The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
A US CH-46 Sea Knight helicopter piloted by US troops and carrying eight British Royal Marines has crashed in an "accident". There were no survivors.
This is a tragedy.
This is a tragedy.
Page:
And apparently, the British troops who died were SAS.
Imagine that.
The finest troops on the planet, who have probably gotten themselves out of near death situations, are killed by their Allies, in a helicopter crash accident.
Imagine that.
The finest troops on the planet, who have probably gotten themselves out of near death situations, are killed by their Allies, in a helicopter crash accident.
WòókieeMøn§†€® wrote:
> Even in peacetime they repeatedly demonstrate their incompetence.
> They've flown technologically advanced Apache gunships into hills
> during peacetime. As Goatboy has told us, their "elite"
> Navy Seals got lost on a training mission and had to be rescued by (I
> think) Canadian rescue teams.
You are still underestimating the difficulties in carrying out even 'basic' military operations. The first thing the SAS did in the Falklands war was get stranded on an iceberg for the night in the south Atlantic due to mechanical helicopter faliure and planning errors. They had to be rescued in the morning by the one serviceable helicopter available to the forces in the area at the time. If the US have the majority of the forces in the region, then they are going to suffer the majority of the technical failures (unless we're talking rifle jams, in which case British difficulties will far outweigh US troubles). Yes it happens to everyone, even if they're British! Quick, someone inform the Queen!!~!
> Even in peacetime they repeatedly demonstrate their incompetence.
> They've flown technologically advanced Apache gunships into hills
> during peacetime. As Goatboy has told us, their "elite"
> Navy Seals got lost on a training mission and had to be rescued by (I
> think) Canadian rescue teams.
You are still underestimating the difficulties in carrying out even 'basic' military operations. The first thing the SAS did in the Falklands war was get stranded on an iceberg for the night in the south Atlantic due to mechanical helicopter faliure and planning errors. They had to be rescued in the morning by the one serviceable helicopter available to the forces in the area at the time. If the US have the majority of the forces in the region, then they are going to suffer the majority of the technical failures (unless we're talking rifle jams, in which case British difficulties will far outweigh US troubles). Yes it happens to everyone, even if they're British! Quick, someone inform the Queen!!~!
I'd rather a friend/family member was killed in action than killed in an "accident"
Some propaganda!
Some propaganda!
Miserableman wrote:
> Iraq have more military personnel in the Gulf right now than the US
> and allies combined, it's just ours have better equipment and
> training.
According to a report yesterday, there are only a third the number of aircraft out there now thatwe had in 1991.
Anyway, accident or not, I can understand perfectly why people are angry over the helicopter crash. The US forces manage to be the first to do this in almost EVERY conflict they take part in.
They destroyed a number of CLEARLY MARKED British vehicles in the Gulf War with so-called 'friendly fire'. They killed more British troops then than the Iraqi's managed, and in less than 48 hours of this conflict they're in the lead yet again.
Even in peacetime they repeatedly demonstrate their incompetence. They've flown technologically advanced Apache gunships into hills during peacetime. As Goatboy has told us, their "elite" Navy Seals got lost on a training mission and had to be rescued by (I think) Canadian rescue teams.
This was obviously an 'accident' simply because no-one would deliberately crash a helicopter. By rights, visibility should not be to blame for such an accident; these are supposedly highly trained pilots, and *should* be able to fly these aircraft blind, using instruments only. Okay, maybe not in a built-up area, but over a flat desert it really shouldn't be a problem.
So initially, it's not surprising that people assumed that it was another case of a member of the US military panicking and/or cocking it up.
However, reports are saying that eyewitnesses saw the helicopter "nosedive into the desert" and explode - which would seem to indicate some form of technical or mechanical failure.
> Iraq have more military personnel in the Gulf right now than the US
> and allies combined, it's just ours have better equipment and
> training.
According to a report yesterday, there are only a third the number of aircraft out there now thatwe had in 1991.
Anyway, accident or not, I can understand perfectly why people are angry over the helicopter crash. The US forces manage to be the first to do this in almost EVERY conflict they take part in.
They destroyed a number of CLEARLY MARKED British vehicles in the Gulf War with so-called 'friendly fire'. They killed more British troops then than the Iraqi's managed, and in less than 48 hours of this conflict they're in the lead yet again.
Even in peacetime they repeatedly demonstrate their incompetence. They've flown technologically advanced Apache gunships into hills during peacetime. As Goatboy has told us, their "elite" Navy Seals got lost on a training mission and had to be rescued by (I think) Canadian rescue teams.
This was obviously an 'accident' simply because no-one would deliberately crash a helicopter. By rights, visibility should not be to blame for such an accident; these are supposedly highly trained pilots, and *should* be able to fly these aircraft blind, using instruments only. Okay, maybe not in a built-up area, but over a flat desert it really shouldn't be a problem.
So initially, it's not surprising that people assumed that it was another case of a member of the US military panicking and/or cocking it up.
However, reports are saying that eyewitnesses saw the helicopter "nosedive into the desert" and explode - which would seem to indicate some form of technical or mechanical failure.
Losing troops and equipment in combat is better than crashing your own helicopters before you can get them there.
Imagine all the families at home, who know that there is a chance their husbands etc could die in combat. To see them go there and have them flap about in the air and end up choking on sand will be infuriating.
Imagine all the families at home, who know that there is a chance their husbands etc could die in combat. To see them go there and have them flap about in the air and end up choking on sand will be infuriating.
Key word of the war:
'Propaganda'
Do we know that it was an accident?
If I was to say to you, "You smell!"
You'd reply, "No I don't."
If we were to say to the US, "Your helicopter got shot down by the Iraqis!"
They'd reply, "No it was an accident."
They're not gonna admit that it got shot down as it would look bad, they're gonna lie! Same way that the Iraqis are claiming that they did shoot it down...
Iraq are gonna say that civilians got killed as it makes anti-war protesters feel stronger about their cause...
Oh, and did anybody see the video of those missiles hitting those buildings? 3 of them landed on the buildings around one in the middle, the 3 were destroyed but the one in the middle was fine apart from the windows...
All the streetlights in the area were still active too!
It's pretty impressive if you ask me...
'Propaganda'
Do we know that it was an accident?
If I was to say to you, "You smell!"
You'd reply, "No I don't."
If we were to say to the US, "Your helicopter got shot down by the Iraqis!"
They'd reply, "No it was an accident."
They're not gonna admit that it got shot down as it would look bad, they're gonna lie! Same way that the Iraqis are claiming that they did shoot it down...
Iraq are gonna say that civilians got killed as it makes anti-war protesters feel stronger about their cause...
Oh, and did anybody see the video of those missiles hitting those buildings? 3 of them landed on the buildings around one in the middle, the 3 were destroyed but the one in the middle was fine apart from the windows...
All the streetlights in the area were still active too!
It's pretty impressive if you ask me...
It was a US helicopter piloted by US troops.
Having an accident does not absolve you of all responsibility for the consequences. If you, for example, accidentally drove a car onto a railway track and couldn't remove it, you're responsible for the resulting disiaster when the train arrives.
I'm not blaming the US for the death of those 12 troops, but I am saying they are responsible for their deaths.
Having an accident does not absolve you of all responsibility for the consequences. If you, for example, accidentally drove a car onto a railway track and couldn't remove it, you're responsible for the resulting disiaster when the train arrives.
I'm not blaming the US for the death of those 12 troops, but I am saying they are responsible for their deaths.
Ha, not for a second.
"A U.S. flag flew over the Iraqi port of Umm Qasr on Friday after U.S. Marines took control, according to Reuters reporter Adrian Croft. Croft said the old port, about a mile away, was still in Iraqi hands".
CNN
They haven't renamed it....yet.
CNN
They haven't renamed it....yet.
Grix Thraves wrote:
> Unbeliever wrote:
> Just heard that the US have taken a port, stuck their flag down and
> re-named it.
>
> I thought this war was about bringing freedom to the country, not
> taking it over..
They need to capture the port as it's vital for them transporting in aid...
> Unbeliever wrote:
> Just heard that the US have taken a port, stuck their flag down and
> re-named it.
>
> I thought this war was about bringing freedom to the country, not
> taking it over..
They need to capture the port as it's vital for them transporting in aid...
Page: