 |
| |
|
| |
|
|
Rogan Josh
|
|
quote:
Rogan - a good part of it may be attributable to schedule and fatigue. A lot of these people are working 18-20 hours a day, and having to make split-second choices in combat situations. Same with the vehicle accidents. |
I can certainly understand the fatigue argument. I certainly can't work 18-20 hours a day without making mistakes.
But that then brings up another question: is it really necessary? I can see the point of blitzkrieg during the first attack and for strategic objectives (e.g. to secure the oil-fields and strategic bridges etc.), but at this stage in the war, is it really needed? I would have thought that, with total air superiority, the coalition has enough troops and war-planes to not have to operate 18-20 hours a day? Even if just for the sake of morale.
I realise that soldiers don't care much for politics but now that the military campaign is almost over, the political war to win the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people becomes increasingly important. That objective isn't going to be met when accidentally killing civilians.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
MichaeltheGreat
|
|
Apolyton Grand Executioner
|
 |
mooning the house that Ruth built.
Oct 1999
time: 21:27
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Rogan Josh
But that then brings up another question: is it really necessary? I can see the point of blitzkrieg during the first attack and for strategic objectives (e.g. to secure the oil-fields and strategic bridges etc.), but at this stage in the war, is it really needed?
|
That's always the toughest judgment call to make, and there's never a clear answer looking forward. You don't give any slack to a routed, disorganized enemy, but there is a risk in being too aggressive - late, useless fratricide or civilian casualties.
It's a tough balancing act between enough pressure on the enemy, and starting relief and security duties.
quote:
I would have thought that, with total air superiority, the coalition has enough troops and war-planes to not have to operate 18-20 hours a day?
|
For pilots, there's a lot of time into and out of the target areas, loiter time for air traffic control and refueling, then you get on the ground, and more work then - debriefings, after-action reports, problems with the aircraft, squadron administrative work, etc. For infantry and armor pukes, when you're not fighting, you're likely moving, digging defensive positions, cleaning your weapons and gear - there's always something.
quote:
I realise that soldiers don't care much for politics but now that the military campaign is almost over, the political war to win the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people becomes increasingly important. That objective isn't going to be met when accidentally killing civilians. |
This is when the tough phase really begins. It's also something the diehard irregulars will exploit, by doing the disguised as civilians bit, the suiciders, etc.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lincoln
|
|
No one thinks it is "OK" to kill your own people.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sikander
|
 |
Boulder, Colorado, United Snakes of America
Jan 2000
time: 22:27
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Rogan Josh
What the hell does it matter how much I know about it? It shouldn't have happened! The guys who were bombed were the guys who called for the airstrike (to hit Iraqi armour). If they had no armour that makes it even worse since it implies that the pilot, as you put it, didn't know "all that much".  |
While I agree that it isn't what we wanted to happen, I find your assertion that the U.S. Air Force is somehow inadequately trained to be laughable. By that standard every Air Force in the world is inadequately trained. Btw, there was a knocked out Iraqi T-55 near the friendly forces that probably drew the pilot onto the wrong group. Add to that the fact that this group was using non-military vehicles and was armed to the teeth much like many of the irregular forces that we are fighting and the error is easier to understand. I think everyone involved is sick about it, and it would be nice to find a way to avoid this sort of thing, but I have to look at the bigger picture. We have taken a lot of ground from a lot of very well armed people, and our casualties have been miniscule in comparison. Part of this happens because of our methods of waging war, which alas do not preclude friendly fire incidents.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
My Wife Hates CIV
|
|
Michigan
Jan 1970
time: 05:27
|
|
So what's the problem??? As far as war goes this one has seen such light casualties I can't understand how anyone can complain. Even Iraqi troops have not suffered like they would if Iraq where being invaded by the likes of Russia or China (savages). I can't see those countries taking care of 8000 POW's to the extend the US does. And we've all seen how Russia takes a city.
I posted before the war that the US would have casualties of 500 or less. I think the US is up to 120 or something like that - and the fighting (for the most part) is over. Iraq (not military) is what? something like 500 dead. In a country of 24 million... those numbers are pretty freakin good. WAY better than ANY OTHER power could do when taking a country.
Kinda makes me think why stop now??? Iran is right next door and the US has everything more or less in place right now to take a right hand turn and keep on pushing.
How many would have died this year under Saddam?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
My Wife Hates CIV
|
|
Michigan
Jan 1970
time: 05:27
|
|
I guess I don't see it like that. The US is right there when they blow up a house by mistake. I think just today or yesterday the US reported 11 people killed in a afgan village when a bomber targeted something by mistake. gezzz... what the heck do you want?!? i'd like to see the russians take a cnn reporter along for the ride the next time they level a city.
What other army in this world is as open as the US???? In terms of news and sharing info.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
My Wife Hates CIV
|
|
Michigan
Jan 1970
time: 05:27
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ming
Well Hurricane... The reporters are stubbornly denying that any gunfire came from the hotel...
Both sides are sticking to their story... At this point, who is to say what really happened. |
and who you going to believe??? some reported with his head up his butt who probably couldnt tell the difference between a tank round over a car back firing 15 floors below them!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
It's interesting to say the least that 3 different news agancies bases were hit in one single day....
not to say that the powerful scopes on board any war vehicle can clearly discern a camera from a gun...
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:27.
Apolyton Time is 00:27. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
09-04-2003 12:28
. Perhaps they arent camera flashes, but something else... maybe bulletes from machine gun fire hitting the building? 
), but when you sum up all the friendly fire incidents, at least I get a picture of an army with a policy of "since the winners write the history, we couldn't care less about our FUBAR's. If we shoot some unarmed civilian, it's he's fault that he was at the wrong place at the wrong time, not our's. Our soldiers are untouchable".
|