|
British commanders condemn US tactics (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| FuzzyGreen |
| 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. |
|
|
| Dervish |
| 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? |
|
|
| FuzzyGreen |
| 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. |
|
|
| Dervish |
| 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 up". It's that attuitude which needs to change. |
|
|
| borron |
| 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. |
Bull answer. You still haven't responded why you can't join the army (disabled, lack of physical ability?, what kind of 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. |
|
|
| Dervish |
| 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? |
|
|
| DjSway |
| 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. :D |
|
|
| Dervish |
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. |
|
|
| DjSway |
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. :whip:
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. |
|
|
| Yoepus |
| 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:D |
|
|
| St_Andrew |
| 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. |
:conf: |
|
|
| St_Andrew |
| 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. |
|
|
|
|
