2 Apaches Kill a Platoon Of Taliban

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by IvanAstikov

 

In war you use every advantage and weapon you have to defeat the enemy.

This ain't COD.

If you are killing people from a position where you are never in any danger of being fired back at, you might as well be.

reply to post by IvanAstikov


Helicopters get shot down all the time.

Apaches are not impervious to enemy attack.

I crew in Blackhawks. I man the 7.62mm machine gun

Should the need arise to use it, it is because I and the crew I fly with are in real danger.

I know rotor craft. I work closely with apache crews. Its not a damned video game and it is not free of danger.

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by billdadobbie

 

Sorry i don't buy 9/11 conspiracy/ Alex Jones bs.

you can leed a horse to water but you will never make it drink ?

reply to post by billdadobbie


Drink the George Bush did 9/11 Kool-aid?

Yeah..Silly me.

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by IvanAstikov

 

Helicopters get shot down all the time.

Apaches are not impervious to enemy attack.

I crew in Blackhawks. I man the 7.62mm machine gun

Should the need arise to use it, it is because I and the crew I fly with are in real danger.

I know rotor craft. I work closely with apache crews. Its not a damned video game and it is not free of danger.

edit on 26-6-2013 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)

Wait until drones make you obsolete and you have to either retrain on the PS4, or risk getting your hands bloody in more direct combat.

reply to post by IvanAstikov


What does that have to do with anything?

The other part of my job is maintaining the aircraft.

Even if drones did replace the Blackhawk, they would still need techs.
The worst that will happen is that I wont be on flight status anymore.

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by IvanAstikov

 

What does that have to do with anything?

I was hoping you might chime in on whether you consider killing by drone a warrior-like activity, in the truest sense of the word? When David killed Goliath, he wasn't a warrior, he was just a good shot with a sling. It's like a hunter who can sneak up to his prey and take it out with a knife has a bettter claim to the title than someone who can kill his prey from a mile away because he has a fancy weapon and the skill to aim it.

reply to post by projectvxn



Didn't they say 98% of the people killed in drone strikes were not confirmed to be terrorists?
I can imagine apache helicopters make the same mistakes as well.

So what we have here is a vicious cycle of people losing their families, maybe acting out in revenge against US soldiers, then get blown up again (creating more terrorists). You kill 1 innocent person, the entire family/village will be against the US. You better hope those generations of kids who witness this violence overseas don't grow up and get plane tickets to the US.

Take a step back and think about what you would do if foreign soldiers were in your country messing sh*t up, would you not arm yourself? People living in those countries can't even arm themselves from the Taliban anymore or they'll get blown up.

Remember the journalists who got blown up because his camera looked like a gun? Yep, the video should still be on youtube.

Originally posted by IvanAstikov

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by IvanAstikov

 

In war you use every advantage and weapon you have to defeat the enemy.

This ain't COD.

If you are killing people from a position where you are never in any danger of being fired back at, you might as well be.

Welcome to warfare in the real world over say the past 100 years.
If you want hand to hand fighting then go watch Sparticus .

reply to post by IvanAstikov


To be honest with you I dont think the policy of using drones for large scale warfare is bad. Anti tank and materiel missions and what not. When it comes to hunting down and killing terrorist leaders not so much. A drone is great for surveillance but its weapons package isn't a scalpel its a sledge hammer and many times their use in such missions creates far more damage than is warranted.

Apaches have a different mission. They are primarily tank hunters and close air support for engaged ground units. As is evidenced by the video.


As to the question of whether they are warriors..Depends on what you consider a warrior.

Its a subjective term it seems. Though the definition of the word would certainly describe the Apache pilot.

reply to post by peashooter


Its not the same,

The roles of the two aircraft are vastly different as explained above.

Originally posted by tothetenthpower

I really don't feel bad for people who put themselves in that position, knowing why they are truly there. It's not fighting for freedom or anybody's rights, it's fighting a oligarch's war.

That's not true. See my post on page one.

It's about protecting Afghani girls from monsters.

That's not expansionism.

reply to post by xavi1000


Did you see the donkey have a poop at 5:20?



After watching this video, I don't want to be anywhere near an Apache : /

reply to post by Miracula


It's there society/religion,who are we to force change upon them? see how Afghanistan,iraq,libya,Syria turned out a lot of inhumanity goes down in other countries,i don't see bombs raining down on them (see China)
To them and from the video these people are fighting a foreign military occupation, and rightly so
at least they have the balls to stand up when they realize there getting scre*d
The ptb has failed on every front,the war on terror (now far worse) spreading democracy(see 911)
seaking wmd's (there were none) humanitarian concern's through war(like that makes sense)
time to call it a day and bring the boys home imo or should I say Obama's, but that was soo 2008
or maybe they didn't fail,because we did nothing about it and probably still wont.

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by billdadobbie

 

Drink the George Bush did 9/11 Kool-aid?

Yeah..Silly me.

i will leave the kool-aid alone the aspartame is bad man . u.s.a more likely to be killed by lightning than a terrorist or falling out of your bath

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by buster2010

 

It was going on from the day the Taliban took over the country. This is a matter of historical record.

www.gwu.edu...

Taliban oppression:
www.liveleak.com...

Don't fall for the propaganda. Here's two lies from your first link

It soon became clear that Taliban rule was detrimental to Afghan and international security, as evidenced by their sanctioning of continuing narcotics production -despite its un-Islamic quality- and shelter for al-Qaeda and other terrorists.

When the Taliban took over they burned the poppy fields Afghanistan went for being the top producer of opium to almost off the chart. Now after the invasion they are back on top again. The shelter for Al-Qaeda is also a lie. They told Bush show us the evidence linking Bin laden to 9/11 and we will hand him over to you. Guess what happened? Bush could show none.

Originally posted by projectvxn

Originally posted by buster2010
reply to post by projectvxn

 

Did I support our mission in Iraq? No. I found it to be wasteful and misguided. We didn't even get oil contracts at the end of the day. We left empty handed.

So you think we should have gotten something for invading Iraq? Oh sure it's ok to invade countries that haven't attacked America as long as we get something out of it. That's just sick and twisted dude.

I don't recall saying that.

But ok.

Interestingly it does.call into question the whole "war for oil" dynamic though, doesn't it?

edit on 26-6-2013 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)

You were the one that brought up we had to leave empty handed. That implies we should have gotten something for wrongly invading a nation and killing a million plus innocent people.

reply to post by buster2010


Is that what it implies?

Or are you just inferring that because you want to pick a fight?

Sorry not interested.

reply to post by buster2010


Yes...George Washington University is known for being a propaganda machine.

You're right, the Taliban are a shining example of good in the world.

reply to post by Dominar


That 30mm gun can do some damage for sure.

A few of things should be taken away from this video.

1. They took the safety of innocent people into account.

2. They did not use missiles until they were well clear of the innocents and friendlies and called "winchester" on 30mm(Meaning empty)

3. There was a second gunship for coverage of more precise targets closer to the escaping population and friendly forces, while the other gunship engaged targets further away toward the north with missiles.

All in all it was a textbook close air support engagement. Every precaution was taken, both the pilots and the ground element team leader were careful, precise, and professional.