Why so long to acknowledge Challenger casualty?

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Herrumph, Apr 23, 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:

  1. Just heard that Challenger Casualty actually happened on 6 Apr.

    I note that ARRSE notified it but why did it take so long for MoD Press Office to push out news. OPSEC can't be issue as the terrorist must already know.

    The fact that is still a major news issue some 2 weeks later makes this seem strange. Any coincidence that 6 Apr was when MoD Press Office must have been tackling the issue of the Iran 15. Did they take eye off ball or just not want to drop Ditchwater Broone in it even deeper.

    Best wishes to the lad. Hope he gets all support he deserves. Good time to publicise fine work done by BLESMA
     
  2. Spelling corrected!
     
  3. (If you want you can edit your original post to change the title).
     
  4. It's not something you would like to brag about, is it?
     
  5. Tin foil hat on.

    1. MoD does not 'do' bad news if it can avoid it.
    2. ARRSE discussed said bad news.
    3. Lurking journos read the comments.
    4. Lurking journos ask MoD for confirmtion/denial of rumour.
    5. MoD confirms bad news realising it can avoid no longer.

    Tin foil hat off.
     
  6. A very, VERY, interesting question.

    Probably it was NOT the day to issue bad news.

    This scabrous and leprous spawn of Hades, masquerading as a goverment, simply cannot handle events that it has not engineered itself.

    I pray that God cares for the soldier killed and gives strength and succour to his family and friends.

    I pray also that the same God, visits upon the dishonest, disreputable and filthy oik Bliar and his cohorts a dreadful end - lengthy, painful and publicly disgraceful.

    PS This is electronic communication ( probably Bliar will have this site banned ) and spelling is irrelevant.
     
  7. Maybe they didn't want to compromise any follow-up operations against the bad guys by declaring how successful the attack had been.
     
  8. msr

    msr LE

    And you honestly believe they weren't watching or even filming the attack?
     
  9. Why should MOD release the news? There are plenty of attacks on MNF in Basra on a very regular basis, some of which result in casualties, others of which see equipment damaged. The tank was not destroyed, merely damaged and callous as this may seem, no one was killed (although my heart goes out to the driver). Why do the British public "need to know" that one tank was hit when they haven't needed to know on many other occasions involving other vehicles or troops?
     
  10. Agree with above post. No need to spread too much info to the press particularly if it is all bad, and they are already digging the minister about lack of eqpt ships etc...

    Also not good for General Morale and his subordinates to realise that if it does that to a Chally - you have 0% chance in something with a thinner skin.

    Sorry to hear about the casualty, but it worries me as to the level of armour piercing power now in use. Next time i am offered a road move inside armour i might review my options for a night move by heli.
     
  11. Also why publicise the fact that the chally is vunerable and enemy tactics paid off?

    If it reached the mainstream news it may dirrectly cause it to happen again.
     
  12. It could be that this dreadful government hearing the word 'Challenger' thought it was some jumped up twit challenging the annointed one for leadership (wrong word) boss of the Liabour party.
     
  13. Spot on.

    Lots goes on in theatre that stays in theatre.

    For an incident to become 'news' needs, broadly speaking, at least one of 3 factors to be in place:

    1. A military fatality (MoD policy to release details of all of these)
    2. The incident is deemed to be 'good news' by the MoD - therefore they release details for, essentially, propaganda purposes (ugly word, but it is probably about right)
    3. The incident is covered by independent media - therefore is released without MoD involvement (other than to confirm/restrict certain details)

    Bad news stories without fatalities or independent coverage do not hit the newspapers. Incidents involving fatalities of civilian contractors or PSC staff do not, generally, hit the newspapers.

    I suggest it was only the Yon story that pushed this one onto the wider media agenda - modesty (and respect for Mr Yon) prevents me suggesting it had anything to do with the subsequent discussion on ARRSE.

    A similar situation occured with the Harrier destroyed by rocket attack on the ground in Kandahar a year or so ago. It very nearly didn't make the papers at all, despite being, on the face of it, quite a interesting story.

    I don't have a great problem with any of this, except a slight niggling concern that the British public is generally unaware of the huge sacrifice made by those who, whilst they retain their lives, have lost their limbs or other faculties in service of their country.

    D
     
  14. Good points made, but at the end of the day there is no need to unnessarily worry the families of those serving.99.9% of the general public do not have a loved one on a tour in either of those places..therefore it doesnt afffect them.

    People seem more concerned about the England football mangers job and Big Brother.
     
  15. Agreed; in fact most of the discussion on ARRSE about Mr Yon's story was rubbishing his claim that indeed a CR2 had been damaged and the driver seriously injured. Perhaps a few ARRSErs out there will have to concede that, sometimes, journalists do know what they are talking about.