Yanks at it again

Brits, Canadians, Iraqis, Afghans, children, old men and women all legit targets to the US A10 pilot.

Maybe LNV on her rid the world of muslins crusade was at the controls.
Bloody yanks
I believe these occurrences are a direct result of the US government/military’s:
1. Reluctance to risk friendly casualties to the point of losing grasp of reality;

2. The belief that airplanes and hi-tech intelligence gathering equipment are superior to men on the ground;

3. High-up US commanders’ prejudice against the use of Special Forces because:
a. “They expect us to treat the local nationals as real people?!”
b. “Oh, no. They might grow a beard and not salute me”.

4. Too much Air Force involvement in choice of tactics used on ops.

5. Training funds being cut to finance unplanned military incursions.

These things fly in the face of good sense. I believe that many of those in charge don’t understand that there is a difference between “winning” and “achieving a successful conclusion”.

All of the above is the direct result of the US government’s decision to rely on technology instead of people. The British government is now on this same path (see the “White Paper” thread). Maybe you can do something about it in next election. I’ll be doing my best here.
Winger? You should change your name to 'Sensible Poster' with immediate effect! :wink:
Let me tell you straight Winger.

I love Yanks, I have many Yank friends, I love America and believe our present stance as allies is spot on (with the proviso that we start to act more professionally and get rid of that cnut Bliar) But...

You are probably the one and only fcking Yank I ever met who wasn't either a) a fcking moron b) a fcking moron or c) a fcking moron. :D

And no, I don't want to suck your willy, unless you are a tart, then I will gladly oblige any request to lick your minge :D


War Hero
Winger said:
4. Too much Air Force involvement in choice of tactics used on ops.
So that's where it went wrong!
Errr, uhm - Shotgun, Plant-Pilot - Cheers.

I think I'll keep "Winger". Ever see the movie "Stripes"? He's the guy that, while appearing to be very un-military, made all the sense and succeeded. When I was a young lieutenant (22) involved in a v. dangerous undertaking, I had several excellent NCO's (some of whom were even actual "hillbillies"), and one commander, who taught me how to analyse the world around me and use reality, like Winger. And to be honest. It helped me become a fat old man w/goatee, instead of a name on a memorial.

When I became an NCO later (my choice), I tried to pass these things on. It must have worked because my commanders and SNCOs were always bitching at me when the good young men wanted to transfer over to my squad/platoon/company. "You can't have all the good ones" they'd say. F*ck them. Got 'em anyway.

One thing that has truly helped me is to have been out into the world. I've lived in Europe and Asia (in contact with the civ's, not on military bases). Most Americans haven't, for many reasons, and consequently, lack the knowledge to make informed decisions in many areas. This ain't good.

Too bad the media is managed the way it is now. I used to like the BBC and CBC for what used to be fairly unbiased reporting. Now it's all politics. F*ck that too.

Shotgun - I don't know about all that but if the chance ever arises, I would gladly stand you a beer. We even have some here worth drinking these days.

Gotta go now. Got to give a little Aunt Jemima loving, a spatula job, as it were.
If you are Air Force (of any country) and are offended, remember - this is just my opinion. What’s yours?

As to your question - No, not completely. It is a contributing factor, though - in my opinion. The Roberts' Ridge action in Afghanistan is an example. The US Air Force said they could support the rescue op with A/C-130's instead of artillery. The Air Force decided not to use artillery, not the Army. The ground commander, a mere Ranger captain, had no say.

The USAF general in charge of the ground op withdrew the gunship at dawn but not the troops. So, no support. The so-called rescue mission was unbriefed, and unsupported. Therefore some died.

When this kind of thing happened on recon LZ's in Vietnam, our supporting artillery and/or close air support was on the spot to keep the enemies' head down while we were extracted. It worked great.

In the US Army and Air Force right now there is a school of thought that artillery is out-dated; air-dropped precision weapons are the thing. Until the plane can't fly, of course.

I'll bet those guys wouldn't have minded a battery six, or several, of 155 "dumb" rounds on the enemies' position. But none of any caliber was present. Ground ops with no supporting artillery. Sh*t.

Since I'm starting arouse some ire here, might as well also say that I think there is nothing stupider than losing more men to recover dead bodies, as in the case of the rescuers, above. The rescuers weren't stupid. They were brave soldiers. It was the commander, safe in his bunker, watching it on drone TV. In most cases, bodies can be recovered after the action w/no casualties.

This is an emotional subject and I can respect the opposite viewpoint. But having been the person who had to write the letters to next-of-kin, I wouldn't want to have to justify it. My senior NCOs, some w/4 years combat experience, warned me on this. I listened.

OK, that's enough of that. Even I get tired of hearing me.

Similar threads

Latest Threads