U.S. Army finds Tillman probably killed by friendly fire ...

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Horus

Platinum Member
Dec 27, 2003
2,838
1
0
Originally posted by: GreasyBurger
If Horos ever served in the military he should know that M16A1 was the FIRST generation of the M16/M4 in U.S. military. US military got rid of M16A1 and its automatic capability over 10 years ago. Now we are using 3 round burst and single round burst M16A2, M16A3 and M4A1.

By the way, Canadian Forces is using Diemaco C7 / C8 which is a copy of M16A2.

Honestly, I don't think Horos ever served in the military because he doesn't know crap about military and weaponary. How can you don't know about M16 series when your country is using the same thing?

My weapon, personally, is a Browning Hi-power 9mm pistol. I trained on the C7A1(A copy of the M16A1, with a rail for the C72 Optical sight, and an arctic trigger guard) the C6 (Same as the M240) and the C9 (Same as the M249 SAW).

Whatever...it's amusing to see how hyped up you guys are all getting. I feel sorry for Pat Tillman's family, and think that his unit should be court martialed for shooting him. He died a soldier, and there's nothing better than that.

I'm not gonna be coming back to this thread. Talk about me all you want, I could care less. You'll never meet me in RL, so what do I care? :p

Enjoy!
 

MacBaine

Banned
Aug 23, 2001
9,999
0
0
Originally posted by: Horus
Originally posted by: GreasyBurger
If Horos ever served in the military he should know that M16A1 was the FIRST generation of the M16/M4 in U.S. military. US military got rid of M16A1 and its automatic capability over 10 years ago. Now we are using 3 round burst and single round burst M16A2, M16A3 and M4A1.

By the way, Canadian Forces is using Diemaco C7 / C8 which is a copy of M16A2.

Honestly, I don't think Horos ever served in the military because he doesn't know crap about military and weaponary. How can you don't know about M16 series when your country is using the same thing?

My weapon, personally, is a Browning Hi-power 9mm pistol. I trained on the C7A1(A copy of the M16A1, with a rail for the C72 Optical sight, and an arctic trigger guard) the C6 (Same as the M240) and the C9 (Same as the M249 SAW).

Whatever...it's amusing to see how hyped up you guys are all getting. I feel sorry for Pat Tillman's family, and think that his unit should be court martialed for shooting him. He died a soldier, and there's nothing better than that.

I'm not gonna be coming back to this thread. Talk about me all you want, I could care less. You'll never meet me in RL, so what do I care? :p

Enjoy!

So how often do you receive fire when you're a clerk in an artillery regiment?
 

Rudee

Lifer
Apr 23, 2000
11,218
2
76
Originally posted by: MacBaine
Originally posted by: Horus
Originally posted by: GreasyBurger
If Horos ever served in the military he should know that M16A1 was the FIRST generation of the M16/M4 in U.S. military. US military got rid of M16A1 and its automatic capability over 10 years ago. Now we are using 3 round burst and single round burst M16A2, M16A3 and M4A1.

By the way, Canadian Forces is using Diemaco C7 / C8 which is a copy of M16A2.

Honestly, I don't think Horos ever served in the military because he doesn't know crap about military and weaponary. How can you don't know about M16 series when your country is using the same thing?

My weapon, personally, is a Browning Hi-power 9mm pistol. I trained on the C7A1(A copy of the M16A1, with a rail for the C72 Optical sight, and an arctic trigger guard) the C6 (Same as the M240) and the C9 (Same as the M249 SAW).

Whatever...it's amusing to see how hyped up you guys are all getting. I feel sorry for Pat Tillman's family, and think that his unit should be court martialed for shooting him. He died a soldier, and there's nothing better than that.

I'm not gonna be coming back to this thread. Talk about me all you want, I could care less. You'll never meet me in RL, so what do I care? :p

Enjoy!

So how often do you receive fire when you're a clerk in an artillery regiment?

Although I absolutely despise that childish "pwned" phrase, this time I think it's fitting.
 

Horus

Platinum Member
Dec 27, 2003
2,838
1
0
Now that I must defend myself...

My MOC, or job, is an R836, Resource Management Clerk.

However, I'm not always employed in that job. I have tactical communications and tread/wheeled driver qualification.

I was on tour in 2001, in Bosnia. I was driving in a M113 APC. We were attacked by 3 men using AK-47. We dismounted, and followed, but lost them soon after.

Does that explain it for you?
 

0roo0roo

No Lifer
Sep 21, 2002
64,862
84
91
just look at friendly fire in previous wars. hard to id people from far off during gunfights.
 

Mookow

Lifer
Apr 24, 2001
10,162
0
0
Originally posted by: Horus
Yes, poorly trained. As in, "Oh no, my weapon jammed. It's broken, send it off to the techs!"

And I'm sorry, wusses? We were one of the first countries to join you in Afghanistan.

And horray for ignorance! "The more people you have, the more FF you have?" No, not really. It's a simple thing to LOOK WHERE YOU ARE SHOOTING. If they are wearing your uniform, you do not shoot them! If you are in a jetfighter at twenty-thousand feet, and see tiny muzzleflashes, you do not assume that you're being fired at, and dive-bomb people without permission!

U.S. Troops need to get their goddamn fingers off their triggers, and aim at enemies, not friendlies. I'll never do another peacekeeping mission with U.S. troops. I fear for my life.

I'm at work right now, actually. I'm helping to teach a class on Tactical Communications.

You assume that in a "difficult light and terrain environment", you can get a good enough look at them to see their uniform. This isnt training. It wasnt at high noon, and the OpFor was not standing up in the open. This was an ambush, and it started around 1930. You dont see the enemy, you see muzzle flashes and maybe lumps behind them. Remember that Pat Tillman took his squad back even after they were out of the position being attacked. And no one links up their flank to the flank of the guys still in the kill zone. Instead, you flank the ambushers. But the terrain rarely lets you take an optimal approach.

In any event, good job with the reading comprehesion. I hope you dont read grid coordinates like you read the article. And you are still an asshat for laughing about it.
 

MacBaine

Banned
Aug 23, 2001
9,999
0
0
Originally posted by: Horus
Now that I must defend myself...

My MOC, or job, is an R836, Resource Management Clerk.

However, I'm not always employed in that job. I have tactical communications and tread/wheeled driver qualification.

I was on tour in 2001, in Bosnia. I was driving in a M113 APC. We were attacked by 3 men using AK-47. We dismounted, and followed, but lost them soon after.

Does that explain it for you?

It doesn't explain the sheer ignorance you've brought into this thread.
 

0roo0roo

No Lifer
Sep 21, 2002
64,862
84
91
well thats because the more enemy we kill... the more efficiently we protect soldiers against enemy, the more ff casualties we take.. as a % atleast.
 

MikeMike

Lifer
Feb 6, 2000
45,885
66
91
horus.

i have never served.

but, you are just a moronic asshole who thinks he is better than all because he has driven canadas sole tank. in bosnia.

but please tell me what training you have that taught you to line up side by side to fight? maybe when you take role you have them line up side by side, but not since the early 1800's did we fight in "death lines". Also, it was in afghanistan, with terrain that is very difficult to manuever on, see, and let alone know who is your friend, or foe. Tell me how in the middle of a fight, after you have doubled back to take on the enemy after being out of the fight, that you are supposed to know that a man of your unit has gone wide, and come up on the other side, or done something else. yes, you may know he has, but you wont know which one he is. it isnt a video game, your friend does not have an arrow above him pointing to him saying "friend" nor does your enemy.

MIKE
 

MacBaine

Banned
Aug 23, 2001
9,999
0
0
Originally posted by: InstincT
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
http://members.aol.com/amerwar/ff/ff.htm

http://www.ww2pacific.com/friendly.html

That's weird that it's gotten worst with time... Interesting stats.

Not necessarily, as overall casualties have dropped astronomically. Compare the hundreds of thousands of casualties in WWII to the couple thousand of modern day conflicts.

Also, friendly fire is not specifically small arms. Not every friendly fire incident is due to shooting your buddy in the middle of an intense firefight in complete darkness. Misguided airstrikes are the cause of a large number of FF incidents.

When ANY military in the world is engaged in a conflict, there will be FF incidents, it is an indisputable fact of warfare. The number of incidents depends on the size of the force involved, it's capabilities, and the conditions in which is has to fight.
 

Fiveohhh

Diamond Member
Jan 18, 2002
3,776
0
0
Originally posted by: Horus


I'm not gonna be coming back to this thread. Talk about me all you want, I could care less. You'll never meet me in RL, so what do I care? :p

thats the best news I've heard today.
 

PingSpike

Lifer
Feb 25, 2004
21,733
564
126
Originally posted by: GreasyBurger
If Horos ever served in the military he should know that M16A1 was the FIRST generation of the M16/M4 in U.S. military. US military got rid of M16A1 and its automatic capability over 10 years ago. Now we are using 3 round burst and single round burst M16A2, M16A3 and M4A1.

By the way, Canadian Forces is using Diemaco C7 / C8 which is a copy of M16A2.

Honestly, I don't think Horos ever served in the military because he doesn't know crap about military and weaponary. How can you don't know about M16 series when your country is using the same thing?

Yeah, I think it was just a bunch of crap in an attempt to lend credence to his assinine comments.
 

Antisocial Virge

Diamond Member
Dec 13, 1999
6,578
0
0
Originally posted by: Xiety
Originally posted by: mugs
What did he get the silver star for?

no idea.

Is it just me or are they giving them out like candy now and in turn lowering the meaning behind them?
They gave a bunch of medals to that women who got taken prisoner and rescued and she never even fired a shot.
 

Isshinryu

Senior member
May 28, 2004
922
0
0
Originally posted by: Antisocial-Virge
Originally posted by: Xiety
Originally posted by: mugs
What did he get the silver star for?

no idea.

Is it just me or are they giving them out like candy now and in turn lowering the meaning behind them?
They gave a bunch of medals to that women who got taken prisoner and rescued and she never even fired a shot.

Medals are meaningless anyway.
 
Feb 10, 2000
30,029
66
91
As a fellow serviceman, I find it a little hard to believe Horus is actually a military member. I just can't believe any soldier would be so disrespectful of the death of a comrade in arms. The notion that the Army Rangers are less well trained than a garden-variety Canadian infantry unit is laughable (and I don't mean any disrespect toward the Canadian military). I have been to the Ranger camp and seen them train, and they deserve their reputation as one of the world's elite ground forces.

The reality is that the two F-16 pilots who killed four Canadians in the Tarnak Farms friendly-fire incident were charged by court-martial.

The cases against Maj William Umbach and Maj Harry Schmidt were joined at an Article 32 preliminary hearing in which the hearing officer, Col Patrick Rosenow, a senior Air Force judge, recommended dismissing charges.

Maj Schmidt was offered an Article 15 nonjudicial punishment, which he turned down, and now he is again being court-martialed. An acquaintance of mine is his military attorney, as it happens. Maj Umbach was given a Letter of Reprimand.

Speaking as a military attorney, I think it is generally a dangerous precedent to court-martial military members for friendly-fire incidents. The reality is that the fog of war can get thick and confusing, and these kinds of incidents are an unfortunate by-product. With all due respect to the Canadian armed forces, they have been fired on in anger a tiny fraction of the times the American military has in recent years, so it's hardly surprising they have had fewer incidents of friendly fire.
 

TallBill

Lifer
Apr 29, 2001
46,044
62
91
Originally posted by: Don_Vito
As a fellow serviceman, I find it a little hard to believe Horus is actually a military member. I just can't believe any soldier would be so disrespectful of the death of a comrade in arms. The notion that the Army Rangers are less well trained than a garden-variety Canadian infantry unit is laughable (and I don't mean any disrespect toward the Canadian military). I have been to the Ranger camp and seen them train, and they deserve their reputation as one of the world's elite ground forces.

The reality is that the two F-16 pilots who killed four Canadians in the Tarnak Farms friendly-fire incident were charged by court-martial.

The cases against Maj William Umbach and Maj Harry Schmidt were joined at an Article 32 preliminary hearing in which the hearing officer, Col Patrick Rosenow, a senior Air Force judge, recommended dismissing charges.

Maj Schmidt was offered an Article 15 nonjudicial punishment, which he turned down, and now he is again being court-martialed. An acquaintance of mine is his military attorney, as it happens. Maj Umbach was given a Letter of Reprimand.

Speaking as a military attorney, I think it is generally a dangerous precedent to court-martial military members for friendly-fire incidents. The reality is that the fog of war can get thick and confusing, and these kinds of incidents are an unfortunate by-product. With all due respect to the Canadian armed forces, they have been fired on in anger a tiny fraction of the times the American military has in recent years, so it's hardly surprising they have had fewer incidents of friendly fire.

Well Said Don Vito. :beer: I most definitly agree about the Ranger training. It's almost every soldiers dream to be a ranger because of the elite training. Anyone in the US military thats earned a ranger or special forces tab from any branch of US service.automatically gets respect as an elite soldier. They are right up there with any countries best of the best.
 

GreasyBurger

Banned
May 25, 2003
285
0
0
Originally posted by: Antisocial-Virge
Originally posted by: Xiety
Originally posted by: mugs
What did he get the silver star for?

no idea.

Is it just me or are they giving them out like candy now and in turn lowering the meaning behind them?
They gave a bunch of medals to that women who got taken prisoner and rescued and she never even fired a shot.

Which medal are you talking about? PFC Lynch got three medals: Bronze Star, Purple Heart and a POW medal.
 

Mo0o

Lifer
Jul 31, 2001
24,227
3
76
soo basically your combat experience involve driving an ARMORED vehicle then getting attacked by 3 guys which you couldn't even track down?
 

MacBaine

Banned
Aug 23, 2001
9,999
0
0
Originally posted by: Mo0o
soo basically your combat experience involve driving an ARMORED vehicle then getting attacked by 3 guys which you couldn't even track down?

He probably got Canada's highest honor for his bravery in that incident.
 
Feb 10, 2000
30,029
66
91
Actually, speaking of Canadians and courts-martial, they held a court-martial for a Canadian service member at my old base, Tinker AFB, Oklahoma, and it turned into a bit of a comedy of errors.

There are quite a few Canadians stationed at Tinker, because there is a large AWACS tenant wing there, and a number of Canadian crew members fly with them.

In this instance, a female AWACS officer was accused of fraternizing with an enlisted member. Since they didn't have any Canadian JAGs there, the prosecutor, defense attorney, and judge all flew in for the trial. They used our crappy courtroom. Interestingly, at least to me, they hung up a picture of the Queen for the trial, and the judge wore a white wig.

They litigated the entire case, and a number of witnesses testified on behalf of the government. Somehow the prosecutor, though, forgot to have any of the witnesses identify the accused as part of their testimony, so at the close of the government's case, the defense moved for a directed verdict of not guilty, which was granted. Case closed.

I have seen a number of cases slightly bungled in our own military practice, but never one that was busted for such a stupid, fundamental reason. It was pretty funny.
 

Lonyo

Lifer
Aug 10, 2002
21,939
6
81
Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
WTF!

POORLY TRAINED??? GO TAKE A HIKE, YOU CANADIAN WUSS!

As I mentioned in my example, Friendly Fire can occur miles away, sitting in an attack helicopter. It's not as simple as you think.

I think it's easier to FF from miles away than a short distance. If the copter pilot was given the wrong co ordinates, and oculd not see, it's not his fault.
If a guy FF's with close proximity, he has more blame, and could have avoided it.
The copter pilot was following orders and couldn't really check the target(s).
It's not really a very good comparison, and FF is more likely tyo occur further away I think (not having been in the war) because you theoretically wouldn't be able to see targets as clearly.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,265
126
Originally posted by: Don_Vito
Actually, speaking of Canadians and courts-martial, they held a court-martial for a Canadian service member at my old base, Tinker AFB, Oklahoma, and it turned into a bit of a comedy of errors.

There are quite a few Canadians stationed at Tinker, because there is a large AWACS tenant wing there, and a number of Canadian crew members fly with them.

In this instance, a female AWACS officer was accused of fraternizing with an enlisted member. Since they didn't have any Canadian JAGs there, the prosecutor, defense attorney, and judge all flew in for the trial. They used our crappy courtroom. Interestingly, at least to me, they hung up a picture of the Queen for the trial, and the judge wore a white wig.

They litigated the entire case, and a number of witnesses testified on behalf of the government. Somehow the prosecutor, though, forgot to have any of the witnesses identify the accused as part of their testimony, so at the close of the government's case, the defense moved for a directed verdict of not guilty, which was granted. Case closed.

I have seen a number of cases slightly bungled in our own military practice, but never one that was busted for such a stupid, fundamental reason. It was pretty funny.


Doh!!!