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.
Originally posted by mOjOm
In July 2002, Afghan officials said 48 civilians at a wedding party were killed and 117 wounded by a U.S. airstrike in Afghanistan's Uruzgan province. An investigative report released by the U.S. Central Command said the airstrike was justified because American planes had come under fire.
Unless they were celebrating by firing 'Surface to Air Rockets', it would seem that these guys over-reacted just a bit, don't ya think?
Come under fire is stretching it big time, if you're talking about some handguns or even a few rifles popping off a few rounds. I mean it's a Military Plane, in flight and is in more danger of being struck by lightning than being shot down by a few stray bullets.
Originally posted by mOjOm
Now, when it comes to the 48 dead and 117 injured from an Airstrike by Plane, I think that is pretty strange. Perhaps it's just me though too. I also consider it a bit Radical to Hunt Quale with an Uzi and Duck with an AK as well. Just how low was this plane flying anyway? And at what speed? Also, how many passes did it take to rack up them 48 dead, including children, as well as 117 injured, before realizing, Oops! My bad??
Originally posted by djs0ma
Originally posted by mOjOm
Now, when it comes to the 48 dead and 117 injured from an Airstrike by Plane, I think that is pretty strange. Perhaps it's just me though too. I also consider it a bit Radical to Hunt Quale with an Uzi and Duck with an AK as well. Just how low was this plane flying anyway? And at what speed? Also, how many passes did it take to rack up them 48 dead, including children, as well as 117 injured, before realizing, Oops! My bad??
once troops are engaged (firing upon troops would be enough to engage) these gunships keep firing until everything is "neutralized". Moral of this story, dont shoot at us!
Originally posted by Djarums
And once again we see people who have never been in an evironment where people want to kill you passing judgement. It's almost amusing yet sad at the same time.
We've come off a span of a few months in which hundreds of American soldiers have been killed. Some of them by such little tiny harmless things like MACHINE GUNS.
If it's a fun pastime in Iraq to shoot machine guns into the air, well maybe it's not the appropriate time to do that. Machine guns can carry fairly high wouldn't you say? So if a plane patrolling at low altitudes detects that it's being fired upon, what the hell do you want them to do? Land and say "Hey buddies, we caught some bullets whizzing by a few moments ago, are you trying to kill us or celebrating something?"
But no... no one understands how such a mistake could be made. It's more fun to be a hindsight general!! It's more fun to portray America as mass murderers!!
Those of you who insist on Monday morning quarterbacking other people's lives should join the 9/11 commission. Birds of a feather...
Originally posted by worldwatcher
while you condemn the iraqis for celebrating their weddings in traditional manner and blame them for getting fired on....please consider that when you invade a country, you should atleast know the traditions, the lifestyle and customs of the people you invade...perhaps then you will able to tell the terrorists apart from the civilians and not create more enemies instead of friends.
it's not like the US wasn't aware that in the Middle East people fire guns at weddings...and don't act like none of us ever went to a party or wedding that went on into the wee hours of the morning.
there has to be some sort of differentiation when it comes to women and children vs. militant gunmen and terrorists.
someone please stop this runaway train before it crashes.
Originally posted by JayKew
Its a pity these gunships werent about at my wedding.
perhaps then you will able to tell the terrorists apart from the civilians and not create more enemies instead of friends
there has to be some sort of differentiation when it comes to women and children vs. militant gunmen and terrorists
Originally posted by Djarums
I'm sure it wasn't women or children shooting the guns, and I am baffled by the fact that no one finds anything wrong with shooting deadly projectiles in the air in the presence of women and children. For those who are scientifically challenged here's a good one for you: What goes up must come down.