Officers faulted in Iraq mission that left 3 troops dead

[bradclark1]

Like higher didn't know how strung out they were. Piss me off. Sacrifice the juniors to cover their arse!
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/....ap/index.html

[gnirtS]

Been the same all the way through. EVERYONE is aware of the major problems and resource issues. However politics makes the tactical decisions, the big commanders then have to follow it. Then when it all goes wrong they blame someone lower down to get themselves and the politicians out of the crap.
Admittedly ive got no real sympathy for the soldiers involved who weren't conscripts so agreed to be there but a lot of people high up are engaged in constant arse-covering.

[bradclark1]

Originally Posted by gnirtS

Admittedly ive got no real sympathy for the soldiers involved who weren't conscripts so agreed to be there but a lot of people high up are engaged in constant arse-covering.

When one joins it's assumed they would be competently led and protected and they would not be needlessly put in danger.
Putting on a uniform doesn't mean they are dead meat just because and so what.

[gnirtS]

Originally Posted by bradclark1

When one joins it's assumed they would be competently led and protected and they would not be needlessly put in danger.
Putting on a uniform doesn't mean they are dead meat just because and so what.

Not really. When you join up for an armed force you realise you no longer have a view, your politics dont matter. You will do whatever the government tells you, wherever it is and how it wants you do to it. You have no right to assume anything - your rights went when you signed up.

Thats why i have sympathy in a way for those soldiers injured/killed that signed up before Iraq but very little/none for those that signed up afterwards. They knew what they were getting.

[CCIP]

I'm actually in the middle between both of you. On the one hand, yes they're professionals and this is part of what they signed up to do, on the other hand... professional or not, I can't help but feel sorry for a guy who gets into what's reputed to be the world's best army, and gets shafted by a fumbled operation.

I think it's right that the officers were relieved, and totally nothing new. If a captain of a ship gets relieved if he runs aground, so should a commander be relieved if he leads his soldiers to an ambush that could've been avoided with even a slight precaution. I don't think it would be right to throw criminal charges on officers for mistakes, that would probably have very negative effects on morale, but military discipline should apply.

[bradclark1]

Originally Posted by CCIP

I think it's right that the officers were relieved, and totally nothing new. If a captain of a ship gets relieved if he runs aground, so should a commander be relieved if he leads his soldiers to an ambush that could've been avoided with even a slight precaution. I don't think it would be right to throw criminal charges on officers for mistakes, that would probably have very negative effects on morale, but military discipline should apply.

I'm not saying the commander and platoon leader shouldn't have been relieved. The battalion and brigade commanders should have been relieved also. Not just the juniors. They knew what the mission was and they knew the strength's of those units. The buck doesn't stop at the lowest, it stops at the top.
Yes soldiering is a deadly business and no the higher commanders don't need to know the minuet details but they are payed to know what the their units are capable of or incapable of. You know that unit has so many checkpoints and that they have so many people. Simple math would tell the story. The battalion and brigade commander would also know that no reaction force was available. The whole point of my comment was the leadership covered their arse by sacrificing junior officers.

[bradclark1]

Originally Posted by gnirtS

Not really. When you join up for an armed force you realise you no longer have a view, your politics dont matter. You will do whatever the government tells you, wherever it is and how it wants you do to it. You have no right to assume anything - your rights went when you signed up.

Thats why i have sympathy in a way for those soldiers injured/killed that signed up before Iraq but very little/none for those that signed up afterwards. They knew what they were getting.

You are talking political. Thats got nothing to do with this or you are of the assumption that when you put on a uniform you turn into a mindless drone. Thats not what this is about either.
I spent a long time in the army so what I said is said with some experience. I don't know about the British army and that might be the way there but not here.

[gnirtS]

Originally Posted by bradclark1

You are talking political. Thats got nothing to do with this or you are of the assumption that when you put on a uniform you turn into a mindless drone.

Yes you do. You sign up to do what you're told nothing more. You are a drone.
So when you decide to sign up you pretty much agree to be treated however the hell they want you and do what you're told regardless of the motivation, reasons or organisation.