US bombs wedding by mistake
This kind of stuff is very frustrating. Maybe we will apologize....
<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/south_asia/newsid_2079000/2079565.stm"; target="_blank">http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/south_asia/newsid_2079000/2079565.stm</a>;
[ 07-01-2002: Message edited by: Gringo Viejo ] <img src="graemlins/embarrassed.gif" border="0" alt="[Embarrassed]" />
[ 07-01-2002: Message edited by: Gringo Viejo ]</p>
<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/south_asia/newsid_2079000/2079565.stm"; target="_blank">http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/south_asia/newsid_2079000/2079565.stm</a>;
[ 07-01-2002: Message edited by: Gringo Viejo ] <img src="graemlins/embarrassed.gif" border="0" alt="[Embarrassed]" />
[ 07-01-2002: Message edited by: Gringo Viejo ]</p>
Comments
'Some reports suggest that the American planes may have mistaken gunfiring at the wedding for hostile fire aimed at them. '
<img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" /> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
<strong>Isn´t this like the second or third time they do that? I would reconsider getting married if I was an Afghan man. Isn´t it hard enough with the usual worries of how the wife will look like in ten years and if you will be getting along?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Some couples might take it as an omen. Just think of what it could have been like if the US accidentally bombed a couples honeymoon. <img src="graemlins/surprised.gif" border="0" alt="[Surprised]" />
It would bring a new meaning to the phrase "Fireworks between the sheets"
<strong>This kind of stuff is very frustrating. Maybe we will apologize....
[ 07-01-2002: Message edited by: Gringo Viejo ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
Sadly this type of thing has happened before and will happen again. During the Gulf war, more British troops were killed by so called 'friendly fire' from the Americans than by the enemy. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
'Get over it.' is something you say after an appreciable amount of time has passed.
So far: 3667 civilians killed by US bombings in Afghanistan. Weapons may be more accurate now, but to deliberately target areas of dense population?
<img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
<a href="http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/civiDeaths.html"; target="_blank">http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/civiDeaths.html</a>;
<a href="http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/appendix5.html"; target="_blank">http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/appendix5.html</a>;
<strong>Not to be insensitive but this is war, shit happens. Get over it. Weapons are way more accurate than they used to be, be thankful for that. Civilian casualties will ALWAYS be a part of war.</strong><hr></blockquote>
to true. we tend to go way out of our way to limit collateral damage in armed conflict. this is sad none the less, but my guess is that firing weapons into the air in an area patrolled by allied aircraft is probably not the best idea, hostile or not.
this happens all the time in iraq. my brother is an AF pilot and has flown there quite a bit over the years. he says that these guys will continualy "light" them up with radar from SAM and AAA sites or take pot shots at them with small arms fire only to find themselves dead shortly there after. this is kind of funny in a sense because "we" are not suposed to engage them until fired upon or actively locked by radar. yet they keep doing it. dumbasses. it has become quite the game. the brits go fling in there and drawn their fire, only to have the americans bring in death from above. of course they some times hit non combatants. the unfortunate tides of war.
It's like the people on the ground haven't quite figured out what's funny and what's not. And what to joke about, or what constitutes "playing" or a prank, or not.
If I knew that trying to act all macho and shooting my little pea-shooter of a gun at some enemy jets - who are authorized to return fire if fired upon - is going to result in getting the holy hell shot and bombed out of me, I might think twice.
Still sad when civilians are killed, of course.
But makes you wonder how many of these situations were aggravated by individuals acting a fool or just being plain thoughtless and moronic.
<strong>
Sadly this type of thing has happened before and will happen again. During the Gulf war, more British troops were killed by so called 'friendly fire' from the Americans than by the enemy. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
That's not just British troops. It was true for American troops as well. The figure was over 60% IIRC. In that war however we used very few laser guided missiles if any. We used a lot more in Afghanistan, although still many dumb bombs were used. Hopefully as we move to more and more laser and satellite bombs some of the problems will decrease.
However, you still have the even bigger problem which is in distinguishing a legitimate target from a non-legitimate one. It was a problem in Vietnam when we couldn't tell the VietCong from the South Vietnamese. It was a problem in the Gulf War when we couldn't tell that friendly soldiers were sometimes what pilots were seeing in their killboxes. It is a problem in Afghanistan. And it is a problem when we can't tell the terrorists from the average joe. Unfortunately technology cannot solve this problem in the same ways that we have solved other military problems. Well at least not as far as we know yet.
The "get over it" comment seemed silly to me. It just happened yesterday and the people clearly intended no harm. Is firing guns into the air in Afghanistan probably a bad idea? Yes. Do the Afghanistan people deserve some of the blame for their present situation? Maybe. But these were still people at a wedding who just got obliterated. It is a shame and it is something that we should apologize for.
<strong>The Brits wandered in the a "Kill Zone" at the wrong time. Didn't bother to know that huh? Here's a hint; Get GPS and learn how to use it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
if your refering to the gulf war, then you forgot the americans. we did a pretty fair job at killing our own people as well.
during the gulf war we realized a major weakness in our comand and control opperations (actually it started as far back as graneda). our seperate military branches didn't really work well together. vital information was not effeciently if at all being passed back and forth to each branch let alone our allies, resulting in some avoidable losses. the airforce had and still has an excellent intergrated system in place but the other branches have been playing catch up. it's a lot better than than it was 10 years ago, but it's far from perfect. and as far as our allies go, there is a reason why there are so few other countires commiting ground and air forces to the current war effort, not for lack of wanting to be there, they just simply can't keep up due to a lack of intergartion with the current system/s. The exception being the britts for the most part.
<strong>Not to be insensitive but this is war, shit happens. Get over it. Weapons are way more accurate than they used to be, be thankful for that. Civilian casualties will ALWAYS be a part of war.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Even so. But if some alien race came down telling us that they?re protecting our place in universe. Mistakenly, bomb 250 American lives. I don't expect see us to biting our lower lip telling ourselves get use to it.
And I don't expect if it was 250 American soldiers on ground that dies from that errand bomb, that our country would not do all we can to find out what happen and to explain it to American people why this should never happen again. It's easy when it's not us.
<strong>The Brits wandered in the a "Kill Zone" at the wrong time. Didn't bother to know that huh? Here's a hint; Get GPS and learn how to use it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
[ 07-02-2002: Message edited by: Harald ]
[ 07-02-2002: Message edited by: Harald ]</p>
<strong>Not to be insensitive but this is war, shit happens. Get over it. Weapons are way more accurate than they used to be, be thankful for that. Civilian casualties will ALWAYS be a part of war.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Is that what you thought when the twin towers collapsed? Yeah, shit happens. Yeah, civilian casualties will ALWAYS be a part of war.
<strong>
Is that what you thought when the twin towers collapsed? Yeah, shit happens. Yeah, civilian casualties will ALWAYS be a part of war.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Sort of a good point there!
<strong>Not to be insensitive but this is war, shit happens. Get over it. Weapons are way more accurate than they used to be, be thankful for that. Civilian casualties will ALWAYS be a part of war.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Your statement is insensitive! Are you too?
Civilian casualities must be avoided.
don't you know the concept of empathy?