22 Dead from Seal Team Six in Deadliest Day in Afghanistan

[STALKERGB 6]

It was obviously a trap and a setup.

Because it definitely couldn't have been one lucky shot by one Taliban fighter? They must fire hundreds of the damn things so sooner or later one was gonna hit a helicopter.

flying low to the ground, into battle

May very well be wrong but don't helicopters often fly low/fast to avoid being hit?

The press were there before the backup which tells you something doesn't it?

I have often been to a crime scene/emergency service scene before the police or fire brigade turn up, doesn't mean it was a conspiracy. Just right place, right time.

[HyperU2 11]

They weren't flying in, they were leaving. They had just saved some Rangers asses. Seems like Helos always go down while doing that.

[maturin 12]

I have often been to a crime scene/emergency service scene before the police or fire brigade turn up, doesn't mean it was a conspiracy. Just right place, right time.

Yeah, there are even reporters embedded with the Taliban.

[Darkhorse 1-6 16]

:) Surprised I'm the first to think about this, but is it possible that the members of DEVGRU that participated in the Bin Laden raid are being killed off? I'm not a big conspiracy theorist, but what are the odds we'd lose this many SEALs two months after one of their biggest missions? I'd be willing to bet at least SOME of the guys who were in the raid went down with that shithook. DEVGRU only has so many members after all...

Inver Brass, anyone?

[Montanaro 0]

lol, none of the dead were involved in the Bin Laden raid.

and why would they be killed off? Because they know too much? Like what? That he's actually alive?

get out of town.

------------

The most dangerous time in a mission is often the extraction (especially when helicopters are involved).

I don't think they were directly "helping rangers" but were trying to take our a local warlord controlling the troops the rangers were fighting.

This guys hideout was probably tucked away on a mountainside and well defended ESPECIALLY considering there was a heavy battle nearby. As has been proven; all it takes is one heat seeking SAM armed by a competent man lurking in shadows to spoil the whole party.

One of the men killed grew up not 30 minutes from where I am now.

[PELHAM 10]

Um, "obviously?"

I'm sure that by this point, tens of thousands of RPGs have been fired at very large, slow-moving Chinooks.

I was not refering to this, I was refering to the house bomb that killed Delta in 2004.

---------- Post added at 01:35 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:24 AM ----------

In my opinion every war that is not direct homeland defense on own soil is in no way justifiable.

Could we have your explanation about what you would have done after 9/11 then?

(I'm not being sarcastic or anything - just wondered what you would have done in that situation?)

[Prydain 1]

I woke up this morning to this news and actually had to go vomit.

31 died guys, all of the SOAR operators as well as 7 ANA commandos.

Maybe someone should tell you about Darfur... Lets see if we can get you to choke on your own vomit!

[HyperU2 11]

Fuck Darfur. That's just a name that people who pretend to care bring up.

Edited August 8, 2011 by HyperU2

[Beagle 684]

I was not refering to this, I was refering to the house bomb that killed Delta in 2004.

---------- Post added at 01:35 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:24 AM ----------

Could we have your explanation about what you would have done after 9/11 then?

(I'm not being sarcastic or anything - just wondered what you would have done in that situation?)

)/11 was TERRORISM...you can't fight terrorism with military measures. Did Spain invade morooca and syria after the train bombing in Madrid? Or did Germany and the U.K. invade Lybia after Lockerby or the bombing of La Belle ?

No...because we in europe have to deal with terrorims of that kind (ETA, IRA, RAF) for a few decades longer and we know you can't win such problems with sending soldiers...you just make it worse that way.

Btw: terrorism brought the USA to the knees at the end, not the USA terrorism... the USA cant afford thr War aganst terrorisms any longer...technical knock out.

And it was clear that this would happen exactly that way years ago...but nobody cared.

Edited August 8, 2011 by Beagle

[maturin 12]

)/11 was TERRORISM...you can't fight terrorism with military measures. Did Spain invade morooca and syria after the train bombing in Madrid? Or did Germany and the U.K. invade Lybia after Lockerby or the bombing of La Belle ?

Spain and Britain invaded Afghanistan and Iraq with us after 9/11. Not so sure Western Europe is the example you want here.

[Beagle 684]

Spain and Britain invaded Afghanistan and Iraq with us after 9/11. Not so sure Western Europe is the example you want here.

Wrong...the USA forced NATO support by declaring a war is fought against the USA...and some countries realyl felt "forced" to join this mess...inducing talks abut leaving the NATO.

Tthe Bombing in spain was 911 days after 9/11 and was well after Spain joined the call to arms...and Lockerby was LYBIA...not al-quaeda...and it was 1988 not 2001.

[ralphwiggum 6]

Let's not go off topic here.

[Montanaro 0]

Let's not go off topic here.

Honestly, I think this thread has run it's course.

Outside of some bits of info about what actually happened, I don't see this thread staying honorable to the memory of these servicemen.

[Prydain 1]

Fuck Darfur.

It doesn't have an orifice. What now?

[HyperU2 11]

It doesn't have an orifice. What now?

How many do you have?

[STALKERGB 6]

Maybe someone should tell you about Darfur... Lets see if we can get you to choke on your own vomit!

Indeed it is always interesting to see how countries and the media react to the loss of life and the bias received for loss from your own country. IIRC during the Rwandan genocide there was a flesh eating virus in the UK that killed around 10 people and was all over the news while the genocide was barely mentioned if at all during the same period.

Fuck Darfur. That's just a name that people who pretend to care bring up.

Whether that is true or not, the fact is a hell of a lot of people have died there.

[niall0 10]

Can some of the military guys on here give me an explanation of how easy/likely it is to hit a chopper with an RPG, cos I've been trying it in Arma and it's not easy, even on a stationary chopper.

Also, why where they with Afghans? They might have been undercover Taliban opperatives or something, or may be even a cover for another Middle Eastern/Asia special forces also operating in this area. Maybe they were a suicide bomber who detonated, and it wasn't and RPG at all? Oh my, I think im on to something!

[icebreakr 3100]

I hate to derail from the topic, but who made that ignorant comment about Darfur? Truth of Darfur and Sudan - people are being slaugthered daily by government troops and nobody acts... 400,000 dead and UN is all about super-evil Libya, crazy world eh?

[maturin 12]

Wrong...the USA forced NATO support by declaring a war is fought against the USA...and some countries realyl felt "forced" to join this mess...inducing talks abut leaving the NATO.

The Iraq Coalition had nothing to do with NATO. Even the Bush administration couldn't claim to have already been attacked.

and Lockerby was LYBIA...not al-quaeda...and it was 1988 not 2001.

And Libya was bombed soon after.

UN is all about super-evil Libya, crazy world eh?

The simple fact about Libya that no one ever brings up, is that it's not being bombed because Ghaddafi is so terrible, but because he is so weak and his opponents have a chance. In almost all other situations, intervention of this sort is absolutely useless and counter-productive.

[ralphwiggum 6]

ok, do I really have to ban some people here?

edit: locking the thread for now. If you have relevant info to post, send me a PM.

Edited August 8, 2011 by RalphWiggum

[Montanaro 0]

Lock this please, it's almost disgracing their memories.