U.S. soldier killed by sniper fire in Tikrit

[sabra]

Source: Voice of Iraq

Tikrit, Oct 15, (VOI)- One U.S. soldier was killed by sniper fire in central Tikrit on Monday afternoon, a police source said.

"A sniper managed to kill a U.S. soldier in central Tikrit on Monday afternoon," the source told the independent news agency Voices of Iraq (VOI) under condition of anonymity.

"U.S. forces opened fire randomly after the attack, killing two civilians and injuring another one," he added.
No word was immediately available from the U.S. army on the incident.

Read more: http://66.111.34.180/look/english/article.tpl?IdLanguage=1&IdPublication=4&NrArticle=57761&NrIssue=2&NrSection=1

[saigon68]

1. US soldiers adopting the Blackwater method of Defensive fire

Sounds like a good way to "grease" a few islamics

</sarcasm>

[TheLastMohican]

2. They have created at least 2 more families

who will hate our guts.
I guess, this is the way to win a war. :sarcasm:

[Squatch]

4. You can't blame the soldiers for this.

When you get shot at, you return fire until you defeat the enemy or break contact.

[tuckessee]

5. You don't open fire on civilians after taking sniper fire.

There's a concept called "fire discipline" which is something US troops know nothing about.

Isn't it odd that when US troops do this they're considered as innocent as newborn babes but when a PMC does it they're evil incarnate?

[Squatch]

6. You do if those "civilians" are shooting at you.

:shrug:

[tuckessee]

8. That's not what happened in this case.

It's quite common for Americans (both regular troops & PMC's) to shoot at anyone near a sniping or IED attack.

The Brits used greater restraint and actually acquire hostile targets before killing people instead of indiscriminately mowing everybody down in the general area.

That's one of the primary reasons British occupied areas were more peaceful than those occupied by the American gunslingers.

The American troops & contractors I talk to who brag about doing this say they do it because they "know" the locals were involved in the attack "somehow" & they must be taught "a lesson".

[Squatch]

10. Oh, so there was a uniformed enemy combatant/sniper in the AO?

[tuckessee]

11. So because the lone sniper wasn't wearing a uniform

that gives the Americans the right to kill everybody in the area?

Is that the way you handled it in 'Nam? No wonder Charlie never had a shortage of recruits.

[The Stranger]

13. No, there were two innocent civilians shot after the combatant sniper shot at U.S. forces.

Why is this so hard to understand for you?

[happyslug]

7. No you don't. if the fire causes more harm

Yes, they are time where you HAVE TO HOLD YOUR FIRE, even while taking fire. This was one of those times. You are in the middle of town with Civilians all around. To open fire WITHOUT KNOWING WHERE THE SNIPER WAS is just hoping to hit the Sniper. in fact YOUR RETURN FIRE IS WHAT THE SNIPER WAS COUNTING ON (i.e. US Troops return fire, killing Civilians, thus making more recruits for the insurgents). While trained solders learn to take such hits. The problems is we have soldiers whose training has been in decline since 2001 (Most armies decline in training as they fight in a war, for example it is estimated that the US Divisions that landed in France in June 1944, where done by May 1945, and readily deteriorating as to fighting ability for at least a month before that date, if not months before that date, do mostly to the lack of on-going training do to the fact they were in Combat).

Anyway, the issue here is the use of Firepower. You only use it when it does more good than harm. Shooting all over the place because a Sniper fired on the Troops is causing more harm than good. This is why you have fire Discipline, controlled use of the weapons. The problem with Iraq, is that how do you defeat the insurgents? You can NOT take their supply base, for we do not nowhere the bases are. The people support the insurgents, so the insurgents use them o hide in. Our Troops are know viewing the civilians like the trees in a rural areas, not people but things that get in the way when the Solders wants to open fire. This intensively to what the Iraq People want will lead to even more such useless waste of blood. A better approach would be to take the hit and try to find where it came from. Do NOT fire until the sniper is located. Just opening fire Hoping to hit someone, and then declaring anyone you hit as an insurgents, does NOT help end support for the insurgents. What is needed is a "game plan" that reflects the fact most Iraqis do NOT want US troops in Iraq. Unless we are willing to do genocide the US has to pull out. Those are the two choices up to the US Military, Genocide (Killing off all of the Iraqis, this making sure NO insurgents are left) or pulling out of Iraq. THe present decision to do neither is military undependable, and will lead to further deterioration of the US Military. A decision needs ot be made and has to start in Washington, do you want the US Military to kill off most of the Iraqis or do you pull US Troops out. The present system of leaving the Troops shoot at anything they fear will just lead to further insurgents, pull out before we get to deep.

[Squatch]

9. Tell you what...the next time you take sniper fire,

I'd like to see you take the same restraint you seem to speak (from experience?) of.

[NickB79]

14. Isn't that what military training is all about? Instilling discipline?

And isn't that why we send cadets to West Point to become commanding officers? To learn when to show restraint and how to control the troops serving under them?

[happyslug]

15. My father did, and walked away from the area (under Orders) rather than shoot French Civilians

Maybe that is why the French did NOT start shooting our troops??? (And he had just saw his best Friend shot dead by the Sniper).

Fire discipline is important, if you can NOT keep your troops from opening fire why are they there? You can NOT permit troops to open fire just because they want to, at times you MUST TELL THEM NO AND THEY MUST ALSO TELL THEMSELVES NO. It is possible IF TROOPS ARE PROPERLY TRAINED (Something I believe has been in decline since 2001).

[The Stranger]

12. Yes, you most certainly can blame the soldiers for this.

When you take fire, you don't randomly shoot unarmed civilians.

[Massachusetts]

3. RIP Troop

FUBAR!