With friends like these...

[PeterGustafsson]

Hi!

Originally Posted by Soldier

I'd also be willing to bet large sums of money that none of the Americans even remotely involved will be sleeping very soundly for a while.

I understand that you, given your background, will want to think just that. However, I find it just as easy to believe that those involved will sleep just fine, if they assume that they will not be made to be the fall guy(s). (That also presupposes that their schedule and the course of other things will not cause them them to sleep unsoundly, a big if considering that they are in a combat zone.)

So - do you have any more compelling evidence than "trust them - they are probably not bad people"? Any special reason to give them the benefit of the doubt? I personally find it perfectly possible to believe that someone who is trained to (among other things) kill, is in a situation where this is a distinct possibility everyday, and possibly already has done it, will do so and consider it a normal occurrence.

I would like to point out that I personally do not believe that the US. troops were under previous order to kill the Italians, as has been hypothesized in various media.

I find it failing the reality test to posit that some Americans did not know of the operation beforehand - that would require that the Italians could somehow land a plane at the Baghdad airport unnoticed. Also, it would presuppose that a secret agent - who recently had been in Iraq and taken out two previous hostages - would not see to that all necessary contacts to clear the move had been made and double-checked.

I also find it surprising that high vehicle speed is noted as a constant problem by the checkpoint personnel - it would appear that that problem could be easily solved by dumping out a few concrete slabs (there should be ample supply of rubble in a war-torn country) on the road in front of the checkpoint, creating an obstacle course which maximizes vehicle speed at 20 kph or so.

It will be interesting to see what course the US. administration takes. They have recently been asking for more European involvement in Iraq, both money and personnel. If they really want that, they may find it necessary to punish the soldiers involved, no matter what they think of the morality/justice of that themselves. That should be a cause of concern for those soldiers.

My personal guess is that the USFA should not waste its time trying to enlist the Italian federation on *anything* within the FIE votes anytime soon.


Peter Gustafsson

[Cipher]

Originally Posted by PeterGustafsson

It will be interesting to see what course the US. administration takes. They have recently been asking for more European involvement in Iraq, both money and personnel. If they really want that, they may find it necessary to punish the soldiers involved, no matter what they think of the morality/justice of that themselves. That should be a cause of concern for those soldiers.

Peter Gustafsson

As someone that has been in the Army, overseas, and led troops in situations where friendly fire is a real possibility, I have a problem with this. Soldiers are trained to, given the available information, make decisions that will determine the course of the lives of others and themselves. By punishing mistakes like this you'll make soldiers start second guessing their information. This is dangerous when it only takes a fraction of a second for a bullet to kill you or a rocket to take out your squad. There has to be a balance between a soldier doing his job and being responsible for his actions, but that's what investigations are for. If it is found that those involved were grossly neglegent, then they will be punished accordingly. It would be the same if it was an Italian agent, a fellow US soldier, or even an EPW. In my opinion it would be a poor decision for the Army to make an example out of the people involved unless it is proven that some extraordinarily bad choices were made.

[jBirch]

Originally Posted by PeterGustafsson

Hi!

I understand that you, given your background, will want to think just that. However, I find it just as easy to believe that those involved will sleep just fine, if they assume that they will not be made to be the fall guy(s). (That also presupposes that their schedule and the course of other things will not cause them them to sleep unsoundly, a big if considering that they are in a combat zone.)

I think you're stretching the conspiracy theory here a bit too far. Soldiers don't have trouble sleeping because they feel they'll be punished. Soldiers have trouble sleeping because they may have made the wrong decision. It doesn't matter if it was the best decision at the time, that's how they find a way to sleep in the first place. They can't sleep because if they'd just been better, they would have made the correct decision regardless of the information.

So - do you have any more compelling evidence than "trust them - they are probably not bad people"? Any special reason to give them the benefit of the doubt? I personally find it perfectly possible to believe that someone who is trained to (among other things) kill, is in a situation where this is a distinct possibility everyday, and possibly already has done it, will do so and consider it a normal occurrence.

My apologies, but you fundamentally misunderstand soldiers. There are three things here that make me believe that it was an accident:

1) Motive. There is nothing to be gained and everything to lose by shooting up the Italian journalist.

2) If they wanted to kill the passengers, they would have made sure that the job was done. A machine gun would not have been the choice for the task, a HEAT round would have been or a tank across the road and some very deliberate shooting after the car had stopped.

3) Occam's Razor. The environment was such that the most likely explanation was that the entire situation was misinterpreted on all sides.

I would like to point out that I personally do not believe that the US. troops were under previous order to kill the Italians, as has been hypothesized in various media.

I find it failing the reality test to posit that some Americans did not know of the operation beforehand - that would require that the Italians could somehow land a plane at the Baghdad airport unnoticed. Also, it would presuppose that a secret agent - who recently had been in Iraq and taken out two previous hostages - would not see to that all necessary contacts to clear the move had been made and double-checked.

You've never worked with foreign units or intraservice rivalry. The Italians probably just didn't want to deal with some American officer on a power trip. Further, the operational decision was probably taken that the freed hostage would be safer if no one knew they were coming until the move had already been completed.

I also find it surprising that high vehicle speed is noted as a constant problem by the checkpoint personnel - it would appear that that problem could be easily solved by dumping out a few concrete slabs (there should be ample supply of rubble in a war-torn country) on the road in front of the checkpoint, creating an obstacle course which maximizes vehicle speed at 20 kph or so.

This I agree with. Not being in Iraq right now, I don't understand why it would be possible to miss a checkpoint. When the boys were doing them over in Bosnia, they were essentially roadblocks and you couldn't miss them.

It will be interesting to see what course the US. administration takes. They have recently been asking for more European involvement in Iraq, both money and personnel. If they really want that, they may find it necessary to punish the soldiers involved, no matter what they think of the morality/justice of that themselves. That should be a cause of concern for those soldiers.

Those soldiers, especially the officers and non-coms, are probably sweating bullets right now. My opinion, given the facts in the media, is that it was a procedural failure and should be rectified as a lesson learned, no punishment needed. The political climate is a different concern and I believe that you're right to conclude that the political bodies in the US are going to be pressured to sacrifice someone for the "greater good". I just hope those troops can find good officers and good lawyers if it goes that far.

James.

[Gav]

Well the political heat just got turned up 'Italy disputes US hostage account'.

And don't forget that Berlusconi is a US advocate in Itay.

[VELISARIOS]

Try this...and read

http://www.vialls.com/italy/sgrena.html

[Cipher]

When things get as rediculous as that vialls.com article, I stop having an opinion. It's just not even worth it.

[Larrison]

*ROFL!*

Man... Elvis did it! He swooped down in a flying saucer and strafed it!

No? What's the evidence against it? compared to this article?

[gojujay]

Originally Posted by PeterGustafsson

So - do you have any more compelling evidence than "trust them - they are probably not bad people"? Any special reason to give them the benefit of the doubt?

Guilty before proven innocent, what justice.

Originally Posted by PeterGustafsson

I personally find it perfectly possible to believe that someone who is trained to (among other things) kill, is in a situation where this is a distinct possibility everyday, and possibly already has done it, will do so and consider it a normal occurrence.

Yes, the US military is made up of monsters and soulless sociopaths. Why, they'd kill you and step over your corpse to get to their dinner.

Originally Posted by PeterGustafsson

I would like to point out that I personally do not believe that the US. troops were under previous order to kill the Italians, as has been hypothesized in various media.

That seems to be a departure from the norm.

Originally Posted by PeterGustafsson

I find it failing the reality test to posit that some Americans did not know of the operation beforehand - that would require that the Italians could somehow land a plane at the Baghdad airport unnoticed. Also, it would presuppose that a secret agent - who recently had been in Iraq and taken out two previous hostages - would not see to that all necessary contacts to clear the move had been made and double-checked.

See jBirch's comments on foreign rivalries.

Originally Posted by PeterGustafsson

I also find it surprising that high vehicle speed is noted as a constant problem by the checkpoint personnel - it would appear that that problem could be easily solved by dumping out a few concrete slabs (there should be ample supply of rubble in a war-torn country) on the road in front of the checkpoint, creating an obstacle course which maximizes vehicle speed at 20 kph or so.

I've read a story somewhere (sorry I can't remember where. Please, no whips... or at least not that one) that this was not a permanent checkpoint. The logistics of transporting and setting up Jersey barriers seems not to be so efficient. Takes a lot of equipment to move those things. Even if that procedure was implemented, taking out the trucks used to move the barriers would be easy and impact more than just a single checkpoint.

Originally Posted by PeterGustafsson

It will be interesting to see what course the US. administration takes. They have recently been asking for more European involvement in Iraq, both money and personnel. If they really want that, they may find it necessary to punish the soldiers involved, no matter what they think of the morality/justice of that themselves. That should be a cause of concern for those soldiers.

Have to agree with you on this. I hope the Admin. has the cojones to do what's right by those soldiers.

Originally Posted by PeterGustafsson

My personal guess is that the USFA should not waste its time trying to enlist the Italian federation on *anything* within the FIE votes anytime soon.

LOL

[VELISARIOS]

Look I do not believe all of that. It speak about a great concpirancy e.t.c, but we have article like that in the future....sob!!!

[Cipher]

I think article like that are just funny. I mean, assuming that there was some conspiracy and the US did assassinate the agent, that's the best we could do. We didn't even try to hide our tracks. Just meet 'em at the gate and shoot the crap out of them. Then, when they ask us what the hell happened, we'll just say, "oops, our bad, don't blame us." That's like a comical mix of "Get Smart" and "The X-Files".

And just for the record........ I think it was Elvis too.... evil, spaceship flying bastard that he is.

[VELISARIOS]

hahahahaha! I like that Cipher.

Here is the site that I found this...but it say all about conspirancy. Please see it. And make your coments.

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/index.asp

[Cipher]

That's quite the interesting website.... I'm not sure why some people are so quick to jump on these conspiracy theories. I wonder just how many people believe all that. I guess the purpose would be to sow discontent with the current establishment in hopes of something.... a revolution? anarchy? monetary gain? ehhh... I wonder if the people that publish that even believe it or if it's like the tabloids, where they know the stories are rediculous but they make money anyway so why not publish them.

[Soldier]

It amazes me some of the things people can believe...

[Zilverzmurfen]

Originally Posted by Soldier

It amazes me some of the things people can believe...

Ahem...*cough-cough*...religion...*cough-cough*...

[Cipher]

Originally Posted by Zilverzmurfen

Ahem...*cough-cough*...religion...*cough-cough*...

I take offense to this... I am an atheist chaplain and take my religion very seriously.....

[Soldier]

The conspiracy theories mentioned above are based on presumptions and assumptions which are quite simply incorrect, and can usually be proven so. It is all based here in the physical world. And most of the consipacy theories are hateful by nature, blaming the American government, amongst others. Finally, every one of those "conspiracies" claims to have proof, something that is not claimed with religion.

So, there are no real parallels between the two. Thank you ever so much for your comment all the same.

[Zilverzmurfen]

Originally Posted by Cipher

I take offense to this... I am an atheist chaplain and take my religion very seriously...

Originally Posted by Soldier

Thank you ever so much for your comment all the same.

Hey, I'm sorry. Look, I really didn't mean to offend anyone (hence the added smilie) but that posting of yours was just begging me to comment on it!

Nonetheless, this thread was perhaps not the best one for trying to pull off bad jokes...

Again - sorry!

[Cipher]

Originally Posted by Zilverzmurfen

Hey, I'm sorry. Look, I really didn't mean to offend anyone (hence the added smilie) but that posting of yours was just begging me to comment on it!

Nonetheless, this thread was perhaps not the best one for trying to pull off bad jokes...

Again - sorry!

I was actually joking too... notice the smilie... and there's no such thing as an atheist chaplain. sorry for the confusion... I wasn't really offended

[ThatReallyHurt]

Originally Posted by Soldier

The conspiracy theories mentioned above are based on presumptions and assumptions which are quite simply incorrect, and can usually be proven so.

Absolutely correct. Unfortunately, the 0.8% of conspiracy theories that aren't successfully disproven provides 99% of the enthusiasm for all the other ones.

You have to admit, though - both your government and mine sometimes do some pretty stupid things when they're attempting to discredit a conspiracy theory. I mean come on - I go to the media and say that Canada is planning on annexing the US and Mexico, and say that I have proof - there is documentation within the government that shows these plans. The media, picking up on my theory, applies for relevant documents through Access to Information and gets this:

"Canada will XXXXXXXX United States through XXXXXXX due XXXXXX Mexico. Despite the XXXXX, there is XXXXXX; heretofore and XXXXXXXXX forthwith XXXXXXX, XXXXXXXX, and XXXXXXX movement."

Now really - who is that really going to provide ammo for, the government's case, or the general public, who have now solidly taken the conspiracy theorists' point of view? Sure, I may be full of hooey, but the government has essentially messed their own case up...