[Closed] Would you want the Americans to rescue you?

its funny because its true

Any knowledge of the US Army for those informed opinions? (Call of Duty & the like doesnt count).

The latest on the story is that it is thought a grenade lobbed by one of the American rescuers is what actually killed the poor woman. I'm no military expert but surely trying to rescue somebody by chucking a grenade in their general direction is a stupid idea?

I think the 'Special' in American Special Forces is possibly short for special needs.

Any of you keyboard warriors have any idea of what you are talking about?

I think the 'Special' in American Special Forces is possibly short for special needs.

Is it the same "special" that's used in "special relationship" ?

You know, the one TB took us to war in Iraq for. That relationship.

[url= http://media.theonion.com/images/articles/article/645/onion_news1562_jpg_250x1000_q85.jp g" target="_blank">http://media.theonion.com/images/articles/article/645/onion_news1562_jpg_250x1000_q85.jp g"/> [/img] - Click[/url]

@RepacK - No. Sorry.

I've been very pleased to see Americans on occasion. With the rise of Op New Dawn there will be no more Americans as first responders in my job and that's a massive loss.

Clearly being able to read things on the internet has made people experts in areas they clearly know nothing about.

If it comes to a choice between the US "Special" Forces and a bunch of Terrorists I think I'd be better off with the Terrorists

you should have volunteered to put your arse on the line & do the job for them - I'm sure they'd have appreciated the evening off.

I'd rather be killed than tortured. But it is very unfortunate that the rescue went wrong I agree. 🙁

Any of you keyboard warriors have any idea of what you are talking about?

I know plenty of people who have served in the armed forces. Based on what they've told me about the yanks I think the best thing to do when around US armed forces is to make sure you are a very very long way away from them when the shooting starts as they tend to make a bit of a mess.

I think the fact that they may well have killed the very person they were meant to have been rescuing says it all...

I think the fact that they may well have killed the very person they were meant to have been rescuing says it all...

Only if you've already made a decision on the details before knowing anything more than the most basic facts... 🙄

I'd rather be killed than tortured. But it is very unfortunate that the rescue went wrong I agree.

You're right - utterly tragic. Yet the tragedy doesnt stop the asinine comments from some. If this is the case you had better believe that the soldier responsible is utterly devastated by whats happened. My thoughts are with the Family.

Only if you've already made a decision on the details before knowing anything more than the most basic facts..

+1

On balance, I'd rather be killed by my rescuers than killed by my captors.

You 'experts' may not have a high opinion of US Special Forces, which may or may not be justified, but the fact is they were prepared to die to rescue the hostage.
How many of you would do the same?

I think for all time all such operations will now luck amateurish compared to the SAS actions in the Iranian hostage siege. But when you look at what they did there, it involved a massive slice of luck, that is rarely going to happen, if ever again.

And if you look at the SAS they have always been extremely secretive, at that point they where forced into the spotlight, but they then stepped back into the shadows. Who knows how many cock ups and calamities they have had without our knowledge.

I think the mistake the American military make is in trying to create a media image, in courting the media as they do they also highlight the mistakes. There may be something in the American psychi that causes that, an optimism that can cloud the possible negative outcomes.

you can stay here with the terrorists or we come get you, can't be sure how it will pan out mind you.

i know what i would choose.

Fekin shame it went wrong though. 🙁

i suppose it comes down to the risk that she was under, assuming that all avenues of negotiation had been exhuasted a rescue must have been the only option

i doubt we will ever know exactly what happens, unless ome footage makes its way onto wikileaks

Who knows how many cock ups and calamities they have had without our knowledge.

Well if any of Brave-two-zero is actually realistic then the planning for their operation reeked of incompetence.

You know how in war/action films they say that something's risky and it could all go massively wrong but despite the inevitable things going wrong, everything still works out fine 99% of the time.

That's not like real life.

+1 for richmars.

shame but if you enter a war zone, you may get killed, sometimes by accident, i wouldn't fancy the odds of a rescue mission by any special
forces but it's better than being beaten half to death then skinned alive by the locals.

does it sound like the troops were trying to cover up their own mistake
hence the suicide vest story that came out over the weekend

[url= http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/europe/10/11/uk.afghanistan.hostage.death/index.html?hpt=T1 ]http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/europe/10/11/uk.afghanistan.hostage.death/index.html?hpt=T1[/url]
[i]The initial report on the rescue mission by the troops who carried it out did not mention throwing a grenade, but a follow-up report did, which "raised a lot of question about what killed" Norgrove, U.S. Air Force Capt. Gary Kirchner told CNN after Cameron spoke.[/i]

On balance, I'd rather be killed by my rescuers than killed by my captors.

Yeah americans or taliban, 'mericans every time. It would ahve been nice if it was the sas or even the french special forces as they are shit hot, or mossad, but americans will do me nicely thank you.

does it sound like the troops were trying to cover up their own mistake

Possibly. Or as often happens, in the rush to get a story out, chinese whispers takes hold - one reporter overhears someone say that it's normal for them to keep a suicide vest on the hostage so maybe that's what happened and next thing it's being reported as fact.

I wouldn't bother RepacK, any excuse to be racist towards Americans is taken up on this forum. 🙄

I've served alongside US troops (and the US Navy) in the past, and have found them to be very professional. Different in a lot of ways, but professional. I'm sure those above slating them have very often fast roped into a Taliban stronghold in the dark, laden with kit, not really knowing what to expect, come under accurate hostile fire from a determined enemy and risked their lives for a stranger.

Its unfortunate she was killed, but "No plan survives the first contact with the enemy" and its certainly not the US SF's fault.

BSB - Sorry, I'd assumed that "I'd rather not be killed but..." was a moot point.

🙄

would that be the embassy siege where one of our SAS was set alight by burning curtains while dangling from a rapel rope ?

racist towards Americans

when the white colonists arrived and started trampling the locals, or later on on this forum?

I wouldn't bother RepacK, any excuse to be racist towards Americans is taken up on this forum.

Its not just that, its all the armchair heroes who think they know something about an event that they have **** all knowledge of. I would bet my life that none of these critics of US Special Forces have ever been in a firefight themselves.

I've served alongside US troops (and the US Navy) in the past, and have found them to be very professional. Different in a lot of ways, but professional. I'm sure those above slating them have very often fast roped into a Taliban stronghold in the dark, laden with kit, not really knowing what to expect, come under accurate hostile fire from a determined enemy and risked their lives for a stranger.

Its unfortunate she was killed, but "No plan survives the first contact with the enemy" and its certainly not the US SF's fault.

Says it all really.

im not blaming the americans special forces

as far as i can tell the US command panicked when they thought she might be moved to ****stan where her value as a hostage and propaganda tool would be greatly increased
willy hague then agreed with the americans that it was best to send in the troops

this despite the wishes of the negotiating team (and norgroves family) who were confident of a peaceful solution

distrust of the 2 wars and the troops involved is hardly surprising

lies from politicians to get us into iraq (and a complete failure of the opposition to question those lies)
images like abu graib (probably the defining image of america in iraq)
courts martial of troops abusing prisoners, rape, murder subsequent cover ups etc etc

and then a change in the story about how she was killed
and you have echoes of de menezes

the war against terror hasnt done much to improve the public perception of the military or government

When I was in the Territorials, the general opinion of the National Guard was not that high.

However I will the be the first to admit that this is not exactly a sound base on which to make a comparison; obviously the NG and Delta et al are somewhat different animals.

My impression otherwise has always been that the US Special Forces are very competent. Maybe not up to the standards of the SAS and SBS, but very competent nonetheless. You don't get through something like SEAL or Delta selection (or even the Ranger course, come to that) without a great deal of self-discipline and military competency.

[i]Clearly being able to read things on the internet has made people experts in areas they clearly know nothing about. [/i]

With respect, b0llocks, I think the defining feature of this war has been this deferring, "leave the military decisions to military men"/"God bless our boys too bad about the pinko politicians" attitude. People who are not in the army need to confidently challenge decisions made by soldiers for this war to be run effectively. In this respect Obama is doing a hell of a lot better than his predecessor.

In fact if you read around the subject, all the greatest wartime leaders (Churchill, Lincoln, etc.) were not afraid to engage with military decisions. You cannot neatly hive off the military sphere from the political sphere, unfortunately. Incidentally all the comments here about not using grenades to rescue her are [i]right[/i] on, though not in the way that perhaps the commenters mean. The answer to this situation was engagement/negotiation with Elders, Taliban etc. It's not like "grenades were bad, but 5.62mm would have been alright". The kinetic solution was the wrong approach entirely.

jhw - well said, almost..

The answer to this situation was engagement/negotiation with Elders, Taliban etc. It's not like "grenades were bad, but 5.62mm would have been alright". The kinetic solution was the wrong approach entirely.

We dont have all the facts as you accurately stated so how do you draw the conclusion that the choice made was the wrong one? Are you privvy to some info others are not or is that just your opinion?

ps agree with pretty much everything else you say.

Difficult call and the USA defenders have to accept that their record on friendly fire deaths and refusal to testify here on these cases does lead to resentment. Yes sh1t happens in war but stand up and be counted for your errors.
Tough call IMHO damned if they do damned if they dont. I have no wish to pour scorn on the execution of their brave attempt which may or may not have been carried out brilliantly and may or may not have been the best choice.
They are brave whether they are misguided is another issue.
Shot by rescuers would be my choice, whatever their nationality.

I think the question we would all really like an answer to is; what tyres for an Afghan cave assault?

High Rollers blatantly...unless it's muddy.

I wonder which way round the Afghans put their brakes.

You're right, that part of my commment lacks any basis in the particular facts of this situation, of which I'm unaware (I know they were keen to stop her being traded on). It does seem though as if they were about to get a breakthrough using this approach based on reporting etc. although with the news industry what it is today, who knows. I do know on excellent authority that right before the bombing began in Afghanistan in October 2001 it was beginning to look like the Taliban were going to expel Osama anyway. Completely different subject but real food for thought.

I can understand the decrying of "keyboard warriors" etc, but in reality, very, very few people are going to be qualified to make a valid judgement based on first hand experience - and they tend to keep a low profile.

Having no direct experience of an issue is rarely a bar on commenting, and doesn't necessarily indicate ignorance. There have been plenty of balanced "broadsheet" news coverage and in depth analysis of the recent "wars on terror" and other military operations and the underlying politics, along with other media reportage and published factual accounts from current / former serving personnel. "Casual" observers / commentators need not be badly informed....

big dave

anything with a flakjacket sidewall for caves

More kneejerk anti-Americanism from clueless morons.

Grow up.

For any Americans that happen to be reading this thread, the majority of us are not like these cocks, who appear to have got lost on their way to the Guardian's CiF site.

very few people are going to be qualified to make a valid judgement based on first hand experience

Perfectly true but then comments should be made with that in mind and particularly so when they seem to simply be using a sad situation to strengthen their case for their viewpoint (anti-americanism in this case). I'm no fan of the macho US attitude to war/'diplomacy' but these sorts of comments are akin to people using the spread of AIDS to justify their homophobic views.

as said earlier, as if what they tell us on the news is right,they haven't got a clue whats going on and will say anything to grab a headline,

the only ones who will know how it rolled are the ones who were there and the powers that put them there, the rest of us are better of focusing on Rooney and scanky prostitues, the press bunch of numpties

the rest of us are better of focusing on Rooney and scanky prostitues

At which point we should kiss goodbye to democracy and any illusions of the educated, well informed populace that should be the cornerstone of our societal values - FFS 👿

This sort of disengaged ignorant nonsense makes me very angry. Probably the sort of detached indifference that allowed Blair to be re-elected after lying his way into Ws Iraq war

I kissed goodbye to that notion a long time ago, one thing that the UK has lead the world in is replacing news with gutter journalism in order to distract us from reality.

This sort of disengaged ignorant nonsense makes me very angry

Well I do think it's sad. Just as I find it sad when people let their prejudices affect rational thought as has been the case in this thread (and TBH most of the politics threads recently - from both sides...)

Most comments on this thread have actually been quite balanced, the accusations of anti-Americanism have actually been worse than the anti-Americanism itself (even though that was clearly the ops original intent).

the accusations of anti-Americanism have actually been worse than the anti-Americanism itself

How so?

When I saw it was American Special Forces I thought, 'they should have sent ours.

To be fair to them though, they put their lives on the line, and had it gone right, they'd have been heroes.

Can't be easy to get anyone out of a situation like that.

The only person who never made a mistake is the person who never did anything.

Rkk01

Man you really need to chill out , I love that you think that a snap comment
About a fat footballer and his desires is tantamount to bringing down the country,

I was just pointing out that we are not privy to such matters
And will never be and rightly so, we as a populace could not stomach the
Truth or make the decisions that others do,

We only know what we read and what we see on the box ,

You keep on thinking you are informed m8 , the real truth would make your
Pi55 boil 8)

Not trawling through the whole thread, but the few UK blokes i know who have seen war, will tell you that when you are in trouble. It is always the yanks who come in and save your ass. Maybe they come in gung-ho and waste everything around you, but the blokes i knew, really didn't mind too much at the time, or now, for that matter.

The latest on the story is that it is thought a grenade lobbed by one of the American rescuers is what actually killed the poor woman. I'm no military expert...

A mate of mine's Best Man is in the Coldstream Guards (i.e. UK forces) and got himself in a bad way when one of his squad threw a grenade into a room, only to have it bounce off the back wall and straight back out again. 😯

Things go wrong when you throw little exploding bombs.

[i] clubber - Member

the accusations of anti-Americanism have actually been worse than the anti-Americanism itself

How so? [/i]

well most comments have been quite reasoned for or against the americans, apart from bravotel who declared anyone who doesnt adhere to his blinkered views was a cock

I for one was glad of their assistance in the early nineties when we called in an airstrike had they not have been on the money I doubt I'd be typing this now.

kimbers - Member

How so?

well most comments have been quite reasoned for or against the americans, apart from bravotel who declared anyone who doesnt adhere to his blinkered views was a cock

The only 'view' that I expressed was that this troll thread was attracting kneejerk anti-Americanism from the usual suspects.

Is objecting to kneejerk anti-Americanism blinkered, then?

Yes, I described those who indulge in this as cocks. They are. Same goes for anyone who tries to lump a disparate group of people together as one homogenous group with shared character traits.

I guess you chose to forget this then...

Big Dave - Member
I think the 'Special' in American Special Forces is possibly short for special needs.

and this ill informed bollocks about the 'American psychi' (sic)
...ahh, 300 million people who think as one, like The Borg.

MSP - Member

I think the mistake the American military make is in trying to create a media image, in courting the media as they do they also highlight the mistakes. There may be something in the American psychi that causes that, an optimism that can cloud the possible negative outcomes.

and someone else bringing friendly fire into it for no apparent reason.
On that subject, the Americans have been responsible for more 'blue on blues' principally because they have many times more troops in theatre at any given point in addition to providing the vast majority of combat air support. Still, don't let that stop the fun. All aboard the bandwagon, hey?

Rkk01

Man you really need to chill out , I love that you think that a snap comment
About a fat footballer and his desires is tantamount to bringing down the country,

I was just pointing out that we are not privy to such matters
And will never be and rightly so, we as a populace could not stomach the
Truth or make the decisions that others do,

We only know what we read and what we see on the box ,

You keep on thinking you are informed m8 , the real truth would make your
Pi55 boil

Err, you've made some pretty big assumptions about what I do know, don't know or need to know... And, I've deliberately not commented on the rescue attempt, for reason of not wanting to fall back on assumptions and pre-conceptions.

Regarding [i]needing[/i] to know, this...

not privy to such matters
And will never be and rightly so

... is utter nonsense.

It is what leads a country to re-elect a leader that "lied" (misrepresented?) about the reason to go o war in Iraq.

It is one reason why the Americans failed in Vietnam against the rising tide of the anti-war movement.

Arguably, it's why the issue of UK eqpt provision and helicopters / flying hours didn't become a major political issue much, much earlier than it did.

Too much detail can get into the media, too close to the event, and that can undermine operational procedures and security - but the UK Government media clampdown / blackout in Afghanistan protected the politicians arses rather than protected service personnel lives.

We only know what we read and what we see on the box ,

You keep on thinking you are informed m8 , the real truth would make your
Pi55 boil

Which makes my point, really.
I don't claim to be informed, but I do know that what I have read and heard ought to shame UK politicians and journalists for keeping the public in the dark.

Yes, the real truth should have boiled the public's piss - and that should have been routed back to the decision makers to get their bloody finger's out.

I've worked with US Army and USMC, US Navy SEAL's, and spent 10 months working with British Special Forces who I was trained to undertake LRRP's and CSAR actions.

My great uncle was a WOII within the RM, SBS and SAS during the 1950's, I've also had the opportunity to talk "off the record" with an Ex Sgt. who took part in the Iranian Embassy siege.

Belive me folks when I say no matter how hard you train you can still **** things up, and things get ****ed up, all you can do is try to reduice the risk by quality of training and hope for good luck.

There is a lot of things that have happened in various conflicts involving special forces that you will never read or hear about, best just to leave it that way 😉

When I'm on holiday, I'm generally first on the balcony.

CBA

How do we know the mission wasn't a total success?

I'm sure the US special forces are extremely well trained and very competent. I'm also sure the US forces have helped lots of people out of bad spots. I'm even sure that the UK forces - including special forces - have made lots of cock-ups - I mean you only have to look at the last hostage rescue, hailed as a success because they rescued the principal, yet they killed 4 others including his Afghan interpreter.

However

Maybe they come in gung-ho and waste everything around you, but the blokes i knew, really didn't mind too much at the time, or now, for that matter.

On that subject, the Americans have been responsible for more 'blue on blues' principally because they have many times more troops in theatre at any given point in addition to providing the vast majority of combat air support.

woahhh !

ace_sparky - WTF are all those MLA's ?

agreed on [u]pretty much[/u] all counts so far (why do we all have to take such polarised stances all the time ?)

tragic? - clearly
brave? - yes
poorly reported/ mis(or dis)informed? - probably
ill advised? - quite possibly
americans all shite? - unlikely

politicians (military [b]and[/b]civilian) ultimately to blame and likely never to tell the truth? - why, yes, I imagine they are

my total and utter guess (never having been a member of the special forces, 😉 ) is that some objective other than just possible rescue had presented itself - maybe a taliban bigwig was on the premises? I don't see such a massive effort going into "just" rescuing this poor woman. Maybe I'm more cynical than I should be, but see above re politicians.

I wouldn't bother RepacK, any excuse to be racist towards Americans is taken up on this forum

+1 The xenophobic attitudes on this forum are not only extremely old fashioned but numbingly boring too.

and someone else bringing friendly fire into it for no apparent reason

Difficult call and the USA defenders have to accept that their record on friendly fire deaths and refusal to testify here on these cases does lead to resentment. Yes sh1t happens in war but stand up and be counted for your errors.
Tough call IMHO damned if they do damned if they dont

My first thought on hearing it had gone wrong and she was blown up 'probably by a suicide bomb' was 'well they would say that wouldn't they'.

Of course that must just have been my knee jerk anti Americanism coming into play.

but the fact is they were prepared to die to rescue the hostage.

+1

we as a populace could not stomach the Truth or make the decisions that others do

Speak for yourself pal.

but the fact is they were prepared to die to rescue the hostage.

+1

Or more accurately, a senior field commander (and staff) assessed the risks and decided to issue orders for a rescue mission, having weighed up the chances of success against the risks to the team??

Well if you want to discuss that, I'm fairly sure that on a per mission basis they're still well ahead on the blue-on-blue count. No accident there either - there is a difference in the training and the general attitude within the military.

Proof? Or just your opinion..

bravohotel9er - Member

and this ill informed bollocks about the 'American psychi' (sic)
...ahh, 300 million people who think as one, like The Borg.

MSP - Member

I think the mistake the American military make is in trying to create a media image, in courting the media as they do they also highlight the mistakes. There may be something in the American psychi that causes that, an optimism that can cloud the possible negative outcomes.

Of course nations have characteristics that liken them as a group, that's not to say that everyone thinks the same as borg like drones, but they are the product of the same education systems, media exposure and the same political language that creates their understanding of the world.

And just for the record I am frequently embarrassed and dismayed by the actions of the "British authorities", the decisions and cock-ups they make, and there attempts to cover up the truth. That doesn't make me anti british, it means I can form my own view on events and not just accept the press release issued.

Too many people round here are reading Bravo two Zero stylee novels frankly!

A dangerous business without superhuman powers = high liklihood of things going wrong from time to time regardless of national sterotypes and lack of real information about what actually went on. No other sensible conclusion possible frankly.

There have been some awful blue on blue incidents amoung US soldiers, some of which won't ever become public. They do have a gung ho reputation in military nations.

I know this from real life army men when training with HM Forces, not from a book or 212111451th hand.

Answering the OP - if I was a hostage at risk of being killed in any number of unpleasant ways and the results broadcast on YouTube for lots of crazies to gloat over, I'd be happy if anyone came and rescued me. Hell, I might even engage in a two-cheeked kiss if my liberators were French or Italian (just no touching the butt ok!).

Or more accurately, a senior field commander (and staff) assessed the risks and decided to issue orders for a rescue mission, having weighed up the chances of success against the risks to the team??

So as I said, and given the fact that the guys bursting through the door had a choice not to do it.

the fact is they were prepared to die to rescue the hostage.

I'd be very grateful that anyone would risk their life to attempt to rescue me from those animals (whom I hope died slowly).
Let us not forget that the american military have saved countless british lives by supplying fast air in afg (because the RAF now only have an unservicable air balloon and some old rotor blades). You won't find many brit servicemen who will talk badly of them.

I'm as anti-American as they come. All my American friends have had to humbly acknowledge that they live in a failed state before I let them buy me drinks for the rest of the night.

However, if I was in a hostage situation with anyone who believed in an afterlife then I would be desperate for anyone to at least try and rescue me. Whatever the outcome, it's got to be better than what happened to Ken Bigley or Margaret Hassan.

Saying that, I would make the American Special Forces humbly acknowledge that they live in a failed state before I let them buy me drinks for the rest of the night.

There is a lot of things that have happened in various conflicts involving special forces that you will never read or hear about

+1

Tora Bora.