It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

US friendly fire kills British soldiers in Afghanistan

page: 3
6
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 09:54 AM
link   
reply to post by DarkStormCrow
 


Who said that Friendly Fire was only a result of US forces?

I think some posts may have said that there appears to be quite a number of these and that the US will not co-operate in subsequent investigations.

It is unacceptable to accept acts of Friendly Fire in this day and age with current technology etc.
What can be done to minimise the chances of it occuring?

Why must any comment on US actions or events result in replies of "well what about you, you did this first".
I left that childish reaction behind in primary school.

Grow up, be constructive and contribute to improving things not slinging mud just because someone has had the nerve to discuss the US in a less than positive light.

I think you will find that I, and some of the other Brit posters on this thread quite pro- US normally.
Our comments are valid and justified.




posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 09:57 AM
link   
reply to post by shots
 


No-one is wanting to hang the US, we just want to learn the truth about what happened and try to make sure that it doesn't happen again.
WTF is wrong with that?



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 09:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
Shots, this was a combat patrol that called in CAS. CAS is usually controlled from the ground by the unit directing the fire, not the field commander back at HQ.


How do you know for certain that was the case you weren't there? Bloomberg says they were part of a nato operation.



The British soldiers were part of a North Atlantic Treaty Organization effort to quell activity in the area by the Taliban, which during the summer has stepped up a guerrilla campaign aimed at foreign troops and the government of President Hamid Karzai.
Bloomberg

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.



Now kindly cool your anti American Jets until we get alll the details


[edit on 8/24/2007 by shots]



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 10:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by shots
Yet you Brits want to hang the US instantly, now isn't that nice :shk:


How do you think we feel? you refused to had over evidence and failed to co-operate in the last inquiry to a friend fire incident. Can't expect our confidence to be good this time around.



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 10:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Freeborn
reply to post by shots
 


No-one is wanting to hang the US, we just want to learn the truth about what happened and try to make sure that it doesn't happen again.
WTF is wrong with that?


Exactly. Whilst we accept these incidents happen, it's the aftermath that pisses us off.

Every time the Americans do a Blue on Blue, it gets shrugged off and the impression is given that the US DoD does not care. This, understandably, annoys your allies.

Shots, I know that they called in CAS because that is what the MoD said:


The MoD said all of the soldiers had been taking part in a fighting patrol to disrupt Taleban activity to the north west of Kajaki, in Helmand province.

They came under attack from Taleban insurgents and during the firefight that followed, close air support was called in from two US F15 aircraft, according to the MoD.

Source


now, I know your other sites just say "Killed in NATO operation", but we have quite a bit more detail being given out on this side of the pond, it would seem.



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 10:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by shots
How do you know for certain that was the case you weren't there? Bloomberg says they were part of a nato operation.


The Ministry of Defence has confirmed the troops were killed by US forces. Can't you understand that the British government confirmed it? Do you feel Bloomberg is better source than a national government?



Now kindly cool your anti American Jets until we get alll the details


That's it, you play the anit-American card.
If this was American troops killed by British forces you would be up in arms screaming for justice.



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by infinite
 


I realize that was the case for that incident and the Tillman family doctors are claiming a cover up for their sons death no big deal here. It is to be expected of families and other nations to lay the blame on the others because they want the families to receive more money.

[edit on 8/24/2007 by shots]



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 10:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by shots
I realize that was the case for that incident and the Tillman family doctors are claiming a cover up for their sons death no big deal here. It is to be expected of families and other nations to lay the blame on the others because they want the families to receive more money.


And after comments like that, you wonder why majority of the world dislikes the United States?

Those family members want justice, not money. Have a heart.



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 10:15 AM
link   
reply to post by shots
 


It has nothing to do with money but everything to do with truth, responsibility and prevention.

I would be taking exactly this stance if UK forces had killed US personnel in Friendly Fire.

To blindly accept that "it happens", whilst it maybe true it is unacceptable.



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 10:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
Shots, I know that they called in CAS because that is what the MoD said:


The MoD said all of the soldiers had been taking part in a fighting patrol to disrupt Taleban activity to the north west of Kajaki, in Helmand province.

They came under attack from Taleban insurgents and during the firefight that followed, close air support was called in from two US F15 aircraft, according to the MoD.

Source




You are assuming, nowhere does it say who called in the CAS, for all anyone knows it could have been a NATO Commnder who made the call.

Now had the article stated British forces called for CAS you would have a point but at this time it is just an assumption.



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 10:23 AM
link   
reply to post by infinite
 


My comments were not intended to offend or sound heartless sorry if they did. All I was doing was pointing out the reality of the situation in real life is all.



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 10:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by shots
My comments were not intended to offend or sound heartless sorry if they did. All I was doing was pointing out the reality of the situation in real life is all.


Well, its not the way things are done in Britain. Did you see the countless emotional interviews with the families? All they wanted was justice. Don't you ever accuse families of "wanting money" for their dead sons.

[edit on 24-8-2007 by infinite]



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by shots
You are assuming, nowhere does it say who called in the CAS, for all anyone knows it could have been a NATO Commnder who made the call.

Now had the article stated British forces called for CAS you would have a point but at this time it is just an assumption.


Shots, the nature of CAS means it is called for and directed by the boots on the ground. It wouldn't be CAS if directed from HQ.



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by infinite
All they wanted was justice. Don't you ever accuse families of "wanting money" for their dead sons.


I understand what you are saying and again you need to some down off your high chair into the real world. As ugly as it may seem Money always comes into the matter and ends up as the bottom line.

Take this case for example a lady was arrested for DUI yet her family ended up suing the City because she escaped from the police car.


State to pay 350,000 to family of escapee

Granted not really the same situation all I am doing is showing life in real terms is all. No matter what happens the bottom line is virtualy always a lawsuit for money and that is my point.



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
Shots, the nature of CAS means it is called for and directed by the boots on the ground. It wouldn't be CAS if directed from HQ.


Again I ask how can you know for certain you were not there neither was I? For all anyone knows the call may have been made by any number of individuals or perhaps even relayed via a UAV observer.

Also allow me to point out if British forces did call for the CAS perhaps and I am not saying for certain but it is very possible the individual who called for the CAS may have transposed the coordinate numbers. That has happened more then once, so again I say lets wait until we get all the details rather then jump to conclusions.



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 11:12 AM
link   
reply to post by shots
 


Excuse me,
but I clearly made reference for it not being the norm in Britain.

So no need to highlight American examples.



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 11:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by shots
Again I ask how can you know for certain you were not there neither was I? For all anyone knows the call may have been made by any number of individuals or perhaps even relayed via a UAV observer.


True, but I'm going on what the MoD have said.


Originally posted by shots
Also allow me to point out if British forces did call for the CAS perhaps and I am not saying for certain but it is very possible the individual who called for the CAS may have transposed the coordinate numbers. That has happened more then once, so again I say lets wait until we get all the details rather then jump to conclusions.


Indeed, they may well have called the bomb down on themselves. Of course, we are assuming it was GPS guided and not pilot directed, ie; Laser guided. It might not have even been a guided weapon at all. This, we do not know.

I don't recall having played the "anti-America" game here. My gripe is with the subsequent "investigations" and cover-ups that usually follow when the Yanks do a blue on blue.



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 11:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Freeborn
 


Well when I see comments like these




It's easy to mistake us for a member for the Taleban. The Union Jack can be quite confusing.





Don't expect it on any American news sites though





At some point the British are going to have to ask themselves, with friends like this who needs enemies?


It looks to be a bit of US bashing.

I pointed out that UK forces are not immune I wasnt playing a blame game.

The incident in question is less than 48 hours old and it seems that some posters in this thread want a full investigation to be finished already and a turning over of the US pilots for a murder trial.

US Forces make up 90% of the combat forces they will likely have 90% of the friendly fire incidents you can try and minimize them but stopping them altogether is not going to happen.

US forces have killed 6 UK soldiers/pilots in the last 6 years. This is the first US/UK friendly fire incident in Afganistan. US on US friendly fire has killed 24 US soldiers/airmen. The UK has suffered 164 combat deaths in Iraq 3 of those have been due to friendly fire. The UK Has suffered 73 combat deaths in Afganistan 3 of those thursday during the latest friendly fire incident. So of the UK casualties buy US friendly fire is about 3 pecent of the tatal casualties, compared to previous conflicts were totals friendly fire incidents may run a high as 25% example Desert Storm or the First Gulf War. In the present conflicts 56 Coalition soldiers have been killed by friendly fire out of a total of 4566 or about 1.3% which when compared to previous conflicts is pretty amazing.

2003 - American Patriot missile shot down a British Panavia Tornado GR.4A ZG710 'D' of 13 Squadron killing the pilot and navigator, Flight Lieutenant David Rhys Williams and Flight Lieutenant Kevin Barry Main, both from 9 Squadron

2003 - 190th Fighter Squadron, Blues and Royals friendly fire incident - March 28, 2003 when a pair of American A-10s from the 190th Fighter Squadron attack four British armoured reconnaissance vehicles of the Blues and Royals, killing Lance-Corporal of Horse Matty Hull, during the invasion of Iraq.

2007 - One of a pair USAF F-15s called in to support British ground forces in Afganistan dropped a bomb on those forces, killing three soldiers of the 1st Battalion, the Royal Anglian Regiment, and injuring two others



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 11:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by DarkStormCrow
2003 - American Patriot missile shot down a British Panavia Tornado GR.4A ZG710 'D' of 13 Squadron killing the pilot and navigator, Flight Lieutenant David Rhys Williams and Flight Lieutenant Kevin Barry Main, both from 9 Squadron


Whilst I agree with the premise of your post, I must question one thing...

A Tornado from 13 Sq was piloted by 9 Sq aircrew?

That was a stupid Blue on Blue incident... Honestly... How can a fighter/bomber be mistaken for a Scud... Seriously...

Anyhooo...



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 11:36 AM
link   
reply to post by DarkStormCrow
 


Re-read the whole thread, I think you will find that there is no US bashing going on at all.
Why when questioning anything to do with the US is it percieved to be US bashing. Please try to be consructive. All anyone has said is that these seem to be quite frequent occurences and, unlike previous investigations, it requires US co-operation if we are to determine exactly what caused it and how we can prevent it from happening again.
How anyone can construe that as US bashing is, well, quite frankly beyond me


Stop thinking the whole world is against you and being so defensive, I honestly thought that the Americans I had come across on ATS were better than that, maybe not.
The world has a right to question and comment you know, you don't have a monopoly on free thought and opinion.

p.s. I think you'll find that the quotes you attributed to me were not mine


Well that's my lot for the day, I'm off down the pub.
Till tomorrow.
Respect.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join