MilitaryForums.co.uk

Hello,

Can someone tell me if US pilots are cowboys? Are they so driven to get a kill that they'd rather kill friendly forces rather than not get a kill at all? The reason I ask is because this seems like the case.

Just recently an American pilot attacked British armoured vehicles. The experts say those Brits did all they could to avoid a friendly fire incident, yet the American pilot still managed to shoot at them.

And now, a US pilot recently attacked a convoy of Kurds, journalists and US special forces.

It seems that US pilots are out to kill friend or foe. Are US pilots being reckless, or is this all part of the fog of war?

Jesse

jesse, it would be made a lot simpler with the simple addition of a poll. hey, waddya know?!

viewtopic.php?p=27486#27486

The poll is a much better idea. Thanks.

Jesse

I dont know if U.S. pilots are cowboys but alot of ranchers and rodeo people are. Does this help you any?

Im a cowboy but I have never had the misfortune of being blamed for every thing from faulty technology to not being aware of where every single one of the 150,000 ground forces are and being able to distinguish them from the 300,000 enemy groundforces within split seconds after someone called for an air strike on that exact point or just 200 meters away from them. Yee Haw !!!!

Here Here

This subject is always going to be a moot point depending on your point of view. Yes you could argue that the pilots should take that second look before firing, equally you could say that when ground forces call in an air strike they should be more aware of the potential consequences.

It would be interesting to see what the percentage of friendly fire incidents is compared with the number of overall bombing missions flown. Until that calculation is done I don't really see how we can cast aspurtions about anybody's competance.

Of course there's no technological reason why ground units cannot be equipped with IFF kit (as fitted to all NATO aircraft), other than the cost of course.

The likelyhood of friendly fire was discussed at great length after the last Gulf war and the main recommendation to come out of it was the fitting of IFF kit to vehicles. Instead units were given orange air marker panels (just like in 1991) and just like in 91 pilots flying high altitude or fast ground attack missions could not readily disguinish friendly troops from the enemy.

So if we are looking for cowboys - what about the people responsible for sending the lads out there without this kit? My vote for John Wayne award 2003 is jointly shared between George Dubya and Phony B.Liar

Quite right, Gash,
cost isnt an issue, it would cost as much as a DVD player. Compared to the loss of a Main Battle Tank or two, a modern fighter aircraft or two, or scores of dead soldiers, that is small beer indeed.

Texas Ranger,

This issue is particularly interesting to me because during the recent military action in Afghanisan, US pilots killed Canadian soldiers in a friendly fire incident.

In this case, US pilots attacked Canadians that were conducting a live fire exercise. The pilots were explicitly told not to fire on these soliders, yet they did anyway. There is a litany of evidence against these pilots (i.e. least of all that they had a reputation for being reckless) and they got away with murder.

American's are famous for killing themselves and their allies. So much so that these allies are more afraid of the Americans than they are of the enemy.

Incidentially, I found the white supremacist discussion forum you belong to, and I disagree with your views on that topic as well.

Jesse

Regarding the incident in Afghanistan, I believe it was a complete accident but I believe it was nglegent enough to warrant a court marshall that stuck and included at least some jail time. If I were a judge on that one it would have been 6 months in jail and an other than honorable discharge. I would have also asked Canada to look into how it was that they were in the area unannounced. Not that your goverment cares about its military.

What white supremist web site?

See this:

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/2020/Dai ... 21220.html
Open Google search engine, type in
" speed+pilots+canadians " excluding quotation marks.
You'll find loads of articles on this subject.

Negligent.....or high?

Mark.

Texas Ranger,

In response to your question, "What white supremist [sic] web site?":

You're not as annoymous as you think.

You belong to the Stormfront White Nationalist Community discussion board, and your username is Dutchy. That forum preaches hate for the non-Aryan races. One very popular topic of debate is why the Jews should be despised.

The usernames of some of your fellow members are: Auschwitz Shower, Canadian Aryan, CT White Pride, and White Is Right 14.

That is the white supremacist website I was refering to.

Jesse

I thought you were referring to nbforrest.org of which I am also a member. I was going to tell you it was not white supremist. As for stormfront, I reccomend it to everyone. My e mails are public here and there. Want a cookie? I have very firm views regarding immigration in America. On the other hand I travel to Asian countries and help out with thousands of non white people. Also my second post on this board about enoch powell states very clearly how I feel regarding race and there is a confederate flag on my profile so quit trying to act like Nancy Drew and please dont e mail me again. Go stalk someone else you freak.

I don't know are all Canadians cowards? And who said the bombing of Canadians in Afghanisan was an accident? :usa

US pilots are top-notch and fly thousands of sorties a day in defense of coalition forces.

...and speaking of this Blood for Oil rubish that your Anti-American press spew, why don't you explain why your country allied it'self with an oppressive murderous regime in the Sudan which is responsible for the murder of 2 million people over the past few years. I know why b/c your country wants exclusive rights to the oil rich fields in the Southern part of Sudan.

Which country? The UK or Canada? Not been called up yet to do some real soldiering? Good telly though isn't it - but thank god all those civvies aren't uncle sams finest? Still at least they're 'free'.

Who's next then? Syria, Iran? North Korea looks like it might be a tricky one, best to warm up with a few easier ones first. Good luck with policing the world, I know you only have its best interests at heart.

Canada. You say police the world like it's a bad thing. People deserve freedom. And people with the ability to liberate should.