seem the US can do just that. Or the world has a problem with double standards on their double standards.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MichaeltheGreat
|
|
Apolyton Grand Executioner
|
 |
mooning the house that Ruth built.
Oct 1999
time: 21:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Roland
"...and what they can do to fix entrenched positions."
Which makes me wonder why they'd take such positions. Or even like "On Tuesday we caught several hundred of them with RPGs and mortars heading toward the fight." - Sounds like the mobile suicide squad from the life of Brian. |
Re: Fixed entrenched positions - both sides had been in static dug in positions for years. And neither side had seen enough firepower to convince them that wasn't the place to be, when the real warfighters came to town.
Same thing about the Iraqis and their tactics. Everyone talked about how big and bad and tough they were - sure, at figthing the Iranians in World War I style straight up attacks. Warfighting has evolved, but a lot of these self-styled third world badasses are too impressed with themselves to realize how far behind the times they are.
Re: the mobile suicide squad. (a) that's the only way they have to move. (b) that's their means of humping ammo and supplies to the fight (c) there's a lot of barren country out there and (d) they're probably not used to the state of our NV gear, let alone the fact that you've got Predators and OP's all over the place, plus decent maps, comms nets, and mid-air refuelable helos with rapid response times from forward bases.
Same stuff happened to the Iraqis.
quote:
What I do not see on CNN are (similarly unconfirmed) reports about bombs hitting villages. Is it propaganda line now to not even mention "colletaral damage" ? |
Ask them, but the more likely answer (since the villages are not secure) is that they don't have access to confirm. Oh, and just because it's a village, don't mean it ain't a legit target this time - the enemy is in the villages as well. How many civilians are still stuck there? Who knows? Hopefully they had a chance to get out.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ecthy
|
|
Zhonghuà Rénmín Gònghéguó
Mar 2000
time: 06:18
|
|
Now were those guys caught or killed?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MichaeltheGreat
|
|
Apolyton Grand Executioner
|
|
mooning the house that Ruth built.
Oct 1999
time: 21:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Roland
"Fixed entrenched positions - both sides had been in static dug in positions for years."
I'm talking about the Islamists who supposedly regrouped in the Paktia region. |
ok - I was referring in general to the fighthing around Mazar-e-Sharif earlier on.
In the Gardeyz-Khowst area, there's a single roadlet (not much more than a camel track) that goes into Parachinar in Pakistan.
The al Qaeda - Taliban supply caches date to the Russian invasion - they have their caves and tunnels in the mountains, tougher for ground troops to get to, and where their major heavy supplies are hidden. They use the ravines and dug in positions there to provide a defensive perimeter around their major caches and HQ locations.
quote:
"(a) that's the only way they have to move."
Why is it the only one ? Why would they want to move at all? |
They're on foot, and once you come down from the ravines and gullies, the rest of it is a big alluvial plain - desert, and lots of wide open country. Biggest reason for moving is food and water - the caves are meant as supply caches primarily, and are not set up to support hundreds or thousands of fighters - especially in the winter, and especially when they didn't have the previous summer to stockpile food and when there's a drought.
quote:
"(b) that's their means of humping ammo and supplies to the fight"
In concentrations of hundreds ? Reminds me of the Alarich quote... |
Nothing indicates concentrations that big - they'd be strung out over miles, but the Apaches are pretty mobile, and have a lot of ammo. Grease six here, three there, a dozen over there - it adds up.
quote:
"(c) there's a lot of barren country out there"
?? |
They're stuck with moving out of cover, in the open, or staying in place and running out of food and water. That country also has nothing to sustain them - neither food nor water, so their concentration in the overall area really makes them move further and further to keep supplied.
quote:
"(d) they're probably not used to the state of our NV gear, let alone the fact that you've got Predators and OP's all over the place, plus decent maps, comms nets"
All that equipment still lead to what looks like a miscalculation of enemy strength. It may work better now that the enemy has produced the favour of getting together in one spot... |
Of course - you never know the true enemy strength - just what's moving around that you can see, and you estimate what percent of the total force that is.
quote:
"...they don't have access to confirm."
We're talking about CNN here. |
Yeah - they're weenies. 
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
faded glory
|
 |
This trash talking 2 bit dope dealer is about to learn respect for the law
Jan 2001
time: 05:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Apaches did a job on the Iraqis in the gulf, but didn't get much credit.
With VII Corps units, the Apaches went out around our armor, and vertically encircled the Iraqis - hitting their HQ's and rear areas, refuelling and resupply and maintenance depots, and generally kicking them in the ass just as we folded up their recon screens. That's one reason the Iraqis just crumbled so fast against our heavy units. |
The Iraqi's wer stupid. They dug there tanks in exposing the turrets. Not only is that a weak part of the tank, it was also the most noticable. Most Iraqi tanks had anti-helo 12.7 MG's on them. But our helo's would come in 5 & 10's at night and zig zag across the lines. Weaving in and out obliterating everything. They didnt have a chance. Even if they shot at our apache's. And a few did have get shot up, tho not shot down. The 280 degree swivel Axil gattling gun on the nose could turn a man into a pile of goo in 2 seconds.
The apache's effectiveness is debatable because of mechanical issue. But I think the jury has made up its mind on combat effectiveness. Which is good.
quote:
The think heavy firepower is an RPG, that's why they're so in love with the things. |
RPG-7 is one of the deadliest weapons of the 20th century. you can destroy most tanks in the world at 50-100 yards, a helo- if you aim well, a bunker.....there fire and forget and a dime a dozen. Thank the Nazi's tho. All the RPG is a reverse engineered Panzerfaust.
quote:
Also, I think the mile of death or whatever it was called, was due in large part to the Apaches... |
Highway of death on the Kuwaiti-Basrah interstate. Not apaches. But A-10's did that. Another deadly weapon in our arsenal.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
I don't think I'd use an RPG on a helicopter unless for some reason it's very close and utterly stationary. The RPG uses a contact fuse, most anti-aircraft missles use proximity fuses because it's so difficult to land a direct his on a rapidly moving target.
If the Apache can hover at 12,000 feet it's not due to ground effect. The ground effect refers to increased lift resulting from air propelled by the blade bouncing off the ground and is limited to 30 to 50 feet off the ground. You're not going to get significant ground reflection at 12,000 feet. That's not to say that I'm doubting that the Apache might be able to hover further from the ground
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ecthy
|
|
Zhonghuà Rénmín Gònghéguó
Mar 2000
time: 06:18
|
|
can't a mobile squad do the same?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MichaeltheGreat
|
|
Apolyton Grand Executioner
|
|
mooning the house that Ruth built.
Oct 1999
time: 21:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
If the Apache can hover at 12,000 feet it's not due to ground effect. |
Some confusion in the stat - since the lift of a helo is more critically dependent on air density, you measure the highest altitude / temp / humidity in which a hover can be achieved - both in and out of ground effect.
Think of an LZ at 12,000 feet, or trying to follow a turning road or canyon course at brushtop elevations at that altitude - that really defines the limits of the combat performance of the helo, because if you have to maintain translational lift to avoid losing altitude, you either have to operate much higher off the ground to give you a margin of safety, or your horizontal maneuvers have to be gradual enough (not what a gunship is about) to prevent loss of translational lift from hard "kickover" turns where you bleed off forward speed and take advantage of main rotor torque to whip the nose of the helo around faster than any ordinary turn.
In either event, once you're above the highest elevation at which you can hold the bird in a hover, your combat maneuverability is severely compromised.
Zobo - yes, the A-10 can be used in that role, but it's not really ideal. The ammo on the Apache chain gun, and the rapid maneuverability of the gun off the flight axis (linked to the gunners helmet) really gives the Apache the edge in shooting-gallery situations like that where you're just being directed onto small pockets of moving infantry.
Horsie - I'm sure they're pretty resilient at hundreds of rounds of 2.75 inch rockets and thousands of rounds of HE 30mm chain gun ammo blowing their limbs and guts all over that high desert country. Some are probably so resilient they're positively elastic.
We have to use infantry to take that ground, but nothing says we have to leave many of them alive for the infantry to deal with.
If they hole up, kill 'em like rats in their holes, if they move, the Apaches and mountain artillery can do a little shred and spread.
They're determined to die for Allah - we're determined to help them achieve that goal. What a deal.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by faded glory
Thats the thing. Reports are, our troops are moving forward. Fire is a hell of a lot lighter than before the air-strikes. which means 1) We killed a whole lotta those guys (2)There running out of ammo and simply fell back.(3) Its a ruse to get us to move a bit closer.
Either way there doomed. As MTG pointed out. You cannot hide from apache's with Thermal imaging. Especially if your in the open. Or a cave.....I have to feel bad for those suckers. I can imagine quite a few have wet/soiled there pants at the percussions of the B-52 blasts and Diasycutters.
Serb, the Russian army was crushed because the afghans hated them. They carpet bombed Herat, Khandahar, and dozens of other cities. Only Kabul was really spared. The Russians went in with there T-62's and Hind E gunships. Right into valleys, right into ravines. Right were the afghans wanted them. 15,000 Soviets died. mainly cause of the Communist's Political unwillingness to give command to the general. Stories of Russian pilots armed with clusterbombs flying over hundreds of Mujahadeen, yet unable to attack them because there orders were to go bomb some supply building. Lack of Flexibility, unwillingness to go up in the mountains and track the Muja's down. The Roads were so badly ambushed, the last 2 years of the war the Russians had to Fly in all there supplys through Air. |
Also, they weren't worn down by more than ywo decades of continuous warfare. Something like that could make you wonder what you're fighting for. I wonder, among the Taliban groups that have reorganized and renewed the fight, how many are Afghanis and how many are foreigners?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
OTOH, since the entire al-Queda has gone underground, who would they issue the complaint to?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Roland
|
 |
Auf'm Jahrmarkt :(
May 1999
time: 06:18
|
|
From CNN to a more... shall we say, encompassing, source:
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/07/i...sia/07FIGH.html
quote:
The mystery surrounding the combat death of a Navy Seal deepened today as Pentagon officials said the commando's search-and-rescue beacon was activated by hand after he tumbled from a helicopter in Afghanistan.
That fact, contained in classified after-action reports reaching Washington, was interpreted by some Pentagon officials and military officers as proof that Petty Officer Neil C. Roberts, 32, survived his fall from an MH-47 Chinook helicopter that was ferrying Special Operations forces into battle near Gardez.
Even so, the officials could not say with certainty whether Petty Officer Roberts then died from injuries he had already received, either from his fall or from enemy fire, or whether he subsequently died at the hands of enemy forces after being captured.
"The general feeling here is that after he fell from the helicopter he turned on the strobe," said one military officer.
Another official who has read the after-action reports said: "He was alive when he left the chopper. We don't know how he was wounded. We're not sure how he died."
Other officials cautioned that Petty Officer Roberts might not have survived his fall from the helicopter as it abruptly changed course when it come under fire on Sunday.
If he did die immediately from his fall, it is possible that adversaries coming upon his body figured out how to turn on the homing device in hopes of luring American rescuers into an ambush, those officials said.
In the minutes after Petty Officer Roberts fell from the helicopter, commanders monitoring video from a Predator unmanned surveillance plane said they had seen adversaries seize the Navy commando.
"We saw him on the Predator, being dragged off by three Al Qaeda men," Maj. Gen. Frank L. Hagenbeck, the commander of the 10th Mountain Division, who is in charge of the ground operation in Afghanistan, said Tuesday.
The petty officer's body, apparently abandoned by the enemy, was flown off the battlefield on Monday after Special Operations forces fought off troops suspected of belonging to Al Qaeda and the Taliban for 12 hours before rescue helicopters arrived.
No cause of death has been determined for Petty Officer Roberts, although Pentagon officials said his body showed signs of a critical bullet wound.
At the Pentagon today, Gen. Tommy R. Franks, the top commander of operations in Afghanistan, and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said they had not seen the Predator video and declined to speculate on how Petty Officer Roberts had died.
"I will tell you that I have talked to three, maybe four people who were either present or have reviewed the result of this," General Franks said, "and it would probably not surprise you that each of the three or four has a different view of what happened."
Secretary Rumsfeld said the important issue was that "a fine American's dead." |
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:18.
Apolyton Time is 00:18. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
06-03-2002 20:51
|