SwiftVets.com

Fox

I am sure .50 caliber guns have been used.

Since Kerry considers these war crimes I am just wondering if he will be marching our military leaders up to the Hauge to stand trial.

Navy_Navy_Navy · Admin Joined: 07 May 2004 Posts: 5777

Off-topic for this forum, so I'm moving it to the geedunk in a bit.

Thanks,
_________________
~ Echo Juliet ~
Altering course to starboard - On Fire, Keep Clear
Navy woman, Navy wife, Navy mother

rb325th · Admiral Joined: 21 Aug 2004 Posts: 1334

To the best of my knowledge NO! The Rules of Engagement have been pretty tight throughout in Iraq. Our Military has been taking strong measures to avoid collateral damage and killing of innocent civillians. Not saying those things have not happened as in all wars, but we have done what we can to avoid it.
Now the enemey on the other hand is a different story, wether targeting civillians directly, using them as shields, or just being uncaring of the civillians have killed a great many Iraqi Civillians.
I wasn't in Vietnam, but seems the same occured there as well.
_________________
U.S. Army 1983-1995, 11C1P/11H2P NBTDT

JN173 · Posted: Fri Aug 27, 2004 6:57 pm Post subject:

rb325th · Admiral Joined: 21 Aug 2004 Posts: 1334

JN173 · Posted: Fri Aug 27, 2004 8:13 pm Post subject:

rb
Accept my apology. Embarassed

Rereading my response it came across sharp which I did not intend. You answered no and I just have a different viewpoint. I believe there are a lot of misconceptios about 'free fire zones'.

Harry Somers(sp?) in his book "Vietnam Almanac" essentially says that "free fire zones" have been used by every army in every war. (My words not his, but that's the essence of what he said.) He uses the examples of Western Europe before D-Day and everthing north of the MLR in Korea as being "Free Fire Zones". I would venture that in the initial assault into Iraq the same statement would be true.

Nam was just the 1st time the US had a need to identifiy restrictions above and beyond the normal ROEs in compliance with FM 27-10, Geneva, Hague, etc. The term free fire zone was only used for a very short time before the Generals realized that it (the term) was being misconstrued by the growing anti-war crowd. It's unofficial use never ceased. (I can't recall the official term became. I'll look it up and post it later.)
_________________
A Grunt
2/503 173rd Airborne Brigade
RVN '65-'66

rb325th · Admiral Joined: 21 Aug 2004 Posts: 1334

Hey no problems here, I have thick skin and a thicker skull so I am told. I understand where you are coming from on this and I guess my response to that term is geared more torwards those who use the Anti War Crowds defenition of "Free Fire Zone".
_________________
U.S. Army 1983-1995, 11C1P/11H2P NBTDT