rawbunzel
|
posted on April 17, 2002 10:01:47 PM new
Just now on our local news channel they had a breaking news report.It seems we have now accidentaly dropped a bomb on some Canadian forces in Afghanistan. Killed 4. How do we manage to kill our allies?
Canadians, I am so very sorry.
|
rawbunzel
|
posted on April 17, 2002 10:18:49 PM new
A link:
http://webcenter.newssearch.netscape.com/aolns_display.adp?key=200204180044000259156_aolns.src
[ edited by rawbunzel on Apr 17, 2002 10:19 PM ]
|
gravid
|
posted on April 18, 2002 12:13:51 AM new
That is sad but that is what happens when you have live fire exercises. They do it to US troops on a fairly common basis also. It is just like any other activity - say building a dam or a skyscraper - they know they will have a certain number of deaths if they have people doing some activity for x number of hours. The military activities with fast moving planes and explosives and live fire are high risk. They must feel the training saves enough lives in real combat to offset the risk. When you agree to military service you put your life on the line and know there is a greater chance of being killed than if you are say - an accountant. They will probably pin the blame on someone, but really don't we all make mistakes? When you have to make decitions quick and lives depend on it sometimes you still fail being human. I make mistakes shipping items. I make mistakes driving my car also. The chances of serious consequences are much higher driving the car, but I still need to do so. I have seen bosses tell the employees that they have to maintain a zero error rate - that no defects are permitted. Of course that does not happen. What they really mean is no mistake will go unpunished. Even with the space Shuttle you are going to have error result in losing a ship once in awhile. Historically nobody has mad solid fuel boosters that did not have a long term failure rate of about 2% - so when they decided to use them for the Shuttle they had to know they would lose one once in awhile.
|
stockticker
|
posted on April 18, 2002 12:46:38 PM new
Gravid:
I've been pondering why I find your post so offensive. It's not because I disagree with what you said, because I don't.
I think it's because you chose to spend THREE WORDS regretting the deaths ( "that is sad" ) and immediately chose to go on with a VERY lengthy post dismissing the loss and perhaps even trivializing the deaths.
Irene
[ edited by stockticker on Apr 18, 2002 12:47 PM ]
|
krs
|
posted on April 18, 2002 01:06:09 PM new
Irene,
If I didn't believe that Gravid had posted to point up the inexcusable nature of 'accidents such as that but not as a display of his own lack of concern, I would agree with you completely. But I think, and hope, that the perversity of the sorts of rationalizations that he's presented are clear and the callous attitudes he paints are not his own. Here I am speaking for him. I'm only doing that to hopefully direct your ire from Gravid and not to soften the pain you must feel at the horrific circumstance of the loss of those lives, those countrymen of yours.
|
gravid
|
posted on April 18, 2002 01:09:42 PM new
Death is basically one to a customer in nature. If it was 1 who died or 500 it still has the same overwhelming importance to each one. We start qualifying which are important and which are to be regretted more when we consider the circumstances, but I think THAT trivializes death to weigh which should bother us more. It IS sad when anyone dies. I don't have a superstitious view of death but I look at it as a real end. No mythical soul flitting off like a butterfly to carry the personality on so I am perhaps more careful than someone who thinks they are going to meet their heavenly Father and join a harp playing club. I have always been disdainful of those that were reckless with their lives for sport or adventure like mountain climbing. I actually refrain from saying much more than -I am sad- because I would have to express some anger at those that spend a soldier's life like it was another article of supply like a tire. You better believe the ones that order these young men to risk all are sure that they don't share any of those risks. That is the real basic inequality that I object to. Didn't want to get into what cowardly scum I think politicians are...
[ edited by gravid on Apr 18, 2002 07:31 PM ]
|
nycyn
|
posted on April 18, 2002 06:06:35 PM new
Poo happens. I was told by a Gulf War officer that the Agent Orange chemicals were "friendly fire."
|
stockticker
|
posted on April 18, 2002 07:13:53 PM new
I am so glad that I am probably the only Canadian who has read this thread.
Irene
|
stockticker
|
posted on April 19, 2002 01:39:04 PM new
The pilot of an American F-16 fighter jet who dropped a 250-kilogram laser-guided bomb on Canadian troops in Afghanistan, killing four and wounding eight, had ignored orders not to fire, sources say.
The U.S. National Guard pilot twice requested and was refused permission to drop his ordnance after spotting tracer fire in a desert training area near Kandahar, where paratroopers of the Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry were on a live-fire exercise.
"When he saw tracer fire again, he bombed anyway," the source said.
http://www.nationalpost.com/
|
krs
|
posted on April 19, 2002 02:11:12 PM new
"Sources say"
"A Pentagon official said the trouble began when a flight of two F-16 fighters radioed that they were taking fire from the ground and were given permission by their air controller to mark the target.
"When they went back to mark the target, they reported taking fire again and the wing man of the two fighters decided that in self-defence he should drop, and he dropped one 500-pound bomb," the official said.
"Unfortunately what was below them was a Canadian live-fire exercise."
The Pentagon said it appeared the pilots did not know they were flying over a training area and the fire from the Canadian exercise made them believe they were under attack.
One sought permission to bomb and was given the go-ahead only to mark the target, a senior Pentagon official said. On a second pass over the area, again thinking he was under fire, he dropped the bomb in what he believed was self-defence."
--from Irene's link
|
stockticker
|
posted on April 19, 2002 04:12:18 PM new
Nation's Grief Turns to Anger
|
stockticker
|
posted on April 19, 2002 04:35:07 PM new
We went to help out the Americans with their war -- and they used us for target practice.
A PR Nightmare
|
Helenjw
|
posted on April 19, 2002 05:13:02 PM new
It's ludicrous to suggest that this horrible accident was deliberate. In war, communication is bound to be confused, resulting in friendly fire accidents such as this one.
|
nycyn
|
posted on April 19, 2002 05:13:25 PM new
>>We went to help out the Americans with their war -- and they used us for target practice<<
Give me a dog ganged break. I haven't noticed any posts from you expressing sentiment over American soldiers, either killed by friendly fire or by Afghanistans.
Whelp at the Queen and Tony Blair if you don't think the Canadians should be involved. From my understanding, they own a great deal in the U.S. Cut the sentimental BS. The "American War"? Wow. What noble, righteous, honorable people the Brits are.
God Save The Queen (she ain't no human being)--Sex Pistols.
Does it suck these guys were killed, yes. But get off of your self-righteous horse.
You have your own board. Why don't you go bash us insensitive Americans over there? Then make yourself a poster and hit the Canadian streets.
And when they come to get you, don't look us up. We're Aholes and make mistakes.
|
gravid
|
posted on April 19, 2002 05:54:46 PM new
It will probably occur to someone now that having live fire exercises in an area that has several seperate forces with different commands and even seperate languages and actual combat still taking place is not a real good idea.
|
rawbunzel
|
posted on April 19, 2002 06:23:45 PM new
Oh how I wish I hadn't started this thread.
I can't believe you all.The Canadians are the best neighbors any country could ask for. How dare you talk like that to Irene, NYCYN! Canada has their own prime minister and is not part of England you know. How uneducated are you anyway?
The Canadians mourned with us when the towers came down, they feared for our safety after . They let our planes land there on 9-11 and took great care of our people while they waited to be able to go home.They have been nothing but kind.
You all are acting like "ugly Americans". No wonder people around the world hate us. Such an egotistical bunch I have never seen.
You could show some compassion.
What a crock of crap.
[ edited by rawbunzel on Apr 19, 2002 06:27 PM ]
|
Helenjw
|
posted on April 19, 2002 07:22:42 PM new
rawbunzil
You call us ugly Americans because we believe that the recent bombing of innocent Canadians was a horrible accident???
Then you call our responses a crock of crap???
Where in the world are you coming from.
Your entire post is a crock of crap...every word.
Helen
|
plsmith
|
posted on April 19, 2002 07:28:52 PM new
One last parting shot before leaving this cesspool: Helen, YOU are a crock of crap, and have been so from your first days of sidling up to "the power posters" to your more recent days of not giving a "****" about what they think. You're another AW Wacko, Helen. Now that you're "back", maybe you can gain permanent, perpetual rights to that "status".
|
Helenjw
|
posted on April 19, 2002 07:40:01 PM new
Well, I'm so sorry to see you go, plsmith.
Don't slip in the pool on the way out.
|
nycyn
|
posted on April 19, 2002 07:49:07 PM new
Sounds like a case for Auction Crotch. shAME SHE'S NOT IN TOUCH WITH WHAT HER ISSUES ARE. (oops.)
|
plsmith
|
posted on April 19, 2002 08:17:11 PM new
nycyn, does it ever cascade past your limited window that it has dawned upon some of us that you'd rather spend your precious time declaring yourself Queen or making snide remarks about tragedies, rather than focussing your energies upon your child? You're either a sock-puppet or one of the sickest wackos this site has ever hosted. In either case, I not only don't care but hope that your declared custodianship of a young person is a complete fabrication, for you're one way-out-there person, and should not be responsible for a child in "real life".
|
nycyn
|
posted on April 19, 2002 08:25:25 PM new
Let's see, it is 11:23 pm EST. I suppose I could be giving him subliminal suggestions in his sleep.
You are right. I am negligent. I will be somewhat sleepy at the 8:15 am Little League Game tomorrow...
|
nycyn
|
posted on April 19, 2002 08:29:45 PM new
>>does it ever cascade past your limited window that it has dawned upon some of us<<
Unfortunately my window is not that limited except as to who the rest of who these "us" are.
Why do I infuriate you so? Have you a clue?
|
plsmith
|
posted on April 19, 2002 08:35:42 PM new
Yes, by all means, continue to play your game. There's a steady trickle of "believers" flowing through here and you seem to have snagged a few in your colander already. Enjoy this "passtime" -- and, (as they say at AC), "reap what you sew".
|
Helenjw
|
posted on April 19, 2002 08:49:13 PM new
Pat,
What is your problem? Nobody has threatened your territory. I have not posted here very much during the last couple of weeks. Why are you so hostile tonight?
|
plsmith
|
posted on April 19, 2002 08:53:11 PM new
Helen, stay in your uninformed corner, or learn to READ.
|
Helenjw
|
posted on April 19, 2002 08:56:29 PM new
LOL Chill pl.
|
plsmith
|
posted on April 19, 2002 10:48:15 PM new
Helen, believe it or not, I've always liked you, in a circuitous way. You come across (in type) as being both smart AND paranoid. In my economy, that's a perfect recipe for lively debate and healthy repartee. Those two components are, in fact, what have kept me posting here -- despite my abhorrance of the CC-on-file reqirement.
Whether you know it or not, Helen, yours was one of the "voices" I sought here -- even if I categorically disagreed with it. The very fact that you had the guts to show up as yourself and espouse a certain point of view endeared you to me. And even though I've stated in another thread here that you're just another AW Wacko, my appreciation for your participation has not diminished.
With all that said, (and I hope you "got" the true admiration behind it), I will reiterate that this place has become a Wacko Haven, and I can only hope that I will encounter you and some others elsewhere.
In short, I am not going to "chill" -- I'm going to rid myself of cloying baggage and post where I can. This ain't that place, and now that I've said a proper "good-bye" to you. I am gone.
To Irene, I can only offer my ineffectual (but nevertheless heartfelt) condolences for the senseless loss of her countrymen. MY America is not the same one that ineptly bombed those Canadian Soldiers. There will or will not be a "full investigation" into this military tragedy; just know that, FWIW, I read the newspaper account of this "accident" to my Canadian-born Dad five times -- until he "got" it -- and that we then spent most of the day locating and purchasing a Canadian Flag, so that he -- a war veteran himself, too far gone mentally to even recall what he ate for breakfast this morning -- could raise that Maple Leaf and sob/salute his way through a prayer and tribute I didn't even know he remembered and could recite.
|
Borillar
|
posted on April 19, 2002 11:11:26 PM new
AW Wackos, eh? Not very flattering. But I suppose anyone who disagrees with the Bush Agenda is labeled a "Wacko" anymore. Helen has always been a trooper and has put herself on the line many a time. She exercises her First Amendment Right to Free Speech just like the rest of us, but I have yet to hear her ever going off chasing lunatic fringe theories; unlike many Republicans and Conservatives who chased Clinton-as-Murderer-For-Hire baloney stories on here. And were they ever labeled as "AW Wsckos"? Like KRS reminds us: "I don't have to Love Bush to Love America!"
|
plsmith
|
posted on April 19, 2002 11:21:34 PM new
Borillar, as always, you hover above both the "wacko" and "right-wing-conservative" planes. You're just Borillar -- a wacko for all seasons.
|
