Hellfire Jedi Posted March 22, 2003 Share Posted March 22, 2003 I heard we now have Patriot Bombs, they fire out when a missile is fired at us and is in the vincity of the Patroit Bomb's launcher. They are automatically fired to blow up the incoming missile. Pretty sweet ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zodiac Posted March 22, 2003 Share Posted March 22, 2003 Originally posted by CagedCrado Yep, iraq fired scuds that they supposedly didnt have.... doesnt that make the french feel dumb now? (even though they knew anyway) I think France weren't totally correct on their view on things , but I just had to comment on this, because the information isn't correct. Everybody, even the US and France knew that Saddam had small ballistic missiles (24 or 28, can't remember the exact number). They were condoned by both parties, because they weren't "the weapons of mass destruction". They were in the process of getting disabled , but the war started and all the UN weapon inspectors had to leave so they didn't get the chance to finish their jobs . Those 'scuds' you are referring to are in fact small Chinese ballistic missiles with a range of just 60 miles. And Hellfire Jedi, those patriot missiles have been around for over a decade , being introduced in the Gulf War for the first time. Back then they had a dramatically poor succes-rate (with 75% of the patriots missing their target ), but the officials say that the current patriots have improved a lot. It's still not known how good they are now (perhaps 40% lol ).. but let's hope good enough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pisces Posted March 22, 2003 Share Posted March 22, 2003 Originally posted by Hellfire Jedi I heard we now have Patriot Bombs, they fire out when a missile is fired at us and is in the vincity of the Patroit Bomb's launcher. They are automatically fired to blow up the incoming missile. Pretty sweet ass. Cool, I was wondering what kind of countermeasures they'd get. Anyway, as for missiles that Iraq still has they still have like 24 missiles capable of delivering chemical weapons like mustard gas or Sarin I think it's called. Did they make that public info before the war? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clem Posted March 22, 2003 Share Posted March 22, 2003 ok im a bit late to say this but here goes america says 40+ countries support war ... this isnt true of these countries most arent supporting but allowing their airspace to be used ... they are actually against the war but have been bullied by america into letting them fly over and neway ... as the american and british governments have proved ... the "country" can be in the war without the support of the people ... democracy's great huh? these scuds you refer to could easily be the al samood's that there was a hoo har about ... cos theyre based on scuds or just ne old missile .. god knows what they are ... but the media wants them to be scuds so scuds they be france isnt against the war ... they want the inspectors to have more time ... which is what the inspectors said they needed ... but no ... america is too impatient! smart bombs? HA ... that just means they can hit the school next door instead of the 1 down the street! y dont you get some smart troops while ur at it .... 1's that dont shoot each other and/or their allies ... its just as dangerous to fight with america as against! <end of rant> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pisces Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 y dont you get some smart troops while ur at it .... 1's that dont shoot each other and/or their allies ... its just as dangerous to fight with america as against You say that like they mean to. Accidnets happen, it's not like they mean to hurt their own men. Cut'em some slack, they are in the middle of a fight, forgive them if some of their nerves are shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clem Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 no im sure they dont do it deliberately (tho shooting a red cross van by accident is pretty impressive) u say shot nerves i say trigger happy and even if its shot nerves thats only cos they seem to end up in alot of wars across the world cos america does like to stick its nose in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pisces Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 It's the individual soldiers that wind up in the shooting. So what, America's intrusive, the soldiers can't help that. They do they're job as they're told to. They got shot nerves 'cause they're in wars, and it's not like they're insanely eager to go and fight every country they can. America tells them to fight, they fight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hekx Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 Maybe they should go with the idea of eradicated the whole country and building a Disneyland resort instead? Most of the casualties are exagerated numbers from the Iraqis, from what I've heard. What's the latest news? Any more helicopters go down? Last I heard Turkish soldiers have gone into Northern Iraq. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clem Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 yes im not blaming them IF they have shot nerves personally i think they get a bit trigger happy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zodiac Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 Neodios, those 24 missiles you were referring to aren't the missiles that were capable of delivering sarin and/or mustard gas. Read the post I made just before yours and you'll understand that it were Chinese made explosive only small ballistic missiles. And Clem really does have a point in when he addresses the casualties made by friendly fire. ============================================= In 1991's Gulf War, 49% (!!!) of all the casualties on the coalition's side were caused by friendly fire. The units back then in the deserts of Kuwait were so afraid of getting hit by their own tanks and planes, that they actually didn't care anymore about camouflage and they spanned large robes of fluorizing orange plastic on the top of their vehicles. But even that was no insurance for not getting hit by your own troops. The only British ground units killed in the Gulf War were the 9 men in Warrior armored combat vehicles, which were fired upon and hit by an American airplane. The pilot mistook them for Iraqi tanks. Friendly fire, a big euphemism for getting killed by your own troops, has been a big problem since the Vietnam conflict, where 39% of all American casualties were caused by friendly fire. That is a total of 23.000 of the 58.299 men and women who were killed back then. The first American casualty in Afghanistan was also caused by friendly fire. Stanley Harriman was killed on march 2nd 2002 by his own troops. The US government initially acted like it usually does: by denying the whole 'incident', but the truth came out after Harriman's upset military friends stepped to the media. The American War Library, a constitution of 'veterans for veterans', has been doing research since 1988 about incidents where American soldiers were killed by friendly fire. New incidents from the past are reported weekly. Shocking is that not all incidents are a real accident. It is known that American pilots get Dexedrine, also known as "go-for-it-pills", to make them feel less tired. Those pills can influence their ability to judge a tough situation and are most likely the cause of the incident in Iraq in 1994 where two American Black Hawk helicopters were shot down by two American F-15s. 26 men lost their lives that day. It's a weird accident, because every pilot recognizes a Black Hawk helicopter and it is well known that Iraq does not have those kind of choppers. Over the last decade, billions have been invested in the development of these so called precision bombs. Unfortunately, not much has been done for the recognition of the own troops. According to Jane's Defence Weekly, a well respected British magazin specialized in military issues, the equipment to distinguish the own troops from enemy troops aren't much different than they were in 1991. Friendly fire has been a problem for all armies, from the UN armies to the Israelian army and the Russian strike force. But the US and the UK are the nations with most losses by friendly fire. Washington has been more open about friendly fire incidents over the last couple of years, but that's only because of the pressure made by the American War Library. The biggest friendly fire incident occured on Hill 282 in Korea, in 1950. Washington has made the information public that 150 British sholdiers of the 1st of Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders died on that hill, because American commanders didn't believe the hill was already taken by the British.... and although Washington's made it public, London still denies it ever happened.... ============================================ This is a translation of an article in the Algemeen Dagblad, the biggest and one of the most respected newspapers in the Netherlands. source=http://www.ad.nl/artikelen/NieuwsIrak/1048227685494.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pisces Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 Wow, that's screwed. Man, you'd think that with all the money that America puts into it's military, it'd find some way to make it's troops more distinguishable to each other. Meh, I guess it's easier said then done. ... But still ... Damn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zodiac Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 Yes I know.. but what can they actually do to get more distinguishable, without sacrificing good camouflage?? It's too bad that article doesn't mention anything about a solution to solve the friendly fire problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
git_sum_stuka Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 I heard that the americans are using a "shock and awe" strategy.What is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pisces Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 Basically they're sending every bomb and missile they can get (aside from chemical, biological, and nuclear) and smashing them into Iraq. They expected to hit Baghdad with 3000 missiles across a 48 hour period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CagedCrado Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 They were scuds, marines said they were. The countries werent bullied. In fact, you seem to be highly uninformed. The families of troops that have died have denounced the protesting as protesting is disrespectful to them and the war is important to the liberation of iraq. There are 40+ countries whether you like it or not. Face the facts, you have no basis. Anybody agaisnt the war has no basis. France would not support any war before, now even france is beginning to support the war... all countries opposing have shut up since its been proven that saddam needs to be ousted by: Scud missiles fired Saddam not surrendering Iraqis being grateful for liberation Saddam does not care about his people, and if it was up to him hed kill everybody who supports the democracy you talk of. The people protesting are uneducated, naive, or threatened into protesting. The largest opposer of the war, france, is in itself ruled by a dictator (you cant tell me that chirac got electec every time for the past who knows how many years) There is more support for the second gulf war than there was for the first Less civilians have been killed by far Even countries that didnt support the war are being able to participate in the reconstruction (although i feel they are as evil as saddam) All people who ive seen to oppose the war have had no reason, been mis informed, uneducated, forced to protest by fear or are after US aid. This is what i have gathered from watching CNN (a very liberal channel) and Fox News. The iraqi news channels are entirely misinformed and wrong, cnn aired some of the iraqi news. Saddam is evil, and horrible. If countries actually were agaisnt the war they wouldnt let us use their air space. These countries in the EU (a highly liberal organization, borderline communist) have sent troops to assist, all of them are allowing us to use their air space i believe France (only 39 of them but its true) Spain (engineers) Poland (special forces) Italy (im not sure what they sent) The UK Portugal and im sure there are others. And for united states haters, well since about 4 billion people owe their freedom to us... its sad that some of you can even disrespect us Really what it comes down to is not something that is realistic, but really it is fear. They dont like the fact that the US can come into basically any country, any day of the week, and wipe them out. This is a very true statement. The UN is a weak organization that is useless and is a non entity. Politically it is as powerful as thr articles of confederation were in the united states. The UN has no way to control countries (without the united states) It is too weak to stop renegade countries like iraq Every country involved lies Its original purpose is gone do to the above only two countries in it matter without many allies. (the US and china) Another thing, france and germany have backed themselves into a corner. They have no allies, the aly i would be refering to is an actual power. They are lucky the united states government is forgiving, if i was the president, i could tell you right now they would not be getting aid and theyd have a pretty terrif on them. Peace is an idealistic idea, it cannot be achieved over night and it cannot be achieved with saddam hussein. The UN has proven itself a useless entity by working with saddam hussein for 12 years, knowing he has weapons and never reacting. The bombing can be justified, as saddam has proven that he is ruthless and will kill, we made the mistake of backing out because of international support failing in 1991, and the iraqis suffered for it. In the 80s saddam gassed thousands of kurds, and after the war he killed all people he found out resisted him, 14/18 provinces revolted. Since saddam has taken power, iraqs population has fallen from 30 million to 24 million do to famine and terror brought on by saddam hussein. Hussein gives money and food received from food for oil to loyal iraqi middle class and not to the people of iraq. His sons rape women in the street. The fact the iraqi troops are surrendering proves his cruelty. The liberated iraqis have cheered and been very grateful the regime is gone. There is a video tape of an american or british troop tearing down a picture of saddam, a young iraqi man runs up and hits the image of saddam with the bottom of his shoe, in the arab world, lifting the bottom of your shoe to somebody means that you feel you are above them and wish to crush them. Also the thumbs up sign is the equivelant of flipping somebody off. Point being, you ruffle the big dog's fur, he will bite you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CagedCrado Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 Well, new computer visioning systems for ground troops will make it easier to identify friendly and enemy troops. It will tell american troops enemy locations and allied locations making war fare cleaner with less casualties. This technology might be available now but will more likely be available in 5-10 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clem Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 crado you spew pure propoganda .... or as i like to call it ... boll*x im not even gonna begin to correct u ... cos its obvious ur blind to reason and incapable of realising that america is a big bully and while the iraqis are happy now ... i doubt theyll like theyre liberators when they steal their oil ... cos ... im sure u will somehow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogue15 Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 it would be wise not to put fire on a gasleak... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clem Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 if only i knew what u meant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arán Posted March 23, 2003 Author Share Posted March 23, 2003 Those patriot missiles sound sweet:D Hope the U.S won't have to use em:( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luc Solar Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 Oh the amount of crap in this thread.. If you really want to discuss the war in Iraq, go to the Senate Chambers. Now... who the hell supports this war? Even the British people are against it, even though Blair isn't. At least 3 of his ministers have resigned as a protest for his politics. UN is against it. And just because some country sais "ok, we'll send some guys over to give humanitarian aid" it does not mean that they agree with the war. Blair counted on UN handling the situation after the war, but it turns out that the US will run the show. The Brits and Australians (the australian people are against the war as well) are not even allowed to keep press conferences to infom the rest of the world what is going on, because *surprise-surprise!* the US makes all the decisions. I doubt Blair (who's just about the only guy who is supporting Bush, even though a whole lot of his goverment and people don't agree) knew what he was getting in to. US troops putting up flags in Iraq and "liberating" the country and rebuilding (what they themselves destroyed...with the help of US companies, naturally) it as long as the "free" country does EXACTLY what the USA wants, with regards to it's politics, oil, etc. etc. All people who ive seen to oppose the war have had no reason, been mis informed, uneducated, forced to protest by fear or are after US aid. CagedCrado, you must be a troll, right? You baseless propaganda isn't amusing anymore. Please stop. I will not even comment on your post. I have my standards. And two patriot missiles hit Iraq's scud's on the first day of the war...so they have already used 'em, Axel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rumor Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 Originally posted by Clem no im sure they dont do it deliberately (tho shooting a red cross van by accident is pretty impressive) u say shot nerves i say trigger happy and even if its shot nerves thats only cos they seem to end up in alot of wars across the world cos america does like to stick its nose in ok shut up right now. see you have no clue about this stuff. there is no such thing as a "trigger happy" soldier. that is the stuff of movies. child grow up and get to know what you are talking about before you go off running your mouth about it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rumor Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 Originally posted by Clem yes im not blaming them IF they have shot nerves personally i think they get a bit trigger happy ok hows this. i shoot at you. lets see how nervous you get. there is no IF to it. have you been shot at? ok let me make you a generalization of an expample: you ever had a 600 pound bear running at you full speed with the intentions of killing you? no? then shut the f*ck up f*ing idiot. that is what getting shot at is like, but you can't see the bullets so its all the worse. (yes i'm enlisted and yes i hunt bears) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clem Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 well they do seem to shoot each other quite alot picture it now a soldier in a war ... adrenaline is pumping ... someone appears in his sight ... his mind is say "shoot him now!!" he doesnt bother to check ... and shoots away i heard a recording of a pilot shooting a canadian trooper/tank (not sure) he check in with someone ... while hes checking he just gets impatient and shoots and then says "i hope i done the right thing" (i would now say "correct me if im wrong" but some of u will correct me if im wrong or right!) now tell me thats not impatients/trigger happiness Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rumor Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 Originally posted by Clem crado you spew pure propoganda .... or as i like to call it ... boll*x im not even gonna begin to correct u ... cos its obvious ur blind to reason and incapable of realising that america is a big bully and while the iraqis are happy now ... i doubt theyll like theyre liberators when they steal their oil ... cos ... im sure u will somehow your the only one spewing propoganda. do some f*ing research for f*ing once. if you had you would notice these strange things that he's saying are these weird things called FACTS not your closed minded sit at home looser-who-doesn't-know-JACK ideas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.