Guardian: This aerial onslaught is war at its most stupid

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by eveyoz, Feb 7, 2007.

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:

  2. Lets see Simon Jenkins join up and fight a war without US air power....
  3. Actually I thought it was a pretty well balanced article, especially for the Grauniad. The point about air-power in Afghanistan is a good one, would we be using it so readily if we had sufficient troops on the ground I wonder? The British after all, are well aware of the hearts and minds implications of "collateral damage" and are always keen to avoid passing the moral high ground to the enemy, I can't believe there aren't reservations about this tactic, not to mention dissatisfaction at our lack of options in the matter.
  4. All in all, a well balanced article from the Guardian. I'm not sure I agree with this sentence though:

    "It is not the A-10 pilot who should "feel sick" at the death of Matty Hull, but the anonymous controller who affirmed: "You are well clear of friendlies."

    The transcript and video both appear to show some confusion as to what each party are describing, and it must be admitted that the pilots had seen the orange panels prior to attacking. While it is unfair to unilaterally blame the pilots, it is equally unfair to blame someone who did not have the significant advantage they had of visual contact with the target.

    Just my tuppence worth.