US Army chief talks to bereaved father

[Archangel M]

I will refer you back to this post. This is the latest info on the situation:

http://martialtalk.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1330225&postcount=12

 

[Tez3]

I haven't followed this story very closely tbh, but if that is the case then I agree. That scenario being one of the many that caused me to say their taking HE was understandable.



Agreed. This and this making the point perfectly. I'm aware sadly of all of the stories you cited, I just didn't know if it had been proven a factor in the decision making process this time. I think you can guess my standpoint on military funding / procurement.

Following it logically, if the operation required helicopters to get there and Bob Stewart MP (remember him from Bosnia?) was told by Cameron they were essential when Stewart questioned whether they were actually needed, the simple fact is that we have no suitable helicopters for the job so it must have come into play in the decision making process. There is no way it wouldn't have influenced who went. You can have truck drivers and no trucks or you can have truck drivers who have their own trucks, guess who they'll choose.

 

[FieldDiscipline]

I will refer you back to this post. This is the latest info on the situation:

http://martialtalk.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1330225&postcount=12

Thanks. I figured I must have missed that, but I remember the bit at the bottom so apparently not. Sorry.

(remember him from Bosnia?)

Bonking Bob? Never met him, but know the reputation!

told by Cameron they were essential when Stewart questioned whether they were actually needed, the simple fact is that we have no suitable helicopters for the job so it must have come into play in the decision making process. There is no way it wouldn't have influenced who went. You can have truck drivers and no trucks or you can have truck drivers who have their own trucks, guess who they'll choose.

I know that there is a serious helicopter shortage, but find it very hard to imagine they couldn't have got some for a deliberate op like that.

Very sad for all involved. Clearly I've made a habit of missing things in this thread, so to quote Peter Jones - I'm out!

 

[Ken Morgan]

I know that there is a serious helicopter shortage, but find it very hard to imagine they couldn't have got some for a deliberate op like that.

We ordered brand new ones from the US for big bucks because we kept/keep getting hit with IED during convoys. In the interm we leased a bunch. I'm sure the UK could have/of leased some, same as us.

Worst case senerio, the UK asks any of its allies to ferry it's SAS troops to point X. I have no doubt the Americans, the Canadians, the Dutch and whomever else has some helicopters would have said yes.

 

[Tez3]

We ordered brand new ones from the US for big bucks because we kept/keep getting hit with IED during convoys. In the interm we leased a bunch. I'm sure the UK could have/of leased some, same as us.

Worst case senerio, the UK asks any of its allies to ferry it's SAS troops to point X. I have no doubt the Americans, the Canadians, the Dutch and whomever else has some helicopters would have said yes.

I'm sure they would have as well, as it was a Brit who was kidnapped it would have made sense not to risk Allies lives but deal with it ourselves in the first instance, if the Americans had insisted they didn't mind doing it that would have been very kind however it looks as if there was really little choice.

FD, I was down at Dishforth the other night and the AAC lads are not a happy bunch. Their views on what helicopters we should have and what we haven't got I believe are far more valid than the governments, but hey when did they ever listen to the guys on the ground? Ten o'clock news on, quote army to lose thousands of personnel - a cut of between 5-10,000' unquote by the Chancellor. oh great. The army to fall below 100,000.

If I were the American spec forces I'd rehearse hostage retrievals because if another Brit aid worker is misguided enough to put themselves in a postition where they can be kidnapped as sure as eggs is eggs we won't be in a position -again- to rescue them or anyone else for that matter.

It's so bloody depressing.

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

The man who threw the grenade is responsible for her death, there's no doubt, only him.

No, Tez. The ones responsible for her death are the ones that kidnapped her and put her into that situation in the first place. He's just the one that killed her.

 

[Tez3]

No, Tez. The ones responsible for her death are the ones that kidnapped her and put her into that situation in the first place. He's just the one that killed her.

If you take that line of reasoning you will end up blaming her for putting herself in that position in the first place, indeed, I've seen people do just that and for having soldiers risking their lives for her. He is responsible for her death and I'm sure whether you think it or not he is taking that responsiblity to heart, he would because I'm betting he's an honourable man. The kidnappers are responsible for taking her and holding her against her will, a grave crime but they didn't kill her at that time, I imagine they would have but they didn't.

 

[yorkshirelad]

MOUT Training used to teach the use of grenades for building clearing as SOP. If they still do, Perhaps the soldier fell back on his training without thinking.

Not anymore! Since when were grenades used in MOUT for room clearing?

 

[BloodMoney]

I think its sad but honestly, she was working in a war zone, hand grenades get chucked about in warzones, people get kidnapped and beheaded etc. I mean it couldve been a stray bullet hitting her, her kidnappers shooting her, an HE nade, an NFDD/flashie going off right in her face and blinding her etc etc...it could be a million things, its Afghanistan.

I think its horrible that it happened, but I dont see that a general or anyone has to apologize to anyone. She knew the risks, and American soldiers risked their own lives, probably getting paid worse than her, and spent a whole lot of money trying to rescue her and it went sour. Not to be insensitive but at least someone cared enough to try and rescue her, I personally know of someone who was not so lucky and was abandoned by his company and his country (and was eventually beheaded by Al-Qaeda).

War is hell, if you dont want to be killed or maimed I suggest you stay the **** away from it.

Since when were grenades used in MOUT for room clearing?

Since soldiers didnt like dying? Seriously though, most countries teach it, its even in the SOP' in the generic Combat Encyclopedia let alone most FM's on the subject. Also, its not MOUT anymore, its UO (Urban Operations).

 

[yorkshirelad]

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/...4393&mid=0&i=20&nmt=Linda Norgrove.....&mid=0

From one of your countrymen.



It appears to me that this is just a convenient excuse for a bit of Yank bashing.

Anybody ever read THIS story?

http://www.isaf.nato.int/article/ne...t-german-medal-for-bravery-during-rescue.html

or this one?

http://hotair.com/archives/2007/04/03/video-us-troops-rescue-kidnapped-iraqi-man/

or...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/22/us-commandos-rescue-ameri_n_137079.html

Which was a successful rescue of an aid-worker in a very similar situation.

there are plenty more if you would like me to go on....

Poxy salary!!! Trust me. US soldiers make alot more than the Brits. Rent allowance, combat pay, separation pay and of course salary make US soldiers very well paid, and rightly so.

If this guy did throw a frag grenade knowingly into a room with the hostage in it, he has no place in Seal Team 6, SOCOM, or any bog standard grunt unit for that matter. It's not Monday morning quarterbacking, it's basic logic. If I go to a Michelin starred restaurant and the chef burns my steak, he is not deserved of a Michellin star.

Of course, we don't know for certain what happened, so we should reserve judgement. The budget cuts are troubling though. What the **** is Cameron thinking?

 

[yorkshirelad]

I think its sad but honestly, she was working in a war zone, hand grenades get chucked about in warzones, people get kidnapped and beheaded etc. I mean it couldve been a stray bullet hitting her, her kidnappers shooting her, an HE nade, an NFDD/flashie going off right in her face and blinding her etc etc...it could be a million things, its Afghanistan.

I think its horrible that it happened, but I dont see that a general or anyone has to apologize to anyone. She knew the risks, and American soldiers risked their own lives, probably getting paid worse than her, and spent a whole lot of money trying to rescue her and it went sour. Not to be insensitive but at least someone cared enough to try and rescue her, I personally know of someone who was not so lucky and was abandoned by his company and his country (and was eventually beheaded by Al-Qaeda).

War is hell, if you dont want to be killed or maimed I suggest you stay the **** away from it.



Since soldiers didnt like dying? Seriously though, most countries teach it, its even in the SOP' in the generic Combat Encyclopedia let alone most FM's on the subject. Also, its not MOUT anymore, its UO (Urban Operations).

I know what it's called mate, most still call it MOUT before saying "It's UO now btw". I should point out to my platoon sergeant that we've got it wrong, because the generic combat encyclopedia and you insist that we should be clearing rooms with hand grenades. Come to think about it, it would save training time. I don't think Congress or the Pentagon are gonna go with that one though.

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

If you take that line of reasoning you will end up blaming her for putting herself in that position in the first place, indeed, I've seen people do just that and for having soldiers risking their lives for her. He is responsible for her death and I'm sure whether you think it or not he is taking that responsiblity to heart, he would because I'm betting he's an honourable man. The kidnappers are responsible for taking her and holding her against her will, a grave crime but they didn't kill her at that time, I imagine they would have but they didn't.

No, you can't. You blame the ones that committed the negative behavior. Of course, this is purely biased based on culture.

As an example, I will use the cultural aspect of law. I don't know about the UK, but in the United States, if a person is holding someone hostage, for instance, and during the course of the SWAT team conducting a hostage rescue, a police officer inadvertantly shoots and kills a hostage, the suspect is the one that goes on trial for that death, not the police officer.

That is because the suspect is the one that committed the act that put the hostage their in the first place. Were it not for that singular act, then the event would not have occured. Were it not for the act of this woman being kidnapped, she could have conducted her business without ever having been killed by fratricide.

So, once again, the U.S. soldier is responsible for killing her, but the kidnapper is responsible for her death.

And I'm sure that he is taking it hard, and my heart goes out to a difficult man doing a difficult mission. Although I haven't been in that exact situation, I have been in something similar. I know what it feels like to kick yourself in the *** over it every single day, second-guessing what you could have done better. Luckily for me, it didn't end so tragically, but it could have. I get it.

 

[Archangel M]

Not anymore! Since when were grenades used in MOUT for room clearing?

In the early 90's when I went through basic.

MOUT was combat operatons not hostage rescue in those days. And if you read the thread, it's looking like the current description of the incident is that the grenade was thrown into the central compound (usually a large courtyard type of area) during a gun battle, as SEALS were inserting by fast rope, not into a room prior to entry. The kidnappers had dragged the hostage out of a building and into the fight for some reason and she was not noticed.

 

[yorkshirelad]

In the early 90's when I went through basic.

MOUT was combat operatons not hostage rescue in those days. And if you read the thread, it's looking like the current description of the incident is that the grenade was thrown into the central compound (usually a large courtyard type of area) during a gun battle, as SEALS were inserting by fast rope, not into a room prior to entry. The kidnappers had dragged the hostage out of a building and into the fight for some reason and she was not noticed.

MOUT must've been just a few minutes of training then. I can see it now "Just throw a frag grenade into every room and you're done lads!"

 

[Archangel M]

It was about 3 days worth as I recall. One entire day in MOUT city complete with underground tunnel training. You have to remember that the idea was total combat in built up areas (like WWII Stalingrad) back then. Not a hodge podge of LE style room clearing and hostage rescue.

 

[Tez3]

In the early 90's when I went through basic.

MOUT was combat operatons not hostage rescue in those days. And if you read the thread, it's looking like the current description of the incident is that the grenade was thrown into the central compound (usually a large courtyard type of area) during a gun battle, as SEALS were inserting by fast rope, not into a room prior to entry. The kidnappers had dragged the hostage out of a building and into the fight for some reason and she was not noticed.

A hostage makes a good shield!