Should Brits and Canadians operate in the same theater as US troops in light of recent so called Friendly fire

Question

I mean how many Canadians and Brits are going to be killed by American Forces?

This has been going on since Monte Casino in the Italian campaign 1944
Where US bombers were killing more Brits than the Germans....no ****

P/S I spent 24 years in British Royal Navy

Answer 1

Do us all a favor and post the total number of close air support aircraft in both the British and Canadian military inventory. When you do so you'll realize the answer to your question is that Brits and Canadians, if they want any close air support at all, have no choice but to operate with the United States.

While we're on the subject of murdering troops on our own side, you might like to think about what your own generals did to your own troops, and those of your commonwealth nations, at places like Gillipoli and Dieppe. Was anyone court marshaled and shot for those disasters?

Too bad about the Royal Navy. I see where you'll be down to 20 odd ships in just a few years.

Answer 2

Don't be a hot dog and blow this thing out of proportion. The British incident is four years old, and the Canadian was a while back, too. There are a lot more Americans killed by friendly fire than any of our allies, it's just something that happens in wartime.

With some of the defensive measures that have been adopted, there are a lot fewer incidents of friendly fire in this war, than wars gone by. The incident rate is down considerably, so don't try to make yourself look like you know what you're talking about, as a matter of fact, it's past your bedtime, go to your room!

Answer 3

You know when your right with Americans because they get very uptight and start critising everything. Have any other nation killed an American soldier in Iraq who isnt an insurgent or the enemy. Infact has it ever happened. Would be interesting to know

Yanks can have all the equipment the want but as soon as us Brits get some new equipment we will be just fine seeing as we train our soldiers to make a judgement and to make the correct one. Train your soldiers then equip them America. Teach them the difference between a friendly and a enemy. Keep training them till its second nature then train them some more. Dont let them go to war until they can tell the differnce. Its not that hard seeing as Iraq has no armour and the British Army has tanks and aircraft.

Wow who would of thought, the British have an army. That must be the topic of discussion in the US military bases

Hey you below. The Yanks changed frequency so how the hell are we supposed to let them know. The yanks dont share enough info then start pointing fingers. Maybe its time we started returning fire. Having Anti aircraft guns in all convoys. Maybe if we took a few out they would start to think and even learn there lesson. Probably not

Answer 4

'friendly fire' casualties, or Blue on Blue's, simply by fact the British (and particular American) armies call them, are an inevitable component of modern-day conflict. In previous wars, much less solid munitions and weapons structures led to lots extra of them. interior the 1st worldwide conflict, getting hit by artillery 'falling short', and killed by your guy or woman gunners grew to become right into a real possibility. A pals grandfather - a device gunner throughout the time of WW1 - recognized that once confronted with a massed infantry attack it have been needed to place down non-end fire interior the process the enemy, even while it grew to become into sparkling that the fire could kill a lot of your guy or woman troops between the device weapons and the enemy. In WWII, for the duration of the attack on Berlin, a extensive artillery fire plan grew to become into achieved by the soviets on a timber finished of their very own forward troops. interior the Falklands, undesirable visibility at night mixed with tight operational risk-free practices, led to 2 communities of particular forces (marines and SAS) enticing in a fire-combat. it is tragic, and unavoidable. what's contemptible is while human beings attempt and make political capital out of those incidents, and while people who could run a mile before intervening in a schoolyard combat or helping a policeman in a pub brawl, use the prospect to criticise those interior the militia. Armchair generals look getting youthful. -

Answer 5

You mean how many have ALREADY met such a fate. The US has the best "technology" the "best defense systems" "the best military" "the "best trained". We cannot use the excuse that this sort of thing happened all of the time in earlier wars and conflicts. After all and again we have "the best" this and "the best" that ..This was a US war effort. Most of those who adopted themselves IN are now out. I see the same thing happening with the British (it's already happening) and I believe Canada would just prefer to run and defend her own country at this point. Every single country who assisted the U.S. in this war has put themselves in harms way anyway, not to mention the United States..

Answer 6

My question is:

Why did the British tell those pilots that there were no friendly troops in the area?

Can't the British keep track of where their own troops are?

Answer 7

Is it not a war? this shi* happens in a war. Only in most wars it is not covered be 80,000 journalist.

24 years? then how can you ask such a loaded question? On the GROUND all we care about is how to stay alive today! Do your mission and get back alive.

Answer 8

Oh.. geeze... Like friendly fire accidents *NEVER* happen to *ANY* other military operation on the planet... get real

Answer 9

Perhaps you are right - maybe we should all abandon each other - especially rude prix like you.