The Iraq Thread 2

[Tex -USMC- 0]

See, FS, that story isn't the only story, but Balschoiw decided to use it for purely beauracratic reasons- he had to find one that everybody would be happy with.

(10 points if this isn't too subtle for you)

[raedor 8]

u think that the US forces have been faced REAL resistance? erm, i think the only reason why some soldiers were captured and why some convoys were ambushed was the bad plan. do u know why russia wasnt able to conquer afghanistan? yes? this was resistance. or maybe u've ever heard vietnam?

[Goeth 0]

It was well planned because the war was won.

Maybe the war is not over yet since your troops are still dying there. And if your planning to stay there for decades i bet the resistance is getting bigger. Maybe Victor Troska should join and lead them to true free iraq

[raedor 8]

@ July 05 2003,03:34)]

It was well planned because the war was won.

Maybe the war is not over yet since your troops are still dying there. And if your planning to stay there for decades i bet the resistance is getting bigger. Maybe Victor Troska should join and lead them to true free iraq  

i'm sure if germany would attack the state of vatican and i would plan it (so it's very bad planned   ) we would win it!

[FSPilot 0]

u think that the US forces have been faced REAL resistance? erm, i think the only reason why some soldiers were captured and why some convoys were ambushed was the bad plan. do u know why russia wasnt able to conquer afghanistan? yes? this was resistance. or maybe u've ever heard vietnam?  

I think if they shoot back, it's resistance.

I also think if you're sitting and watching people die on TV you've got no right to say "Bah, that's nothing!"

[Schoeler 0]

Quote[/b] ]Then the use of huge isn't justified

Well it is in my opinion and certainly in the opinion of the families who lost their sons and fathers cause of ff.

I'm sure friendly fire seems huge to anyone on the recieving end, however from a historical perspective it was a relatively insignigficant factor given the ordinance expenditure and the number of ongoing and simultaneous combined arms combat operations.

Quote[/b] ]I know you will bash me to death, but as long as I am a soldier and as long as I have been on missions (violent ones), I have never experienced ff incidents amongst our troops.

I mentioned this somewhere before but whenever US troops hit the deck everybody ducks cause they are known for their high ff rate. You can ask other active soldiers if you don´t believe me.

Balsch, I'm not knocking your experience, I certainly cannot speak from my own and I respect your service, but how many operations could you have been involved in that took place on such a scale under hostile fire involving combined arms and multinational forces? The sheer scale and breadth of the Iraq war must dwarf anything you or any other European infantry soldier here has everbeen involved in. When that many diverse elements are playing their own part in the grand scheme of things, accidents are sure to happen. Considering the enormous number of American servicemen who performed admirably under fire, can't you consider your and your fellow servicemen's perspectives about American soldier's propensity for FF incidents to be a bit stereotypical? It's like accusing every French soldier you meet of cowardice because some units in the past cut and ran in the face of opposition. Its neither fair nor logical.

I'd call the resistance the coalition forces met moderate. We didn't encounter armored divisions on the assault, but we did fight armor to armor and their were large scale infantry assaults, urban combat, artillery and counter battery duels etc.. That's hardly light resistance.

[Longinius 1]

"I also think if you're sitting and watching people die on TV you've got no right to say "Bah, that's nothing!""

So you dont believe in freedom of speech?

[Schoeler 0]

I'd have to say that a person has every right to say such a thing at the risk of exposing themself to the world as a complete and total asshole. Recognition well deserved in my opinion.

[raedor 8]

u think that the US forces have been faced REAL resistance? erm, i think the only reason why some soldiers were captured and why some convoys were ambushed was the bad plan. do u know why russia wasnt able to conquer afghanistan? yes? this was resistance. or maybe u've ever heard vietnam?

I think if they shoot back, it's resistance.

I also think if you're sitting and watching people die on TV you've got no right to say "Bah, that's nothing!"

no, i dont say "bah, that's nothing", cos it's NOT nothing. but do u remember how many soldiers died in vietnam and how many died in the last two months? dont forget the measure!

[FallenPaladin 0]

Well, the dying of US soldiers on daily base in Iraq will continue and continue. Get used to it. Also the numbers of KIA servicemen will rise. It`s just the question how long Pres. Bush can keep up with his policy before the US nation looses it`s faith in him.

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]but how many operations could you have been involved in that took place on such a scale under hostile fire involving combined arms and multinational forces?  The sheer scale and breadth of the Iraq war must dwarf anything you or any other European infantry soldier here has everbeen involved in.

6 of the missions I have been part of were major operations.

There were a lot more nationalities and different troop types involved than there are in Iraq. We had 26 different nationalities in Africa once. All with different abilities to communicate and knowledge of english language. Hostile fire is nothing special. Or do you think blue helmets have a wildcard against enemy fire ?

Also it would have been much more likely to have FF incidents in the operations I have been part of than in Iraq.

Why ? Because I spent most of the missions in urban scenarios along with a multinational troop with soldiers from Nigeria, Malaysia, India, Italy, Pakistan, Netherlands, Sweden, Norway, USA, Russia.... This is what I call a mixed contingent. This is where it becomes likely to be a victim of FF. Cramped scenarios are the things I am personally afraid of, not the long range fighting.

The coaltion forces had a 24 h air coverage and surveilance running in Iraq. The CentOp has never been more modern and high-end than it was in Iraq. But even with all the electronics and surveilance systems FF was and is a factor in Iraq.

I personally wont forget the moment when we were heading for Dschallalabad  with a convoi of 7km length, all UN vehicles, with some italian B1 centauros. We had problems because the Brown&Roots trucks broke down every 2 meters and we were attacked by technicals and mortar fire all the way to Dschallalabad. We ran into several roadblocks and really had little fun, so we called for air assistance from Moga as our own UHD´s were only armed with machine guns. They sent us 2 Apache´s and a Kiowa. First thing the Apache´s did was to track the italian apc´s. We really had a hard time to convince them that italians are good guys.

At least in this case  

The convoi setup and vehicle list was given to pilots prior to their mission. They knew that there were italian tanks among us and these tanks had no white paintjob, but they didn´t care much. They wanted to attack them. The credits that they didn´t attack them go to my former boss General Reinhardt. He yelled into his headset and sent the pilots back to Moga. They just didn´t get that camouflaged tanks can be friendly. So the ladies flew back to the USS Inchon and we all felt better that way.

This is only one experience I have made with US troops in combat. There are a lot of others.

B1 Centauro

pic from the mission

EDIT: My last post for a while. I´m going on maneuver and training for congo this sunday. I´ll be back end of the next week.

[Placebo 29]

Balschoiw interesting post, always good to hear it from the horse's mouth so to speak

[FSPilot 0]

Longingus

Quote[/b] ]So you dont believe in freedom of speech?

You have the right to do it, but you're not right in doing it.

raedor

Quote[/b] ]no, i dont say "bah, that's nothing", cos it's NOT nothing. but do u remember how many soldiers died in vietnam and how many died in the last two months? dont forget the measure!

You're belittling it by what you've seen on TV. Just because vietnam was worse doesn't make this a cakewalk. People are still dying.

[Tex -USMC- 0]

Longingus

Quote[/b] ]So you dont believe in freedom of speech?

You have the right to do it, but you're not right in doing it.

[FSPilot 0]

Maybe you should read what I said again.

"You have the right to do it"

then...

"but you're not right in doing it"

So telling someone they're wrong is impurging on their freedom?

[Warin 0]

Maybe you should read what I said again.

"You have the right to do it"

then...

"but you're not right in doing it"

So telling someone they're wrong is impurging on their freedom?  

Pretty much. Saying 'You can do this, but you wouldnt be right to do it' is tantamount to just saying 'You cant do it, it's wrong'

Freedom of speech means being able to say what you want when you want. And so long as you are not slandering someone or inciting illegal acts, there should be no negative repercussions.

And I think you meant impugning...

[Schoeler 0]

I'd call trying to take the credit for the troop's accomplishments away from them because you are politically against the war a cheap shot.  It's petty, vindictive and generally lame.  Misplaced anger is recognized for what it is.  American forces pulled off an armored assault into hostile territory faster and with less casualties than has ever been done before.  I doubt that any other nation in the world is capable of replicating that feat or of achieving that degree of success doing it.  The FF incidents in this war were minimal compared to previous wars, and the civilian casualties were also minimal when assessing the amount of ordinance that was expended.  Baghdad was taken without the urban nightmare that all the gloom and doom anti-war types predicted.  Trying to make those accomplishments seem less than what they are, denying the credit where credit is due, chalking it all up to luck, lack of resistance, or whatever is just pure fucking horseshit.  It shows me that those people who do so are smallminded and weak and can't be magnanimous to someone they disagree with.  Is it really the troops fault that the war took place?  Do you have to slam them?  What will that really accomplish?  Go after our politicans all you want, go after the mentality of the American people even, but don't minimize the efforts of the people who put their lives and futures on the line to do their duty.  They deserve more.

[Warin 0]

Schoeler has hit the nail on the head.

No matter how much we deplore the weasely (Rumsfeld) underhanded (Cheney) moronic (Bush) politicos who brought this war about, I dont think we should be running down those who serve.  After all, they have to come home, and I dont think anyone wants to see a repeat of the way servicemen were treated after Vietnam.

I disagree that we should overlook FF, although.  American doctrine seems to be a little too 'shoot first, ask questions later' at times.   Whether this is a problem with individuals or with indoctrination and policy.. it has to be looked at.  After all, I dont think the Brits were shooting at Americans.  Or canadians at americans in Afghanistan.

[Jinef 2]

I don't like to admit but yeah, the war went better than predicted really, i hoped the Iraqis would have put up better resistance than that, it seems so cowardly to have you information minister assuring the civvies of success (how they could believe him is beyond me, i'm sure very many knew it was a load of bollocks and kept low) while Saddam and anyone important was out of the country for a very long time before. The US army performed as well as or on the same level as the first Gulf war in my opinion, they smashed all opposition any way possible. FF was quite low compared to Vietnam where troops were 'fragging' their officers and intentionally killing soldiers they didn't like much let alone mistaken fire. Their losses were not much lower this time (well, they'll soon overtake the mark anyway as this gangfuck isn't going to end soon) and still basic errors were made e.g. If this old hardware in most modern fighters fails what happens? Well first they are considered enemy, even if they are well within Kuwaiti at high alttitude with no detectable weapon systems activated, then a patriot missile battery's computer system decides (with the same mentality of the programmers most likely) decides to go on a jolly and launch missiles at this unknown aircraft, no AWACS IFF check was done and even if it had been the Patriot system is fully automated and it would be hard to stop it firing.

I still say the US is a formidable force when acting on it's own as all it's forces have a fairly good coordination level, but try to combine it with a miltary far less competent and with outdated equipment (us Brits) it has problems coordinating actions. Also i think the personal level of competence of some of the operators in the US forces has to be questioned, how a A10 did a low pass over a warrior APC displaying a 6ft wide Union Jack made easily recognisable with highly vivid colours and then attacked is beyond me. How could anyone with at least a single Neuron do that? I personnally am begginning to think it was intentional.

Nice post Balschoiw, also please tell me how to pronounce your name!

[Jinef 2]

The difference between British and American military policy.

Caption - UK forces patrol in Jungle around Sierra Leone, the force was sent to establish order between the factions in the area.

(Google - UK Soldier)

No Caption

Suspected Caption - I will defend America against all foreign scum, what a lovely isolationist policy.

(Google -US Soldier)

[DracoPaladore 0]

What I am wondering is where the rest of the Iraqi army is. I heard they had about 33,000 soldiers when the war started. About few thousand left, leaving about probobly 25,000 to 29. But where are they? As well as the Iraqi armoured units.

Did they just disappear in the desert with Crazy Husseiny?

[Tex -USMC- 0]

What I am wondering is where the rest of the Iraqi army is. I heard they had about 33,000 soldiers when the war started. About few thousand left, leaving about probobly 25,000 to 29. But where are they? As well as the Iraqi armoured units.

Did they just disappear in the desert with Crazy Husseiny?

They're safe at home with their families.

[ralphwiggum 6]

that's a good question too.

during war, US CENTCOM claimed that about 60% of Hammurabi and Medina divisions were wiped out by the time US troops entered Baghdad. that's a pretty much a big number.

I guess a lot of soldiers said, "eh, screw this - I'm going back to my family", and it is plausible that conscripts considered dying for Hussein not worth it and deserted as coalition forces closed in. and of course, some remaining loyalists also could have faded into general population and is conducting current guerilla warfare.

[FallenPaladin 0]

Also i think the personal level of competence of some of the operators in the US forces has to be questioned, how a A10 did a low pass over a warrior APC displaying a 6ft wide Union Jack made easily recognisable with highly vivid colours and then attacked is beyond me. How could anyone with at least a single Neuron do that? I personnally am begginning to think it was intentional.

Many of the americans seem to be bloody trigger-happy. The A10 even did a second attack run against the british tank. In addition with Balschoiw`s story where the gunships wanted to attack the friendly tanks because they weren`t white, even after being told that those ARE friendly, remains a very bad taste. I guess other people who had the "honor" to serve alongside US troops in heavy hardware (gunboats, fighter planes, tanks) could come up with a lot of stories like the ones above. Seems like the US military leadership forces it`s troops into a very questionable training after which the need to kill is larger than logic.

Funny about that is that the pilots in the gunboats and fighter planes or the tank crews are dead keen on killing because it`s kinda easy and videogamish from inside those vehicles while the US infantry troops are killing way more than needed just because they are scared shitless (urban warfare, any Iraqi could be hostile, guerilla trauma) .

Well, not all of the US troops are nuts, of course, but the group of the whackos unfortunately seems to be larger  than in other country`s armed forces.

If I have to serve alongside american troops in the next years I`ll be very careful. Not only because of hostiles. If US troops would shoot my men or myself I would give it one try (if not already gunned down) to stop them by using radio or whatever else, after that I would return fire. An eye for an eye. It`s not right that guys like that A10 killer are happily living on after causing so much sadness and tragedy. Murder suspects are grilled on the electric chair in the USA for less reasons.  

[USSoldier11B 0]

Quote[/b] ]Suspected Caption - I will defend America against all foreign scum, what a lovely isolationist policy.

Yeah and you're first on the list you Anti-American terrorist sympathizer.