With the original story, they reported she was being kept in a compound with other women and children (my speculation being that they were family and relations to the kidnappers). That made me question the story of a suicide vest.
Linda Nogrove ''may have been killed by friendly fire''
- Thread starter cm1179
- Start date
With the original story, they reported she was being kept in a compound with other women and children (my speculation being that they were family and relations to the kidnappers). That made me question the story of a suicide vest.
Soldato
No they can't 'translate' it as they don't know it to be fact yet.
Caporegime
My grandad once told me that during WW2 when us Brits threw grenades the Germans ducked, when the Germans threw grenades the Brits ducked and when the Americans threw grenades everybody ducked.
Hahaha, that's class.
Soldato
The question is whose great idea was it to use grenades in a hostage situation it's almost as if didn't they think that the hostage might've been in the same place as the hostage takers?
Man of Honour
Care to share the facts with us?
or possibly it was used i na room/chamber/emplacement that was giving them fire and they believed the hostage to be elsewhere in the building/cave/trenches etc and they decided in the heat of the moment a grenade was the best way to stop the fire and protect themselves.
Now is it based on a report from a soilder saying he used a grenade or simply that they found shrapnel from an American grenade in her body.
Because if it's the latter the m67 grenade ain't exactly exclusive to them.
Last edited:
Caporegime
My grandad once told me that during WW2 when us Brits threw grenades the Germans ducked, when the Germans threw grenades the Brits ducked and when the Americans threw grenades everybody ducked.
u should read the book, D-Day and look to the part where friendly fire from the US (due to incorrectly coloured flares) decimated the allied forces. on more than one occasion.
and during vietnam it was quite common for US firing on US positions, due to the low visibility and terrain which stopped them from being able to ascertain who was who due to the elephant grass etc.
Caporegime
Slightly off topic, but all this talk reminds me of a quote I read somewhere - "A bullet has your name on it, but shrapnel is marked 'to whom it may concern'" which I suppose is of some relevance here.
i think it was probably down to the ''if it moves, shoot at it'' training techniques brought on by getting their behinds handed to them in someone elses back yard
Caporegime
Sell your story to the papers.
Man of Honour
It would be interesting what those who criticise the British decision and the use of US SF troops would have done differently ?
Perhaps they have some insight or 100% accurate source within the Foreign Office ?
It is a tragedy without doubt but I trust the PM and FS to make the decisions given that they have access to intel that you or I will never have.
The US troops dropped in put themselves in immense danger in what I would imagine to be a very difficult hostage rescue mission where there is never a guarantee that the target will survive.
Personally, I give my thanks to them.
Perhaps they have some insight or 100% accurate source within the Foreign Office ?
It is a tragedy without doubt but I trust the PM and FS to make the decisions given that they have access to intel that you or I will never have.
The US troops dropped in put themselves in immense danger in what I would imagine to be a very difficult hostage rescue mission where there is never a guarantee that the target will survive.
Personally, I give my thanks to them.
Soldato
They could've used flashbangs or smoke bombs to solve the issue.
i agree. i don't agree with the fact that the true events may have been covered up.
Man of Honour
The security services don't protect everyone.
Any ransom would simply, be used to buy more weapons to take more people hostage.
Not to sound like an arm chair general but flash bangs aren't really the movie style everyone falls down and has a little nap iirc they're only meant to be effective for something like 10 seconds so they have to be very close for them to capitalise on the situation.
Soldato
I love how people here are suggesting what they SHOULD have done (flashbangs etc.), I assume based on the fact they have played COD and are moderately good at it 