Friendly fire or not so friendly?

Question

So the Americans have done it again, Yesterday it emerged that the three soldiers died in Afghanistan when a US plane called in by British troops to attack Taliban insurgents they were fighting accidentally hit them with a 500lb bomb instead.

As well as reigniting the row over the lack of equipment provided to British troops fighting abroad, the incident threatens to escalate into a diplomatic row after the Tories said the Government should demand the cockpit recorder of the American F15.

Relations with Washington, already strained following criticism by US generals of the British in Iraq, could freeze if the Americans repeat the reluctance to give evidence to an inquest as they did in the case of L/Cpl Matty Hull, Comments please

Answer 1

What is so "Friendly" about killing innocent soldiers, especially when they are on your side. I think the 'Friendly fire" is used to hide the incompetency of the American soldiers. This is not the first time that they have done it.

Answer 2

I hope that it was a mistake and it probably was. I can not imagine an American F-15 intentionally bombing British troops. Politicians in both countries will just make things worse by carping about it.

Yes, Zippo, there were friendly fire incidents in the Second World War. South African tank commander Robert Crisp wrote about tanks of Commonwealth forces firing on each other. Aircraft were involved in most instances of fracticide, as even prop driven aircraft move too fast to see perfectly.

Answer 3

Well, actually, the US government turned over the cockpit tapes in the Matty hull incident, right after it happened.

The British MOD had them for their investigation immediately.

The US just didn't turn them over to the Civilian inquest that happened years later.

And you say the Americans have done it again,

How do you know the British air controller who called in the bomb strike, didn't bugger the job ?

And all things considered, the American friendly fire rate, is still only 10% of the british friendly fire rate in afghanistan and iraq.

With limited soldiers in both Iraq and afghanistan, there have been 4 british on british friendly fire incidents resulting in 6 british casualties.

Not once, have the citizens of britian, called for thier own soldiers to face criminal charges over a friendly fire incident.

So wait untill the facts come out, before another round of whining.

Answer 4

Its a really sad thing that this has happened. That being said only 3 were killed? has anybody ever read of the kind of things that happened in the past fighting wars? WW1 WW2 the Korean war? etc etc.. I would trust American fighter pilots or English fighter pilots to drop bombs over my head any day. If anyone thinks that the F-15 pilot is cheering this accident and is struting around like a .... well.. I would bet that the pilot is suffering more guilt and remorse over killing his comrades than any of us will ever expriance in our lives. Typical of our political system (and the english system) of turning this into a media circus just like anyother thing that happens that is "sad"

Answer 5

The pilots as I see it locked in the coordinates they were given from the Brits on the ground...and they fire away. Let's not be too hasty to draw conclusions here until the military completes their investigation. Some goof....that's for sure. The British are our allies and we feel so badly about what happen.

Answer 6

did you read the whole story!!!!

you are quick to blame the americans. The story said that it could have been a fualty bomb or fualty position given by the forces on the ground.

The planes drop bombs where they are told to drop them. they are given location and from there it is dropped. Its not pilot error most of the time in these accidents but the ground spotters

Answer 7

I read once that as many as 30% of American casualties in Viet Nam were caused by friendly fire. That's upwards of 15000 deaths. Does it surprise you that when 18 year olds are given a license to kill, people die needlessly?

I am against the war, but war is hell comes to mind.

Answer 8

The time period is an oxymoron and It must get replaced by way of whatever like "non-enemy unintentional fireplace" and even use the British time period "blue on blue". It is a approach errors and when you propose using the time period manslaughter, i might decide on it to be known as "company manslaughter" as it is not a one guy's fault.

Answer 9

yeah .....sexy