British troops are getting fed up with ‘blue on blue’ fire by the trigger happy ‘cowboys’ in the USAF.
There does not seem to be anything about this in the US media and some threads on US forums are noting that. I have a problem with the way this incident has been handled and responded to by the US audience. Most apologies are suffixed with mumble mumble “fog of war”, “fighting conditions”, “it’s war, shit happens” mumble, mumble. And then there is the abusive variety of commenters or warbloggers who will assault anyone suggesting that the US military is anything short of orgasmic. Most ‘attacks’ on British frustration with FF by the US reach the same level of intelligence the media have about Iraq. And that’s pretty low.
Given the absence of the debate in the US media (and I do not care how many official channel it has to go through before the various spokepersons are allowed to comment), I checked the situation on a military forum which was linked on ARRSE (Army Rumour Service). Here are a few comments that put the point better than I could:
To our US collegues. I have served many times with the US but one thing you lack is your ability to look at how you do things. You think its your way or the highway! Do not take this as an insult but you do have a terrible history of blue on blue and it needs addressing. My dad was in Korea as a Brit Soldier he said that the Brits were terrified of US Artillery. An old Sgt Maj of mine who is Australian said that his unit also lost more to US “friendly” fire than enemy during Vietnam.
Again in GW1, more Brits lost to US forces than Iraqi, then the Canadians in Afghanistan, now its happening again! My dad is genuinely more concerned about me being hit by US Forces than Iraqi when I deploy as are most of the UK public about our servicemen. These occurences can change public opinion and the consequences of this can be terrible. What gets us is that you appear to just say “Fog of war” or something similar, which just piss*es us of even more.
PS – when I go, I will be the one with the giant UK flag flying above my head
And another one:
A really pissed Brit. Firstly, I’m amazed that I can’t find reference ONE to this incident in the American Press. Who says your media is free. Let me make this plain, we are ALL very angry, and the standard American reply of “It’s war, sh1t happens, is NOT good enough” The fact this story hasn’t even run in the American press, as far as I can see, speaks volumes.
I remember vividly, the last time an A10 killed a British AFV. It was from my Regiments battlegroup in GW1. 2 Warriors killed, in spite of the fact, both IFV’s were displaying Big Union Jacks and Orange recognition panels. Were the pilots court-martialled? Bullsh1t were they.
This is the early report, which as you can imagine, has circulated the British Armed Forces very fast indeed:
- The AFVs were in the location they were supposed to be in at the time they were supposed to be there.
- They were flying the Union Flag
- They had orange ID markers
- They displayed Allied Cheverons
- The pilot took 2 passes, shooting on both with civilians close by
- After the 1st pass British soldiers in British uniforms waved and tried to warn the pilot
- The optical scope on an A10 can id a target at 1500m. The pilot was flying at no more than 50m on each pass. Visibility has been described as “excellent”.
- The tank crews adjacent fired the colour of the day smoke marker to warn the A10 pilot
- The pilot had not been engaged or shot at by either British forces, or Iraqis.
- The pilot was out of his designated Limits of Exploitation.
In spite of all of this, the pilot still engaged, not once, but twice. There is a stong feeling amongst us, that he won’t get prosecuted, there won’t be any action taken, there never is. He gunned that column down, because as he dived in, he had the soundtrack going in his head, and he wanted a kill
Could I have recognised a Scimitar or a BMP2 at 200 knots, in broad daylight? Yes I could…
And just to make matters worse, I remember one RAF veteran telling me about how during the WWII when the Germans were firing, the British and the Americans ducked, when the British were firing the Germans ducked and when the Americans were firing, everybody ducked…
Come on, guys, we are supposed to be on the same side, so don’t get uppity when we start asking questions why are our soldiers being killed by yours…
A very few really are “cowboys”; however, it would appear that the UK has had a few ‘blue on blue’ incidents, too.
Since ‘the cowboys’ are also the ones who decided that they would be willing to take the risks inherent with “Saddam has to go”, just don’t take potshots at us for not being absolutely perfect, please. The UK has been absolutely stalwart in support, so don’t
knock on us too hard is all we ask.
last year an american,,droped a bomb on a friend of mine in afasganastan, im a canadian, the two were charged,the same thing will happen here but after the war nows not the time.
last year an american,,droped a bomb on a friend of mine in afasganastan, im a canadian, the two were charged,the same thing will happen here but after the war nows not the time.
MommaBear, your response just proves my point.
The British blue on blue occurred under very very different conditions and even so, that does not make the US blue on blue less upsetting.
I am not talking about ‘being absolutely perfect’, I am talking about training A-10 pilots and other parts of the US military to recognise friendly vehicles, at least in daylight with all the possible markings on them, whilst signalling by a flare that they are friendly… And when FF happens, report it fairly in the US and make sure that there is an appropriate follow up, especially if negligence and imcompetence were the cause.
Bill, some Brits on the military forums seem to imply that nothing happened to those who bombed Canadian forces in Afghanistan. Have you got any links/info?
Also, I’d rather they do something now to make sure this doesn’t keep happening now…
It certainly sounds like this pilot was reckless. If so, the american forces will discipline him as they did with their pilots that bombed Canadians in Afghanistan.
But don’t forget that friendly fire is now a bigger threat than enemy fire. There have been numerous incidents of Americans firing on each other, not just on Brits. Given that nearly 90% of the firepower is American, naturally American on Brit incidents will be more common than the reverse. They are sad, and sometimes caused by reckless soldiers and pilots. But that’s the sort of thing that is only discovered once combat starts, and is difficult to prevent entirely.
Kevin, understand and agree. It’s just seeing how stupid the debate can get when you get the patriotic wanking brigade on-line that gets to me… Mind you, not here on samizdata.net yet. 🙂
Also, I do have a relative out there in the Royal Marines and am naturally concerned. After all, he did not join to be shot at by our allies.
I’ve never posted before, so we shall see if I’m successful.
Unlike many of you, I’m not particularly “militarily oriented”, and don’t understand the technicalities of warfare. But the incident Gabriel mentions really bothers me, for several reasons.
I first read about it on the BBC website. I was truly shocked and appalled, because it doesn’t make any sense. The huge British flag the soldiers were displaying, the “kit” given to the British by the Americans to avoid this very nightmare with the assurance that it would be sufficient to avoid FF, the fact that the pilot came back a second time, apparently ignoring the soldier waving desperately. Why couldn’t he see them? Why would he deliberately fire on friendly troops?
I, too, am mightily unimpressed with the seeming inability of the American media to even mention this tragedy. I don’t want us to sink into the mindset that “everyone else is against us, so we must relay only good news to ourselves”. What’s the difference between that and Pravda? It’s a huge story, and unfortunately also a huge PR disaster, but don’t make it worse by burying it. If there is an active investigation (and there bloody well should be), at least mention that. All burying it does is give the British the impression that 1) we have something to hide, or 2) we don’t give a shit what happens to them. They’re not important enough to do anything but patronise with “ain’t they something in Basra” puff pieces. Sorry to go off but this has really angered me. The British troops are not along for the ride; they are vital, and the way America, at this point, seems to be handling this story seems very disrespectful to them.
Nancy
Definitely a problem to address. I’m an American civilian and at air and military shows I’ve been to I can distinguish every US, Soviet/Russian, British, and European military aircraft, and most of the land vehicles. And I haven’t even been trained to. How hard can it be to require all allied combatants to qualify on ally/enemy recognition tests once a year. They require them to qualify on all sorts of other things, like marksmanship and eyesight. A 20 minute computer-based ally/enemy recognition test should go a long way toward reducing this problem.
Of course, the other problem is that the US media hasn’t reported this. However, our TV media is more political entertainment and punditry now than real reporting. I’m sure the more serious print media, from the NYTimes to the New Yorker to Time will take it up.
I am with Gabriel 100%.
‘FF’ incidents to, sadly, occur in combat but the number of British victims is growing beyond any reasonable expectation. Of course we all realise that nobody means for this to happen but it does begin to look like recklessness.
More than that, though, the collective shrug of the US military and media in response is deeply galling. It appears that British lives are just expendable. They don’t matter.
There are quite a few people in Britain (of the firmly non-idiot persuasion) who suspect that this alliance is a one-way street. How are we supposed to convince them that they are wrong? Should we even bother to try?
I am astounded that any of you are annoyed about this.
A society in which 75% of the populace is stupid enough to have been hornswoggled into believing that Saddam Husssein had anything whatsoever to do with Sept 11th, 2001 will produce this sort of military activity.
I think the non-coverage by the US media is more a matter of incompetence. The reporters will cover what they personally see, but other than that they basically just regurgitate press releases. Sooner or later friendly fire incidents will get coverage here, but for that to happen either a US reporter has to see one firsthand (or maybe talk to another reporter who did) or else the British have to get sufficiently irate to say something about it in a press briefing.
When people say “But the Brits had their own blue-on-blue with one Challenger tank shooting another”, they miss several points:
1. We are NOT saying that blue-on-blue incident are always negligent… some are indeed an unavoidable consequence of warfare. But some are not.
2. The British blue-on-blue happened in a confused tank-to-tank battle, in a sandstorm and in poor light… the A-10 blue-on-blue happened in daylight, not under fire and in good weather.
All blue-on-blues are not the same.
Also, this is not really a US-UK thing… it is one pilot who well and truly screwed the pooch and he, not the entire USAF, should be held to account.
Given the incredible bias shown by the beeb and most of the rags published in the UK, it’s not surprising it’s being milked for all its worth! Blame the ‘cowboy’ references all over the place to that. As Perry noted, that was and still remains an individual incident, not the entire US contingent! Please just have a wee bit of perspective and not add to the ‘sour everything’ attitude so prevalent these days.
As an American, I am sickened by both the event and the lack of reporting on it by the American media.
There’s a lot of what I call aggressive stupidity in my country. There are still far more good people than incompetent, but we are too tolerant of the incompetent, especially when they manage to acquire some power.
Mommabear, the U.S. military is far better than it was over three decades ago when I was forced into it. But one of the reasons it is better is because lots of people reported on the problems that they saw. It hurts a bit in the short term, but makes things better in the long term.
Everyone in the UK — especially the families most directly affected — has my sympathies.
I am surprised that you say this has not been covered by the US media. I recall hearing of both the Patriot-on-Tornado incident and the A-10 incident you mention. I saw them on CNN/MSNBC/FNC when they occurred.
Blue on Blue _is_ a problem – just the other day one of the US F-16’s (I beleive, it might have been another US a/c) was reported to have taken out a Patriot battery when it’s radar locked on him – he wasn’t going to see if they made a mistake – fortunately the fire control unit of the Patriot’s seem to be located a distance from the missle firing unit.
I agree this type of thing is pretty bad and needs to be addressed, but unless there is a lot more of it going on then you’ve mentioned, it _is_ being reported in the US by major media outlets. As to the adequacy of the US response, well that may be a different matter.
Believe it or not – I live in NYC – and ive heard of this issue – not online even – i just cannot remember from where.
My boss used to fly A-10s and he heard about this and was pissed off. The assumption that the British tank COULD be identified is correct. At 50, the guy should be able to recognize the difference between a challenger and a T series very easily – only the americans and the british share that special armor we use – it is top secret… i believe its called Chobrin armor or something like that.
The A-10 pilot should be charged. But now we come to the real question:
What do you do to a soldier who has decided to put his neck on the line if he totally fucks up in time of war? The issue isnt was he negligent – there is NO question about that – if there is in your mind you have issues – the issue is what kind of punnishment is useful and appropriate?
Say you pull him off the battlefield – which in the case of the A-10 pilot is probably a good idea – do you put him infront of a tribunal DURING the war? With all the press standing around? How should this be handled?
my 2 cents:
1) pull him off duty
2) put him behind lines – give him something to do to keep himself busy – and give him access to legal officers – hes going to have to get his story straight
3) dont worry about it until things settle down – you never know – he might do something fucking incredible and save hundreds of lives before things settle down – and that MIGHT vindicate him depending upon the situation.
4) send him home for Court Marshal.
5) Include British military ADVISORS on the comittee – people that are allowed to ask questions but are not given a vote. This is fair I believe.
6) Charge: manslaughter – 2 counts – its only fair.
Now – he will be found guilty – and he will spend 20 years behind bars for fucking up on the battlefield – are you comfortable with those results? Im not – but I feel equaly uncomfortable NOT holding the man responsible for killing 2 British tank crew members.
I agree with the whole “fog of war” – you all know that in the heat of the moment people can and do stupid things – no matter how good their training has been – but these are British soldiers who were killed in a horribly negligent fashion – and something must be done. Tank on tank in the heat of combat is one thing – even artillary fire is different – or direct small arms fire in a raid – this is an A-10 taking out a tank on a clear day in a non-combat area (so to speak).
my american point of view….
If the pilot was negligent, he should be punished. However, I find it amazing that people who have never, and will never, fly a combat aircraft sit here and talk about “it was daylight! He should have seen!” How do you know? You don’t know the first goddamned thing about flying an A-10, and neither do I. Let’s try and back off the armchair piloting, shall we?
The world has undergone a disturbing trend. Warfare, a dangerous and bloody business, is supposed to be perfect now. This is ABSURD. Friendly fire will happen, even with flags and identifier kits and whatnot. Civilians will die. Does anybody have any friendly fire figures for WWII? I’d be curious to see them, including Allied fighter planes shooting up convoys of Allied POW’s because they thought it was a supply train, and other such tragic things.
And another reason that this hasn’t been played up in the US media, as far as I can tell, is that we have a tendency to shrug off friendly fire casualties. It’s part of the deal; it sucks, but let’s move on. We hear reports in peacetime ALL THE TIME about military training crashes and the like, and we realize that this whole military thingy is a dangerous business, and those who sign up for it realize that. I’ve never spoken to another American who got worked up over friendly fire incidents.
I think the main thing here is that the recent rise in British anti-American sentiment, which has reduced since the beginning of hostilities as we work together, flares up again whenever somebody thinks an American was acting like a “cowboy”. And believe me, the BBC knows this and will milk it for all its worth.
Chill out. This is war, not Civ III, and you are not a fighter pilot, or a general, and you do not have the knowledge to judge this situation.
That being said, I think my tone is slightly hostile because I’m a little heated right now, but please don’t take it that way. I just get upset when people want perfect, which is IMPOSSIBLE.
your link text goes here
A link to the US Dept of Defense statement about the Canadian incident. The pilots are charged with 4 counts of Involuntary Manslaughter, and 8 of aggravated assault. They could get a fair amount of time in Leavenworth, if convicted. The hearings are underway – you can follow them at
your link text goes here.
Sorry, I didn’t manage to change the descriptions on the link. The first is described, the second is at “Canada.com”.
Regarding the Canadians in Afghanistan:
it is unlikely that the US pilots will
face charges.
‘No friendly fire trial, U.S. judge advises’
I’m in the US and I’ve heard about all of the blue-on-blue incidents also. I think the point has to be made that the US has the majority of forces in the area and is naturally going to have a higher rate of accidents. If we were seeing Tornadoes all over the battlefild instead of F-16’s and A-10s I’m certain that we would have seen UK on US friendly fire by now. That said, you can rest assured that all of these incidents will be investigated by the military as the accident with the Canadians in Afghanistan is. The reason that the military isn’t making a big stink about this is that they are fighting a war and don’t need the media circus that would accompany such a tribunal in peace time.
Alfred E. Neuman: Samizdata.net can hardly be accused of being an ‘anti-American’ blog! In fact we get criticized for being too pro-US. That does not mean we will not ask the things that need asking, just do not ascribe them to ‘anti-americanism’ on our part because a quick read of our blog shows that is clearly not the case.
The fact is negligence is negligence. My views would be no different if the vehicle (a Scimitar, btw, not a Challenger) had been a Bradley and the pilot had been an RAF chap in a Harrier… I think a court marshal is needed to examine the case because unless there are factors that have not come out, it sure looks like negligence to me.
I heard about this on American media, I believe it was on the radio. This sort of thing does happen. The truth will come out in the court martial hearings as it is coming out in the Canadian affair. If the pilot was negligent he will be justly punished. Period. There are way too many friendly fire incidents, but there are far fewer to date then in the first Gulf war and hopefully this will continue to decline. That being said, we have a war to fight. Things are going to get fubared, but that always happens in war. We just try to learn from our mistakes and do better in the future. By the way, thank God for cowboys like GWB. Nice to have a leader with balls for once.
A pilot saying “oops” gets the same pass as a cop saying “I thought he had a gun”. Nothing will happen to our (I’m American) pilot. This will be buried because its bad PR, and the govt is probably afraid that support for the war is a mile wide and an inch thick. This is the sort of BS from govt that people on this board oppose (if that’s not putting words in anyone’s mouth), but is a requirement for a war. We gotta keep morale up, you know, and not let the anti-war America hating commies have an issue.
You didn’t honestly think that the War on Terror would differ from any other action of Big Government, did you?
The regrettable truth is that our troops are not sufficiently integrated with the American war machine, most probably due to a lack of capital investment. If we are to continue joint operations on a long term basis it would probably be a good idea to fully integrate on an economic, social and defence basis…How else are we going to put an end to franco-irritation?
If y’all had just let us elect members to Parliment back in the 1770s…… 🙂
Perry, nowhere did I accuse Samizdata of anti-Americanism; I read the site every day and I know what you’re about. I merely mentioned anti-Americanism in the UK in general.
It’s understandable to get pissed if you think one of your guys got killed negligently. But I can’t help feeling the “cowboy” sneer from this blog entry; the tacit assumption that this guy just went and did some nice shootin’, Tex. The standard support for the military is immediately jettisoned to be replaced with “this pilot was negligent” because, by all accounts, he should have known what he was shooting at.
So, normally, you give our military the benefit of the doubt, but when something this egregious happens, instead of saying “there must have been some sort of screwup/problem, because an American pilot wouldn’t do that”, you revert to “negligent cowboy asshole”. Why is that? Because he’s American, and all British people know we throw lead around first and don’t even ask questions later?
Lay off the backhanded, though undoubtedly unconscious, ignorant cowboy crap. It got old around 1898.
And if the pilot did turn out to be acting like Doc Holliday after a bottle of whiskey and a two-dollar whore, court-martial him after this war is done.
Like Bush said, you’re either for us (and our pilot) or against us.
When will they court marshal the Aussie pilot who straffed me in 1950 at Kunu Ri?
Alfred,
Given the level of vile, anti-American sentiment abroad a little sensitivity on the part of Americans is understandable. However, in the case of this posting, you are seeing it where it does not exist.
There was no ‘sneer’ in this post at all, merely a sense of frustration at the apparent lack of concern in the US for British ‘FF’ casualties. I think we’re entitled to that. You would be equally upset(and rightly so) if the situation was reversed.
As you are a regular reader of this blog, you must know that we have been at the forefront of the battle for truth amidst all the ludicrous and defamatory ‘yankee cowboy’ propoganda buzzing around the world. We will remain at that forefront but it does make life so much harder for all of us when our natural concern for the lives of our own soldiers is either dismissed or not taken seriously.
In the war of ideas, perceptions matter.
David, I think I see what our disconnect is here. You said:
a sense of frustration at the apparent lack of concern in the US for British ‘FF’ casualties
I can’t speak for other Americans, but I didn’t think of this incident in those terms. I saw a news report of friendly fire between coalition forces, and went “it happens.” I didn’t, and don’t, look at it divided down a US vs. UK line. It could have been Aussies shooting the Polish, or you shooting us, or us shooting us. To me, same difference.
As for the sneer, it’s stuff like this:
He gunned that column down, because as he dived in, he had the soundtrack going in his head, and he wanted a kill
that gives me that impression. I know Gabriel didn’t write that, but he did choose to quote it as a supporting argument.
Maybe where the UK troops are operating just has to be a “no-fly” zone for american planes. I dunno, I’m not a general or anything, but maybe that’s the best answer. I don’t understand how stuff like this can keep happening.
Gabriel
As an American, I am very, very sorry to hear about this incident. It was reported fairly widely in the American media, just not as much as in the British media.
Anyway, I hope it is thoroughly investigated, and hopefully, our military can use what they learn to make such incidents less likely (with appropriate punishment of the pilot, if that is indicated).
I admit, I don’t like the tendency in some comments to duck certain issues – I think you gain much more credibility by facing them head on, and also, you diffuse the (quite understandable) anger.
That being said, this is still a full war on and emotions run high. We’re on the same side guys – victory will bring our men and women home sooner, and I, for one, can’t wait.
Beware of unintended consequences.
If we start chraging, trying, and convicting soldiers for blue on blue incidents, it will have an effect on combat readiness and worthiness. Every time someone shoots, they’ll have to take an extra second to double check their target. As with everything else, the harms of both sides have to be weighed against each other.
I fully support trials for soldiers where gross incompetence or gross negligence leads to allied deaths. But only when it is gross. Not every allied caused fatality is deserving of a trial.
I was very sorry to read and hear about this incident. I’m grateful for the presence of UK and other partners in this effort.
Re: how it could have happened, I’m not certain but I *think* that close air support planes like the A10 don’t visually identify friendly tanks, because so often on the battlefield there is massive smoke. Instead they look for infrared beacons unique to the coalition. If so, did the tank in question have one? Was it working & did the pilot check it? Hard to say.
Integrating multiple countries’ forces isn’t always easy. Some countries were offended that the US didn’t accept offers to send large numbers of troops to Afghanistan, but if those troops aren’t equipped and trained as ours are, the possiblity of problems increases …. I would expect the UK forces to be closest to ours, tho.
Did the US press bury the story? It hasn’t been played up but neither has it been played down — I’ve read and heard about it and was very sorry to hear it. Are there gung ho pilots who need to be pulled? Sometimes. This one will face a court martial, probably.
It would be a bore if the Brits had to start firing back. I saw one report that a pilot (wisely) destroyed a Patriot battery immediately upon detecting its systems scanning his aircraft.
Can’t blame him.
I would like to refer some of you to this thread.
http://www.bhd93.com/community/forum/viewtopic.php?t=9989
You have to register to view it but here are some of the more interesting bits.
“QUESTION? Would there not be some video of the attack? Is it not SOP to “film” targeting runs/attacks? I would think that video would give at least SOME backround on what actually happened!”
“There was probably gun camera footage which is probably being gone over second by second.
There are only two excuses the A10 jock have for this one:
a. He thought he was taking ground fire from the column.
b. The vehicles did not have VS-17 marker panels or have the right color panel showing. (Watch the TV coverage all the vehicles have the purple/lavender side up. In ’91 the organe side was used.) The VS17 Panel is about 2 feet wide and four feet long. Even covered with dust the color stands out.
This is one A10 jock that is getting a real serious debrief.”
—
”
Then imagine you are flying at about 300+ miles per hour and have but a few seconds to make up your mind. A British tank looks a lot like a BMP especially when it’s a BMP you want to see. The mind plays tricks especially when you have some pre-concieved notion of what it is you are looking at. I can’t tell you how many times people have shot at cows on a range because they wanted that hot spot on the flir to be the target and not a cow. We have no idea of the events that occured other than the version given in the papers. As they say there are two sides to every story and unfortunantely in war, sometimes shit happens.”
—
There is alot of military jargon but they know what they are talking about. Like they said, there is two sides of every story and all we are getting is the press version.
Well, the pilots in the Afghanistan incident are facing charges, anyone who says otherwise is simply lying.
Secondly, while I’ve heard it said a lot that there were more British casualties in the first Gulf War due to friendly fire from US troops than hostiles, that doesn’t seem to be true.
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/gulf.war/facts/gulfwar/
It lists 24, 9 by US fire. That’s a lot, unfortunately, but it’s closer to a 1/3
The Tornado was widely reported in US news. I also had heard about the A-10 attacking the tank. I’ve also heard of Marines attacking Marines (A Cobra fired on a US tank, some shot at each other in a gunfight, a bunch were wounded) and the Challenger tanks attacking each other.
I’m a Yank who’s deeply embedded with Her Maj’s forces (peaceably enough… not deployed ‘over there’) and we were discussing this today.
Today one of my RAF counterparts talked about a recent joint-warfighting training exercise he had been deployed to here in the UK. He mentioned that Her Maj’s forces incurred a ridiculously high FF casualty rate (note: this exercise involved only British forces). The general consensus was that if the Brits were able to pony up anywhere near the amount of horsepower that Uncle Sugar can, we’d see just as many US troops eating British bullets.
The simple fact is that when you pull 90% of the workload, you’re going to f*ck up a lot more than your teammates will. And no amount of self-righteous indignation will make up for that, nor will it bring back those lost to FF.
trigger happy ‘cowboys’ … mumble mumble “fog of war”, “fighting conditions”, “it’s war, shit happens” mumble, mumble … assault anyone suggesting that the US military is anything short of orgasmic … same level of intelligence the media have about Iraq … when the Americans were firing, everybody ducked … don’t get uppity …
Gosh, no. No sneering here.
I keep thinking of all the reports I have been getting about the lack of sleep and the driving push ALL the soldiers have been performing…that so many of them are EXHAUSTED…
and I keep thinking bad things are going to happen when that is the case.
I don’t wish to belittle what has occured. In a perfect war, there would be NO friendly fire AT ALL…and I certainly don’t wish to brush off how serious this is…
but I can’t keep from thinking that it could simply be because the men in question are ALL SO VERY TIRED.
I hope a fast conclusion…or at least a genuine pause in teh battle so both British and American forces can regain their breath!
Wahoo, you should read some of the comments, especially on Stg Stryker’s posting on the same topic. It was that that got me annoyed, not the incident per se.
http://www.sgtstryker.com/weblog/archives/week_2003_03_30.html#002934
Look guys, I’m not trying to get all “uppity” here, but there’s a few things I want to state:
1) The overwhelming majority (at a ratio of something like 10-1) of allied strike aircraft are American. I don’t state this to take away from the fine contribution of the RAF or air forces of the Royal Navy, it’s just a fact.
2) Much of the close combat, where air support most needed, has so far has been going on in the south of Iraq, where British forces are dominant.
If “blue on blue” is going to happen at this point, there’s a pretty good chance its going to be US aircraft on British Ground forces. That’s just the way the forces are lined up, and the way combat is occurring.
If the situation was reversed, with the UK having the air power and the US having the majority of forces on the ground, do you think incidents like this wouldn’t happen? I very much doubt it, but to insinuate from this incident that the whole of the USAF is cavalierly whacking British units because it can’t be bothered to check its targeting scope is ridiculous, and offensive.
If this pilot acted negligently, as survivor reports indicate, then he’s going to face the consequences of attacking friendly troops. Whether “friendly” means American, British, or Australian is irrelevant. We’re all on the same team here boys and girls.
Gabriel:
I’m as appalled as you are at the lack of US press coverage of the A-10 attack on the Scimitars. There’s no acceptable explanation for it, and your anger is perfectly understandable. It pisses me off too.
As for the pilot: if he’s culpable, I hope he’s tried for manslaughter. I just don’t know enough about air combat or the facts of the case to have an informed opinion. Was he a “cowboy”? Possibly. But he might have been an otherwise decent and well-trained operator who was simply shorted sleep too often to do his job properly. In that case, his superiors and possibly the operational doctrine under which the A-10 pilots work should be reviewed. Whatever the answer may be, an open and unflinching *public* investigation, incorporating British military authorities, is warranted. Bring it on. (Possibly after the war; but get the pilot off flight duty until then.)
Nobody, but *nobody* over here wants to see our best friends killed in this way. That we may be perceived as uncaring and dismissive about these accidents is pretty terrible also.
This is war, and shit does happen. Americans are getting killed by blue-on-blue, too. The only reason there hasn’t been UK-on-US is that you guys aren’t flying much air support for us. If it were only British planes supporting British forces, similar incidents would occur too, but it wouldn’t have the “cowboy” talking point.
Was this specific guy in the A-10 reckless? Sure*. And there are reckless people in all walks of life, and they kill other people with their errors all the time, as any brief look at a highway would tell you.
In the end, it’s war, and shit happens. If that isn’t good enough for Britain, you better dissolve your armed forces, since you’ll never be able to accept the consequences of using them. There’s not been a single war in history without blue-on-blue.
*Assuming the eyewitness account was accurate and accurately reported.
I keep reading people, especially Brits, on this thread complain that the US media isn’t covering the friendly fire incidents. This is simply not true. I hear about each one on the telly as it happens. You people should know how to use the internet. Google it. There are HUNDREDS of articles about the friendly fire in Iraq from dozens of US outlets. Maybe we are guilty in the US of not paying sufficient attention to the problem, but to say it isn’t being reported or is being suppressed is something worthy of the wacky conspiracy theory left.
Chuck Watson, Shoutin’ across the Pacific, says, “Friendly Fire Isn’t.”
The comments here have been very illuminating and helpful. It seems there is media coverage of British casualties in the US and I am pleased about that.
Of course it shouldn’t really matter whether some coiffured TV anchor notes the tragedy. It is the lost lives that matter and if some members of the Samizdata Team (me included) appear somewhat aggravated it is because the least we owe our fighting troops is to give a damn. And we do give a damn. It is rewarding and confirmatory to note that our American readers clearly give a damn as well.
As for me, I find Martin Cole’s explanation above to be persuasive (i.e. lack of integration). In this time of electronic warfare it is boring, inglorious details like that which can mean the difference between living and dying in a hostile situation.
I hope and pray for no more ‘FF’ deaths but we all know that they are part and parcel of war nor they should they distract us from acknowledging the outstanding professionalism and bravery of both British and US forces in this conflict.
As I’ve read through these many comments, the one thing Americans cannot be held accountable is the British Press milking it for all its worth…that little hot potato is square in the laps of you chaps. If you dislike their concentration on the justifiably weeping widows, what the heck are we supposed to do about that, pray tell? There have indeed been references to this sorry episode in our press, but it was not that kind of coverage. Would you have felt better if we had those women on our front pages, too.
Having gone through all the wars starting with WWII, MB has seen the press turn from “just the facts” to yellow journalism, mawkish straining for tears over everything. There is naught any of us can do about that, particularly if your press decides only to print negatives about us.
I am a former US serviceman. I simply want to say I am truly sorry for these tragic incidents. I will personally send letters to my Congressman requesting they investigate this problem fully and forcefully press for implementing any and all measures possible to end this problem.
As an American, I’m very troubled by these senseless mishaps and think our guys need a good primer on UK fighting vehicles to avoid this sort of thing. We are brothers in arms and such carelessness is inexcusible. From just one Yank, please accept my apology and rest assured I will contact my Congressman and Senators regarding this.
Mark, Jeffersonian and others,
Thank you. And God Bless America.
If I’m not mistaken, there have been three friendly-fire accidents(1 British + 2 US) that resulted in coalition deaths. Given the fact that there are nearly ten times as many American soldiers on the ground than there are British, and the fact that US air sorties outnumber UK sorties by about by a factor of fifty to one, it looks as though, at least from a statistical standpoint, the British are far more “trigger-happy” than the Americans.
If anyone is still following this comments thread, I’m American, I’m pro-victory for our troops. I have to say that whatever one thinks of the tone of the “inquiry”, it the discrepancy in the numbers is a good enough reason to look into it deeper.
The subject goes right to the heart of joint operations between the US and its allies. The US needs to have allies fighting along side it, and those allies’ troops must not be treated (or have an appearance of being treated) lesser than US troops, or else future joint operations will come under the same cloud even before the fighting begins. The American’s complaints about other NATO members not holding their own in defence capabilities will further fall on deaf ears because those nations will become shy about collaborating with the US.
You can’t blame them, and it is in our own interests to find out what the heck is the cause so we should show some concern. Is it a statistical fluke, or an operational snafu? We need to know as much as they.
Eric Anondson
I, for one, hate to see these things happen. We occasionally eat our own– procedures should be reviewed, technologies developed, apologies issued, and culpability established (if that is merited).
Fog of war is only part of the equation. I know we (tankers and cavalrymen) train vehicle ID… sometimes I wonder if our pilots do. Perhaps that is unfair, as I’ve never piloted an A-10, but something clearly needs to be done to improve our procedures without paralyzing our close air support. If we can put a bomb in a window, we should be able to come close to eliminating fratricide.
If anything, this is one American soldier who is damned proud to have the Brits as allies. We owe their soldiers our best… when we fall short, real answers need to be forthcoming. “Fog of war” simply isn’t good enough.
Blue on Blue engagements have been a major concern of the American military and defense industry since GWI. Unfortunately, it now takes approximately 15-20 years to field a major weapons system, so the communications and electronic identification systems developed from the lessons learned last time are still mostly in Congressionally-mandated testing and won’t hit wide-scale fielding until 2005-2010.
There was no mention above of the ground forces radioing the aircraft, a lot the radios in GW1 weren’t compatible, and even if they are now, the ground forces would still need to know the right frequency to “dial” the aircraft.
All of the other information above indicates visual friend-or-foe id only, a bad move in anything other than ideal conditions. As for optical range of 1500m on the sight, there is nothing above that indicates that the pilot fired from that close, particularly since at that distance the pilot would only have 5-10 seconds before he overflew the target.
In all sincerity, my condolences to all the British folk here about the fratricides.
That said, give the pilot and the US military the benefit of the doubt. All Coalition pilots are flying a frightening number of sorties each day. He erred, and Brits died, but we can’t justly assume from our safe, well-rested vantages that we know why.
He will be investigated. Even if you somehow don’t think officers in the US military care about British soldiers’ lives, remember that they care about their own troops and even themselves on the ground – and about allied unity. If he did act stupidly, he’ll probably be punished. If there was somehow a valid reason why he screwed up, he’ll probably still carry the guilt of killing allied soldiers for the rest of his life.
And yes, from observations of the US military and its personnel, I do think that if any part of my government is remotely capable of correcting its mistakes, it’s our military.
I keep thinking of a clip of gun-camera footage and radio chatter I watched a few years back from a fractricide in the first Gulf War. An Apache pilot, unaware that a slight wind had moved him from his hovering position without being detected by the inertial navigating system, saw what he took to be an Iraqi APC. He checked to make sure it wasn’t a friendly. Based on his mistaken coordinates, it couldn’t have been a friendly vehicle. So, he blew up the APC and then picked off the surviving, fleeing soldiers with cannon fire.
Seconds after the last silhouette crumpled to the ground, someone somewhere put together this attack and reports of allies under fire. Almost immediately, the pilot received word that he’d just killed “friendlies”. Not Americans, as they happened to be, but “friendlies”. I can’t remember what exactly he said next, whether it was “Oh, God” or bleeped, but I can remember his horror and grief cutting through the radio static. He all but melted down, and the guy at the other end of the conversation had to talk him into holding himself together.
No one shrugs this off. I honestly doubt that anyone involved in this can or would. But in the end…yes, it’s war. It’s awful, and from a soldier’s standpoint, the best you can hope for is that you kill the right living, breathing human beings you’ve never met before and that no one else kills you.
I live in New York and I certainly heard a lot in the media about the friendly fire incident regarding the Brits. If anything, it made bigger headlines than the incident regarding American-American friendly fire. So, yeah, it’s gotten decent press coverage.
Nothing much to add but I can confirm there was a big ho-ha about the blue-on-blue casualties of GWI. The consensus was we needed electronic IFF for ground vehicles, but during the nineties a lot of things got put on the back burner because certain congress and executive critters were convinced that it was time to spend the “peace dividend.” Also, to be blunt, training for regular, reserve, and guard forces got skimped on. To function when you are tired unto death you have to train, train, train. I suprised we haven’t had more blue-on-blue casualties. If there hasn’t been more comment on this in certain sections of the US media it may be due to fear of what a deep investigation will reveal. Can you say politician embarrassed.
Not true there was no coverage in the US.
Can’t say how wide the coverage was in the US,
but I heard and read about it in Boston.
I saw it on a TV report. Read about it in the paper, and on one of the radio talk-shows it was one of the topics for the evening.
Consensus on the radio was:
– A horrible thing to happen
– Soldiers involved must be investigated
(and charged, if found negligent)
– Various ways of preventing this from happening
were discussed.
A UK web page collecting money for British soldiers’ families was given, which I didn’t note as I was in the car driving home from work, and people were encouraged to express their sorrow and donate money for the families.
Regards,
Chris J.
Boston, MA.
1. Nothing we can say or do is going to bring back the dead guys.
2. I flew jets in the (US) Navy and spent an awful lot of time at low altitude and around 200 – 300 knots. At 50 feet the pilot has a tremendous workload just trying to avoid hitting the ground. Throw in combat and the workload goes up dramatically (not to mention the stress). This makes identification of objects on the ground difficult – but not impossible. It does not excuse the pilot, it just it makes what happened a little more understandable.
3. As to the comment about some sort of optical scope that can identify objects at 1500 yards – that’s called a Mark I eyeball. The A-10 has a simple gunsight/HUD. I guess the pilot could be carrying a rifle telescopic scope or binoculars, but he would not be using them at an atlitude of 50 meters.
4. What was the AAA/SAM environment like in the area ( and I don’t just mean in the airspace around the friendly convoy? It’s much easier to ID things from a higher altitude (not too high, but high enough that you’re not worried about flying into the ground). This would be where the scope/binocs would come in.
5. Who was controlling him? Was it a ground based Forward Air Controller (FAC) or an airborne one? What were the Rules of Engagement the pilot was operating under? Why was he where he was? Had Close Air Support (CAS) been requested? If so, by who? Had he been briefed on friendlies in the area?
6. I think the points made above about fatigue and seeing what you want to see are very valid ones. Particularly when you combine the two.
7. The A-10 pilots pride themselves on doing their job – being the ones who can save the lives of the guys on the ground is a very strong motivator to them.
8. Equipment compatibilty is a definite possiblity, hell, we still have problems among the services in the US.
9. It would be very interesting to see what the gun camera films show. And it will be investigated!
10. As to whitewashing this – BS. Good comments about the effect of sending someone to prison for screwing up on the battlefield. The effect this would have on other aircrews would be ugly. I suspect that there would be a lot worse cooperation between the guys on the ground and the aircrews if this happened.
11. The only way this guy should go to jail is if they find him grossly negligent – i.e. he deliberately broke all of the rules.
Well as a Brit now living in America i thought i should reply or at least get my four peneth in 😉
For one the British media has had the opinion of the Americans are cowboys at everything just for the fact they do things bigger and better (maybe a hint of jealousy … who knows)
for the second yes i saw a post regarding the USA press having the thing that they only post what they see and yes they are on the front line and more concerned with that than reporting an incident that yes i agree is awefull as all the help is an asset and should not be treated any less so
However we must remember that im sure that just because it isnt reported in the national garbage press as i like to call it especially in the UK that i am sure it was reported to the USA troops and they would have launched an investigation into it immediately. Just because we dont hear it doesnt mean it doesnt happen.
One must also remember the incident of brit vs brit in the fact of the 2 helecopters coliding in mid air in good visibility in midday. Am i missing something 2 big machines surely they must have seen each other but all we got was a 3 min speak about it and nothing since, no report as to why or anything seems to me that is due to the fact someone is investigating it but right now in the news headlines they are busy reporting what is happening at the front line not what someone is investigating in an office somewhere
Well enough from me and as a person in a country of true free speech thats just my nopinion 🙂
As an American, let me first offer my condolences, and my general appreciation of British support during this time.
Second, it is not true that the latest friendly fire incident wasn’t covered in the American press. No, it was not front-page, above the fold in Tuesday’s newspapers. But it was covered.
If I was shot at by friendlies, I’d be pissed off too. I don’t begrudge the Brit tank crews for sounding off. Fratricide from the air is probably the most common way nowadays. And if you’re on the ground it’s probably the most obvious thing in the world. Everyone sees the aircraft, no one can mistake an A-10 for anything else, especially as the Iraqi airforce is not flying.
I read in the Times (London) that there was a Union Jack on one of the Scimitars. The man said it was “like, 12 inches by 18 inches.”
Again, let me offer my condolences. I don’t wish to be seen as making excuses, but… I’m making excuses. Fratricide (and that’s the proper term, I believe) is doubly terrible, because there is always a feeling that it might have been avoided. But the sad reality is that wherever humans fight, humans will err.
I keep hearing people saying that there’s “nothing in the media” about the US/UK friendly fire incidents. I’m not sure if that’s true for broadcast media or not — I only watch about 15 minutes of TV news a day– but it’s certainly been covered in the online news sources — blogs, the Fox/CNN websites, AP/Reuters newsfeeds, etc.
As an American, I feel horrible about this, but I don’t know what I can do about it. I agree that these incidents seem too common to write off as “just one of those things”, but I’m really not a military person; I don’t know for certain. I just hate the fact that even though the UK stands by us (and we them, I like to think) we keep killing more of their troops than the enemy does.
I think a part of this might just be proportions — if you’re a US soldier, the odds of “non-US” equating to “enemy” are very high, because a large majority of the friendly forces are American. For the UK troops, that’s not the case, because most of the alliance is non-UK. I would suspect that this makes UK soldiers more inclined to be cautious (when balancing “wait to make sure it’s an enemy” vs “kill it before it can kill us”) than the US forces are. In other words, for both the US and UK, the risk of getting killed if it IS an enemy is the same; but the risk of it NOT being an enemy is much higher for the UK than it is for the US.
That’s one possible theory, anyway. I don’t think this is a “cowboy attitude” problem; the military people I’ve known have been highly professional, and pretty intolerant of carelessness. But whatever the problem, it needs to be dealt with. We have very few true allies, and we need to do all we can to see that we do our part to help and protect them and their soldiers.
It is pretty widely reported here. Boston Globe. NYT, and the anti-American ABC.
What isn’t reported is any investigation of the most recent incident. As for the Canadians, Jesus Christ their is a courts martial over the Goddam thing. What do you want, frontier justice???
As my small part to resolving that tragic episode, I have e-mailed FoxNews requesting their coverage of all details. FoxNews here appears to have the most comprehensive and fair coverage of the Iraqi liberation.
We yanks cannot lose the goodwill of the British people, who have chosen to fight the good fight against a substantial foe. All of us WILL get to the bottom of that air-to-ground occurrence in order to prevent its ever happening again.
Sorry for a second post but wanted to add:
I feel terrible whenever I hear one of our soldiers is guilty of friendly fire on an ally and I apologize to all who have been impacted by it.
In addition to offering my apologies, I *will* write to my congresspeople and to others in charge of reviewing/setting policy for the US soldiers.
The UK troops have proven they are second to none. Look at Basra. The US troops could learn a lot from them.
I hope people realize the UK troops have been recognized here as being invaluable to the war. I’ve never heard anyone speak of the UK or Australian troops as anything other than equal partners.
Many of us, myself included, have family ties to the UK. I’ve been reading all I can about battles the Black Watch has been in because in my distant past I had relatives who fought in the Black Watch.
Regards,
Chris J
Boston, MA.
You have my condolences and I hope, as an American, that this incident will be promptly and thorougly investigated.
I also want to add that this event was in fact covered on TV news, on the radio, and on “big news” type online media (cnn.com, etc) here in the U.S. More so, in fact, than other accidents and friendly fire incidents.
In reading some of these posts I’m reminded of the line from the movie “The Unforgiven”:
‘…It’s a terrible thing to kill a man… you take away all he has… and all he ever will have…’
Perhaps military personnel can’t, or don’t have time to think about that while in the heat of battle. However, the least we should do, as we sit here in comfort, is to remember that line and show some senstitivity and compassion for those suffering the loss of friends, family, and countrymen.
I’m troubled by all these “blue-on-blue” incidents, but not terribly surprised.
I’m a US veteran, and once trained reservists. While I haven’t been able to ascertain much about the A-10 pilot involved in this incident, most A-10s in the US arsenal are operated by reservists because the Air Force has never been in love with the aircraft–it’s a slow-flying tactical ground support aircraft, not a multi-role fighter, so it’s relegated to part-time warrior squadrons.
US friendly-force recognition training has always been horrible. And while reservist training has generally been spotty, a lot of these reserve units have been called up for a while now–which, ironically, may be negatively affecting their training.
To be honest, I don’t think the average American under arms could recognize a British ARV even if it was painted red, white and blue. Reservists and other US forces don’t train enough with UK or other NATO units; and most of the regular troops over there now were in grammar school during the last Gulf War.
I’ve been out of the loop for some time but it occurs to me that tactical aircraft operating in close proximity to ground forces ought to be under positive control by those ground forces. ‘Back in the day’ tac air control parties provided this control though there were never enough of them.
My condolences to the friends and family. This is a tragic loss. You blokes need to know that we Americans love and respect you and realize your fighters are the very best.
I was an air-to-mud (F-4c) jockey in Vietnam. It (ID) ain’t all that easy, folks. Yak has raised all the right questions, above. I’m certain the A-10 pilot is/will be flying a desk for the duration. Let the investigation proceed. If he was negligent, he’ll be punished. No punishment will be worse than his memory of the event for the rest of his life.
In RE to Sean that the pilot may have been a reservist. Weren’t the soldiers in Afghanistan reservists? I thought I heard that somewhere…
In RE to Sean that the pilot may have been a reservist. Weren’t the soldiers in Afghanistan reservists? I thought I heard that somewhere…
In RE to Sean that the pilot may have been a reservist. Weren’t the soldiers in Afghanistan reservists? I thought I heard that somewhere…
warmongering lunatic’s comments prove he is an fool and no gentleman. the tone of his remarks are unwarented as our english friends here are just asking reasonable questions and if he had read this blog as often as i have, any remarks implying anti-americanism or liberal squeemishness or a lack of understanding of the realities of war are absurd. the brits have been in a great many more wars than we have and do not need to be told about the consequenses. that does not mean they cannot ask questions when things go wrong however. we are big boys and we can take it.
Letter to my congressman and senators:
*******
To the Honorable Todd Akin/Kit Bond/James Talent,
I have been disturbed recently regarding our nation’s conduct in Operation Iraqi Freedom regarding the treatment of our allies, in particular Great Britain. The UK media are filled with stories of our pilots mistakenly bombing and strafing British personnel. The number and frequency are indeed alarming, to the point that even some very pro-American commentators are chagrined at the degree of our carelessness. I think you will agree that we do not need this ill will at this time.
I realize the difficulty of carrying out these missions, the peril pilots place themselves in and the split-second decisions required of them. But I also realize the value of an ally like Britain and am loathe to turn the sentiment of its fine people against us. Surely a more satisfactory medium can be found to save both British personnel and our fast alliance with them while still efficiently destroying our enemy.
I would be grateful for you help in relaying these sentiments to the proper officials in the Department of Defense and for requesting that our pilots be better trained and briefed on allied troop indentification. Let’s not make enemies of our friends needlessly.
Sincerely,
“Jeffersonian”
“Given that nearly 90% of the firepower is American, naturally American on Brit incidents will be more common than the reverse. ”
Bullshit.
The force makeup is 90% American, 10% British.
The American’s shoot 10% of their fire at random friendlies. 90% of this is at Americans, 10% is at British. 90% of the troops fire 10% friendly fire (9%) at 10% of the force (.9%)
The British shoot 10% of their fire at random friendlies. 90% of this is at Americans, 10% is at British. 10% of the troops fire 10% friendly fire (1%) at 90% of the force (.9%).
Thus, if there are more actual incidents of American’s firing on Brits than Brits firing on Americans, either the:
b. British shoot less than Americans
a. British shoot less fire at friendlies as a % of fire than Americans
c. British shoot less friendly fire at Other-Flag troops as a % of friendly fire.
Otherwise, it’s a wash. MATHS IS GOOD.
I may be mistaken, but my impression is that option (b) is correct, and the United States is providing a disproportionate amount of the air support (which is what has caused most of the friendly-fire incidents thus far).
Option (a) is also probably partially true, since from a UK perspective the majority of the non-UK forces on the battlefield are Americans, whereas from a USA perspective the majority of the non-USA forces on the battlefield are Iraqis. Thus, out of pure self-preservation it makes more sense for an American to shoot before he’s 100% certain of his target than it does for a UK soldier to do so.
Finally, you forgot option (d), which is that since the American military has much better information-control over US troops than it does over UK troops, American-on-American friendly-fire incidents are a lot less likely to receive press coverage.
Isnt it nice, to be sitting in the comfort of your own homes and debating an issue taking place in an enviroment that you do not now and never will understand?
Blue on Blue is an “American” thing?
How European of you.
The incidents are deeply tragic. As a Yank they make my blood boil, and I will commit to holding the DoD’s feet to the fire to do the right thing when this is over. I cannot imagine the mind-set of the gunner when this occurs. BUT all the rant about this not being in the US media is just horse feathers. I’ve heard it over and over and over on the tube – which has become our second line of information [the first being blogs, third being print], so please bugger off about “controlled press”. In my view your preconceived notions along this line place you in the same society as John Birchers during the Nixon years. Our print press is as liberal as yours.
The incidents are deeply tragic. As a Yank they make my blood boil, and I will commit to holding the DoD’s feet to the fire to do the right thing when this is over. I cannot imagine the mind-set of the gunner when this occurs. BUT all the rant about this not being in the US media is just horse feathers. I’ve heard it over and over and over on the tube – which has become our second line of information [the first being blogs, third being print], so please bugger off about “controlled press”. In my view your preconceived notions along this line place you in the same society as John Birchers during the Nixon years. Our print press is as liberal as yours.
There are many more American than British troops in Iraq on the ground and especially in the air. This fact alone makes it much more likely that U.S. troops will be responsible for more incidents of FF. As for the historical anecdotes of Ameircans being more apt to make FF mistakes, I’d like to see some stats on that. I think it just burns more when an ally makes a mistake than when your own troops do it. If an American mistakenly kills a Brit there is a little less sympathy for the shooter than there would be if a Brit kills a fellow Brit. I’ve read many a book on WWII including one on El Alamein. In that battle, Commonwealth forces mistakenly shelled the hell out of each other, attacked columns of their own tanks, raided trenches filled with their own infantry, etc. Back then, it was the Aussies or the New Zealanders who used to say that the Brits were more likely to committ acts of FF. Same psychology as your posts. It burns more when someone else makes the mistake. It’s not ok to say “shit happens” because it’s too tragic for that but you still have to realize that it does. Finally, this doesn’t excuse individual acts of recklessness for which prosecution is appropriate. The A-10 incident sounds like such an incident and I would hope that it is investigated thoroughly.
U.S. Press has covered FF. Unfortunately, Americans are of the mindset that FF is part of war so it is not discussed endlessly. Want to end FF? Stop giving teenagers and 20 somethings war toys that can kill lots and lots of people. I think people tend to forget the age – and agressive nature – of U.S. troops/pilots, nevermind the stressful and “draining” environment.
Firstly, it deeply saddens me (and most Americans, I assume) when ANY life is needlessly lost in combat. That includes our own, our Allies, as well as opponents who are forced into combat (usually with a pistol in their back).
Quote:
“British troops are getting fed up with ‘blue on blue’ fire by the trigger happy ‘cowboys’ in the USAF.”
I must take exception with your disrespect to our men in the sky. Did it ever occur to you that perhaps the Brits on the ground would be no way near as successful without support from our pilots?
If indeed the pilot was negligent, I am 100% confident that he will face charges…just like the pilots in the Canadien incident (yes, they are being charged…contrary to what some insist).
And again…quote:
“There does not seem to be anything about this in the US media ”
How, if you actually looked, could you have missed this coverage? It was actually covered nationally more than the instances of US on US fire.
Again, it IS a tragedy…our militaries should work closely when this is through to improve communication and coordination on the battlefield, as I’m sure they will do.
My condolences go out to the families of those killed or injured…rest assured that your loved ones will be remembered as heroes who helped free millions of human beings that live under harsh, oppressive conditions. The ‘good fight’ indeed…can’t think of a more noble action.
The British are right to be outraged by this.
But you should know that the stories are being reported in the US. I’ve heard them on TV, and read them online (though not as much in the UK).
I am an American and I agree with the current war’s necessity.
1) I am amazed that people continue to insist that the culprits of the Canadian incident are being held accountable in any meaningful way. As a previous hyperlink indicates, the judge’s “recommendation” is that the culprits be “disciplined administratively,” which may mean as little as a “letter of reprimand” (!) or as “much” as dismissal from the reserves. (Losing the second/moonlighting job that paid for their poker nights. Big deal!) Right from the start, it was obvious to me that the incident would essentially be whitewashed. I have seen such whitewashes all too often, not just in the American military but also with respect to police, prosecutors, judges, etc.
2) I have every reason to think that the A10 incident will receive exactly the same whitewash. Objective statistics indicate that the American military virtually *never* *significantly* punishes even the most *egregious* recklessness. This is not surprising, because–as I mentioned–the exact same whitewashing is well-documented with respect to our police, prosecutors, and judges as well. The phenomenon is all the more frightening because members of such professions are known to perjure themselves for their colleagues when “necessary” to avoid rightful punishment.
Not to mention a certain President who flagrantly perjured himself before a grand jury, and got off scot-free (and who is now treated as a hero by his party, and who is actually being touted as a candidate for secretary-general of the United Nations).