Thumbs up to the Aussie F18 Hornet pilot

[crocodile deathroll]

I will give my thumbs up to the Aussie pilot who disobeyed the American orders to bomb a dubious target.

BTW I do support our Aussie troops but I do not support the Australian government for sending them to the Bush Abomination's war. I think bring them home and we all welcome them here with open arms before they get shot down by trigger happy Americans.

I know full well how Australians will react the friendly fxxxups like this one (http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,6175368%255E1702,00.html) I don't think the Brits will be too pleased

time for Brits to get mad:mad:

[Always Free]

Originally posted by crocodile deathroll
I will give my thumbs up to the Aussie pilot who disobeyed the American orders to bomb a dubious target.

BTW I do support our Aussie troops but I do not support the Australian government for sending them to the Bush Abomination's war. I think bring them home and we all welcome them here with open arms before they get shot down by trigger happy Americans.

I Know full well how Australians will react the friendly fxxxups like this one (http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,6175368%255E1702,00.html) I don't think the Brit will be too pleased - time for Brits to get mad

Geez, people get killed in wars don't you know. Accidents happen and you know that as well as I. It's always a disaster when something like this happens.
I agree and give my thumbs up to the pilot for using his on the spot knowledge/suspicions concerning this target. He chose not to bomb this target because of his doubts not because he thought he would just say "up yours yanks" and not take action.
And your "trigger happy Americans" comment is out of line.

[Reginald]

Originally posted by crocodile deathroll

I know full well how Australians will react the friendly fxxxups like this one (http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,6175368%255E1702,00.html) I don't think the Brits will be too pleased

time for Brits to get mad:mad:

How typical.

And may I add pathetic.

Get mad? Why? Its a tragedy yes. Its an accident, yes.

These things happen.

People with extreme bias like yourself, having failed to stop the action are now seeking to stir it up as much as possible.

Not enough Iraqi civilian deaths for you to make your point? Falling back on trying to create ill feeling between the UK and US?

Wont work........sorry.

[Rusty_the_boy_robot]

Originally posted by Reginald


How typical.

And may I add pathetic.

Get mad? Why? Its a tragedy yes. Its an accident, yes.

These things happen.

People with extreme bias like yourself, having failed to stop the action are now seeking to stir it up as much as possible.

Not enough Iraqi civilian deaths for you to make your point? Falling back on trying to create ill feeling between the UK and US?

Wont work........sorry.


Good boy, now fetch me my slippers.

[crocodile deathroll]

Originally posted by Always Free


Geez, people get killed in wars don't you know. Accidents happen and you know that as well as I. It's always a disaster when something like this happens.
I agree and give my thumbs up to the pilot for using his on the spot knowledge/suspicions concerning this target. He chose not to bomb this target because of his doubts not because he thought he would just say "up yours yanks" and not take action.
And your "trigger happy Americans" comment is out of line.

A British fighter plane is so distinguishable from an Iraqi Scud how did they make such a stupid stuffup?
And unfortunately with the American gun culture there are some not all and I am sure there are many Americans who are very sensible with guns and I applaud them, but some of these trigger happy Americans would find American military a very attractive career move for them and they a looking for only the slightest excuse to fire deadly rockets and shoot only on the vague suspicion that it is enemy fire. Which is probably why the Australian pilot did not follow orders. You rarely if ever here of anyone killed by Australian or British friendly fire.

[Reginald]

Originally posted by Rusty_the_boy_robot



Good boy, now fetch me my slippers.

Erudite and thoughtful analysis and comment.

Well done.

As you learn, you will find that the next level, if you really stick at it, is name calling. I look forward to seeing you master that.



:rolleyes:

[Zep]

Reginald: Get mad? Why? Its a tragedy yes. Its an accident, yes.

Reggie, old boy, I note from your sig. that you are currently "in a nice armchair near London UK". Having a quiet brandy and cigar while some of your countrymen accidentally get the chop from a trigger-happy Yank in the old Iraqi-land, wot wot?

If they were any countryman of mine, I'd be pretty mad about it! Doesn't matter about the desirability or otherwise of the war, this is nothing to get blase about. WHY should "these things happen"? Yes it IS "pathetic", from the word "pathos", which is also the basis of the word "sympathy". Of which you seem to have none for these flyers nor their families. Nor even for the poor Yank who probably feels utterly mortified at pulling the trigger (or whatever you do to launch a Patriot).

Thick skin, thick head. Read up on General Haig.

And in the absence of details to the contrary, it does appear that the Coalition of the Willing has so far managed to take out far more of its own people than enemy forces have.

These things should NOT be happening.

Zep

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by crocodile deathroll
I will give my thumbs up to the Aussie pilot who disobeyed the American orders to bomb a dubious target.

BTW I do support our Aussie troops but I do not support the Australian government for sending them to the Bush Abomination's war. I think bring them home and we all welcome them here with open arms before they get shot down by trigger happy Americans.

I know full well how Australians will react the friendly fxxxups like this one (http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,6175368%255E1702,00.html) I don't think the Brits will be too pleased

time for Brits to get mad:mad:

maybe he wasn't high on speed.

[Rusty_the_boy_robot]

Originally posted by Reginald


Erudite and thoughtful analysis and comment.

Well done.


Thank you. I've been working on my wit lately, I believe I'm somewhere between a razor and a butterknife. Much better then the rock I was of old.

Thankfully other posters take you seriously and have responded so.

How typical.

And may I add pathetic.

Get mad? Why? Its a tragedy yes. Its an accident, yes.

These things happen.

People with extreme bias like yourself, having failed to stop the action are now seeking to stir it up as much as possible.

Not enough Iraqi civilian deaths for you to make your point? Falling back on trying to create ill feeling between the UK and US?

Wont work........sorry.

Accidents happen. Like when some misguided child shoots himself in the head. Why get mad? These things just happen. It's not like we could PREVENT them. God forbid any other pilots exercise caution like this horrible Australian pilot. Why I bet the potential victim's family is writing nasty letters about what a bad bad man that Aussie is right now. Maybe you could get out of your chair and help.

[Hypocolius]

Originally posted by crocodile deathroll
You rarely if ever here of anyone killed by Australian or British friendly fire.

Absolute rubbish, sadly. Blue on blue fatalities are not common in any army, but they do happen. There were several well documented incidents in the Falklands, not to mention N. Ireland, and large-scale exercises even in peac-time often incur fatalities. With any large scale action involving live ammunition there are going to be accidents. All that can be done is to try and minimise those accidents, but I doubt they can be done away with altogether.

Just to back myself up, a quote from the BBC: Figures show that between 1996 and 1997 five soldiers were killed on active service, but 10 were killed on exercises. from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/639682.stm

[Reginald]

Originally posted by Zep


Reggie, old boy, I note from your sig. that you are currently "in a nice armchair near London UK". Having a quiet brandy and cigar while some of your countrymen accidentally get the chop from a trigger-happy Yank in the old Iraqi-land, wot wot?

If they were any countryman of mine, I'd be pretty mad about it! Doesn't matter about the desirability or otherwise of the war, this is nothing to get blase about. WHY should "these things happen"? Yes it IS "pathetic", from the word "pathos", which is also the basis of the word "sympathy". Of which you seem to have none for these flyers nor their families. Nor even for the poor Yank who probably feels utterly mortified at pulling the trigger (or whatever you do to launch a Patriot).

Thick skin, thick head. Read up on General Haig.

And in the absence of details to the contrary, it does appear that the Coalition of the Willing has so far managed to take out far more of its own people than enemy forces have.

These things should NOT be happening.

Zep

On the contrary, I said it was a tragedy with all the associated feelings that go with that sentiment.

I was not the one who has cynically chosen to use this terrible event to make some kind of misguided, devisive political point.

[Reginald]

Originally posted by Rusty_the_boy_robot



Accidents happen. Like when some misguided child shoots himself in the head. Why get mad? These things just happen. It's not like we could PREVENT them.

What planet are you on?

Of course you can prevent some accidents!

And the way you do that (unfortunately) is to learn a lesson and try to ensure that it dosnt happen again.

You have obviously never worked in any industry or environment where life threatening accidents are a possibilty.

And as for this ........

God forbid any other pilots exercise caution like this horrible Australian pilot. Why I bet the potential victim's family is writing nasty letters about what a bad bad man that Aussie is right now. Maybe you could get out of your chair and help.

UK pilots in this conflict stated on TV at the start of the conflict that if they were in any doubt as to the validity of a target they would NOT fire upon it. So this commendable action of this Australian Pilot are not unique.

The rest of this comment is just emotional posturing, based on nothing.

[The Fool]

Originally posted by crocodile deathroll


A British fighter plane is so distinguishable from an Iraqi Scud how did they make such a stupid stuffup?

Not a decision the operator can make. They have rules of engagement. I'm no expert on patriot missile systems but I assume they are like all the others, when the threat hits a certain parameter the system engages the target. This could quite easily have been the sole fault of the Aircraft. It would be unfair to suggest this was the cause without further information, just as unfair as assuming it was a patriot missile operator at fault.

And unfortunately with the American gun culture there are some not all and I am sure there are many Americans who are very sensible with guns and I applaud them, but some of these trigger happy Americans would find American military a very attractive career move for them and they a looking for only the slightest excuse to fire deadly rockets and shoot only on the vague suspicion that it is enemy fire.

Uninformed rant. All the American forces in this show are professional soldiers. Equal to the best you would find anywhere. Triggerhappy cowboys are weeded out early in the training cycle...In both the Australian and American military....


Which is probably why the Australian pilot did not follow orders. You rarely if ever here of anyone killed by Australian or British friendly fire.

No... The Australian pilot did not disobey any order. The Aircraft commander ALWAYS makes the final judgement on release of weapons.

Originally posted by crocodile deathroll

time for Brits to get mad:mad: [/B]

The British armed forces are well aware that if they go anywhere near Americans in battle that they are likely to get accidentally attacked by a bunch of trigger-happy amateurs. Sad, but true. The US armed forces have a very bad reputation in this regard.

NB : I have heard this opinion directly from a number of British army personnel, this week.

[Always Free]

Well out of 250,000 troops (all armed) there have been surprisingly few mistakes. I guess if the Americans made no mistakes they would be hated even more hey?

BTW, They haven't mistakenly killed any Australian soldiers.

[Rusty_the_boy_robot]

Originally posted by Reginald


What planet are you on?

Of course you can prevent some accidents!

And the way you do that (unfortunately) is to learn a lesson and try to ensure that it dosnt happen again.



WRONG!! He's a bad soldier and will probably be court martialed. If he's not then he should. You don't disobey orders in the military. That's what those godless COMMUNISTS are always!!! saying we should do. DONT YOU WATCH THE NEWS OF HIPPIE LIBERAL SAN FRANCISCO.!!????

You have obviously never worked in any industry or environment where life threatening accidents are a possibilty.

wrong again buddy. Jeez, your good at this! I work in law enforcement and if I was pointing my gun at people randomly it could go off and kill someone. BUT IM NOT THAT STUPID.

And as for this ........



UK pilots in this conflict stated on TV at the start of the conflict that if they were in any doubt as to the validity of a target they would NOT fire upon it. So this commendable action of this Australian Pilot are not unique.

The rest of this comment is just emotional posturing, based on nothing.

Hey don't shoot! This isn't the military or anything (end sarcasm) :eek: :D :D :D

[Troll]

Well if the reports are true there's a great chance that the plane's transponder either failed or malfunctioned and therefore did not identify itself as a friendly aircraft to the Patriot system which then took it as an incoming missle.

If this is true then I'd be mad at the ground crew for that aircraft if anyone at all. So let's not blame the American's just yet.

Also, we have more friendly fire accidents than anyone else because we have more engagements. It's really just the law of averages. More guns than anyone more homicide by guns, more cars on the road, more accidents, etc., etc., etc...................

[Reginald]

Rusty_the_boy_robot

WRONG!! He's a bad soldier and will probably be court martialed. If he's not then he should. You don't disobey orders in the military. That's what those godless COMMUNISTS are always!!! saying we should do. DONT YOU WATCH THE NEWS OF HIPPIE LIBERAL SAN FRANCISCO.!!????

There are a lot of reasons that could have caused this, not ALL of them would lead to it being the fault of the guy manning the patriot system. So untill we have all the facts I suggest you stop "knee-jerking". Innocent until proven guilty.


wrong again buddy. Jeez, your good at this! I work in law enforcement and if I was pointing my gun at people randomly it could go off and kill someone. BUT IM NOT THAT STUPID.

Who, in this case has pointed anything at anyone in a random way??

Do you have ANY evidence to suggest that anyone did anything so reckless?

My point was that you seem to have no idea of the processes by which risks of accidents are calculated and proper and prudent precautions taken to avoid such. But then you seem think that either a thing is safe or some loony is waving something around in a frivolous manner, black and white.

Sorry its not that simple, discuss it with someone who is involved in any workplace safety project.

[Checkmite]

Indeed...Patriot missile defense systems aren't operated by people with binoculars who have the luxury of looking at the target to see what it is. By the time one could visually identify any missile, it would be seconds away from impact and stopping it would be impossible.

I find it very likely that the failure of the transponder or the IFF (Identification, Friend or Foe) system on the aircraft may be at fault. A flying object appears on radar, it doesn't emit friendly radio identification codes, so the Patriot locks on and fires. It wasn't a personnel mistake, it was probably an equipment malfunction.

And indeed, the pilot of any aircraft has the final say on all weapons runs. Pilots are never ordered to fire, they are cleared to fire. If the pilot, once cleared, determines that the target is unsafe, or that there has been a mistake in target selection, or that unnecessary risk would be taken, he is perfectly within his rights - and indeed, expected - to refrain from firing or dropping his ordinance. If it turns out the pilot was in error, they can always send another sortie.

[arcticpenguin]

I haven't read anything yet about an Aussie pilot rejecting a target. Do you have a link for this? I do not watch TV.

Thanks,

[arcticpenguin]

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/world/iraq/2003-03-20-weapon-facts_x.htm

This is a rundown on some current U.S. weapon systems.

RE the M1-A2 Abrams battle tank: " * The latest versions have been fitted with devices to protect them from "friendly fire."
"

1) intersting that someone should think this is necessary.

2) Is this aircraft style IFF they are talking about, or something else?

[Mike B.]

Remember arguments by sterotype are always effective:rolleyes:

Thankfully, Fool, a veteran himself (i.e. someone who actually knows what he is talking about rather than spewing hatefilled rants with sterotypes) adds some much needed light.

[LTC8K6]

There seems to be a misconception here that Patriot is not supposed to be used against aircraft. Aircraft are are one of it's primary targets. It can be used in several modes, one of which requires no operator to engage a target. It can engage multiple simultaneous targets also.

There is not enough info available to say who's fault this was.

Anyone who thinks protection from friendly fire should not be necessary during wars is talking out of their a#se.

Oooops!

· Falklands In 1982, a patrol of Royal Marines from 45 Commando unit engaged one of its mortar sections, wrongly identified as an enemy unit, killing five.

[LTC8K6]

Just to clarify, the mistake was in id'ing an allied aircraft as a threat aircraft. No one mistook a Tornado for a missile.

[crocodile deathroll]

Originally posted by Hypocolius


Absolute rubbish, sadly. Blue on blue fatalities are not common in any army, but they do happen. There were several well documented incidents in the Falklands, not to mention N. Ireland, and large-scale exercises even in peac-time often incur fatalities. With any large scale action involving live ammunition there are going to be accidents. All that can be done is to try and minimise those accidents, but I doubt they can be done away with altogether.

Just to back myself up, a quote from the BBC: Figures show that between 1996 and 1997 five soldiers were killed on active service, but 10 were killed on exercises. from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/639682.stm

Typically during the days Maggie Thatcher leadership of course and she was some kind of G W Bush in drag

[crocodile deathroll]

Originally posted by arcticpenguin
I haven't read anything yet about an Aussie pilot rejecting a target. Do you have a link for this? I do not watch TV.

Thanks,

Sorry, I never thought to provide a link so here it is (http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/03/23/1048354475967.html) and you can read all about it.

[LTC8K6]

It is common for pilots, forward observers, etc., to reject a target. This probably happens many times every day.

This is because the people on the scene sometimes have better info or a better look at the "target". It is common to defer to the person who is actually on the scene.

There is nothing special here, nor are Austrailians any more careful about targets than anybody else.

[Hypocolius]

Originally posted by crocodile deathroll


Typically during the days Maggie Thatcher leadership of course and she was some kind of G W Bush in drag

What has that got to do with it? Are you suggesting that Maggie was somehow involved in the SAS shooting dead a couple of SBS on the Falklands? I know she was a bit of a witch, but that's taking it a bit far!

Soldiers have been accidentally killed by their own side, in war and peace, ever since Ug accidently hit his brother Og over the head with a tree when he was attempting to ambush Grunt from the neighbouring valley. The only difference these days is that the weapons used are infinitely more potent, and they happen on our TV screens.

[Always Free]

LTC8K6-"There is nothing special here, nor are Austrailians any more careful about targets than anybody else."

I've noticed a couple of people misspelling the word, Australians.;)

[BillyTK]

...and in an interesting reversal of events, an F-16 fighter jet shot at a Patriot missile defence battery near Najaf in central Iraq today. Accident or just being careful? Source (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2883171.stm)

Btw, scanning through the thread list I read this title as "Thumbs up the ass of Hornet pilot". Doh!

[LTC8K6]

We have patriot batteries in Najaf? That's a good sign. Pilots probably did not expect them to be far inside Iraq already.

Always Free - merely a typo. :p

[mbp]

Originally posted by LTC8K6
Just to clarify, the mistake was in id'ing an allied aircraft as a threat aircraft. No one mistook a Tornado for a missile.

According to this (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,5944-622997,00.html) article in The Times, the Tornado was indeed mistaken for a missile.

The missile had locked on to the second Tornado after the Patriot battery radar indicated that the jet was an Iraqi missile. The US lieutenant at the Patriot battery on the Kuwait/Iraq border was faced with a split-second decision. She pressed the button to launch the surface-to-air missile, which exploded into the Tornado as it prepared to land.
and

Essentially, a software “glitch” allowed the Patriot radar to read the Tornado as a missile, despite the jet emitting its own individual signature. The US lieutenant only realised the mistake when she had no corroboration of an incoming missile from other monitoring locations.

[rikzilla]

Originally posted by Zep


Reggie, old boy, I note from your sig. that you are currently "in a nice armchair near London UK". Having a quiet brandy and cigar while some of your countrymen accidentally get the chop from a trigger-happy Yank in the old Iraqi-land, wot wot?

If they were any countryman of mine, I'd be pretty mad about it! Doesn't matter about the desirability or otherwise of the war, this is nothing to get blase about. WHY should "these things happen"? Yes it IS "pathetic", from the word "pathos", which is also the basis of the word "sympathy". Of which you seem to have none for these flyers nor their families. Nor even for the poor Yank who probably feels utterly mortified at pulling the trigger (or whatever you do to launch a Patriot).

Thick skin, thick head. Read up on General Haig.

And in the absence of details to the contrary, it does appear that the Coalition of the Willing has so far managed to take out far more of its own people than enemy forces have.

These things should NOT be happening.

Zep

By your own admission you don't even know what end of the tube the round comes out of there matey. Why don't you keep your lefty ill-informed opinions to yourself?

There are many reasons this may have happened....from human error to mechanical failure. You don't know what happened, all you can do is cast aspertions and blame. You are a speculating *********.

So, who are we to get mad at? The Patriot officer? Why? Perhaps the Brit plane was sending the wrong transponder code. Would that make it their fault? No...perhaps their transponder was tuned right, but not functioning properly...if that's the case there is NO ONE TO EVEN BLAME!! Can you imagine such a thing! :eek: the no one to blame scenario kinda plunges a spanner into your speculative BS doesn't it?

You betray your own lefty bias by speculating on assigning fault in order to attempt to split the coalition. Such speculation is baseless....wait for the results of the investigation before you decide to hang someone there, Dundee. Have another Foster's and go protest somewhere....friggin' idiot.

-zilla

[LTC8K6]

Thanks, mbp. Like I said, no one mistook a tornado for a missile. The gist of the posts seemed to be that American soldiers were too stupid to tell the difference.

For various reasons, I doubt that story is very accurate, though.

[mbp]

Originally posted by LTC8K6
Thanks, mbp. Like I said, no one mistook a tornado for a missile.

No person mistook a Tornado for a missile, no. A computer did.



For various reasons, I doubt that story is very accurate, though.
Why? It's in a "serious" newspaper and provides actual quotes.

Do you doubt that:

Colonel Tim Glaeser, in charge of the Patriot batteries that defend Kuwait, made a personal visit to the Tornado base at Ali al-Salem yesterday to apologise to the RAF detachment commander, Group Captain Simon Dobb, and to pass his condolences to the families of the dead crew.

or that this quote is accurate:

Group Captain Dobb said: “Without pre-judging a board of inquiry, we have resolved certain issues to obtain cast-iron guarantees that a mistake like this cannot happen again. The Americans have made a rapid and prudent re-evaluation of Patriot rules of engagement. I can assure my crews that there is no danger of inadvertent engagement.”

and while

The RAF commander was not prepared to go into details of what action had been taken to ensure that the mistake would not happen again.

Essentially, a software “glitch” allowed the Patriot radar to read the Tornado as a missile, despite the jet emitting its own individual signature. The US lieutenant only realised the mistake when she had no corroboration of an incoming missile from other monitoring locations.

is not a direct quote, do you have any reason to doubt that this is basically what the journalist was told by the RAF?

The ABC (Australian) report the same thing (http://www.abc.net.au/news/justin/nat/newsnat-25mar2003-79.htm).

[jj]

Originally posted by UndercoverElephant


The British armed forces are well aware that if they go anywhere near Americans in battle that they are likely to get accidentally attacked by a bunch of trigger-happy amateurs. Sad, but true. The US armed forces have a very bad reputation in this regard.

NB : I have heard this opinion directly from a number of British army personnel, this week.

Was it Field Marshall Montgomery you heard it from, by any chance, UCE? Or maybe Lady Astor?

[LTC8K6]

Mbp, it doesn't sound quite right to me.

This was the lead aircraft of a formation. Why would patriot "decide" that only one of the Tornados was an Iraqi missile? Patriot is capable of tracking and attacking multiple targets simultaneously. Why would only one of the tornados "look" like an Iraqi missile. Why didn't it engage all of the tornados?

If patriot could confuse a formation of aircraft and a missile, I would think we would have had a lot more incidents.

I am inclined to believe the patriot system misread or could not read one of the tornados transponders and decided it was a threat aircraft. That could explain the launch of only a single missile. That would also explain the quick solution.

I don't think the 2 articles are the same. One attributes something to an American colonel regarding a software glitch, and one doesn't. I find it hard to believe a software glitch in Patriot's recognition abilities that caused it to be confused between a group of tornados and a single missile could be resolved so quickly to everyone's satisfaction.

We don't really know exactly what happened, but it is certainly our fault, not the aircraft or the pilot's.

I could be wrong, of course. :p I have read a lot about patriot, but I have no actual experience with it.

That Dobb fellow seems to indicate that a simple change in the ROE fixed the problem. That indicates to me that there wasn't anything wrong with the missile battery at all.

Well, I suppose the person on the button could have misread what the system was telling her. That's an easy fix too......

It's just that it's not so simple as earlier posters have tried to make it seem. Keep in mind that the grenade / M16 attack by our own guy was going on at the same time as this incident, further distracting everyone.

Note also the very simple error the Brits made that caused them to be unaware that they were missing an aircraft. If the pilots had survived, the Brits weren't going to be looking for them for a a while. A simple error that might have been disastrous. This is not to slight the British, as it is a common error made all the time by nearly everyone. Failure to communicate.

Since this thread started with a comment only meant to belittle American troops, I should really not have fed the troll, and will not join such threads in the future. Some folks here don't like America or George Bush or something, and they just can't get past that, or keep it out of their posts. People are going to believe what they want, and I really can't change that. (Not directed at you, mbp)

Good luck to all of the coalition forces, all of whom are doing a great job in my opinion.

Up yours! To those who stood by and did nothing but whine.

[mbp]

Originally posted by LTC8K6

Since this thread started with a comment only meant to belittle American troops, I should really not have fed the troll, and will not join such threads in the future. Some folks here don't like America or George Bush or something, and they just can't get past that, or keep it out of their posts. People are going to believe what they want, and I really can't change that. (Not directed at you, mbp)

Fair enough. I can understand how some of the comments made here could but you in a "defensive" mood. I just thought that the article provided more information about the incident than I had previously seen anywhere, but of course no conclusions should be made before we know the result of the official inquiry.

Mistakes have been and will be made by all sides, and as I'm neither American nor British I'd like to think of myself as "neutral" in these incidents.

And no friendly-fire is likely to involve the Danish "forces" as they are staying at a safe distance. :)

[Skeptical Greg]

Originally posted by crocodile deathroll
I will give my thumbs up to the Aussie pilot who disobeyed the American orders to bomb a dubious target.

BTW I do support our Aussie troops but I do not support the Australian government for sending them to the Bush Abomination's war. I think bring them home and we all welcome them here with open arms before they get shot down by trigger happy Americans.

I know full well how Australians will react the friendly fxxxups like this one (http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,6175368%255E1702,00.html) I don't think the Brits will be too pleased

time for Brits to get mad:mad:


Hear ! Hear !


Need to save those bombs for some deserving Iraqi Soldiers!!:)

[Jocko]

Originally posted by UndercoverElephant


The British armed forces are well aware that if they go anywhere near Americans in battle that they are likely to get accidentally attacked by a bunch of trigger-happy amateurs. Sad, but true. The US armed forces have a very bad reputation in this regard.

NB : I have heard this opinion directly from a number of British army personnel, this week.

I find it very hard to believe that anyone in any nation's armed forces would communicate with the likes of you, except perhaps with the sharp end of a broken bottle.

These "trigger happy" amatuers have swept through 80% or Iraq in a week. You'd do well to stuff your ignorance in a box until the real fighting is done.

[arcticpenguin]

Originally posted by crocodile deathroll
I think bring them home and we all welcome them here with open arms before they get shot down by trigger happy Americans.

I know full well how Australians will react the friendly fxxxups like this one (http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,6175368%255E1702,00.html) I don't think the Brits will be too pleased

time for Brits to get mad:mad:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,6190208%255E1702,00.html

TWO British tank crew have been killed in Iraq after they were fired on by comrades in another British tank.

Neener neener.

[LTC8K6]

I think we'd better not get our Abrams tanks in between any British units.

The Brits should have rejected the target.

I wonder if they need an IFF system?

Perhaps they should ask those dreadful Americans?

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:



Really, this is just a tragic accident that happens all too often in the fog of war.

BTW, the British do have a sophisticated IFF system in the tanks to prevent this.

[Kthulhu]

Not to trivialize the tragic deaths that occur from friendly fire but in reality the fog of war eventually bites any armed forces in the ass. It is best summed up with a simple phrase: Poop Occurs.

~The thing That Should Not Be

[Nately]

Something about this article feels more like patriotic backslapping than solid facts. Based on this passage, it sounds like the Australian pilot did something unusual.

"In this case the pilots made that assessment - decided that the information didn't support the justification for the use of the weapon and aborted the mission," Brigadier Hannan said.

But when you consider this quote that came before all that, it sounds to me like the pilot got over the target area, couldn't find it, and thus decided not to try and guess where it was.

But as they got closer, the pilots stopped the mission because their intelligence was insufficient to identify the target positively, Brigadier Mike Hannan said.

Sounds like not being able to find the target rather than thinking the target didn't look appropriate. Maybe the pictures they had weren't very good. Maybe they just lost their bearings and couldn't figure out where it was.

Based on the second quote, I'd call the article inaccurate. Not enough info though, so take your pick.

[schplurg]

Elephant:


The British armed forces are well aware that if they go anywhere near Americans in battle that they are likely to get accidentally attacked by a bunch of trigger-happy amateurs. Sad, but true. The US armed forces have a very bad reputation in this regard.

NB : I have heard this opinion directly from a number of British army personnel, this week.

These personnel called the US troops "a bunch of trigger-happy amateurs"? Or is this just another "America Sucks" shot?

Why is it assumed that the Americans are to blame?
Why does it seem to always be the Brits who get shot?
Maybe the Brits just don't know what they're doing out there?

Just an idea. ;)

[Zep]

rikzilla: By your own admission you don't even know what end of the tube the round comes out of there matey. Why don't you keep your lefty ill-informed opinions to yourself?

There are many reasons this may have happened....from human error to mechanical failure. You don't know what happened, all you can do is cast aspertions and blame. You are a speculating *********.

So, who are we to get mad at? The Patriot officer? Why? Perhaps the Brit plane was sending the wrong transponder code. Would that make it their fault? No...perhaps their transponder was tuned right, but not functioning properly...if that's the case there is NO ONE TO EVEN BLAME!! Can you imagine such a thing! the no one to blame scenario kinda plunges a spanner into your speculative BS doesn't it?

You betray your own lefty bias by speculating on assigning fault in order to attempt to split the coalition. Such speculation is baseless....wait for the results of the investigation before you decide to hang someone there, Dundee. Have another Foster's and go protest somewhere....friggin' idiot.


Hi Rikzilla! Gee, with "coalition friends" like you, who needs Saddam Hussein! You're certainly doing your bit to keep us as pals, aren't you! :D

I'm also so glad to know you have such good long-distance vision and can see my political tendencies and political agenda from there. Of course, you are absolutely spot on ... NOT! Geez, what a w@nker, folks!

You will see from subsequent and more than likely reliable reports that there was a cause for this incident - poor operating procedure, not human or mechanical error. And who designed that poor operating procedure? *cough* Weren't me, sunshine! You will also see that everyone involved, including the highly trained Patriot officer, was indeed mortified, as I said. (You know what "mortified" means, Rik?)

The real reason this occured was that these people were in a war. If they were not, it would be highly likely that it would not have happened. So do I have to lead you to the obvious conclusion here?

Oh, and if you want to insult me, try brushing up on some REAL invectives. Your effort above was pretty childish and hardly even tickles. It also shows your lack of knowledge of us, which is typical of ranters.

Zep

[Zep]

These personnel called the US troops "a bunch of trigger-happy amateurs"? Or is this just another "America Sucks" shot?

Why is it assumed that the Americans are to blame?
Why does it seem to always be the Brits who get shot?
Maybe the Brits just don't know what they're doing out there?

I would be willing to say that, as has been shown for the last few hundred years, when the bullets start flying they aren't choosy about who they hit. Whoever has the most bullets hits the most stuff, ours OR theirs. Not everyone with a rifle is a cool, brave marksman.

Zep

[schplurg]

Ok, I was kinda being a smartass, but are there statistics that show that the US military has an abnormally high percentage of friendly fire incidents? Seriously, I have no idea. This place is overflowing with "Anti-America" comments of varying degrees, more-so from a certain few (certainly not from everyone, mind you), and I'm not going to let every single one slip by unchallenged. I don't consider statements that I don't agree with as being Anti-American, just those that are (sometimes constantly) laced with distaste. What happened to bashing the French anyways? :D

I just searched a little for these stats, but I really need sleep, if I can get it.

[Zep]

schpurg: lI think it would be fair to say that "friendly fire" has been a problem from time immemorial, from when the first spear was thrown at a mammoth and some poor neanderthal stepped in the way and copped it in the back. As much as we would like it not to be, even modern laser-guided pinpoint munitions sometimes get away from us and do what they should not, or get pointed successfully at the wrong folks. This was always the "nightmare scenario" for the Cold War!

Sometimes, as mentioned above, it's poor operating procedure or unforseen circumstances, eg: no allowances made for inoperative IFF on a friendly aircraft overflying a Patriot battery. Sometimes we only learn from our mistakes (well, I hope they learn!).

As far as statistics go re this war, I can only go on the reporting we receive from the various news channels, which we expect to have a certain bias anyway. And my rough count from those sources indicates that the Coalition of the Willing, even with the long fight north to Baghdad, has managed to kill more of themselves by their own hand by various means than the Iraqis have (the most prevalent cause being aircraft crashes!).

Is this "good or "bad", I don't know. I would call it "bad" only because I'm probably what you would call a typical bleeding-heart liberal (an American term not used elsewhere, incidentally!) and don't like to see anyone dying unnecessarily, least of all in military accidents.

Zep