Skip to comments.
507th Weapons Records Missing
El Paso Times
| 17 Sept. 2003
| Laura Cruz
Posted on 09/17/2003 11:23:07 AM PDT by Lurker
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-128 next last
To: Lurker
Sometimes the weapon is fine and the magazine is wack-a-doo. I remember having to keep 19 rounds in the magazine, the 20th round would sometimes retract the spring too tight where it wouldn't release. Also grit in the magazine could do the same thing.
Sure seems like too many weapons and too many different kinds of weapons to be the weapons fault.
21
posted on
09/17/2003 12:02:21 PM PDT
by
stylin19a
(is it vietnam yet ?)
To: Lurker
Liberal type slander, hiding behind their common cry that no one should be held responsible, even when they die or fail. Having spent 20-years with the Army around weapons, it was rare for a misfire - and being a true professional I made damn sure I knew how to clear the round/jam. Trouble with support troops is that they care little for their physical fitness, weapons training or anything akin to being a soldier... a fatal flaw in combat.
22
posted on
09/17/2003 12:06:57 PM PDT
by
Jumper
To: Lurker
"...were destroyed in the Iraqi attack ..."I heard that aliens guided by Santa Claus took them...Well, its just as believable anyway...
To: Lonesome in Massachussets
One account I read said that the CO's GPS locator was not working and he had not been issued a map for this area. The same account said he passed a stationary Marine unit outside the town. Maybe its just me, but if I had a support unit before passing through a combat unit my reaction would be to take a break and look up that Marine CO just to be sure I was where I was supposed to be.
24
posted on
09/17/2003 12:10:44 PM PDT
by
colorado tanker
(USA - taking out the world's trash since 1776)
To: Lonesome in Massachussets; Lurker
The CO of that unit should be relieved of command.Only if you believe what you read in the papers. Linda Cruz could be the pen name for Jason Blair. It's my understanding that they got lost and ambushed by Iraqi irregulars...
The account I heard (ABC, 20/20?) was that the unit made a wrong turn, passed a Marine unit at one end of a bridge, and drove on into hostile territory at the other side of the river. They drove on through town unmolested: it was only then the CO realized the navigational error. At this point, IMHO, all is still forgiveable. Been driving all night, it's now dawn, people are tired, mistakes happen.
However, the CO decides to drive back through the town to return to the supply line. Meanwhile, the town has woken up to the fact that U.S. troops are nearby, and the Army unit gets slammed. The decision to run back through the gauntlet was the worst choice from a decidedly poor set of alternatives.
25
posted on
09/17/2003 12:37:41 PM PDT
by
Fudd
To: colorado tanker
Look, there's living witnesses to this. You can write up all the maintenance papers you want. It's not like they're time stamped and put into a hermetically sealed jar, in a vault, in the middle of the desert for future reference.
It's a miracle that there were any survivors!! Kudos to their rescuers.
26
posted on
09/17/2003 12:39:03 PM PDT
by
Sacajaweau
(God Bless Our Troops!!)
To: Fudd
I can forgive tactical errors and navigational errors. Command failure to adequately train, drill and prepare troops is not forgivable.
To: Sacajaweau
The Army has already done a report based on interviewing all concerned that seems pretty accurate by comparison to the public information. It's the families who are claiming a cover up because the maintenance logs were lost in battle. Some in the unit are trying to blame defective equipment, but there isn't any support for that either.
I'm not critical of the soldiers, who responded the best they could when attacked. I am somewhat critical of the commander who got them into that pickle, however.
28
posted on
09/17/2003 1:11:27 PM PDT
by
colorado tanker
(USA - taking out the world's trash since 1776)
To: drjimmy
The weapons were not defective--only the soldiers' maintenance of those weapons. And you know that how?
I would have to agree with Poohbah on this
This is not intended to be a derogatory comment but this Companys was normally not to be in front line combat there the second or third string (again not intended to be a derogatory comment)
There maintenance of there weapons might also be second or third string it might be natural but not acceptable
Compounding the problem is the front line troops get the first rate weapons as they should.
The second or third string might get the older weapons so you have a viscous cycle.. the troops that might tend to have the bad habit of doing less weapons.maintenance get the weapons that required the most...you have to be aware that this might be the way it is and keep on top of it
The Marines have it right EVERYONES a combat rifleman this is not bravado its common sense ... if you in the back ranks and get the old weapons guess what you have got the time to do whats needed to keep your weapon in top working order
29
posted on
09/17/2003 1:26:02 PM PDT
by
tophat9000
(The price for Tom to drop is ....Parsky goes ....let Tom have the CA party purse strings)
To: Lurker
The CO of that unit should be relieved of command.I recently reviewed the actual report the Army put out regarding the attack on the 507th at An Nasiriyah, and I could not agree with you more. This guy is responsible for them taking the wrong route in the first place, but even on the route he took his unit would have most likely made it to their next destination if the CO had not made the second wrong turn into the city of An Nasiriyah. Even with these two mistakes, he could have again led is troops out of harm if he had not missed the ramp back on to the freeway when the convoy had turned around and backtracked through the city. On top of all this, it appears he executed an improper retreat by hauling a#@ away and leaving the rest of the troops in slower moving vehicles to fend for themselves.
30
posted on
09/17/2003 1:46:58 PM PDT
by
Chief_Joe
(From where the sun now sits, I will fight on -FOREVER!)
To: Feckless
Where would other records be? Wouldn't there be some history on each gun or gun lot--manufacturer, date of purchase, circulation, etc.?
To: Chief_Joe
While the unit commander is part of the problem Department of the Army policy is the crux of the matter. It's very simple, these troops were not prepared to engage an enemy in any environment no less an environment where the constant maintenance of your weapon was paramount.
The solution is not hanging unit commanders or NCO's, the solution is for the Army to take a hard look at how the USMC trains every Marine to be a rifleman first and foremost.
And it pains me to say that since I am Army and my son in law is a Marine.
But that's the fact of the matter.
32
posted on
09/17/2003 3:59:16 PM PDT
by
jwalsh07
To: Lurker
Laura Cruz: Another media slut fabrication!
33
posted on
09/17/2003 4:02:21 PM PDT
by
verity
To: Rusty Shackelford
"Something smells funny here. "
"First thing you know Jessica's a millionaire" (sung to the tune of the Beverly Hillbilly's).
34
posted on
09/17/2003 6:34:55 PM PDT
by
afz400
To: AnnaLaura
Not at unit level. These weapons were fired prior to deployment and annually (at a minimum) prior to that. Neglect at user level (which can happen only with NCO/Officer neglect) most likely caused malfunctions.
35
posted on
09/17/2003 7:22:21 PM PDT
by
Feckless
To: Chad Fairbanks; CyberCowboy777
Ping.
36
posted on
09/17/2003 7:28:50 PM PDT
by
DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
(Hard work never killed anyone, but why take a chance?)
To: afz400; Chad Fairbanks
LOL - you should put Chad to work on that - unless you've completed it, in which case, I want to hear it! : )
37
posted on
09/17/2003 7:30:46 PM PDT
by
DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
(Hard work never killed anyone, but why take a chance?)
To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet; Chad Fairbanks
What is the chance that these records would be destroyed with no backups?
38
posted on
09/17/2003 7:41:59 PM PDT
by
CyberCowboy777
(SELECT * FROM liberals WHERE clue > 0 .............................................. 0 rows returned)
To: jwalsh07
While the unit commander is part of the problem Department of the Army policy is the crux of the matter. It's very simple, these troops were not prepared to engage an enemy in any environment no less an environment where the constant maintenance of your weapon was paramount.I agree with you that Army policy is part of the problem, but I think it goes up a bit higher, dare I say Secretary of Defense higher. Those soldiers knew how to clean their weapons, and they were trained and instructed to do so repeatedly all the way up to when they begin to roll out of Kuwait. From what I read, it seems that they were undermanned. They had two men/women per vehicle and they were not just driving through Iraq, but they were supporting and replenishing the supplies of the air defense unit. The time and energy required to do this meant some things had to go to keep the convoy moving. With more crew members they could have assigned someone to the perpetual upkeep of the weapons.
39
posted on
09/17/2003 7:53:04 PM PDT
by
Chief_Joe
(From where the sun now sits, I will fight on -FOREVER!)
To: CyberCowboy777; #3Fan
Who knows if they have actually been destroyed? But if they havn't, I bet our good buddy #3fan would be willing to destroy those records, in order to spare PFC Lynch from having to deal with the media...
40
posted on
09/17/2003 7:54:27 PM PDT
by
Chad Fairbanks
("I guess we got so focused on the rubber penis we didn't even pay attention to what he was saying.")
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-128 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson