Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Switchboard >

Blue on Blue

10:51 / 05.02.07

From reading this article at the weekend; Observer piece about death of Trooper Hull

What are the genral feelings about these incidents - are the MoD to blame for not providing adiquate equipment, or the US for their gung ho attitude? I found it interesting that although an agreed upon notion of extridition exists from the Uk to the US, none has been needed as, to date, the number of 'blue on blue' incidents (friendly fire deaths) that have occured in which UK troops have mistakenly killed Allied troops, is zero. The report mentions something that has been touched upon in such books as Black Hawk Down, namely that the US army is ill trained but well equiped - often giving the smaller, least trained soldiers the biggest guns. Although I have no doubt that highly intenst situations call for extremely quick and difficult dicisions to be made, is there a fault in communication as to Allied troops activities? Why is the blue on blue ratio so completely slanted against the US troops? Should individual soldier's be accountable for these deaths?

All Acting Regiment

13:56 / 06.02.07

I have this pet feeling, which is probably bogus, that it's something to do with coming from a very large, powerful country and having a (seemingly) inexhaustible supply of money and weapons and being brought up with plenty of action films and video games, but very little actual war reporting or books, which makes American troops more likely to act in this way, whereas the British troops a) don't have this massive wealth and b) have the class system to consider - in the sense that they might consider themselves to be "all working-class lads together" and/or construct the war as a "job to be done" rather than a place to go and get a chance to play around with big exploding toys - Parker as opposed to Scott Tracy.

This is probably all a convenient mythology, however...

18:57 / 06.02.07

I think you are wholly mistaken allecto - have you seen the footage in question? or read the transcript? It's available here (with expletives deleted)

19:14 / 06.02.07

Man, that's harrowing.

They kept asking if they were friendlies....

STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK

13:54 / 08.02.07

Funny (well, not "funny", obviously, but you know what I mean) how when this happens in a war situation (where, we are constantly being told, "accidents happen") ministers will "battle for years" to get some accountability, whereas if the police shoot a civilian (Stanley, de Menezes, et al) who's not even in a war zone and where there is no "fog of war", we are basically told it's the price we have to pay, and to shut the fuck up with our whining.

Not to say that there should be no accountability in war- the exact opposite, in fact- it'd just be nice to see the same thing extended across the board.

MattShepherd: I WEDDED KALI!

14:49 / 08.02.07

Canadians have a certain cynicism about the whole issue now, stemming back to 2002, when four Canadian soldiers were killed, and eight wounded, in Afghanistan by American pilots disobeying standby orders. No criminal charges of any consequence.

And another recent 'whoops!' resulting in another death and dozens of wounded.

A good part of the frustration for me... and I suspect many... is that the Afghanistan mission is increasingly seen in Canada as a totally ridiculous endeavour; there's a feeling that we were hoodwinked by the U.S., emotionally blackmailed on the strength of 9/11 to "support" them in Afghanistan and then the victim of a bait-and-switch while they charged like idiots into Iraq.

It's like showing up at your friend's house to repair the roof after a hurricane, and then he leaves you up on the roof with the shingles and the hammer and takes off to go get in a fight over his bar tab. Oh, and then he shoots you in the face.