WHAT SHUD HAPPEN TO THE PILOTS..........

by Mary 28 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  DakotaRed

  The "speed" was legal, the biggest factor here was a break down in the pre-flight mission brief.

  Yes, Davey, I know it was "legal." But, it is unknown how much was taken and they themselves are claiming it interfered with their judgment. Humans have this little quirk that if a little is good, a lot is even better. At best, I see this as a really poor policy. Useage of the same amphetemine is being also linked to the murdered wives at Ft. Bragg last year.

  Legal or not, from my own standpoint and experience's, if I got into a firefight, I did not want to worry about the guy in the bunker next to me groovin out on the tracers and not firing back. The UCMJ does allow for refusal of certain orders too, unless that too has changed.

  As stated, it was not mandatory to take it. Are they using it as an excuse? Who knows? That's why I call for a full and complete investigation and absolutely no coverup.

  Many breakdowns contributed to this, but to allow a pilot to be high while sitting in a $30 million weapon is unthinkable to me. Would you like to take an intercontinental flight with your pilots also using this "legal" "go pill?" I wouldn't.

  Lew W
• 

  RAYZORBLADE

  Oh the 'pills'. I just read about that within the last 24/36 hours. I also heard about the use of 'pills' by the pilots in question, on CBC radio yesterday.

  It'll be interesting what facts are brought forward when this investigation is over. Once the findings are finally made public and recommendations are written up, let's hope...this stuff doesn't happen again.

  I grew up in an Armed Forces family. I have family still with the CAF (Canadian Armed Forces/UN Peacekeeping). Friendly Fire (the oxymoron of the century) is something they are all too familiar with. The issue of Land Mines is another scary reality. Soldiers of all nations and civilians are constantly at risk.

  Despite the horrific events of last year, I hope that justice is metted out. I do not wish to see any of these men placed on death row. They should be relieved of their duties as fighter pilots and air force personnel.

  As I had mentioned, living with that guilt over your head, for the rest of your life: punishment I could not bear.

  Let's see what happens over the next couple of weeks.

  Edited by - RAYZORBLADE on 18 January 2003 4:39:22
• 

  Preston

  Well, you can't say there isn't a double standard. Some guy in Canada calls Bush a moron and our government gets all pissed off...yet a couple fo canadian soldiers get killed by us, and nobody here gives a shit....
• 

  mike047

  Preston; I don't think that "no one" here cares. Our government might not have shown "they" care . I for one care about any casualties. It is unfortunate, but very likely in the future MANY will be harmed friend, foe, combatants, non-combatants.......NO ONE WINS.......

  mike
• 

  OUTLAW

  The US pilots had no idea there were training exercises going on,on the ground.The Canadian soldiers did`nt have the flashing red light on indicating there were exercises going on,on the ground.It was a cluster-fuck on both sides.Those in command are at fault,not the soldiers or pilots carrying out their duties...OUTLAW

  Edited by - OUTLAW on 18 January 2003 14:56:27
• 

  back2dafront

  If I accidentally run over a little girl in my truck, I'm still to blame and am accountable for it.

  No difference here. Whether or not it's the pilots fault or the commanders - that's what needs to be determined. One of the two needs to be held accountable. I don't think it's a life in prison kind of thing though...
• 

  Valis

  This was from a canada.com article..

  A recording of the pilots' words was played along with the video. At one point an air controller told Schmidt to "stand by" after the pilot requested permission to use a 20-mm cannon on ground forces he thought were attacking the F-16s.

  Umbach also advised restraint even as Schmidt seemed primed to fire. "Let's make sure that it's not friendly," said Umbach.

  About a minute and a half later, Schmidt spotted more flashes of light on the ground. "I've got someone on the road and it looks like a piece of artillery firing at us. I am rolling in, in self defence," he said. "Bombs away."

  The bomb made a direct hit. Seconds later, the Air Force controller ordered: "Disengage. Friendlies. Kandahar."

  "Can you confirm they were firing at us?" Umbach asked the controller.

  "You are cleared, self defence," the controller replied.

  The apparently contradictory messages from the controller were not explained on the tape. As they flew back to Kuwait, Schmidt expressed concern. "I hope that was the right thing to do," he told Umbach. "Me too," Umbach said.

  Stutzriem, who was monitoring radio transmissions from the command centre the night of the incident, testified that the request to fire on the ground troops was "extremely unusual, not something that you would expect" at night.

  And you can watch the cockpit video here..

  http://www.cnn.com/video/us/2001/07/02/jm.friend.bombing.pent.med.exclude.html

  It appears they think they are coming under fire regardless of whether or not they were on speed. I think the US should make some reparation to the families of the dead soldiers, have better ground/air communication, institute their own "no fly zones" for training areas, test pilot recogniton and ability to function while using speed thoroughly before giving it to more pilots, and NOT convict those two pilots for making the error. Just my two cents..

  Sincerely,

  District Overbeer
• 

  Yerusalyim

  PReston,

  Trust me, we care that people died, especially that it was by "friendly fire" which in many ways is one of the most frustrating ways to lose a soldier's life. I've lost several friends to friendly fire incidents, in Kuwait and Afghanistan. We Care, we just want the right people to be punished. If the command knew there were friendlies in the area the pilots should have been briefed.

  Back

  The problem with your little "truck driving" scenario is that no truck drivers primary job is to kill the enemy and destroy his equipment. Nor do truck drivers generally have weapons to return fire. Yes, somebody is culpable here, and that someone should be punished, but the pilots aren't the guilty ones here.

  The government is hanging these two warriors out to dry and it's an insult to all soldiers.
• 

  back2dafront

  Yeru,

  I think you missed the moral of my story. The moral is that anyone who takes another persons life, whether it be by purpose or by accident, is liable. That's the law. Granted involuntary manslaughter is not as serious of a crime as murder, but it is still something that has to be done for the sake of justice.

  Also, I never said it was the pilots fault - read again:

  Whether or not it's the pilots fault or the commanders - that's what needs to be determined. One of the two needs to be held accountable

  If it's the commanders fault, penalize them.

  If it's the air controllers fault, penalize them.

  etc. etc. etc.

  From the excerpt that Valis posted, it sounds like it's the controllers fault, even though it was probably a simple slip of the tongue. Very unfortunate.