Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: pabianice

I've seen a truncated version of the video, and it was represented to be a AH-64B attack --- which did not quite jive with my experience, although my experience is rather dated.

It's here on Snopes:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/military/apache.asp


13 posted on 01/04/2006 7:53:02 AM PST by MeanWestTexan (Many at FR would respond to Christ "Darn right, I'll cast the first stone!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: MeanWestTexan
AH-64B

No such animal. The proposed Bravo upgrade was cancelled in 92.

38 posted on 01/04/2006 8:10:25 AM PST by A.A. Cunningham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: MeanWestTexan

From your link:

"Army officials acknowledged that the 30 mm cannons used by the Apache gunners were far bigger than what was needed to kill the men, but said it is the smallest weapon the Apaches have."

Which I find rather funny, implying as it does the original question "how horrid - did you really have to use such a large gun?"


65 posted on 01/04/2006 8:32:34 AM PST by alnitak ("That kid's about as sharp as a pound of wet liver" - Foghorn Leghorn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: MeanWestTexan

Yes, the truncated version omits the footage which shows what the pull-starts were doing prior to becoming red mists in the field. I believe that the truncated version was a French media mod to portray the US as firing indiscriminately on innocent civilians.


90 posted on 01/04/2006 8:59:30 AM PST by xander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson