Page 1 of Regardless of your stance on the war, are you worried by the seeming incompetence of our allies?

I ask this because the number of recent "friendly fire" tragedies would appear to indicate that many American troops are, at best, ill-suited and under-trained for a combat situation or, at worst, grossly incompetent. I accept that a number of such mistakes will inevitably happen during any conflict of this scale. However, I don`t believe that patriotism and post-9/11 sentimentality should cloud the issue of the American forces` glaring inadequacies. If the negligent recruitment of unfit Americans has led directly to the loss of many British lives, those responsible should be brought to book.

unfortunately, the acceptance of the powers that be that it WILL happen means it`s probably counted as `acceptable`..and I`m sure there were British forces killed when British forces fired on them (Challenger tanks I think), and indeed the US has fired on themselves as well. The first British plane shot down in WW2 was friendly fire (by the RAF...or ack ack or something)...perhaps because it`s now reported immediately and across the whole world in a few minutes it seems that it happens more, From what I gather it`s been happening since we could kill each other with big weapons.

Mind you....after stories of a US `tankbuster` making two passes over some obviously British vehicles, it makes you wonder who the enemy actually is.

Yes I am. Out with friend of mine last night who is a Royal Marine, some of his stories just about training excercises are frightening. Gung ho all the way

It should be cause for concern when one`s allies are apparently responsible for more casualties than the enemy...

However such reports should be treated very carefully. I`m sure that coalition forces would be loath to report significant losses due to enemy action, if only to combat morale issues.

===========================
Jitendar Canth
Site Reviewer
DVD Reviewer

Lets be honest, when it comes to war the Americans aren`t the best people to fight it.

In the last Gulf War more British soldiers were killed by American "friendly fire" than by the enemy... What does that tell you?

I wonder what the total amount of "friendly fire" victims caused by the US in the past 20 years would add up to?

Adam.

This item was edited on Monday, 31st March 2003, 18:57

The good old US army, it has more firepower than any other army! Unfortunately its also got a much higher percentage of idiots using said firepower it seems! The difference between the US and UK forces is the UK places the emphasis on a much smaller force but training it a lot better. The US however has a some highly trained, highly skilled units...it also however has a lot more in the way of ill-trained grunts all too eager to get a shot in.

The story about the A10 friendly fire incident was case in point - the UK Convoy was clearly marked, at least one of them even had a big Union Jack on it. The A10 has high powered targetting optics which the pilot of the A10 would have to have used to be able to fire it so there`s no way he could have missed the friendly designators yet he made two attack runs still...

How about a "live ammo" and "blank ammo" situation like in Die Hard 2. Put the Yanks behind the competent soldiers with blanks in their clips and let them feel they`re doing some good, firing away with gay abandon.


"Now I know I`m pretty... but I ain`t as pretty as a couple o` titties"

lol, cracking idea!

Excellent idea Martin. Just one modification, put the Yanks at the front with blanks.

Apart from that I totally agree with Alan Titherington.

This `war` is just a media circus, with vultures circling around for the big fcuk-ups.

It all frustrates me too much to comment.