Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Aussies turn big guns on Taliban (misleading and defeatist)
News.com.au ^ | 2-27-08 | Peter Veness

Posted on 02/28/2008 12:59:09 PM PST by atomic conspiracy

AUSTRALIAN troops have been forced to use some of their heaviest firepower to fight Taliban insurgents in Afghanistan during a series of recent skirmishes, the Department of Defence says. The soldiers have been using 81mm mortars, which can hit targets kilometres away but which have not been widely used by Australia since the Vietnam war. No Australian soldiers were killed or injured in the fighting and it was not clear if any Taliban had been hit. The Taliban have launched multiple simultaneous attacks during the past fortnight. The raids have been aimed at a security post that soldiers from the Reconstruction Task Force (RTF) have been building about 15km from Tarin Kowt, in the Afghan province of Oruzgan. Chief of Defence Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston praised the work of the soldiers. "The immediate and aggressive response by RTF soldiers caused the enemy to break off their attack and abandon their weapons in hastily prepared caches. "These (weapons) were recovered through aggressive follow-up patrolling, which was sustained for a number of days."

(Excerpt) Read more at news.com.au ...


TOPICS: Australia/New Zealand; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: afghanistan; aussietroops; deception; desperation; fifthcolumn; firepower; taliban
What a ridiculous hit-piece, loaded with weasel words and false inferences ("forced to use"). The 81mm mortar is not a "big gun" by any reasonable standard. It is a man-portable infantry weapon. Its use in small unit actions is routine.

"Some of its heaviest firepower" is meaningless, a classic example of weasel words. There aren't many larger types of weapon in the Australian army, it is true, but some are a great deal larger. The Australian army has 155mm howitzers, which would reasonably be "big guns" in the current context and which are enormously more powerful and destructive than a mortar. I initially thought the 155 might be what the headline referred to.

The exaggeration of a particular weapon's significance is a familiar trope in the Oz-left media, as when they attached great significance to the replacement of B-52s with B-1s in a routine Iraq support rotation.

Here, the obvious purpose is to portray the allies as so hard-pressed that they are forced to take extreme measures to maintain their "holding action."

The Taliban are known to use 120mm mortars and 122mm rockets, both significantly more powerful than the 81mm.

1 posted on 02/28/2008 12:59:14 PM PST by atomic conspiracy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: atomic conspiracy

Splash, out.


2 posted on 02/28/2008 1:04:23 PM PST by fireforeffect (A kind word and a 2x4, gets you more than just a kind word.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: atomic conspiracy
Now, THIS is a big gun, defeatist media monkeys:

280mm "Atomic Annie" firing on Nevada test range, 1953

Navy types and WW2 buffs are invited to post pics of the 16' battleship gun and the Germans' Gustav monster, respectively.

3 posted on 02/28/2008 1:10:48 PM PST by atomic conspiracy (Rousing the blog-rabble since 9-11-01)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: atomic conspiracy

Look up karl morser and thor morser and the paris gun


4 posted on 02/28/2008 1:43:03 PM PST by omega4179 (B.HUSSEIN.Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: atomic conspiracy

Yep

Use “emotional” laden words to make a story. That’s not reporting, it’s selling and idea.


5 posted on 02/28/2008 2:48:21 PM PST by Red6 (Come and take it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: omega4179

6 posted on 02/28/2008 3:18:20 PM PST by omega4179 (B.HUSSEIN.Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: atomic conspiracy
(misleading and defeatist)

Not in the slightest. I had no difficulty in reading the article.

The Reconstruction Task Force (RTF) which not a combat unit, but an engineering unit, engaged in, well, reconstruction, came under fire. They broke out the biggest tubes they had, which have not been widely used since Vietnam, because they are not portable enough for the operations the combat units of the Australian Army have been specializing in. The 81mm has been relegated to give fire support to engineering units (and a heavier punch to the RAN Patrol boat force). So old tech, broken out of mothballs to deal with a problem. Problem Sorted. End of story.

And try not to look like a oversensitive jessie.

7 posted on 02/28/2008 3:39:54 PM PST by Oztrich Boy (Never say yer sorry, mister. It's a sign of weakness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oztrich Boy

“And try not to look like a oversensitive jessie.”

First, you can kiss my arse, media girl.

It’s obvious I hit a nerve here. Can’t stand to see the media called out, can you, so you re-wrote it for them. As I said, weasel words. You and your media darlings aren’t as clever as you think.

I understand perfectly well why this would be unusual for the RTF but that is not the thrust of the article. I wonder if you did read it.

Try not to look like a sycophantic weasel.


8 posted on 02/28/2008 8:50:29 PM PST by atomic conspiracy (Rousing the blog-rabble since 9-11-01)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson