Rules Of Engagement

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2346618/My-hero-son-won-Victoria-Cross-died-Army-ban-weapons-damage-Taliban-mud-huts.html

/// The change – in response to a request from President Hamid Karzai to protect local infrastructure – meant British patrols no longer carried mortars and shoulder-held rocket launchers on routine operations, forcing them to engage any targets at close range. ///

Why just like our police should the army also carry out their duties with one arm tied behind their back?

[Gromit]

Doesn't quite stack up.

If the sniper was in a mud hut, why could they not have fired their machine guns at it to kill the firer?

If the idea of the ban was to protect buildings, why were they trying to blow it up?

[anotheoldgit]

Gromit

/// If the sniper was in a mud hut, why could they not have fired their machine guns at it to kill the firer? ///

I would think that the term 'Mud Hut' was a little confusing, some of those 'Mud Huts' are pretty substantial building, and are unlikly to be penetrated by machine gun fire.

/// If the idea of the ban was to protect buildings, why were they trying to blow it up? ///

that is the whole point if it had not been for the ban on heavy weapons which could have killed the sniper but also could have inflicted damage to the building, this soldier would most likely still be alive.

[Gromit]

// James died because he was forced to crawl to within a few feet of an enemy sniper in a mud hut while clutching a grenade //

It doesn't sound confusing, it sounds like it was a hut, made with mud. Perhaps the Taleban have bullet proof mud. Why crawl to within a few feet of the sniper, when they could just return fire?

[anotheoldgit]

Gromit

/// Why crawl to within a few feet of the sniper, when they could just return fire? ///

Return the fire with what Gromit, they could have spent all day firing into a 'Mud hut', while at the same time the sniper could continue to take more soldiers out, whereas one nicely place motor shell fired from a safe distance would have seen the job is done.

[Gromit]

When he was awarded the Victoria Cross, it was stated // he intentionally put himself in the line of fire, saving the lives of others as a result //


// Lance Corporal James Ashworth, 23, was on patrol with the Reconnaissance Platoon of 1st Battalion Grenadier Guards in the Nahr-e Saraj district of Helmand province when they were engaged in battle with Taliban fighters on June 13 last year.
Fighting inside a number of enemy-held compounds, he intentionally put himself in the line of fire, saving the lives of others as a result.
He was said to have been at pains to ensure no civilians were at risk of being hit, but he himself was killed by the blast from a grenade.
His award will be announced next week. //

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/9934510/British-soldier-to-receive-posthumous-VC-for-bravery-in-Afghanistan.html

The two versions of events are inconsistent.

[meglet]

But they're not just Taliban mud huts, they're Afghani mud huts. How are soldiers to know that there aren't innocent civilians in there? Otherwise we may as well carpet bomb the place and count it all as collateral damage.

[jake-the-peg]

No love, your son died because he joined the Army to fly halfway around the world to fight a bunch of tribesmen who are no threat to people back home in the UK.

If he'd decided to serve his country by becoming a mental health nurse he'd be alive today.

Is it me? or does anybody else link this story to the recent finding that the MOD is liable in cases of negligence?

Ka - Ching!

[anotheoldgit]

jake-the-peg

/// No love, your son died because he joined the Army to fly halfway around the world to fight a bunch of tribesmen who are no threat to people back home in the UK. ///

How disgusting can one be against the mother of a young soldier killed in line of duty, you should be ashamed of yourself, and perhaps you need the attention of a mental health nurse, that you suggested this young hero should have been?

But then the likes of you neither deserve any protection from the armed services or any other protective service.