Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6551|SE London

DBBrinson1 wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

Where's the ratio of Iraqi friendly fire on US forces?

Also, footage of the strike

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7450091.stm
Shouldn't the US just apologise and shut the fuck up instead of releasing videos to legitimise what they did? Where's the respect?
Why should the US apologise?  It was legit.  Maybe if the Pakies were doing a better job at controlling their borders...
Because they conducted a military operation on foreign sovereign soil belonging to an allied nation without permission. Surely that is reason enough to apologise. In what way is any of what they did "legit"?

Pissing off the Pakistanis is incredibly stupid. It's about the stupidest thing you could possibly do with regards to the war on terror.

Last edited by Bertster7 (2008-06-12 12:56:38)

13rin
Member
+977|6449

Bertster7 wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:


Shouldn't the US just apologise and shut the fuck up instead of releasing videos to legitimise what they did? Where's the respect?
Why should the US apologise?  It was legit.  Maybe if the Pakies were doing a better job at controlling their borders...
Because they conducted a military operation on foreign sovereign soil belonging to an allied nation without permission. Surely that is reason enough to apologise. In what way is any of what they did "legit"?

Pissing off the Pakistanis is incredibly stupid. It's about the stupidest thing you could possibly do with regards to the war on terror.
Join Operation.  Besides bullets don't recognize state borders.  Do you really expect US soldiers any competent military to not defend itself.
These guys killed were tribally recruited soldiers (low pay=easily corruptable), I'd bet they were firing on US forces.

About the "war on terror"....
Screw Pakistan.  It's not like we give the Pakies a butt load of money or anything.  And it's not like the Pakies take full f'n advantage of it.  Hell if there is one person who doesn't want Osama caught its Pakies' fearless leader.  No more search for Bin Laden = No money.
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something.  - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
M.O.A.B
'Light 'em up!'
+1,220|6193|Escea

Bertster7 wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:


Shouldn't the US just apologise and shut the fuck up instead of releasing videos to legitimise what they did? Where's the respect?
Why should the US apologise?  It was legit.  Maybe if the Pakies were doing a better job at controlling their borders...
Because they conducted a military operation on foreign sovereign soil belonging to an allied nation without permission. Surely that is reason enough to apologise. In what way is any of what they did "legit"?

Pissing off the Pakistanis is incredibly stupid. It's about the stupidest thing you could possibly do with regards to the war on terror.
Wiki's got this:

The U.S. military says that it informed Pakistan it was engaged in fighting anti-Afghan forces in the area, but Pakistan denied being notified of the air strike and the fighting.
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6551|SE London

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:


Why should the US apologise?  It was legit.  Maybe if the Pakies were doing a better job at controlling their borders...
Because they conducted a military operation on foreign sovereign soil belonging to an allied nation without permission. Surely that is reason enough to apologise. In what way is any of what they did "legit"?

Pissing off the Pakistanis is incredibly stupid. It's about the stupidest thing you could possibly do with regards to the war on terror.
Join Operation.  Besides bullets don't recognize state borders.  Do you really expect US soldiers any competent military to not defend itself.
These guys killed were tribally recruited soldiers (low pay=easily corruptable), I'd bet they were firing on US forces.

About the "war on terror"....
Screw Pakistan.  It's not like we give the Pakies a butt load of money or anything.  And it's not like the Pakies take full f'n advantage of it.  Hell if there is one person who doesn't want Osama caught its Pakies' fearless leader.  No more search for Bin Laden = No money.
I'm guessing you mean joint operation. In what way is it a joint operation? None of the forces that called in the airstrike were Pakistani and they did not have permission to be there or be conducting operations there. The US were clearly in the wrong, they should just apologise and be done with it. They are just coming off, even more so than usual, as arrogant pricks who don't give a fuck.

You really don't seem to have any clue as to the significance of Pakistan in the war on terror.
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6551|SE London

M.O.A.B wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:


Why should the US apologise?  It was legit.  Maybe if the Pakies were doing a better job at controlling their borders...
Because they conducted a military operation on foreign sovereign soil belonging to an allied nation without permission. Surely that is reason enough to apologise. In what way is any of what they did "legit"?

Pissing off the Pakistanis is incredibly stupid. It's about the stupidest thing you could possibly do with regards to the war on terror.
Wiki's got this:

The U.S. military says that it informed Pakistan it was engaged in fighting anti-Afghan forces in the area, but Pakistan denied being notified of the air strike and the fighting.
Which tells us very little of use or consequence.
M.O.A.B
'Light 'em up!'
+1,220|6193|Escea

Bertster7 wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

Because they conducted a military operation on foreign sovereign soil belonging to an allied nation without permission. Surely that is reason enough to apologise. In what way is any of what they did "legit"?

Pissing off the Pakistanis is incredibly stupid. It's about the stupidest thing you could possibly do with regards to the war on terror.
Join Operation.  Besides bullets don't recognize state borders.  Do you really expect US soldiers any competent military to not defend itself.
These guys killed were tribally recruited soldiers (low pay=easily corruptable), I'd bet they were firing on US forces.

About the "war on terror"....
Screw Pakistan.  It's not like we give the Pakies a butt load of money or anything.  And it's not like the Pakies take full f'n advantage of it.  Hell if there is one person who doesn't want Osama caught its Pakies' fearless leader.  No more search for Bin Laden = No money.
I'm guessing you mean joint operation. In what way is it a joint operation? None of the forces that called in the airstrike were Pakistani and they did not have permission to be there or be conducting operations there. The US were clearly in the wrong, they should just apologise and be done with it. They are just coming off, even more so than usual, as arrogant pricks who don't give a fuck.

You really don't seem to have any clue as to the significance of Pakistan in the war on terror.
They have apologised, of course if this was a vid of Israeli tanks bombarding something taken by a Palestinan it would be the worlds ultimate justice weapon. That video shows no structures of an outpost, how do you know that the Pakistani sodiers weren't either

A) Shooting at US forces thus prompting a response.
B) Caught in an entanglement between US forces and Taliban fighters, failed to identify themselves and were thus engaged.

Now contrary to what everyone seems to think, the US does not engage friendly units on purpose. I still find it odd that Pakistan had such a bad reaction to this incident. Other countries that have sustained friendly fire in the past did not refer to the attacks as cowardly. I'm failing to see how they came to that conclusion, its almost like one the Taliban would say when they're fighting and a bomb gets dropped on them, because they don't have that weapon and can only fight on the ground they label it as cowardly.

So far the US side of the story seems far more truthful than the Pakistani one. Don't understand why people think its wrong that the US is trying to show people what actually happened, almost like some people dont want to know the actual events and rather just say, 'omg friendly fire, they stupid.'

Also US forces operating in those regions are not exacly difficult to distinguish from enemy fighters if they wear their ACU uniforms and gear. The only ones that could be mistaken for enemy fighters that could prompt an attack by Pakistani forces are the SF units, and even then regardless if you take heavy fire from a position you will retaliate.

Last edited by M.O.A.B (2008-06-12 13:25:09)

13rin
Member
+977|6449

Bertster7 wrote:

I'm guessing you mean joint operation. In what way is it a joint operation? None of the forces that called in the airstrike were Pakistani and they did not have permission to be there or be conducting operations there. The US were clearly in the wrong, they should just apologise and be done with it. They are just coming off, even more so than usual, as arrogant pricks who don't give a fuck.

You really don't seem to have any clue as to the significance of Pakistan in the war on terror.
Sorry for the abbreviation,  Your a smart guy though .  The Pakies were informed that it was going on and I'd bet it wasn't the first time border operation have occurred.  But what do you do?  Of course the Pakies are going to say "we didn't know there were ops in progress" they can't say "we didn't know what our guys were really up to, sorry".

Unfortunately, I do have a grasp on Pakies "war on terror".  Just curious, where do you think Osama is cowering at?
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something.  - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6551|SE London

M.O.A.B wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:


Join Operation.  Besides bullets don't recognize state borders.  Do you really expect US soldiers any competent military to not defend itself.
These guys killed were tribally recruited soldiers (low pay=easily corruptable), I'd bet they were firing on US forces.

About the "war on terror"....
Screw Pakistan.  It's not like we give the Pakies a butt load of money or anything.  And it's not like the Pakies take full f'n advantage of it.  Hell if there is one person who doesn't want Osama caught its Pakies' fearless leader.  No more search for Bin Laden = No money.
I'm guessing you mean joint operation. In what way is it a joint operation? None of the forces that called in the airstrike were Pakistani and they did not have permission to be there or be conducting operations there. The US were clearly in the wrong, they should just apologise and be done with it. They are just coming off, even more so than usual, as arrogant pricks who don't give a fuck.

You really don't seem to have any clue as to the significance of Pakistan in the war on terror.
They have apologised
I don't think they have. They've said the deaths of Pakistani soldiers was regrettable, but I'm pretty sure that's as far as they've gone.
M.O.A.B
'Light 'em up!'
+1,220|6193|Escea

Bertster7 wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:


I'm guessing you mean joint operation. In what way is it a joint operation? None of the forces that called in the airstrike were Pakistani and they did not have permission to be there or be conducting operations there. The US were clearly in the wrong, they should just apologise and be done with it. They are just coming off, even more so than usual, as arrogant pricks who don't give a fuck.

You really don't seem to have any clue as to the significance of Pakistan in the war on terror.
They have apologised
I don't think they have. They've said the deaths of Pakistani soldiers was regrettable, but I'm pretty sure that's as far as they've gone.
Not sure, but at this point they're probably investigating what exactly happened before they take blame for anything, the Pakistanis should do the same before labelling it a 'cowardly attack.' The two stories at this point almost look like they were seperate incidents. The vid shows footage of the bombings taking place nowhere near structures. It could even be a case of the fighting taking place not far from the outpost, the bombs are dropped and then something used by the Taliban created a large explosion in the Pakistani outpost as jets were flying over. But at the minute the video footage is as hard a source of evidence as anything, and what it shows doesn't seem to match the accusations. The unseen explosion occurs to the left of the footage as well and that's where the three fighters come from before they start launching RPGs.
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6551|SE London

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

I'm guessing you mean joint operation. In what way is it a joint operation? None of the forces that called in the airstrike were Pakistani and they did not have permission to be there or be conducting operations there. The US were clearly in the wrong, they should just apologise and be done with it. They are just coming off, even more so than usual, as arrogant pricks who don't give a fuck.

You really don't seem to have any clue as to the significance of Pakistan in the war on terror.
Sorry for the abbreviation,
It's not an abbreviation.

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Your a smart guy though .
That should be an abbreviation (should be a contraction of you are, which would be you're).

DBBrinson1 wrote:

The Pakies were informed that it was going on
That's not what they say.

DBBrinson1 wrote:

I'd bet it wasn't the first time border operation have occurred.  But what do you do?  Of course the Pakies are going to say "we didn't know there were ops in progress" they can't say "we didn't know what our guys were really up to, sorry".
What do you do? You make damn sure to clear any airstrikes on foreign territory before they happen, that's what.

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Unfortunately, I do have a grasp on Pakies "war on terror".  Just curious, where do you think Osama is cowering at?
I think he's almost certainly dead.

You really don't seem to have any grasp whatsoever of Pakistan's significance in the war on terror, the great benefits they bring as an ally or the immense potential threat they pose.
Lotta_Drool
Spit
+350|6153|Ireland
Bert-

The Pakis fired on Americans in " A foreign territory " without clearing it.  Thus the Americans returned fire. 

You're such a troll with your antiAmerican B.S.  Why do you envy the US so much that you hate it?  England must be a real let down for you to act this way.
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6551|SE London

Lotta_Drool wrote:

Bert-

The Pakis fired on Americans in " A foreign territory " without clearing it.  Thus the Americans returned fire. 

You're such a troll with your antiAmerican B.S.  Why do you envy the US so much that you hate it?  England must be a real let down for you to act this way.
The Taliban fired on the Americans. Not the Pakistani paramilitary troops in the area who were killed by a blast from one of the dozen or so 500lb bombs dropped on the area.

Envy the US? That's a good one I've been to the US numerous times (how many times have you been to England?). I don't care for it much. I did quite like Canada when I was over there though. But my feelings about the US as a place have very little to do with my opinion on US foreign policy, which I regard as very silly - much sillier even than British foreign policy, which is bad enough.
(T)eflon(S)hadow
R.I.P. Neda
+456|6799|Grapevine, TX

sergeriver wrote:

The Pentagon has said an air strike by US forces in the Afghan-Pakistani border region, said to have killed 11 Pakistani soldiers, was legitimate.

Scenario: Pakistani forces kill 11 American soldiers in the Afghan-Pakistani border (their border).  What would the US do?
Shot back, using the Rules of Engagement...

Rules of Engagement:

1.)(DOD) Directives issued by competent military authority that delineate the circumstances and limitations under which United States forces will initiate and/or continue combat engagement with other forces encountered. Also called ROE.
2.)Directives issued by competent military authority which delineate the circumstances and limitations under which military forces will initiate and/or continue combat engagement with other forces encountered.


War sucks.

I can assure you if I was being fired upon and I was given the order, was following the current RoE,  I would not hesitate to counter and accomplish the mission.

Yes it is a tragedy, mainly poor communication.
(T)eflon(S)hadow
R.I.P. Neda
+456|6799|Grapevine, TX
M.O.A.B
'Light 'em up!'
+1,220|6193|Escea

Bertster7 wrote:

Lotta_Drool wrote:

Bert-

The Pakis fired on Americans in " A foreign territory " without clearing it.  Thus the Americans returned fire. 

You're such a troll with your antiAmerican B.S.  Why do you envy the US so much that you hate it?  England must be a real let down for you to act this way.
The Taliban fired on the Americans. Not the Pakistani paramilitary troops in the area who were killed by a blast from one of the dozen or so 500lb bombs dropped on the area.
Dozen? There's only three that went off
sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|6727|Argentina

(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:

http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=102959

sergeriver wrote:

Lotta_Drool wrote:

I'm such a troll.
spammer/hater
Why spammer?  Read the title.  Read your link.  Hater?   How does your logic work?  Someone disagrees with a foreign policy and he's a hater?  Good logic m8.
(T)eflon(S)hadow
R.I.P. Neda
+456|6799|Grapevine, TX

sergeriver wrote:

(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:

http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=102959

sergeriver wrote:

spammer/hater
Why spammer?  Read the title.  Read your link.  Hater?   How does your logic work?  Someone disagrees with a foreign policy and he's a hater?  Good logic m8.
Its not US Administration or Congressional Foreign Policy. You're  logic is mistaken, if that's what you think you are discussing here.

It's US Armed Forces, Rules of Engagement, we are talking about here.

You don't want to bash the troops now do you? Maybe you do... but that's not an easy thing to do now is it?

You clearly are blinded by your hate of the US Foreign Policy, the Administration, and bf2s members standing up for your hate, etc, etc. I am calling you the hater, just to clear it up. It's been very obvious you are biased and dont logically look at the way you post threads and not expect people to call you out, the way that you do. You've been that way for a long time now.Glad I could help you out
13rin
Member
+977|6449

Bertster7 wrote:

It's not an abbreviation.

That should be an abbreviation (should be a contraction of you are, which would be you're).
Thanks for the catch.  You are absolutely right.  I originally had written JO and then changed it to joint operations.  Left off the "t" and spell check didn't get it.  I retract my previous compliment. 

berster7 wrote:

That's not what they say.
No shit that's what they'll say.

berster7 wrote:

What do you do? You make damn sure to clear any airstrikes on foreign territory before they happen, that's what.
They knew.

Berster7 wrote:

You really don't seem to have any grasp whatsoever of Pakistan's significance in the war on terror, the great benefits they bring as an ally or the immense potential threat they pose.
Why the hell do you think we're giving them boat loads of money?  Thick.
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something.  - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|6727|Argentina

(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:

http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=102959


spammer/hater
Why spammer?  Read the title.  Read your link.  Hater?   How does your logic work?  Someone disagrees with a foreign policy and he's a hater?  Good logic m8.
Its not US Administration or Congressional Foreign Policy. You're  logic is mistaken, if that's what you think you are discussing here.

It's US Armed Forces, Rules of Engagement, we are talking about here.

You don't want to bash the troops now do you? Maybe you do... but that's not an easy thing to do now is it?

You clearly are blinded by your hate of the US Foreign Policy, the Administration, and bf2s members standing up for your hate, etc, etc. I am calling you the hater, just to clear it up. It's been very obvious you are biased and dont logically look at the way you post threads and not expect people to call you out, the way that you do. You've been that way for a long time now.Glad I could help you out
I don't hate anyone.  I don't like the current administration's foreign policy.  I don't like GWB.  I don't like any government violating other countries sovereignty.  I don't like a government that justifies a war over false evidence just for oil.  I don't like a government that has no respect for Human Rights.  I don't blame the soldiers, I blame the guy in charge.  But again, I don't hate anyone.  If you are so blind not to see that I'm not attacking the US but GWB's administration, well that is your problem.  I try to be unbiased, but there's no such thing as 100% unbiased people.  So, I guess I'm biased, like any other person.  If giving my opinion on certain matters makes me a hater, call me a hater.  I'm cool with that.  And FYI I have great appreciation for the US.  Half my cousins are American.  I love to visit your country.  Bill Clinton is the alive politician I admire the most.  And I don't have a problem with people calling me out, I don't have anything to hide.  I try to be honest with myself when giving an opinion.  If that is a crime, then I am guilty.

Last edited by sergeriver (2008-06-12 15:35:45)

rawls2
Mr. Bigglesworth
+89|6530
So what government do you like? Any at all? Who do you compare us to when you make these judgements? Is there ever been a country like us to be compared to? Just wondering.
(T)eflon(S)hadow
R.I.P. Neda
+456|6799|Grapevine, TX

sergeriver wrote:

(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

Why spammer?  Read the title.  Read your link.  Hater?   How does your logic work?  Someone disagrees with a foreign policy and he's a hater?  Good logic m8.
Its not US Administration or Congressional Foreign Policy. You're  logic is mistaken, if that's what you think you are discussing here.

It's US Armed Forces, Rules of Engagement, we are talking about here.

You don't want to bash the troops now do you? Maybe you do... but that's not an easy thing to do now is it?

You clearly are blinded by your hate of the US Foreign Policy, the Administration, and bf2s members standing up for your hate, etc, etc. I am calling you the hater, just to clear it up. It's been very obvious you are biased and dont logically look at the way you post threads and not expect people to call you out, the way that you do. You've been that way for a long time now.Glad I could help you out
I don't hate anyone.  I don't like the current administration's foreign policy.  I don't like GWB.  I don't like any government violating other countries sovereignty.  I don't like a government that justifies a war over false evidence just for oil.  I don't like a government that has no respect for Human Rights.  I don't blame the soldiers, I blame the guy in charge.  But again, I don't hate anyone.  If you are so blind not to see that I'm not attacking the US but GWB's administration, well that is your problem.  I try to be unbiased, but there's no such thing as 100% unbiased people.  So, I guess I'm biased, like any other person.  If giving my opinion on certain matters makes me a hater, call me a hater.  I'm cool with that.  And FYI I have great appreciation for the US.  Half my cousins are American.  I love to visit your country.  Bill Clinton is the alive politician I admire the most.  And I don't have a problem with people calling me out, I don't have anything to hide.  I try to be honest with myself when giving an opinion.  If that is a crime, then I am guilty.
No Im not blind, I clearly pointed out you're hate for the US Admin, Bush, etc. Every has an opinion, I have no problem with that. This issue, the thread you posted, is about Us Forces. Not GWB, the Administration, US Congress or our Foreign Policy. FFS we're not even talking about Iraq. You brought this topic up, remember? We are talking about wht would US Forces do if they we're shot at, the lack of a sincere apologie from the Pentagon, and there you have it a discussion. Lets try to stay on that. We already know your stance about GWB, lets move passed that, because you obviously can't stop talking about it.

I answered you question in my first post. Good day
sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|6727|Argentina

(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:


Its not US Administration or Congressional Foreign Policy. You're  logic is mistaken, if that's what you think you are discussing here.

It's US Armed Forces, Rules of Engagement, we are talking about here.

You don't want to bash the troops now do you? Maybe you do... but that's not an easy thing to do now is it?

You clearly are blinded by your hate of the US Foreign Policy, the Administration, and bf2s members standing up for your hate, etc, etc. I am calling you the hater, just to clear it up. It's been very obvious you are biased and dont logically look at the way you post threads and not expect people to call you out, the way that you do. You've been that way for a long time now.Glad I could help you out
I don't hate anyone.  I don't like the current administration's foreign policy.  I don't like GWB.  I don't like any government violating other countries sovereignty.  I don't like a government that justifies a war over false evidence just for oil.  I don't like a government that has no respect for Human Rights.  I don't blame the soldiers, I blame the guy in charge.  But again, I don't hate anyone.  If you are so blind not to see that I'm not attacking the US but GWB's administration, well that is your problem.  I try to be unbiased, but there's no such thing as 100% unbiased people.  So, I guess I'm biased, like any other person.  If giving my opinion on certain matters makes me a hater, call me a hater.  I'm cool with that.  And FYI I have great appreciation for the US.  Half my cousins are American.  I love to visit your country.  Bill Clinton is the alive politician I admire the most.  And I don't have a problem with people calling me out, I don't have anything to hide.  I try to be honest with myself when giving an opinion.  If that is a crime, then I am guilty.
No Im not blind, I clearly pointed out you're hate for the US Admin, Bush, etc. Every has an opinion, I have no problem with that. This issue, the thread you posted, is about Us Forces. Not GWB, the Administration, US Congress or our Foreign Policy. FFS we're not even talking about Iraq. You brought this topic up, remember? We are talking about wht would US Forces do if they we're shot at, the lack of a sincere apologie from the Pentagon, and there you have it a discussion. Lets try to stay on that. We already know your stance about GWB, lets move passed that, because you obviously can't stop talking about it.

I answered you question in my first post. Good day
The Pentagon is where the Department of Defense is located, isn't it?  And the Secretary of Defense depends from the President, who is GWB, right?  How come this incident has nothing to do with this administration?  Anyway, don't get all offended, I don't hate the US, but you are free to think otherwise, not my problem.
sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|6727|Argentina

rawls2 wrote:

So what government do you like? Any at all? Who do you compare us to when you make these judgements? Is there ever been a country like us to be compared to? Just wondering.
Bill Clinton's.
God Save the Queen
Banned
+628|6313|tropical regions of london
plenty of iraqi soldiers and police have killed american troops by accident.  next question? you dont hear about it because people like you wouldnt find it very interesting.
(T)eflon(S)hadow
R.I.P. Neda
+456|6799|Grapevine, TX
Serge, not offended at all. Yes the DoD is HQ'ed there, so is the SoD, I don't know anything about him depending from the Prez, who is GWB, though... See you are not being logical here. Srs. You posted a question in the OP.

Go read it again. You must have forgot the topic. This isn't an Administration or GWB call. It's the Commander in charge of the operation, not the Commander in Chief.

BTW it was never fucking Bill Clinton's country....

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard