and don't they have some kind of pylons that friendlies are supposed to lay out so aircraft can ID them?

You know, it could be our uniforms. I heard the new CADPAT uniforms are supposed to neutralise your heat signature ed:.

[quote="Sgt Stryker":40b7a]and don't they have some kind of pylons that friendlies are supposed to lay out so aircraft can ID them?[/quote:40b7a]
Yes, each Canadian had some sort of an infared emitter on their helmet so that friendly aircraft could id them, plus the training feild was marked with infared strobe things. The pilots should have known it was a friendly training ground.

[quote="redhawk_six":054d7][quote="Sgt Stryker":054d7]and don't they have some kind of pylons that friendlies are supposed to lay out so aircraft can ID them?[/quote:054d7]
Yes, each Canadian had some sort of an infared emitter on their helmet so that friendly aircraft could id them, plus the training feild was marked with infared strobe things. The pilots should have known it was a friendly training ground.[/quote:054d7]

This is a quote from a news article at the vet forums. Canadian Capt. Joseph Jasper "Jasper testified Tuesday that more than half of his men had covered up blinking red lights on their helmets, which they normally used for safety reasons during live-ammunition exercises, because the blinking sometimes bothered helicopter pilots landing at an airfield about three miles away".

I think as this thing drags out, that blame could be placed on everyone, the biggest mistake (besides the bombing) seems to be a lack of communication.

That's another thing, Kandahar (I know I probably didn't spell that right), was only a few KM's away, and was brightly lit, the pilots should have known that they were in friendly territory.

it all boils down to the fact that the pilots were told to hold fire by the AWACS crew and seconds later dropped the bomb anyway.

Never in the history of the United States of America has any soldier in any armed force been court marshalled for friendly fire in a combat situation.

Remember the facts, which seem to be conveniently ushered to the side and forgotten at this point:

- The Canadians did not identify themselves.
- The Canadians were somewhere they weren't supposed to be.
- The pilots were ordered to engage ground troops if plausible (Check the articles from when this first happened, should be in CNN archives)
- They thought they were being attacked

So, let's review what you'd do in the situation. You're flying around in a loud-as-hell, hear-me-coming-8-miles-away fighter jet. You make a couple passes over an old training camp for recon, to make sure no one is still hiding there. You happen to spot a small group of people in camo and carrying weapons, possibly Stingers left from the CIA's stay in Afghanistan. You know no one is supposed to be there. These people neglect to signal they're friendly.

I don't care what any of you say, I would drop bombs. And anyone who persecutes those two men for doing as they're trained to do is simply wrong. The fault lies in faulty communications, faulty planning, and neglect on the part of the ground troops. Not in the man who pulled the trigger.

The casualties incurred from the incident were a great tragedy, and I would wish no father to have to bury his son. However, this was a war. These things happen in war, and no one has a right to persecute these two men. Period.

And isn't it great how the AWACs crew just happened to remember that they told them to hold fire, what, months later?

[quote="Captain Noctis Aeternus":845f3]

Remember the facts, which seem to be conveniently ushered to the side and forgotten at this point:

- The Canadians did not identify themselves.
- The Canadians were somewhere they weren't supposed to be.
- The pilots were ordered to engage ground troops if plausible (Check the articles from when this first happened, should be in CNN archives)

.[/quote:845f3]

#1. the canadians were where they were supposed to be, On a live fire training mission. .
#2 the pilots were ORDERED not to fire until confirmation. As in an article in the paper today "pilots did not give enough time" and he also requested to fire his machine gun on them (something to that matter it was a busy day) wich they say is very rare.

Also in the "did not give enough time" no location was given when reporting in the fire. So it was obviosly much harder for them to figure out back at the command station if they were friendlies when they werent given any location.

I'll say it again, SHIT HAPPENS.

hey i wasnt saying anything either way i was just posting the facts.

We can sit around and throws "facts" at eachother, that ain't gonna bring our soldiers back from the dead and save those pilots from the system.

I'll go with the original facts, not the ones that "surfaced" a month ago.

[quote:98050]hey i wasnt saying anything either way i was just posting the facts. [/quote:98050]

Kack Off, Commie! evil:

[quote:cbd47]had covered up blinking red lights on their helmets[/quote:cbd47]

[quote:cbd47]had covered up blinking red lights on their helmets[/quote:cbd47]


[/quote]had covered up blinking red lights on their helmets[quote:cbd47]

[/quote:cbd47]had covered up blinking red lights on their helmets[quote:cbd47][/quote:cbd47]