Russian SU-24 - Shot Down by Turkey

Tefal said:
not heard that before?

why didnt the Americans want to kill?
Click to expand...

It's not just the Americans. It was first noted during ww1. Inexperienced troops tend to aim over the heads of their enemy. They may be an excellent marksman in training but they just inherently don't want to kill another human being.
 
This was a factor that had an effect during the Falklands war too. Argentine troops were trained firing at a bullseye, whereas British troops were trained firing at the figure 11 target, which is in the silhouette of a man that rises, then twists and falls when hit, much like a person. Thus, Argentine troops, burdened by the natural aversion to killing another person, hesitated or deliberately missed, while British troops had been psychologically conditioned by their training to shoot as a subconscious reflex.
 
arknor said:
http://www.historynet.com/men-again...apons-at-the-enemy-during-the-vietnam-war.htm
Click to expand...

did you even read your link?

it says nearly the opposite of what you said.

The American fighting man made sure that these concerns were short-lived. He showed little hesitation to use a rifle, pistol, shotgun, machine gun, grenade launcher or whatever other weapon he carried. Marshall himself visited Vietnam to conduct studies similar to those done during World War II and later emulated in Korea. He concluded that much had changed since those earlier conflicts and that it was not unusual for close to 100 percent of American infantrymen to engage the adversary during firefights in Vietnam.
Click to expand...

it says 2 out of 10 men werent firing at any one time much of this because they were suppressed, doing something else, or scared while taking fire.


not one mention of firing over the enemies heads.

in fact the article states that the fact aboutww2 men not shooting was fabricated.
 
The Funktopus said:
This was a factor that had an effect during the Falklands war too. Argentine troops were trained firing at a bullseye, whereas British troops were trained firing at the figure 11 target, which is in the silhouette of a man that rises, then twists and falls when hit, much like a person. Thus, Argentine troops, burdened by the natural aversion to killing another person, hesitated or deliberately missed, while British troops had been psychologically conditioned by their training to shoot as a subconscious reflex.
Click to expand...

lots of the argies were also conscripts and treated pretty harshly by their own chain of command, a good portion of them simply didn't want to be there at all
 
as for Vietnam, some troops were perfectly content with killing civilians in addition to the enemy:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Lai_Massacre

The Mỹ Lai Massacre was the Vietnam War mass killing of between 347 and 504 unarmed civilians in South Vietnam on March 16, 1968. It was committed by U.S. Army soldiers from the Company C of the 1st Battalion, 20th Infantry Regiment, 11th Brigade of the 23rd (Americal) Infantry Division. Victims included men, women, children, and infants. Some of the women were gang-raped and their bodies mutilated.
Click to expand...
 
George Hincapie said:
That's the main reason. The suggestion about the targets is utter nonsense.
Click to expand...

Try giving Acts of War by Richard Holmes a read, explains the point better than I can, but there are numerous sources that repeat the claim, that the training of British troops using a psychologically conditioned response gave them a decisive edge over the Argentinians.

But, we are getting somewhat off topic.
 
There's a few Turkish journalists on trial for "divulging state secrets" after they reported on the Turkish secret service supplying arms to ISIS - Story - and for even doing an investigative report on corrupt officials which "tarnishing public officials' reputation by spelling out their names" - Story

Turkey hasn't been the most democratic place for a while.
 
Kurdish prominent lawyer shot dead live on TV

A day after Turkey arrested two journalists for their report exposing Erdogan's weapons deliveries to "extremist groups" in Syria, confirming that no dissent to the president's foreign policy would be allowed, today a new riot has erupted in Istanbul following the dramatic murder in broad daylight of Tahir Elci, the president of the Turkish bar association in southeastern Diyarbakir province, who was shot dead by unidentified gunmen while giving a public speech.
Click to expand...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkAc8N5MjtU
 
Turkey are the link between the militants and the EU. Keeping them sweet will keep a flow of intelligence, or at least we can keep a closer eye on their activities. Unfortunately if they were full EU members, it would facilitate easier passage of terrorists around Europe.

They use to be a secular and tolerant country but now seem to be going the opposite way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom