Uh oh! Here we go again...

[p_p_man]

The London Times

July 02, 2002

"US bomb 'killed 40 at Afghan wedding'
From Roland Watson in Washington

UP TO 40 members of an Afghan wedding party were killed and scores more injured when American forces mistook exuberant revellers for a hostile enemy."

Oops! Sorreeee!

ppman

 

[InnocentAngel81]

grrrrrrr

 

[koalabear]

http://pages.prodigy.net/rogerlori1/emoticons/chairfall.gif

 

[DevilBoy79]

The London Times

July 02, 2002

"US bomb 'killed 40 at Afghan wedding'
From Roland Watson in Washington

UP TO 40 members of an Afghan wedding party were killed and scores more injured when American forces mistook exuberant revellers for a hostile enemy."

Oops! Sorreeee!

ppman

eh thats nothing new

 

[p_p_man]

Re: Re: Uh oh! Here we go again...

eh thats nothing new

I know.

That's why I said 'here we go again'.

Do you think the whole of the US armed forces should go back to training on how to recognise a hostile situation?

ppman

 

[Azwed]

I think KM said something similar to this once before. We rely too much on our 'Smart' Weapons. Hey its just point and click. Just fire and forget. They can't miss so you don't have to worry about collateral damage.

The problem is that the people using this weapons seem to forget that they are only as 'smart' as the brains behind them. If I point my laser guided 2000 lbs bomb that has an accuracy of +/- 2 meters at a group of people I better be damn sure they are the right group of people because they are all gonna die.

 

[koalabear]

Always has and always will be accidents in war.......Even the fucking british.....have many in Ireland did you guys kill p_p_man.

 

[p_p_man]

Always has and always will be accidents in war.......Even the fucking british.....have many in Ireland did you guys kill p_p_man.

Quite a few.

But we weren't flying overhead in sophisticated jets with cutting edge technology at our finger tips. We were on patrol, or involved in street to street fighting.

As Azwed says "people using this weapons seem to forget that they are only as 'smart' as the brains behind them"

ppman

 

[scylis]

if you mount an airial campaign against a nation, you will ALWAYS make mistakes or cause collateral damage such as this. doesn't matter who you are or how expensive your weapons are. if you got targets in a city, civilians will die, guaranteed.

you know, i suppose we COULD go back to carpet bombing and fire bombing like in the good ol' days. just pulverize or roast the whole damn city.

aahhh, the good ol' days...

 

[p_p_man]

if you mount an airial campaign against a nation, you will ALWAYS make mistakes or cause collateral damage such as this.

Yeah but America seems to make more of them than anyone else.

ppman

 

[SleepingWarrior]

When I saw this on the news the (PR) General in Afganistan said that a group of soldiers were fired upon from that area and called in the airstrike and it will be investigated. In the past I have said that mistakes are made in war and generally went along with whatever was done but for some reason I thought the same as you did p_p "Here we go again" and cringed at the thought. I really hope that soldiers were fired upon and it can be proven. Otherwise I don't know what I will do because if it was just a wedding party that was destroyed (no fire coming from that area) I may have to re-evaluate my stance on the issue.

 

[scylis]

Yeah but America seems to make more of them than anyone else.

ppman

that's b/c we do more BOMBING than anybody else, PERIOD.

see, there's there's a connection between how much bombing you do and how much collateral damage you cause. the more bombs you drop, the more collateral damage is caused.

the US seems to drop a good number of bombs in any given year, so, naturally, they'll cause more collateral damage than, say, the UK, who drops just slightly over a fuckall of bombs (meaning about... two, i guess).

 

[p_p_man]

that's b/c we do more BOMBING than anybody else, PERIOD.

see, there's there's a connection between how much bombing you do and how much collateral damage you cause. the more bombs you drop, the more collateral damage is caused.

the US seems to drop a good number of bombs in any given year, so, naturally, they'll cause more collateral damage than, say, the UK, who drops just slightly over a fuckall of bombs (meaning about... two, i guess).

I'm not just talking about Afghanistan. Way back during Desert Storm the Americans managed to knock out a British Tank killing all 8 of our soldiers. And that was in the middle of the desert with British and Coalition markings all over it!

I reckon it happens just too often to be accidental. Poor or inadequate recognition techniques seem to be the root cause. Whether it's recognising a hostile situation or a friendly ally.

ppman

 

[koalabear]

I'm not just talking about Afghanistan. Way back during Desert Storm the Americans managed to knock out a British Tank killing all 8 of our soldiers. And that was in the middle of the desert with British and Coalition markings all over it!

I reckon it happens just too often to be accidental. Poor or inadequate recognition techniques seem to be the root cause. Whether it's recognising a hostile situation or a friendly ally.

ppman

Your British, your hostile.....DUCK!


http://pages.prodigy.net/rogerlori1/emoticons/chairfall.gif

 

[Ishmael]

Spill the whole report pp.

American forces came under anti-aircraft fire. They retaliated and one bomb went astray.

Afghan survivors attest to the fact that there was ground to air fire in the vicinity.

Unfortunate, yes. But this is just another incident where the opposition uses civilian activity and presence as a shield.

The results don't please me, but the provocation and circumstances don't make me apologetic either.

To callously put your own people at risk for propoganda purposes is a tactic that I'll never quite understand. But I've seen it before, so while I'm still incensed about it, I do understand the principle.

Ishmael

 

[p_p_man]

Your British, your hostile.....DUCK!


http://pages.prodigy.net/rogerlori1/emoticons/chairfall.gif

Missed...

Nanananaa!

 

[scylis]

I'm not just talking about Afghanistan. Way back during Desert Storm the Americans managed to knock out a British Tank killing all 8 of our soldiers. And that was in the middle of the desert with British and Coalition markings all over it!

I reckon it happens just too often to be accidental. Poor or inadequate recognition techniques seem to be the root cause. Whether it's recognising a hostile situation or a friendly ally.

ppman

yes, and the Iraqie ground forces also turned tail and ran from the Coalition ground forces, making the area where the Brits and the rest of the ground forces the expected location of the Iraqie troops in the original battle plan. and considering your RAF's Tonados were doing more strikes deeper in Iraq and nowhere near as much air support to the ground forces as was the USAF and USMC fighters, well, you get the point?

 

[koalabear]

Missed...

Nanananaa!

http://pages.prodigy.net/rogerlori1/emoticons/poke1.GIF

 

[p_p_man]

Spill the whole report pp.

American forces came under anti-aircraft fire. They retaliated and one bomb went astray.Ishmael

More of the Times Report:

"The accident happened after wedding guests fired volleys of small arms fire into the air in celebration, according to the Afghan authorities.

American officials said that a special forces team had come under fire. A US bomber and gunship called in to provide air support had also been fired on, and had returned fire.

Local officials put the casualty toll at more than 120, with between 30 and 40 dead.

Hamid Karzai, the Afghan leader, called for a “comprehensive investigation” of the incident yesterday and appointed a four-man team to oversee it. The team will travel to the village in Uruzgan Province, 100 miles northeast of Kandahar, today.

It is the second time that US bombers have attacked a wedding party. In May ten civilians were killed at a celebration near Khost, also in eastern Afghanistan. American helicopters there also mistook the traditional Afghan celebration for hostile fire."

Come on Ishmael. It's badly trained crew. You know it, I know it, the whole world knows it. But we listen to these American excuses in an attempt to be fair and listen to both side of the story.

But we all know the American side just ain't true...

It happens too often.

ppman

 

[koalabear]

Highly intelligent people fire guns in celebration in the middle of a war zone. DUH!

 

[Zamdrist]

Tony & Tina's Wedding opened in Afganistan? Wow.

 

[SleepingWarrior]

Ok, now that I see some explanations... What would you have had the US pilots do? Are they suppose to think that the gun fire is celebration all of the time and get killed? What would you do if you were a pilot and gun fire started coming your way? Would you take a chance with your life or would you retaliate? In situations like that thinking too long CAN kill you.

 

[kiwiwolf]

Yeah but America seems to make more of them than anyone else.

ppman

Jesus Christ man... same shit different day! Do you know any new tunes?

 

[Ishmael]

And all that tells me is that the reports are still fresh and conflicting.

But to take your side of the story for a change. You are in a war zone. There are aircraft overhead that you know are warcraft. So, you shoot your guns in the air? Sorry pp, even aboriginies are imbued with a certain amount of common sense.

Ishamel

 

[p_p_man]

Ok, now that I see some explanations... What would you have had the US pilots do? Are they suppose to think that the gun fire is celebration all of the time and get killed? What would you do if you were a pilot and gun fire started coming your way? Would you take a chance with your life or would you retaliate? In situations like that thinking too long CAN kill you.

Afghan is a country where celebrations of any kind involve firing rifles into the air. You've probably seen that on TV.

I think the American forces, brought up on the rule of the gun as they are, jittery and badly trained just don't think.

A paragraph from the same story but published in the Guardian:

"Pentagon officials last night conceded that at least one bomb dropped on the village of Kakarak was "errant". But their initial response was confused and they were unable to explain why the pilots had failed to establish whom they were attacking in a region clearly abandoned by Taliban and al-Qaida fighters several months ago."

Why bother to deny or defend. Just admit re-training is probably needed and everyone will be satisfied...

ppman