French soldiers unprepared for Taliban ambush: report

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by msr, Sep 20, 2008.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. msr

    msr LE

  2. Isn't the whole point of an ambush that you aren't prepared for it?
  3. What like they didn't have the white flags ready and the working parts removed from the bang sticks.
    Brought shame upon their country by being caught out in such a dishonourable fashion....

    Next one will be seen crying on TV when he loses his IPOD
  4. I thought that? Isn’t the whole idea of an ambush is to take the enemy by surprise?

    Though 'where there's, blame, there's a claim'.
  5. That's some wild ammunition.
  6. Are they talking about tracer ammo for heavy machine guns?
  7. Crap post that.
  8. There it it, report denied:

    According to an AFP from 13h14, the spokesman for NATO James Appathurai said "the secretary general is not aware of such a report (...) At this stage, and after research We found no trace of such a report ".] In Paris, the Ministry of Defense says that" we do not have the time element for the very existence of this document. "He there was no report of NATO is hogwash "react more strongly an officer of the General Staff.
  9. msr

    msr LE

  10. Very much so, including the french being rescued by, of course, US forces.

    Complete and utter BS like said before and confirmed by a NATO spokesman
  11. Audio link to EMA and NATO spokespersons' statements for those of you who speak French. It's the top story on Franco Info today.

    France Info
  12. What is true though is that the current french army individual kit is crap and that no many in the head shed expected such casualties so early in the mission.

    Like I wrote before on this forum, I hope these 10 KIAs will at least open the eyes of the top brass on the crying needs of deployed units
  13. Sorry, just to clarify but when you say it's 'utter BS' do you mean the actual contents/facts of the so called report was utter BS or that the information mentioned was generally factual but that the actual reporting of a report was BS? If that makes any sense. :)