Brit team kill Suicide Bombers

#3
Excellent Work!
 
#4
I don't believe in this fairy-tale for many reasons.

As we know the main methods of the insurgents are roadside bombs and car-bombs. Using of vests with explosices is very rare in Iraq (recall me even one proven fact with photos and witnesses). Let's apply a common sense: why should the insurgents commit suicides at all? They are able to reach the same effect using more secure ways.

Each terrorist was wearing a suicide vest laden with commercial explosives.
Photos please. Without them I can suspect that they were ordinaly Iraqis and were as guilty as the Brasilian.

A 16-man unit of the SAS, acting on intelligence obtained by an Iraqi agent...
16 snipers and one agent - a drop in the ocean. And what is the result? Only 3 killed (if they were ever killed) for months. The effect is almost invisible.

Details of the mission codenamed Operation Marlborough have remained secret until now - primarily because it was launched in the same week that a Metropolitan Police firearms unit in London shot dead Jean Charles de Menezes...
Here is the main objective of creating of this fairy tale. It is an indirect approval of obvious mistake in London.

It marked one of the most successful counter-insurgency operations undertaken by British forces since the start of the Iraq conflict.
So it was confirmed that result in spotting of roadside bomb and car-bomb makers is near to null. It is the only thing that I believe in the article.
 
#5
Well said Sergey.
You've seen streight throught the British lieing barstewards. An old hand like you could not be fooled by these amatures.
john
 
#6
Good skills.

Sergey, has news of the attack last week by Iraqi suicide bombers wearing explosive vests not reached Russia yet? Whilst our government has a penchant for choosing when to release news to put itself in a good light, I don't think they are trying to show approval of the shooting of the illegal immigrant in London, since this would involve a minister or lickspittle (the Met commissioner) taking responsibility.

The op was successful not just because it means there are three less lunatics to cause harm, but because it shows that the insurgents have been infiltrated, and that will have a much more lasting effect. It is also a success precisely because of the difficulties of operating on Iraq. You remind me of the nay-sayers who were critical of a previous SAS op which resulted in three fewer terrorists.
 
#7
Its also a success due to the fact its kind of hard to concentrate on making bombs, if you think there is a trained sniper on every roof. waiting to pop you off. Well done lads.
 
#8
KGB_resident said:
I don't believe in this fairy-tale for many reasons.

As we know the main methods of the insurgents are roadside bombs and car-bombs. Using of vests with explosices is very rare in Iraq (recall me even one proven fact with photos and witnesses). Let's apply a common sense: why should the insurgents commit suicides at all? They are able to reach the same effect using more secure ways.
Incident early last year in N Iraq when a terrorist dressed in Iraqi Army uniform walked into a joint US/Iraqi army mess tent & let rip. I have seen the photos. Around the same time (slightly earlier IIRC) in the same area a fnd of several vests in transit. So they are there, if not used as much as other IEDs.

Also, while the 'roadside bomb' is more common, suicide VBIEDs are fairly common, especially in th ecentral & northern areas. Ask our two EOD team members who lost their legs to one last year.
 
#9
Sir Rowley Birkin QC said:
Incident early last year in N Iraq when a terrorist dressed in Iraqi Army uniform walked into a joint US/Iraqi army mess tent & let rip. I have seen the photos.
Fair point and good example that obviously shows ineffectiveness of snipers against human-bombs. If the man was known as a would be suicide bomber then better way to deal with him would be a detention or killing outside the base. And if those three (btw, what are their names?)were known as terrorists then why there wasn't attemt to arrest them (or it was?).

And I repeat, I don't see pictures or any proof of the whole story, only words. Btw, why do the snipers don't being used agains drivers of car-bombs. In this case the proof would be very easy: killed drived in a car ladden with explosives.
 
#10
KGB_resident said:
were known as terrorists then why there wasn't attemt to arrest them
I might be missing something here, but I strongly feel that you lose any rights to arrest and civility when you are prepared to detonate a bomb, whether is be remotley or strapped to yourself.
 
#12
KGB_resident said:
16 snipers and one agent
No.

16 MAN unit. That doesn't mean 16 snipers. At most that's 4 snipers, 4 spotters and 8 normal troopers armed with assault rifles.

Also, just because there is a unit of 16 men, doesn't mean they'll be operating together. It'll probably be 4x 4-man patrols or 2x 8-man patrols.
 
#14
KGB bloke you are pretty far off the mark in your arguments and conclusions

lets just call it a good shoot and leave it at that

The soldiers do have a right to be paranoid about about alot of stuff (Support from above, legal action, equipment, cutbacks etc)
but your twisted level of conspiracy theories should have their own web site

toodlepip
theGimp
 
#15
[quote="KGB_resident And if those three (btw, what are their names?)were known as terrorists then why there wasn't attemt to arrest them (or it was?).[/quote]

You are right Sergey, we should follow the Russian exaple when it comes to handling terrorists in Chetznia. :roll:
 
#16
What's that then? Give them it full automatic, blat about 3 magazines at them, lose 90% of your team doing so and also encure 100% civilian casualties in the surrounding areas?

Sounds like a plan!
 
#17
I have seen a pic from Iraq of an insurgent with a belt of explosives on his chest and half his head missing from a US Sniper's bullet
 
#19
Mighty_doh_nut said:
...I strongly feel that you lose any rights to arrest and civility when you are prepared to detonate a bomb, whether is be remotley or strapped to yourself.
Werewolf said:
Three terrorists killed with no loss of civilians or soldiers.
Good effort, good result.
Well said - my thoughts exactly.
 
#20
KGB_resident said:
Sir Rowley Birkin QC said:
Incident early last year in N Iraq when a terrorist dressed in Iraqi Army uniform walked into a joint US/Iraqi army mess tent & let rip. I have seen the photos.
Fair point and good example that obviously shows ineffectiveness of snipers against human-bombs. If the man was known as a would be suicide bomber then better way to deal with him would be a detention or killing outside the base. And if those three (btw, what are their names?)were known as terrorists then why there wasn't attemt to arrest them (or it was?).

And I repeat, I don't see pictures or any proof of the whole story, only words. Btw, why do the snipers don't being used agains drivers of car-bombs. In this case the proof would be very easy: killed drived in a car ladden with explosives.
I would have though you would know a bit about suicide bombers.

Do you think they will put their hands up and say, 'it's fair cop'...

Shame on you...
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top