Figleaf Posted September 5, 2006 Report Share Posted September 5, 2006 What is the American record when it comes to pasting allied forces by mistake? A bit troubling, perhaps: http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=am...earch&meta= Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FTA Lawyer Posted September 5, 2006 Report Share Posted September 5, 2006 Criticising someone for a friendly fire incident (or for their record of such incidents) is one of the worst examples of kicking someone while they are down as part of an overall punishment for being heroic so that you and I don't have to be. While we get force-fed a diet of nicely cropped and queued videos of smart-bomb detonations we very quickly forget that the operators of the billion-dollar war machinery are all still people...humans who make mistakes. Personally, I don't see much difference in a friendly-fire accidental bombing from an historical order to go "over the top". The fact of the matter is that in any war, each side will kill its own soldiers...not by design, but by the nature of the exercise. "War is hell" (and I can only speak from things I read or hear...not experience) and all of us who would like to play "armchair General"...particularly in 20/20 hindsight over friendly fire...ought to either enlist or kindly shut up. FTA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted September 5, 2006 Report Share Posted September 5, 2006 What is the American record when it comes to pasting allied forces by mistake? A bit troubling, perhaps:http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=am...earch&meta= Not really. Those who never do anything never make mistakes. FTA has the gist of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted September 5, 2006 Report Share Posted September 5, 2006 What is the American record when it comes to pasting allied forces by mistake? A bit troubling, perhaps: http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=am...earch&meta= Not really. Those who never do anything never make mistakes. FTA has the gist of it. On the otherhand, is there something about their training or SOP that contributes to the incidents? Given that it is not just allies who are the victims of fratrcide, but many more US casualties, it may be a valid criticism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted September 5, 2006 Report Share Posted September 5, 2006 What is the American record when it comes to pasting allied forces by mistake? A bit troubling, perhaps: http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=am...earch&meta= Not really. Those who never do anything never make mistakes. FTA has the gist of it. On the otherhand, is there something about their training or SOP that contributes to the incidents? Given that it is not just allies who are the victims of fratrcide, but many more US casualties, it may be a valid criticism. If you have the largest military and are involved in more wars, it is only logical that you will be involved in more incidents. Those who never go to war will never have any incidents. We have no capability to provide air support for our army in Afghanistan, therefore we will never be guilty of bombing our own side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted September 5, 2006 Report Share Posted September 5, 2006 What is the American record when it comes to pasting allied forces by mistake? A bit troubling, perhaps: http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=am...earch&meta= Not really. Those who never do anything never make mistakes. FTA has the gist of it. On the otherhand, is there something about their training or SOP that contributes to the incidents? Given that it is not just allies who are the victims of fratrcide, but many more US casualties, it may be a valid criticism. If you have the largest military and are involved in more wars, it is only logical that you will be involved in more incidents. Those who never go to war will never have any incidents. We have no capability to provide air support for our army in Afghanistan, therefore we will never be guilty of bombing our own side. That's not the point nor is friendly fire limited to air strikes. The British are at war, are they experiance a similar number (weighted to troop strength) of fratricidal incidents? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted September 5, 2006 Report Share Posted September 5, 2006 That's not the point nor is friendly fire limited to air strikes. The British are at war, are they experiance a similar number (weighted to troop strength) of fratricidal incidents? It is not the point but it is a very valid point. Also the more lethal your equipment the more deadly the the incidents. Could the situation be improved? Probably, it almost always can but fratricide in war will always be a reality. As far as the Brits go, I don't know. Do you? Remember, the US is trying to supply air support for our troops because we let our military reach a state where we are incapable of doing it ourselves. I guess we will just have to wait and see what contributed to this latest tragedy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted September 5, 2006 Report Share Posted September 5, 2006 That's not the point nor is friendly fire limited to air strikes. The British are at war, are they experiance a similar number (weighted to troop strength) of fratricidal incidents? It is not the point but it is a very valid point. Also the more lethal your equipment the more deadly the the incidents. Could the situation be improved? Probably, it almost always can but fratricide in war will always be a reality. As far as the Brits go, I don't know. Do you? Remember, the US is trying to supply air support for our troops because we let our military reach a state where we are incapable of doing it ourselves. I guess we will just have to wait and see what contributed to this latest tragedy. No and neither am I trying to demonize the Americans. But in the past, their procedures has been suspect, particularly in the length of a sortie and the drugs they use to stay awake. That being said, we could provide our own air support with our CF-18s but the Harper gov't, for whatever reason has not authorized it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daddyhominum Posted September 5, 2006 Report Share Posted September 5, 2006 That's not the point nor is friendly fire limited to air strikes. The British are at war, are they experiance a similar number (weighted to troop strength) of fratricidal incidents? It is not the point but it is a very valid point. Also the more lethal your equipment the more deadly the the incidents. Could the situation be improved? Probably, it almost always can but fratricide in war will always be a reality. As far as the Brits go, I don't know. Do you? Remember, the US is trying to supply air support for our troops because we let our military reach a state where we are incapable of doing it ourselves. I guess we will just have to wait and see what contributed to this latest tragedy. No and neither am I trying to demonize the Americans. But in the past, their procedures has been suspect, particularly in the length of a sortie and the drugs they use to stay awake. That being said, we could provide our own air support with our CF-18s but the Harper gov't, for whatever reason has not authorized it. Thogh Canadians have not killed any NATO colleagues to my knowledge, they have been accused of friendly fire deaths against the Afghan police, army and civilians. The cause of casualties can be read in detail at: http://www.icasualties.org/oef/Afghanistan.aspx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theloniusfleabag Posted September 5, 2006 Report Share Posted September 5, 2006 Dear FTA Lawyer, http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index....ic=2676&hl= However, I am not surprised at all to hear he was killed by his own troops. Throughout history, the US has been the land of 'trigger-happy morons'. Far from being a 'random tragedy', it is actually very typical.After the 50th time, what do you do when a pattern develops? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted September 5, 2006 Report Share Posted September 5, 2006 That being said, we could provide our own air support with our CF-18s but the Harper gov't, for whatever reason has not authorized it. Our CF-18s are old and poorly equipped for bombing. In fact, they didn't even come with the right systems for bombs. We had to special order a few when we participated in the Kosovo campaign, and as I recall we didn't have the right communications gear even then. I doubt the CAF trains much in bombing, and I doubt we even have much of a supply available. Besides which, the CF-18s are not anywhere near as capable in close-in ground support as the A10 warthogs. They are primarily a high level fighter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted September 5, 2006 Report Share Posted September 5, 2006 Dear FTA Lawyer,http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index....ic=2676&hl= However, I am not surprised at all to hear he was killed by his own troops. Throughout history, the US has been the land of 'trigger-happy morons'. Far from being a 'random tragedy', it is actually very typical.After the 50th time, what do you do when a pattern develops? You do your best to be careful, but it is an exceedingly dangerous business, humans are fallible, and casualties are inevitable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theloniusfleabag Posted September 5, 2006 Report Share Posted September 5, 2006 Dear Argus, You do your best to be careful, but it is an exceedingly dangerous business, humans are fallible, and casualties are inevitable.I agree. However, if someone 'on my team' accidentally shot another teammate, we'd all feel sad, a bit of anger, etc. and move on. If that teammate did it on a daily basis, I'd take his gun away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Anthony Posted September 5, 2006 Report Share Posted September 5, 2006 However, if someone 'on my team' accidentally shot another teammate, we'd all feel sad, a bit of anger, etc. and move on. If that teammate did it on a daily basis, I'd take his gun away.What if his gun was bigger than yours? [i am not too sure that sounds right.... ]What if you were of a lower rank on the team and the trigger-happy moron was the captain? I wonder whether the Canadian military shares equal power in such a dilemma. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted September 5, 2006 Report Share Posted September 5, 2006 That's not the point nor is friendly fire limited to air strikes. The British are at war, are they experiance a similar number (weighted to troop strength) of fratricidal incidents? It is not the point but it is a very valid point. Also the more lethal your equipment the more deadly the the incidents. Could the situation be improved? Probably, it almost always can but fratricide in war will always be a reality. As far as the Brits go, I don't know. Do you? Remember, the US is trying to supply air support for our troops because we let our military reach a state where we are incapable of doing it ourselves. I guess we will just have to wait and see what contributed to this latest tragedy. No and neither am I trying to demonize the Americans. But in the past, their procedures has been suspect, particularly in the length of a sortie and the drugs they use to stay awake. That being said, we could provide our own air support with our CF-18s but the Harper gov't, for whatever reason has not authorized it. No we can't. Yes the F-18 can be a very capable all round aircraft. The US Navy has used different versions of it to replace both the A6 Intruder and F-14 Tomcat. The problem is not so much the aircraft but the military's inability to support an air unit in Afghanistan. They informed the previous government that this was the case and I assume nothing has changed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theloniusfleabag Posted September 5, 2006 Report Share Posted September 5, 2006 Dear Wilber, Yes the F-18 can be a very capable all round aircraft.Fantastic piece of equipment. However, air power cannot win a war. It's been tried, and it cannot be done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted September 5, 2006 Report Share Posted September 5, 2006 Dear Wilber,Yes the F-18 can be a very capable all round aircraft.Fantastic piece of equipment. However, air power cannot win a war. It's been tried, and it cannot be done. Never said it could but it can be a lot more difficult and maybe impossible to win without it, just pointing out why we have to rely on someone else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Anthony Posted September 5, 2006 Report Share Posted September 5, 2006 just pointing out why we have to rely on someone else.I think you are right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted September 6, 2006 Report Share Posted September 6, 2006 Our CF-18s are old and poorly equipped for bombing. In fact, they didn't even come with the right systems for bombs. We had to special order a few when we participated in the Kosovo campaign, and as I recall we didn't have the right communications gear even then. I doubt the CAF trains much in bombing, and I doubt we even have much of a supply available. Besides which, the CF-18s are not anywhere near as capable in close-in ground support as the A10 warthogs. They are primarily a high level fighter. CF-18s are all updated. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/04092006/2/nati...ce-ponders.html That new story just came out yesterday about the updates being complete. The Dutch are using their F-18s for airstrikes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theloniusfleabag Posted September 6, 2006 Report Share Posted September 6, 2006 Dear Charles Anthony, What if his gun was bigger than yours? [i am not too sure that sounds right.... ]What if you were of a lower rank on the team and the trigger-happy moron was the captain? I suppose my analogy was somewhat facetious, no one can really 'take away the guns' from the US. However, I would be very reluctant to serve anywhere near them. My father and two uncles served in WWII, and they joked that it was equally dangerous to hear that Germans or Americans had been spotted in your sector. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Borg Posted September 6, 2006 Report Share Posted September 6, 2006 That being said, we could provide our own air support with our CF-18s but the Harper gov't, for whatever reason has not authorized it. Our CF-18s are old and poorly equipped for bombing. In fact, they didn't even come with the right systems for bombs. We had to special order a few when we participated in the Kosovo campaign, and as I recall we didn't have the right communications gear even then. I doubt the CAF trains much in bombing, and I doubt we even have much of a supply available. Besides which, the CF-18s are not anywhere near as capable in close-in ground support as the A10 warthogs. They are primarily a high level fighter. Trips to the bombing range in the Hornet are very common. An exceedingly fine air to ground aircraft. Far more agile than most would ever think and at the same time quite able to be "self escorting" making it one of the better older generation multi role aircraft. It is dual role and dual purpose for this reason. If a Hornet is "FAC'd" in on your position you had better put your head down and pray. Auto bomb, toss bombing, radar aided, continuosly computed impact - all available on the old model. Trust me - it could do the job then and it is even better now. Secure comms, RHAW, Jammers and Link was an issue from day one - has been fixed. Borg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Borg Posted September 6, 2006 Report Share Posted September 6, 2006 Criticising someone for a friendly fire incident (or for their record of such incidents) is one of the worst examples of kicking someone while they are down as part of an overall punishment for being heroic so that you and I don't have to be.While we get force-fed a diet of nicely cropped and queued videos of smart-bomb detonations we very quickly forget that the operators of the billion-dollar war machinery are all still people...humans who make mistakes. Personally, I don't see much difference in a friendly-fire accidental bombing from an historical order to go "over the top". The fact of the matter is that in any war, each side will kill its own soldiers...not by design, but by the nature of the exercise. "War is hell" (and I can only speak from things I read or hear...not experience) and all of us who would like to play "armchair General"...particularly in 20/20 hindsight over friendly fire...ought to either enlist or kindly shut up. FTA Well said. Borg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Borg Posted September 6, 2006 Report Share Posted September 6, 2006 What is the American record when it comes to pasting allied forces by mistake? A bit troubling, perhaps: http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=am...earch&meta= Not really. Those who never do anything never make mistakes. FTA has the gist of it. On the otherhand, is there something about their training or SOP that contributes to the incidents? Given that it is not just allies who are the victims of fratrcide, but many more US casualties, it may be a valid criticism. If you have the largest military and are involved in more wars, it is only logical that you will be involved in more incidents. Those who never go to war will never have any incidents. We have no capability to provide air support for our army in Afghanistan, therefore we will never be guilty of bombing our own side. That's not the point nor is friendly fire limited to air strikes. The British are at war, are they experiance a similar number (weighted to troop strength) of fratricidal incidents? Interesting points - for those who might not know - the first "blue on blue" by the recently deployed group to Afghan was a Canadian soldier fatally shooting a Canadian soldier. It is unfortunate. Extreme measures are taken to prevent it from happening. But mistakes do happen in the heat of the moment. Usually it is as simple as forgetting to follow established procedure. A common happening that for the most part causes no grief. Once in a while however ...... Typically if blue on blue happens it demoralizes the crews involved - on both sides. Unfortunately there also seems to be a few on the outside who are quite prepared to jump on the Yanks when they are involved. They are not the only folks to have done this and it will happen again. Hopefully not soon, but the longer militaries go without an incident, the closer they are to having yet another. Rest assured this will be investigated - closely - and procedures will be put in place to prevent a re-ocurrence. Until another way is found to "screw the pooch". Then it will start all over again. To blame the nation is not only ludicrous, it shows what appears to be a nasty streak of satisfaction. Not on. As there are no atheists in fox holes or cockpits I say - may God rest the soul of the departed and may he bless this man's family. May God bless the wounded and send them on a speedy recovery. May God bless the pilots involved. May they be blessed with the ability to sleep at night after the nightmares stop happening. May those nightmares stop happening before the pilots reach their old age death beds. Borg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Borg Posted September 6, 2006 Report Share Posted September 6, 2006 .That being said, we could provide our own air support with our CF-18s but the Harper gov't, for whatever reason has not authorized it. The ability to support F-18's in Afghan land is not there - it may come in time - but we are a long way from it. Borg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Borg Posted September 6, 2006 Report Share Posted September 6, 2006 The Dutch are using their F-18s for airstrikes. Dutch Air Force has no F-18 aircraft. They fly the F-16. Reference - Order of Battle - http://www.scramble.nl/nl.htm Borg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.