Posted on 07/03/2002 10:29:36 PM PDT by JohnHuang2
Edited on 07/12/2004 3:55:08 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
An anti-aircraft weapon fired at U.S. aircraft this week in Uruzgan province was stationed in a civilian area, which could explain why an AC-130 gunship that attacked those targets this week is thought to have killed or wounded scores of Afghans by mistake.
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
Routinely "carry" anti-aircraft artillery? Huh?
I'm starting to change my opinion (pending final data). I thought this was a grave, but honest, mistake.
Now I'm starting to think that the local population, represented by an anti-aircraft gun, fired on our forces.
Bomb's away.
last year the important lesson of: "don't throw rocks at people with guns" was taught to the palestinians.
This year the important lesson of, "don't fire your guns in the air during a wedding, especially when there is a war on" is being taught to the afghanis.
In a permissive environment the AC-130 would then engage and destroy any targets deemed to be putting the ground troops or gunship in harms way. As the article pointed out, the AC-130s would red mist anyone on the ground and there should be blood/body parts somewhere.
Routinely "carry" anti-aircraft artillery? Huh? I'm starting to change my opinion (pending final data). I thought this was a grave, but honest, mistake. Now I'm starting to think that the local population, represented by an anti-aircraft gun, fired on our forces.
Reminds me of the movie, "Rules of Engagement". Supposed innocent civilians being fired upon by the evil American forces. By the time an "investigation" is performed, all trace of the killers and terrorists has been removed.
The only question left for me is..."WHERE's THE TAPE?"
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.