Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

6 NATO jets destroyed in Camp bastion incident

page: 2
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 17 2012 @ 11:06 PM
link   
Cool down people,

recall the helicopter incident ? Not a single bullet fired and not even any enemy sighted.

Which is worse - helicopter down by cheap stunt or destroyed by the Afghans ?




posted on Sep, 17 2012 @ 11:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Swills
 


They're using almost identical tactics to Sterlings original LRDP SAS back in WW2 - they harassed the enemy by driving modified jeeps armed with heavy calibre machine guns to destroy aircraft.



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 10:37 AM
link   
"The approximately 15 insurgents, dressed in US Army uniforms"

I am smelling a big fat rat here. First off, these airbases are usually built with lots of empty space between them and the nearest populated area, precisely so they can see an attack coming. Secondly they are well guarded, with barbed wire fences, remote sensors, canine patrols, and watch towers. And how did the insurgents get US Army uniforms?

And those Harrier jets have been a lemon since they were introduced, just like the V-22 0sprey. I believe they were due to be phased out by the Marine Corps anyway. If they want to carry any serious ordinance, they have to take off like a conventional jet bomber. Taking off vertically, they can't carry anything heavier than a couple of bowling balls. Now the military has an excuse to run to Congress and demand more money to make up for their losses.

If this attack was an inside job, it's main purpose would be to convince the sucker taxpayers that the war isn't over, and we need to keep funding it for the foreseeable future. Don't want to cut and run now, do we?
edit on 18-9-2012 by starviego because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 03:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by starviego
"The approximately 15 insurgents, dressed in US Army uniforms"

I am smelling a big fat rat here. First off, these airbases are usually built with lots of empty space between them and the nearest populated area, precisely so they can see an attack coming. Secondly they are well guarded, with barbed wire fences, remote sensors, canine patrols, and watch towers. And how did the insurgents get US Army uniforms?


Obviously you've never been to a Marine base. There may be a few guard towers, with 2-4 men in each tower and concertina wire around the perimeter. Never saw any remote sensors, canine patrols, or anything like that...

Maybe they're doing all that now, since it's been awhile since I've been there. As for the Army uniforms, you can get them just about anywhere...

www.ebay.com...



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 09:49 AM
link   
reply to post by starviego
 


Just last year the Navy bought 72 retired Harriers from the British, along with replacement engines to support the AV-8 fleet. The Marines love them, and they have been used more for Close Air Support than almost any other type in Afghanistan. The reason that this base was so close to the front lines was for the Harriers to be able to respond rapidly to any attack on troops, and they had up until this happened.

As an aside, one of the Marines killed in the attack was the squadron commander of the Harrier unit.



posted on Sep, 22 2012 @ 08:08 AM
link   
This is a serious matter, and lives were lost -even taking that into account I cannot help but laugh at total mismatch in economic scale in this so called war.

A handful of peasants, armed with 30yr old AK-47's and few grenades attack and destroy hundreds of millions of dollars of hardware.

Even if the invading forces counter attacked and got them all - the economics of this kind of fight will never add up - there are simply no high value targets that the invaders can counter attack that will balance the costs.

You can't win against self sufficient peasants armed with $5 weapons - unless you are willing to commit genocide. The only place I currently see a genocidal policy being enacted is in Palestine - so I think the Afghans can toast themselves for this effort in relative safety.






top topics
 
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join