Soldier Five - The next Bravo Two Zero story

[rabby]

Mike Coburn finally managed to get his book published and is due out in March sometime. If you get the Mail on Sunday they have been printing bits of the book for the last couple of weeks and are continuing to do so.....

[ortlieb]

It'll be interesting to see if he can bring a new view to the table, or just churn on with the "Chris Ryan slated Vince Phillips unfairly" mantra.....

[Jon]

From what ive seen in the papers it conflicts with what Mcnab wrote - eg: Coburn says that they took along an Iraqi when they hijacked a taxi (backed up by Michael Asher) while McNab says they didnt.

Even though ill buy the book and read it, the whole episode of BTZ is starting to annoy me. It was just one patrol that went wrong. Dozens of other c@#t have been writtenabout the SAS etc and noone blinks an eye. Just tabloids capitalising on a story these days.

[Undertow]

oooooooooooooooooooooo I've got it and from what i have read it is very good. It is quite a different tale then what McNab said but who knows? It also goes back when Mike first joined 1RNZIR and then NZSAS. I really do like it, good book.

[Jason Bourne]

[Jon]

I think whoever posted that vote poll about who do you believe needs to add another tick box for Mike Coburn.

Just tried but couldnt. Sorry.

[Jon]

Just finished the book. I think that what he says is true. McNab, Ryan and Asher published there versions of events simply to make money. After reading what Coburn went through to get the book published - he risked becoming bankrupt when paying for legal costs - it is clear that his motivation was not money but a moral obligation to tell the truth.

McNabs book is full of exagerations while Ryans account has lies embedded throughout and is biased towards him. Asher's does clear up some things but fails to explain others, or in some cases says things biased towards the Iraqis accounts.

One example is when the patrol was first compromised in the wadi. McNab says that the shepherd boy locked eyes with Mcnab and then ran. He says that Vince and Stan/Mal tried to cut him off. Ryan says that Vince moved and the boy saw him. Asher interviewed the shepherd (now a man) who stated that he didnt see the patrol at all, which is what Coburn also says.
Asher goes on to say that the tractor driver (Abbas) was the one who saw the patrol, which is also backed up by Coburn. I believe Asher and Coburn here. (McNab even said that they landed 20kms from the LUP while the others support the 2km distance)

They all, except Asher, go on to say that they then confronted the Iraqi army. Asher said that it was only 3 men who fought them, but McNab, Ryan and Coburn argue that it was scores of Iraqi soldiers and trucks/APCs. I reckon that the patrol members are telling the truth here. The Iraqis have a history of exaggerating events.

The rest is basically the same. All four authors have different views of events. I think McNab made a good many wrong decisions and in his book he has twisted the truth to cover his faults. Ryan has exaggerated his position, but I believe what he says about the E&E is mostly true. Coburns is the most likely to be true, while Ashers is flawed because it is based on the Iraqis point of view.

[Jason Bourne]

[adj125]

De La Billiere's "Eye of the storm" also adds a perspective from the point of view of their debriefs at hq apparently

peter ratcliffe wrote eye of the storm

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASI ... 74-1046804