It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Was there concern that the British "soldiers" who were being held by the Iraqi National Guard would be obliged to reveal the nature and objective of their undercover mission?
The Strykers and even the Abrams are getting blown up by custom made bombs. The bomb developers do not have large staffs of engineers and scientists. They do not have the ability to call up lots of machine tool suppliers or electronic motherboard design firms. With tools which are relatively crude they are building and planting bombs that are knocking out multi-million dollar US military armored vehicles. They are also getting better at hiding bombs.
But Antonio said some insurgents had found "the right mix of explosives and IED positioning to inflict severe damage on the vehicle."
Originally posted by cloakndagger
I would not leave out the disappearance of tons of explosives early on. 380 tons worth of high explosives.
Originally posted by ChrisJr03
I'd have to agree with all of that; however, the one thing I'd somewhat disagree on is the bombs. I think its possible that you could put together something to take out a tank. I'm not saying they found it out, but I'm saying its possible. As someone who actually looks up how to make bombs, I'm sure there is a formula out there on how to do it. I'd also suggest that, after enough idiots getting blown to bits, they finaly got it right and hit the right spot and had sort of a revelation. That seems to be something that an insurgent could logically do; not saying this happend, but I think its definatly feasable. The Flob Falcon, never heard of that event.
Originally posted by jackinthebox
reply to post by ITSTHECIA
I don't think most civilians really have a concept of how advanced the armor is on an Abrams. It is one thing to disable it, quite another to utterly destroy it. I do agree with the logic of "where there's a will there's a way," but I too smell a rat. The original versions of the Abrams were meant to withstand the assault of the Soviets most advanced T-72's. Your're not taking out an Abrams with a molotov or a few hand grenades stitched into some dog's belly.
Please elaborate on "FLOB FALCON"
It is the most heavily equipped, and heavily armored main battle tank that the US has ever put out in the field, and supposedly can protect those inside fairly well," said Patrick Garrett, an analyst with GlobalSecurity.Org, a private research group.
"If it is true that a tank was damaged to this sort of extent resulting in fatalities by a simple roadside bomb, depending on whatever size it was, that does not bode well for the future of the occupation," he said.
That really does prove there is no safe place for American soldiers," he said.
Originally posted by jackinthebox
The video of the explosions was impressive, but I doubt 300 soldiers died there. I may look a little deeper, but I think the tape speaks for itself really. The soldier was only about 3 or 4 miles away and didn't seem overly concerned about high casualties, though he did state something along the lines that he hoped no one was getting hurt. The footage is about what I would expect to see from an ammo depot blowing up, and this wasn't an isolated incident. Ammo depots can go up by accident as well as from deliberate enemy action. Unfortunately, a few people might very well have died, but I really doubt 300.
I still have my other suspicions about the war though.
“How did our government pay for all the support that we gave Afghanistan in the 80’s?” Do the research to answer this question my friend and you will learn something about American politics.
Remember what Eisenhower said when he left office, “Beware the undue influence of the Military Industrial Complex.”