Usan special forces killed Linda Norgrove?

[Normal Dude]

Some people seem to be overreacting to the OP.

I take it you don't read many EJ threads.

There are all sorts of grenades. A flash-bang can kill you, for example, although it's not intended to kill anyone.

Yes, but I'm pretty sure those are exceptionally rare. Would be some real bad luck if one did.

 

[JWideman]

In any hostage rescue situation, there is the likelihood that things will go wrong. Things went wrong. A better headline would have been "U.S. Special Forces failed to rescue Linda Norgrove" But then you care neither about using proper English nor facts.

 

[Rolfe]

There do seem to be some questions here. Why were the US forces so adamant that she had not been killed by friendly fire, in the initial stages? This latest development is upsetting her family dreadfully, after the initial line.

And US forces do have something of a reputation for gung-ho behaviour. One remembers IranAir 655, in which 290 pilgrims flying to Mecca were killed because a very gung-ho commander had drilled his crew in such a way that they went through their training scenario in spite of a number of signs being evident that the plane was not a military threat. The parallel there is that immediately after that happened, the US vessel announced that no, they hadn't shot down any airliner, they had shot down a fighter plane, and if there had been a civilian aircraft shot down, then the culprit was the nearby HMS York - which didn't even have anti-aircraft weapons on board.

The captain of the ship that shot down that plane promptly sailed away from the area, and left the crew of the York to spend the next two weeks fishing body parts out of the Persian Gulf. Later, when he returned to the USA, he was given a hero's welcome and a medal.

I imagine, and hope, that the US officers who tried to rescue Linda acted in the best possible way they could have done with the information they had, and that her death was a tragic accident. However, past indicidents do colour how these things are perceived, and the subsequent denials followed by admissions in this case is leaving a slightly sour taste.

Rolfe.

 

[Normal Dude]

There do seem to be some questions here. Why were the US forces so adamant that she had not been killed by friendly fire, in the initial stages? This latest development is upsetting her family dreadfully, after the initial line.

And US forces do have something of a reputation for gung-ho behaviour. One remembers IranAir 655, in which 290 pilgrims flying to Mecca were killed because a very gung-ho commander had drilled his crew in such a way that they went through their training scenario in spite of a number of signs being evident that the plane was not a military threat. The parallel there is that immediately after that happened, the US vessel announced that no, they hadn't shot down any airliner, they had shot down a fighter plane, and if there had been a civilian aircraft shot down, then the culprit was the nearby HMS York - which didn't even have anti-aircraft weapons on board.

The captain of the ship that shot down that plane promptly sailed away from the area, and left the crew of the York to spend the next two weeks fishing body parts out of the Persian Gulf. Later, when he returned to the USA, he was given a hero's welcome and a medal.

I imagine, and hope, that the US officers who tried to rescue Linda acted in the best possible way they could have done with the information they had, and that her death was a tragic accident. However, past indicidents do colour how these things are perceived, and the subsequent denials followed by admissions in this case is leaving a slightly sour taste.

Of course, you don't hear nearly as much about (or remember) all the times that US forces didn't act with gung-ho-ness (new word) between 1988 and now. Confirmation bias anyone?
I really don't understand the issue with the reversal, or see anyone being "adamant". It took them what, less than 24 hours (EDIT: It took less than 72 hours. My bad) to say they now weren't sure? Isn't this jumping the gun just a tad bit? But hey, let's not worry about waiting more than five minutes before playing politics over someone's corpse.

As a side note, the medal given to that officer didn't have anything to do with the incident, as you imply.

 

[geni]

Of course, you don't hear nearly as much about (or remember) all the times that US forces didn't act with gung-ho-ness (new word) between 1988 and now. Confirmation bias anyone?

Not really. Since having a reputation for gung-ho-ness is a compartive measure the US not being gung-ho from time to time isn't statisticaly relivant.

I really don't understand the issue with the reversal, or see anyone being "adamant". It took them what, less than 24 hours to say they now weren't sure? Isn't this jumping the gun just a tad bit?

Depends on how the US is doing information management. If the initial story is pretty clear but posertive and the follow up isn't it thats something people find concerning.

But hey, let's not worry about waiting more than five minutes before playing politics over someone's corpse.

You mean like fine wine politics over dead bodies gets better with time? Those deaths in the Bangladesh ship breaking yard at the weeked not so good with politics but carthage totaly awesome?

 

[geni]

Of course, you don't hear nearly as much about (or remember) all the times that US forces didn't act with gung-ho-ness (new word) between 1988 and now. Confirmation bias anyone?

Not really. Since having a reputation for gung-ho-ness is a compartive measure the US not being gung-ho from time to time isn't statisticaly relivant.

I really don't understand the issue with the reversal, or see anyone being "adamant". It took them what, less than 24 hours to say they now weren't sure? Isn't this jumping the gun just a tad bit?

Depends on how the US is doing information management. If the initial story is pretty clear but posertive and the follow up isn't it thats something people find concerning.

Sure the 7/7 reports were far more posertive than the eventual outcome but were far from clear.

But hey, let's not worry about waiting more than five minutes before playing politics over someone's corpse.

You mean like fine wine politics over dead bodies gets better with time? Those deaths in the Bangladesh ship breaking yard at the weeked not so good with politics but carthage totaly awesome?

 

[Doubt]

There do seem to be some questions here. Why were the US forces so adamant that she had not been killed by friendly fire, in the initial stages? This latest development is upsetting her family dreadfully, after the initial line.

And US forces do have something of a reputation for gung-ho behaviour. One remembers IranAir 655, in which 290 pilgrims flying to Mecca were killed because a very gung-ho commander had drilled his crew in such a way that they went through their training scenario in spite of a number of signs being evident that the plane was not a military threat. The parallel there is that immediately after that happened, the US vessel announced that no, they hadn't shot down any airliner, they had shot down a fighter plane, and if there had been a civilian aircraft shot down, then the culprit was the nearby HMS York - which didn't even have anti-aircraft weapons on board.

The captain of the ship that shot down that plane promptly sailed away from the area, and left the crew of the York to spend the next two weeks fishing body parts out of the Persian Gulf. Later, when he returned to the USA, he was given a hero's welcome and a medal.

I imagine, and hope, that the US officers who tried to rescue Linda acted in the best possible way they could have done with the information they had, and that her death was a tragic accident. However, past indicidents do colour how these things are perceived, and the subsequent denials followed by admissions in this case is leaving a slightly sour taste.

Rolfe.

I had never heard this version of the story about downing the Iranian air liner. I decided to check one little detail that looks wrong on it's face. Most modern warships carry at least a little bit of anti-aircraft weaponry. Those that don't are pretty worthless in battle. The HMS York is armed with a sea dart missile system. See the Royal Navy for documentation here:

http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/operati...ing-department/weapons-engineering-department

So do you have anything that backs up your account? How much of the rest of it is likely to be wrong?

 

[Normal Dude]

You mean like fine wine politics over dead bodies gets better with time? Those deaths in the Bangladesh ship breaking yard at the weeked not so good with politics but carthage totaly awesome?

What I meant was that we could wait until there is more information before the blame game begins.

 

[LTC8K6]

There do seem to be some questions here. Why were the US forces so adamant that she had not been killed by friendly fire, in the initial stages? This latest development is upsetting her family dreadfully, after the initial line.

And US forces do have something of a reputation for gung-ho behaviour. One remembers IranAir 655, in which 290 pilgrims flying to Mecca were killed because a very gung-ho commander had drilled his crew in such a way that they went through their training scenario in spite of a number of signs being evident that the plane was not a military threat. The parallel there is that immediately after that happened, the US vessel announced that no, they hadn't shot down any airliner, they had shot down a fighter plane, and if there had been a civilian aircraft shot down, then the culprit was the nearby HMS York - which didn't even have anti-aircraft weapons on board.

The captain of the ship that shot down that plane promptly sailed away from the area, and left the crew of the York to spend the next two weeks fishing body parts out of the Persian Gulf. Later, when he returned to the USA, he was given a hero's welcome and a medal.

I imagine, and hope, that the US officers who tried to rescue Linda acted in the best possible way they could have done with the information they had, and that her death was a tragic accident. However, past indicidents do colour how these things are perceived, and the subsequent denials followed by admissions in this case is leaving a slightly sour taste.

Rolfe.

That version of events re IR655 is completely new to me. Not saying it's wrong, mind you. I've never heard that version before.

 

[geni]

What I meant was that we could wait until there is more information before the blame game begins.

Well of course the problem with that is that those involved didn't.

Now to be fair in a modern media enviroment enforcing a 24 hour freeze on all news isn't going to work. Journalists will just try other routes. In fact a fair bit of modern media manament involves trying to keep the press tied up with the story you are feeding them so they don't go causing problems. For example the classic relative of missing child appeal's main use is not as an effective tactic for getting the child back but for keeping the media happy for 24 hours.

However the US army does have proffessional press officers who should be able to keep media under control without needing to use the "the captors blew her up" story. So their descission to jump the gun doesn't look too good. It is possible that the troops on the ground fed them false info but in that case we really do have a problem.

 

[little grey rabbit]

She was killed by a grenade and that grenade appears to have been thrown by a US soldier.

 

[geni]

She was killed by a grenade and that grenade appears to have been thrown by a US soldier.

Hasn't been confirmed yet though.

 

[little grey rabbit]

I don't really see this is a US bad, Allies good, kind of thing.

3 Australian soldiers have been charged recently for killing a bunch of children on a raid - basically just going in guns blazing and whoops, then people get killed.

And when I was in Basra, the British intelligence tried to deliver me over to an Iraqi insurgent group. I like to pretend it was to have my head chopped off, but I presume they just wanted to stage a heroic rescue mission - a la this
http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/topstories/SAS-hero-was-rescued-as.5226082.jp
(which of course meant it was far too dangerous for the British Army to evacuate Basra and they had to stay and "protect" Iraqis)

Fortunately for me, the Iraqi insurgents decided they didnt want me. So after a few more fun and games, like the British Army staging a fake shooting incident, they let me go.

 

[lionking]

I don't really see this is a US bad, Allies good, kind of thing.

3 Australian soldiers have been charged recently for killing a bunch of children on a raid - basically just going in guns blazing and whoops, then people get killed.

And when I was in Basra, the British intelligence tried to deliver me over to an Iraqi insurgent group. I like to pretend it was to have my head chopped off, but I presume they just wanted to stage a heroic rescue mission - a la this
http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/topstories/SAS-hero-was-rescued-as.5226082.jp
(which of course meant it was far too dangerous for the British Army to evacuate Basra and they had to stay and "protect" Iraqis)

Fortunately for me, the Iraqi insurgents decided they didnt want me. So after a few more fun and games, like the British Army staging a fake shooting incident, they let me go.

You're 63 and recently in Basra? Excuse me for not believing you.

 

[little grey rabbit]

You're 63 and recently in Basra? Excuse me for not believing you.

not recently, back in 2004.

 

[LTC8K6]

She was killed by a grenade and that grenade appears to have been thrown by a US soldier.

US grenades aren't necessarily thrown or set off by US soldiers.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

You're 63 and recently in Basra? Excuse me for not believing you.

He's a 9/11 truther and a Holocaust denier. Groups not particularly known for honesty and integrity.

 

[shadron]

It has just been reported on BBC national radio that Linda Norgrove may have been killed by a grenade from US special forces rather than by a suicide bomb vest, as previously reported by the Usan military.

...and I'll mark that as an attempt to blame the victim rather than the kidnappers.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

And when I was in Basra, the British intelligence tried to deliver me over to an Iraqi insurgent group. Fortunately for me, the Iraqi insurgents decided they didnt want me. So after a few more fun and games, like the British Army staging a fake shooting incident, they let me go.

This kind of thing seems to happen to you a lot:

I had a dispute with my employer that involved them spying on my email communications. When I made a request under the Privacy Act the response was "we can find no record of a request to monitor your email account, therefore your privacy was not violated"

Oh there is no doubt the email was being monitored.

The email account was suddenly deleted when I moved 4 journal papers from it to a private account. The four papers detailed how the director of research institute I then worked for was engaging in scientific fraud.

And no one has seriously contested that the work in question was fabricated. My then employer was just engaging in every single possible obsfucation to avoid admitting that the reason for the sudden deletion of the account was due to email monitoring.

 

[plumjam]

Give an American a grenade and he'll throw it. It's their culture.