Posted on 07/07/2006 7:53:46 PM PDT by naturalman1975
AUSTRALIAN soldiers did the right thing when they opened fire on a rogue vehicle in Baghdad last month killing a government security guard.
The only criticism of the soldiers action came from defence chief Angus Houston, who said they should probably have fired on the vehicle sooner.
An investigation into the June 21 incident by Australian commander Brig. Mick Moon has found the soldiers acted appropriately and within their rules of engagement.
Releasing the findings yesterday Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston said the troops, from the Darwin-based Cavalry Regiment, should probably have fired before the 4WD pulled alongside their armoured vehicle.
Air Chief Marshal Houston revealed the White Toyota 4WD station wagon driven by Iraqi bodyguards drew right alongside an Australian light armoured vehicle before the Diggers opened up with a Mag 58 7.62mm light machinegun.
"They should have engaged it sooner than they did," he said. "Their actions were warranted under the circumstances."
The Toyota approached the convoy of three armoured vehicles in an aggressive manner after breaking through an Iraqi manned road block.
It ignored repeated orders to move away and signs on the back of the vehicles and when it pulled alongside one of the armoured vehicles it was engaged by the troops.
The Diggers fired 10 shots into the vehicle, which returned fire with 10 shots from AK-47 assault rifles.
A burst of 20 shots from the Mag 58 ended the fight and the Toyota slammed into a wall.
Two other bodyguards of Iraqi Trade Minister Abdel Falah al-Sudani were wounded and a civilian was caught in the fire.
Air Chief Marshal Houston said the civilian was being treated by Australian doctors and would probably receive an "act of grace" payment from the Government.
Mr al-Sudani accused the Australians of trampling on the dignity of Iraqis by shooting his bodyguards.
Trade Minister Mark Valie wrote to his Iraqi counterpart apologising for the incident.
"The only criticism of the soldiers action came from defence chief Angus Houston, who said they should probably have fired on the vehicle sooner."
There we go.
The Left Wing assault is winning overall I think, however. The confidence of the Free World militaries must be ebbing, realizing there is a full scale attack from the rear.
BTTT!!!!
Good thing it wasn't American troops who killed this innocent man, because they'd be tossed in some military prison and charged with "murder".
As one American who has a deep and abiding respect for the Aussies who have joined us and who have put their lives on the line, all I can say is that I must echo the sentiments here. Shi'ite happens.
I think war is hell, and a oft' times a confusing, mind-numbing hell at that. Soldiers are human beings, not metal robots. After a certain amount of exposure to combat, especially this type of combat where you are at all times surrounded by an enemy whom you cannot detect, many men will simply lose themselves in battle.
In Iraq we have a great many troops who have been assigned there two and three times, and it's simply unrealistic to expect all men to remain calm and normal at all times under those conditions. This latest alleged 'situation' involved men from the same platoon as the two soldiers who were captured, tortured, butchered up like porkchops and barbarically murdered. For all of the above reasons no American soldier in Iraq should ever be charged with actual "murder", because the circumstances there just cannot be compared to anything remotely approaching civil life.
Having had the experience of being a combat veteran in Vietnam, and my father and several uncles being combat veterans of WWII and Korea, I have seen for myself, and heard from hardened veterans that "stuff happens" in war, and men do things they would never do in a thousand lifetimes outside of war. But in wars past this was understood, and the 'situations' our troops are being prosecuted for today were regularly overlooked in wars past.
In short, I think our guys are being held to unreasonably high standards and ridiculous "rules of engagement", and are expected to be robotic automotons no matter what they have been through or for how long. They have to fight this war with embedded liberal media types watching and recording their every move, which is another ridiculous, unnecessary burdon on the guys. A military of moral giants with emotions and nerves of hardened steel, who never crack under prolonged pressure from combat is great in theory, but in reality men do 'crack' in prolonged warfare and sometimes do things they would never, ever do otherwise. You can only watch just so many of your friends get picked off like sitting ducks or blown up by cowards using IEDs before the desire for revenge takes over a man's soul. I certainly understand why our troops are held to very high standards of behavior, but it's the rigid enforcement of these standards during the heat of combat that is new to military convention.
As far as I'm concerned all the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan are our country's heros, and perhaps looking the other way, as was done in every other war in our history, would be more appropriate than this endless spate of military court martials against our guys. I'm really tired of this pc $#!t. You can't fight and win a war with an army of Emily Post Institute graduates.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.