TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- British commanders condemn US tactics
Pages (9): « 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 »

I know quite a few lads in the forces or people who know people in the forces and they all say the Americans are absolute psychos. They dont trust them one bit. It seems that the British join the army for a job, a career and are professional...the Americans join cos to them it is a game...

Fuzzy Green, I really hope you or anyone you know dont die in the next terrorist attack, but to be perfectly honest, with some of the shit you come out with and the way you view other races, nationalities and cultures, I think you'd probably deserve it...

quote:

Originally posted by Dervish But please either explain or pull back your comment about either the Iraqis being sub-human or having the US army belive them to be so is a good idea.

Ok, fine, maybe being "sub-human" is a little harsh and I don't want to come off as a Jewish hating nazi.

The Iraqi's are not anyway, but the terrorists we are fighting are.

I was just trying to make a point that the original liberal article is doing nothing but showing a viewpoint that is biased against Americans and what they are trying to accomplish in Iraq.

Yeah I know exactly what you mean George. Everyone I've spoken to says the Americans just want to "play with their toys". For example using Apaches at low level. Apparently there is no reson to do it. The Britsh found in N.I. that to use helicopters effectivly with minimal danger you fly high and fast. The Americans love to swoop around over the buildings. No tactical value just "looks cool". High danger, less visablity and utterly pointless. And everyone of them had storys, each differnt I might add, about the Americans acting completly inapropriatly.

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Fuzzy Green, I really hope you or anyone you know dont die in the next terrorist attack, but to be perfectly honest, with some of the shit you come out with and the way you view other races, nationalities and cultures, I think you'd probably deserve it...

Geeze, look at who is coming off as psyco. Did I say anthing about any other race or culture? The only people I have a problem with is the terrorists and their sympathizers (Cyrus King).

Ok just for a wee while try not branding things for example "libral" "good" "bad". The article voices concerns, the concerns of an educated british officer. Who is currently there. I don't think any of us here are in a postion to tell him what the situation is like.

quote:

Originally posted by FuzzyGreen The war has reached my front door. If I was capable of being in the army fighting I would be, but unfortunately I am disabled and have to rely on using my brain power. I am not a product of right-wing propaganda because very little of it exists over here any more (except on AM radio). But I am the product of an expensive University education, love for the history channel, and a hard work ethic.

Firstly, how exactly war has reached your front door? Are bombs being dropped near your home? Has any relative of you been killed recently while in combat?

Oh yes, and unfortunately you are disabled... Sorry, but i don't believe you. I think you would either run or panic when bullets started flying over you. Nah, i think you wouldn't have the guts to join the army anyway. Now about your use of brain power... it seems to me that your brain is the only thing disabled. Expensive university education... look where it's got you - calling a different culture sub-human - it seems you are a waste of money to your parents.

I recently heard on the news that many tv stations decided not to show the images of the american bodies being dragged over the streets, so that public opinion does not get shocked because of that, creating a political storm. Now how liberal is that?

quote:

Originally posted by FuzzyGreen Geeze, look at who is coming off as psyco. Did I say anthing about any other race or culture? The only people I have a problem with is the terrorists and their sympathizers (Cyrus King).

Like I said, I really hope your not killed in the next attack (cos believe me, with people with views like yours, like your government for a start, there WILL be another big attack), but you call Iraqis sub-human and that makes you scum...

quote:

Originally posted by Dervish And everyone of them had storys, each differnt I might add, about the Americans acting completly inapropriatly.

That's funny, I've been told so many stories and even seen it played in movies about the British army acting "properly" at the wrong times. Nothing is "proper" about war.

BTW - Apache pilots are highly trained and adhere to strict rules and codes of conduct. Low flight is often used to avoid SAM's, radar tracking, and to take advantage of the Apaches terrain following radar. This is part of their training and is completely appropriate.

Re: British commanders condemn US tactics

quote:

Originally posted by Spankster Link To Article Senior British commanders have condemned American military tactics in Iraq as heavy-handed and disproportionate. One senior officer said that America's aggressive methods were causing friction among allied commanders and that there was a growing sense of "unease and frustration" among the British high command. The officer, speaking on condition of anonymity, said part of the problem was that American troops viewed Iraqis as untermenschen - the Nazi expression for "sub-humans"............ To read the rest check the link above.

firstly let me correct you, it was a british commander's opinion that americans view iraqis as "sub-humans". this does not meant that the americans actually view it this way. In fact, you'd have a hard time conviencing me, let alone proving to me that americans do indeed view the iraqi general population as sub-human. although i do want to add that those iraqis who participate in targeting of human civilians, hostage taking and mutilating dead humans are sub-human themselves.

anyways to say that the US use overwhelming force is not surprising. It should not come as a surprise that europeans hold a different opinion on warfare than the americans do. afterall, most european countries, including the UK are considerably weaker military than the US - this would of course alter their strategies. One who has force is more willing to use it then somebody who doesnt. It is widely known that this overwhelming force is one of the tennents of modern american warfare, and to which has shown considerable accomplishments.

when you look at Americas past accomplishments you can see that "heavy handed" initial bursts of power and force have led to quick resolution of warfare and allowed for diplomacy to take over. here are the successes:

gulf war 1 - america invaded iraq with all its might right away and drew to a quick resolution of the war.

Afghanistan - a heavy dose of arieal bombardment led to the quick victory of the taliban and allowed for peacekeepers to enter quickly

gulf war 2 - american reached and conquered baghdad in lightning speed and replaced the saddam regimn quickly in order to set up a new governing councel

Haiti - American troops played a more peacekeeping rule instead of a more forceful role which led to the recent rioting and overthrowing of the current "president"

Somalia - small surgical troop activities led to the somalian warlords to defeat the american forces. this would probably not have been the case had american troops used overwhelming force.

i would also add the failure of european forces to stop the warfare in yugoslavia and their request for strong american force (95% of bombing raids were done with american airplanes)

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Like I said, I really hope your not killed in the next attack (cos believe me, with people with views like yours, like your government for a start, there WILL be another big attack), but you call Iraqis sub-human and that makes you scum...

Again, I didn't call the Iraqi's sub-human, I'm calling the terrorists sub-human.

Anyway Fuzzy I think maybe I and some other perhaps misintrepreted what you ment. When you said Iraqis you ment terroists yeah? But I would say even the "terrorists" are just trying to get a occupying force out of their country. However misguided thats what they are trying to do. To be honest half the Iraqi police force and army are probebly the least altruistic in their actions and have the dirtist hands. Now I have mates there and I can say that. You can't just see things in black and white.

quote:

Originally posted by borron Firstly, how exactly war has reached your front door? Are bombs being dropped near your home? Has any relative of you been killed recently while in combat?

Well, 3000 of my fellow countryman died on 9/11 and yes, a distant relative of mine has been injured in battle.

quote:

I recently heard on the news that many tv stations decided not to show the images of the american bodies being dragged over the streets, so that public opinion does not get shocked because of that, creating a political storm. Now how liberal is that?

That is extremely liberal. The American public needs to see those images because those images are exactly what will inflame the American people to give them the will to fight like it has me. I wasn't even active on this board until I saw those pictures. After hearing what happened I was so pissed off that I wanted to fight, but since I lack the physical ability to join the army I choose to vent my fustration here by fighting the psy war on this web-site.

quote:

Originally posted by FuzzyGreen to avoid SAM's, radar tracking, and to take advantage of the Apaches terrain following radar. This is part of their training and is completely appropriate.

Emm Who's SAMs? Who's Radar? And that terrain follwing radar..... will that be a toy then?

quote:

Originally posted by Dervish Emm Who's SAMs? Who's Radar? And that terrain follwing radar..... will that be a toy then?

I'm sure that is all it is in your (home) country.

Re: Re: British commanders condemn US tactics

quote:

Originally posted by Izzy including the UK are considerably weaker military than the US -

You see this is the problem it's not an issue of force. It's an issue of balance and reson. These were lesons learned in 30 years of exactly these type of operations in N.I.. Simply stating "the other nations are weaker so they will use less force" is about the, ok was gonna insult but I'm gonna resist it. This is a war of hearts and minds and development not "growing a pair and blowing shit up". It's that attuitude which needs to change.

quote:

Originally posted by FuzzyGreen Well, 3000 of my fellow countryman died on 9/11 and yes, a distant relative of mine has been injured in battle.

Bullshit answer. You still haven't responded why you can't join the army (disabled, lack of physical ability?, what kind of shit is that).

quote:

That is extremely liberal. The American public needs to see those images because those images are exactly what will inflame the American people to give them the will to fight like it has me. I wasn't even active on this board until I saw those pictures. After hearing what happened I was so pissed off that I wanted to fight, but since I lack the physical ability to join the army I choose to vent my fustration here by fighting the psy war on this web-site.

I think you misunderstood what i was trying to say. I was trying to say the opposite, that most media didn't show the images of bodies being dragged, kicked and hanged because it didn't want to shock public opinion creating a political storm. Most only showed the iraqis having a party with the bodies in the background.

quote:

Originally posted by FuzzyGreen I'm sure that is all it is in your (home) country.

Ehh??? Don't know what you mean. Secondly what I ment was in Iraq thouse pilots are swooping around low all over the place subjecting themselfs to ground fire for no reson.

But anyway thats not the point of the post.

Edit: You do realise the UK has Apaches too yeah?

quote:

Originally posted by Dervish Emm Who's SAMs? Who's Radar? And that terrain follwing radar..... will that be a toy then?

Don't know if you're joking but really, if brits fly their heli high as the Russians did in the Afghanistan/Russia war then they might as well keep them on the ground and collect dust. If you fly a helicopter high and fast you defeat the whole purpose of what the attack helicopter [close air support] is built for. When you fly a heli high, pilots cannot provide close support for ground troops effectively and become a nice big juicy target for SAMs (surface to Air missile). Your views on US tactics may not be agreeable, but please don't make any uneducated comments about military tactics that you do not have any clue about. Stick to djing with those cheap headphones you got... By the way, brits soldiers have died in Iraq, if you don't recall.

Hahahaha WHO HAS SAMS IN IRAQ????? WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? As for un educated I've been taught aerobatics by a former leader of the british red arrows team. And as for the british soliders as I said I have friends there. They are professionals doing a job and they know the risks.

Edit: You do realise a simple stinger missle is not the same as a cordinated SAm network. If you want to get hit by a stinger FLY LOW.

Iraq insurgents have in their position Russian SA-7 similar to the American Stinger missiles. Not your big missile but dangerous enough to bring down a helicopter or plane which these bastards have done so already.


Maximum range for the SA-7 3.6 Km


1. There have been no fewer than 4 major incidents involving shoulder-fired SAMs in the past two years:

+ The downing of a US Army CH-47 Chinook in Iraq with heavy loss of life two months ago.
+ The strike by a shoulder-fired SAM on a civilian cargo aircraft near Baghdad International in the fall.
+ The strike by a shoulder-fired SAM on a USAF C-17 Globemaster II transport aircraft near Baghdad International within the past month.
+ An unsuccessful attempt by al Qaida terrorists to shoot down an Israeli airliner in Mombassa, Kenya in November of 2002.

quote:

Originally posted by borron I think you misunderstood what i was trying to say. I was trying to say the opposite, that most media didn't show the images of bodies being dragged, kicked and hanged because it didn't want to shock public opinion creating a political storm. Most only showed the iraqis having a party with the bodies in the background.

Lets assume you are right. This is the reason the media didn't want to show it, and this is the consequence it would have had if they showed it (public outrage).

Now considering that, does the media carry any responsibility in distributing this informaiton?

I mean if thie informaiton will cause the American public to demand say full withdrawl from Iraq (which I doubt it would, as fuzzy bears witness to, I think it would do the opposite) and since the media are basically a bunch of intellectuals, knowing this would you distribute the pictures?

If the media by showing the pictures of the soldiers would cause the USA to withdraw from Iraq - which I think the whole world, even the press agrees would be perhaps the worst thing to ever happen to the USA. Does the media still have to insist on showing video of the mutlilated soldiers? If that is the certain outcome of distributing those events is the media obligated to distribute them?

Afterall, the American media, as unbiased as it would like to be, is it still not American, do they have no moral obligation anymore to there nation?

I think this type of unbiased attitude is very dangerous. Afterall, you could report on it in any number of ways. Just as the media has chosen, you can describe it in print, in words, and show mugs of the soldiers slain. This will inform the public, and yet will not allow the greatest defeat of your nation.

Its a divergence of principle. I think the press, espeically the American press have a responsibility to be American. They should not let it get in their way, but they should never abandon it either. Most reports seem to agree to a point with this principle, regardless where they are from.

So in summary, what I'm saying is you have an empty point

quote:

Originally posted by FuzzyGreen This is a good example of how the British people are acting like libral Nancyboys and fail to see that we are fighting a war for our survival. The Iraqi's are sub-human and when you are in a war it's good to promote this thought among your army.

quote:

Originally posted by FuzzyGreen Again, I didn't call the Iraqi's sub-human, I'm calling the terrorists sub-human.

quote:

Originally posted by FuzzyGreen Alright, I agree with that, they should, of course take steps to avoid blowing up civillians (and they do), but it's the media blowing it out of proportion that is working for the enemy. We need to take steps to avoid the media doing this, not put our soldiers at risk. Sounds to me like the Americans need to use more electronic jamming and psy-ops and stop news from getting out of the area until it has been secured completely. People need to be told -Civillians died in Vietnam too, but the rate was way higher then it is in this war. America is fighting for them, not against them. It's stupid and silly to not believe that.

Please tell me how exactly is the media blowing this out of proportion? aren't they alloud to report about civilian casualties, uprisings or what is the problem?!

and you know what? it doesn't matter in any way what you think, what matter is what the iraqis / the rest of the arab world thinks, if they hate you for this, they will become new potential terrorists, even though saddam was a bad man that needed to go away.

One question how many helicoters have been brung down with them? And how many have either crashed or hit power lines or downed by small arms. The higher you are the more chance you have to dodge.

Edit: By the way isn't this getting a bit off topic?

And do you even know what type of headphones they are! hehehe

Re: Re: Re: British commanders condemn US tactics

quote:

Originally posted by Dervish You see this is the problem it's not an issue of force. It's an issue of balance and reson. These were lesons learned in 30 years of exactly these type of operations in N.I.. Simply stating "the other nations are weaker so they will use less force" is about the, ok was gonna insult but I'm gonna resist it. This is a war of hearts and minds and development not "growing a pair and blowing shit up". It's that attuitude which needs to change.

i dont know that i can agree with what you said. to me the "lessons learned in 30 years of exactly these type of operations in N.I." are a testiment that balance does not work. if the UK had not held back and dealt with the IRA in a more forceful way and taken one strong innitiative to destroy the organization at its roots, this problem may have have taken three decades and countless lives before it was solved.

i agree that this is a war of hearts, that way things must be dealt with quickly so that "sub-humans" such as Shiite cleric Moqtada Sadr can dont have the chance to win the hearts of other iraqis with their poisonious idealogoy.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.