world

SEALs on rescue mission killed in Afghan crash

10 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2011 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

10 Comments
Login to comment

Sounds like the classic blunder of putting all your eggs in one basket. That is quite a lot of people and gear to put in one helicopter, and no doubt slowed the thing down tremendously. A couple smaller faster choppers might have been a better idea?

Of course there is no topping just getting out of Afghanistan all together.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

Night raids have drawn criticism from human rights activists and infuriated Afghan President Hamid Karzai, who says they anger and alienate the Afghan population. But NATO commanders have said the raids are safer for civilians than relatively imprecise airstrikes.

NATO is correct. I personally think they should just leave, but raids are the only way to go given the goals. No risk, no reward. I cannot say the typical soldier has the "bedside manner" to properly conduct a raid, from the civilian's point of view, but it beats getting innocents slaughtered in an airstrike.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Yeah, 30 people is way too many to have in one helicopter. The fact they were on a rescue mission, going into territory known to be dangerous, kind of exposes the bad decision making on the part of the command. In the first years of the Aghanistan war, another Chinook was shot down in similar circumstances, but there were only 16 on board. I can't help but think having 30 guys in there was against military doctrine.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

You guys have no idea what you're talking about. Chinooks are DESIGNED to carry large payloads of troops and equipment. The Chinook used can seat up to 55 people. You say 30 people would slow down a Chinook? Are you serious? You know the thing can lift artillery pieces, vehicles, other helicopters, and planes, right?

You suggest "smaller, faster" choppers as a replacements, but for one, there would be more targets. Secondly, no other transport chopper can navigate the mountainous terrain or cope with the altitude or temperatures of Afghanistan like the Chinook can. One Chinook replaces FIVE Blackhawks. You'd rather have two or three crammed Blackhawks transporting them, even though they have had far more accidents than the Chinook? Come on now.

Against military doctrine to put 30 guys in a chopper meant to be used as such? Don't be ridiculous.

At the end of the day, the insurgent who fired that RPG got lucky. He hit the right spot at the right time, and that's why the heli went down.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

It is Shame to you SEALs , you say you are elite , and you are the best and you have the most sophisticated weapons...in the world like night visions... combat cars...so many.. even the world can not imagine.... But you 30 Guys .. blind and totally lost to Donkey riding fighters... is n't it..? This war you will never win ...you are the Looses Best Fight is Leave Afghanistan... At least you will be safe..

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

You guys have no idea what you're talking about.

Actually, you seem to have no idea what I said and didn't say. Or, you love to put words in people's mouths. Your arrogance is a weakness.

You may have more practical experience. But that does not make my ideas wrong.

Now, did I say the chinook could not carry heavy loads? Nope. I said 30 people AND equipment surely slowed it down. About that I could be wrong about how much. Have not done any field tests. But if you lend me some choppers, I will find out how much, because any weight slows an aircraft down at takeoff.

Did I suggest Blackhawks? Nope. I suggested smaller faster helicopters. That could be minimum 3 Venoms or 2 Seahawks if you want a practical real world suggestion. But I was actually suggesting better aircraft should be available for this task. There probably are better choppers to be used as I suggested, just not avaible to U.S. military ATM.

More targets? EXACTLY. Don't put all your eggs in one basket. All those guys as a result of being inside ONE BIG LOUD target. This is at least the second time someone "got lucky" putting an RPG into a Chinook in Afghanistan. That might not seem like a lot, but I don't think there are many firefights quite like that going on in Afghanistan.

Against military doctrine to put 30 guys in a chopper meant to be used as such? Don't be ridiculous.

Never said it was against military doctrine. I said it was against MINE. Would not be the first time I saw military doctrine change to my doctrine. Have you noticed they scaled down the airstrikes and are now going with soldiers conducting raids? Yep. My doctrine and has been all along.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

The Chinook must be shot down by portable SAMs like SA7, it was impossible to shoot a chopper at midnight! The Pentagon hiding alot of facts from the public!

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

When the US fails in Afghanistan the Afghani people win.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Expatriate,

You're kind of getting ahead of yourself. According to a new story released by the AP today, there's already debate in the upper echelons of the military about whether cramming that many elite troops into a single craft was really a very good idea.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

When you kills you got killed!

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites