Tribute to Pat Tillman.
Whispering Death
Active member
What do you mean?bulldogg said:
jackehammond
Active member
Chief Bones said:
Dear Member,
I have no issue with the friendly-fire death of Tillman. That is war. As they say sh*t happens. My father in WW2 was on a destroyer escort off of Okinawa and he stated he saw US Navy fighters shot down by US warships more than once. It was a fast decision about incoming Kamikazies and it had to be made. During the invasion of Sicily the incoming C-47s towing assault gliders flew over the invasion force and lost a large number of both aircraft and gliders to friendly-fire.
You have to accept friendly fire by ground forces - ie especially infantry -- in a more understanding way. If a fighter-bomber does not release all that happens is some bad guys might not be killed. If a warship refuses to fire a missile it has its close in back up and low level missiles. But if an infantry man in the heat of combat holds fire it can result in his death.
Finally, I have no doubt that those soldiers who accidently fired on Tillman will feel bad about it the rest of their lives. But I think they need a lot more understanding. It is the one time that President Teddy Roosevelts famous statement quoted by JFK is so true "... the credit and blame belongs to the man in the arena in the dust in blood ...." or something to that effect if I remember correctly. If they hang one of those poor soldiers involved it will be one of the grosses injustices of the 9/11 War. It will show that officers are held to no standard and enlisted to the maximum standard.
Jack E. Hammond
PS> I once talked to a retired colonel and he stated that in warfare it is not like wine. To wit "Bad news does not get better with age." That is something every new US Army general staff officer is taught. But for what ever reason that US Army general when Tillman was killed was as Tony Soprano stated "If you can quote the rules, you can obey the rules." He couldn't do that. And now the piper must be paid I fear.
Chief Bones
Forums Grumpy Old Man
jackehammond
Death by friendly fire happens ... I recognize this and I have personally seen it happen ... but ... rumors surfaced that this death MAY NOT have been a case of 'friendly fire' but something else. The IG didn't have a choice at that point - not if the military didn't want to be accused of a cover up.
LET'S FACE IT ... IF IT WASN'T 'FRIENDLY FIRE' OR 'ENEMY FIRE' THE ONLY OTHER THING IT COULD BE IS A CRIMINAL ACTION BY AN INDIVIDUAL OR INDIVIDUALS UNKNOWN.
I would sure like to know for sure if it was as first reported - wouldn't you?
If not - then I would like to see the person responsible brought to justice.
Death by friendly fire happens ... I recognize this and I have personally seen it happen ... but ... rumors surfaced that this death MAY NOT have been a case of 'friendly fire' but something else. The IG didn't have a choice at that point - not if the military didn't want to be accused of a cover up.
LET'S FACE IT ... IF IT WASN'T 'FRIENDLY FIRE' OR 'ENEMY FIRE' THE ONLY OTHER THING IT COULD BE IS A CRIMINAL ACTION BY AN INDIVIDUAL OR INDIVIDUALS UNKNOWN.
I would sure like to know for sure if it was as first reported - wouldn't you?
If not - then I would like to see the person responsible brought to justice.
mmarsh
Active member
Bones is right. There have been stories about friendly fire accidents from as far back as the ancient Greeks. Nor was Tillman the only friendly fire accident in Afganistan. One might remember on of our F-16 dropping a LGB on a group of Canadian troops back in 2002. Its unfortunate, but it happens.
Something else is brewing with this story...
Either it was a friendly fire accident that the military slopply tried to cover up, and the cover-up is being investigated. OR, there are still additional details about Tillmans death that have not been made public.
I tend to lean toward the latter, Army cover-ups are not exactly new (i.e Mai Lai massacre), and it says something when even the Pentagon thinks that the Army's conclusions behind Tillmans death was bull, thats why they have reopened the investigation.
Something else is brewing with this story...
Either it was a friendly fire accident that the military slopply tried to cover up, and the cover-up is being investigated. OR, there are still additional details about Tillmans death that have not been made public.
I tend to lean toward the latter, Army cover-ups are not exactly new (i.e Mai Lai massacre), and it says something when even the Pentagon thinks that the Army's conclusions behind Tillmans death was bull, thats why they have reopened the investigation.
PJ24
Active member
How are those armchairs workin' out? Are they nice and comfortable? I hope so. :sarc:
All it says is that they are bending to the pressure of the media and the family in an attempt to appease those, like you, sitting in armchairs thinking they actually know a little something about what it is like in a hostile area. If Tillman wouldn't have been a famous NFL player, this would all be moot, that's the bare bones of it.
Mai Lai has nothing to do with this incident, the two aren't even comparable. Negligence is being looked at, not homicide.
Funny how all of the other friendly fire incidents never saw reason to be investigated past the initial inquiry for negligence. And I'm not talking about with the Canadians.
Unless you've been there, it's really hard to understand it, despite what you think you (the general you, not necessarily you specifically) know from watching the news, reading the news or from history/military channel documentaries.
All I can say is that I hope the investigation is carried out properly, and they see that no one is at fault. Bad things happen in war, sometimes they happen to your own by your own hand. It is a harsh, cold reality.
All it says is that they are bending to the pressure of the media and the family in an attempt to appease those, like you, sitting in armchairs thinking they actually know a little something about what it is like in a hostile area. If Tillman wouldn't have been a famous NFL player, this would all be moot, that's the bare bones of it.
Mai Lai has nothing to do with this incident, the two aren't even comparable. Negligence is being looked at, not homicide.
Funny how all of the other friendly fire incidents never saw reason to be investigated past the initial inquiry for negligence. And I'm not talking about with the Canadians.
Unless you've been there, it's really hard to understand it, despite what you think you (the general you, not necessarily you specifically) know from watching the news, reading the news or from history/military channel documentaries.
All I can say is that I hope the investigation is carried out properly, and they see that no one is at fault. Bad things happen in war, sometimes they happen to your own by your own hand. It is a harsh, cold reality.
Last edited:
Marinerhodes
Active member
PJ24 said:
I agree.
jackehammond
Active member
Dear Chief Bones,
I have heard no one suggest it is nothing more than Friendly-Fire. (If it was murder by his own mates, the US Army is in serious problems and in serious danger as a fighting force). The problem is that his parents in their grief believe that someone should be punished for what is basically an unfortunate act of war. Similar to that TV show with Carol Burnett about the Mother of a son killed in Vietnam by a 105mm round that hit the tree tops where is unit was and who wanted someone punished at the battery who fired the round not takign into consideration the trees. Or the British parents that demanded a corner inquest after the 1st Gulf War over their sons killed by the FF of a USAF A-10. To wit, If their son was not a famous NFL player the DoD would not even be considerintg this. And DoD reopening this investigation beyond the cover up of the fact that general knew he died of FF is a dangerous precedent. If anyone in the unit involved in that firefight is hanged or seriously investigated, in the future in FF incidents they will lie and claim enemy action. And their commanders will not know they have a problem with FF.
To wit, the Chief of Staff of the US Army should write a letter to the parents expressing his sorrow at their lost. But the matter of the friendly fire incident is closed. Nothing will be accomplished by reopening. But that statement after their sons death by that general claiming he died do to enemy fire while bravely charging a Taliban/AQ position will be fully investigated and the wrath of God brought down on those that knew the whole truth and twisted it.
Jack E. Hammond
PS. A famous US Army writer, Colonel Ralph Peters, once wrote a book on future wars the US would fight, and he stated that because "death" until old age (ie in days not far back a mother gave birth to four babies and two would die before five years and after 45 years of age death would claim a lot of people before 65) is not common that the American people expect the same in wars - ie wars without (or with just a few) deaths. For example the US in Iraq has lost less people than what the US lost in the first day of the Battle of the Bulge or on Iow Jima or heaven forbid again, Tarawa. In past wars (ie till Vietnam) there was no military group in Class As with a Chaplin in tow that went to the family to tell of their sons death in war. It was a simple telegram. And the American public fully accepted that and seen no cruelty in it. Not today. And our enemies know it. And they make their war plans accordingly.
I have heard no one suggest it is nothing more than Friendly-Fire. (If it was murder by his own mates, the US Army is in serious problems and in serious danger as a fighting force). The problem is that his parents in their grief believe that someone should be punished for what is basically an unfortunate act of war. Similar to that TV show with Carol Burnett about the Mother of a son killed in Vietnam by a 105mm round that hit the tree tops where is unit was and who wanted someone punished at the battery who fired the round not takign into consideration the trees. Or the British parents that demanded a corner inquest after the 1st Gulf War over their sons killed by the FF of a USAF A-10. To wit, If their son was not a famous NFL player the DoD would not even be considerintg this. And DoD reopening this investigation beyond the cover up of the fact that general knew he died of FF is a dangerous precedent. If anyone in the unit involved in that firefight is hanged or seriously investigated, in the future in FF incidents they will lie and claim enemy action. And their commanders will not know they have a problem with FF.
To wit, the Chief of Staff of the US Army should write a letter to the parents expressing his sorrow at their lost. But the matter of the friendly fire incident is closed. Nothing will be accomplished by reopening. But that statement after their sons death by that general claiming he died do to enemy fire while bravely charging a Taliban/AQ position will be fully investigated and the wrath of God brought down on those that knew the whole truth and twisted it.
Jack E. Hammond
PS. A famous US Army writer, Colonel Ralph Peters, once wrote a book on future wars the US would fight, and he stated that because "death" until old age (ie in days not far back a mother gave birth to four babies and two would die before five years and after 45 years of age death would claim a lot of people before 65) is not common that the American people expect the same in wars - ie wars without (or with just a few) deaths. For example the US in Iraq has lost less people than what the US lost in the first day of the Battle of the Bulge or on Iow Jima or heaven forbid again, Tarawa. In past wars (ie till Vietnam) there was no military group in Class As with a Chaplin in tow that went to the family to tell of their sons death in war. It was a simple telegram. And the American public fully accepted that and seen no cruelty in it. Not today. And our enemies know it. And they make their war plans accordingly.
PJ24
Active member
mmarsh said:
I wasn't detailed with the Rangers that day, but we were in the immediate AO and that's all I'll say. It really doesn't matter anyway.
I'm not trying to make it a pissing match, but your profile indicates you have no military experience, I know it's kind of a trend these days to assume you know just as much as those dudes that have actually gone out and done the deed, but c'mon, let's be realistic.
I don't tell a computer guru about his job, or how things are when the networks crash.
Whether me or anybody else was actually there is irrelevent, if you know how things are in combat, you know what types of accidents can happen and just how easily they can happen.
Don't misunderstand me, I'm not begruding you for not serving. I'm not any better than you because I have, but I have been in Afghanistan, I have served with the unit in question, and I am familiar with the caliber of men and their training within that unit. So my comments on this aren't just coming out of my ass.
If I wanted an armchair, I wouldn't have reupped, I'm a masochist, what can I say.
You'll just have to assume what you want on that, I guess. Most of the operations in Afghanistan are still classified. I will tell you that it isn't that Tom Clancy-ish.
To even assume he was murdered shows very little understanding of how this particular unit operates.
You'll have to excuse me, I was busy wading through much of the other crap you wrote.:mrgreen:
All friendly fire incidents are investigated from the start. There is a three step process. Criminal Investigation, to determine if any negligence was involved. Safety investigation, to prevent it to happen again. Commanders inquiry to determine of any admin action is needed.
No one, not even the Pentagon wanted to handle incident by the book, and now because of the media, they want to pretend like they're going to jump in and save the day. Like I said earlier, it's a case of CYA, and it is a complete farce.
And btw, military has plenty of heros, it doesn't need to shop to find them, they're just there.
And just because they say something happened, doesn't mean it isn't true.
It might be fun to dislike the military, assume we're the big bad guys while passing judgement on actions you've no experience with from the safety and security of your home, but it doesn't make it right.
Anyway, I don't want this to turn into some pissing match, like I said, so I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. :cheers:
Last edited:
mmarsh
Active member
I'm not trying to make it a pissing match, but your profile indicates you have no military experience, I know it's kind of a trend these days to assume you know just as much as those dudes that have actually gone out and done the deed, but c'mon, let's be realistic.I don't tell a computer guru about his job, or how things are when the networks crash.
WTF??? I don't remember me telling you how to do your job? I was merely stating an opinion that I happen to distrust the Army version of events. We are entitled to our opinions are we not? Thats what this forum is for...
Whether me or anybody else was actually there is irrelevent, if you know how things are in combat, you know what types of accidents can happen and just how easily they can happen.
I agree, as I said there are friendly fire accidents going back to ancient days.
If I wanted an armchair, I wouldn't have reupped, I'm a masochist, what can I say.
Hmm, I'll have to try that sometime..
To even assume he was murdered shows very little understanding of how this particular unit operates.
I was refering to another post (and various internet rumours) I never gave it much stock myself, (on the other hand it did happen in Iraq not to long ago). I do wonder about the circumstances of events surrond the death of Corporel Tillman, and why the Army has been less than streightford in this affair. Remember the Army originally stated that Tillman was killed by enemy fire. So right off the bat the Army started off with a lie, not actually off to a good start wouldnt you agree?
You'll have to excuse me, I was busy wading through much of the other crap you wrote.:mrgreen:
I'm confused, is this really lame attempt to flame me your idea of "not wanting to start a pissing match?" I wont respond any further to this.
No one, not even the Pentagon wanted to handle incident by the book, and now because of the media, they want to pretend like they're going to jump in and save the day. Like I said earlier, it's a case of CYA, and it is a complete farce.
Which was precisely what I was saying...
And btw, military has plenty of heros, it doesn't need to shop to find them, they're just there.
I know that, I agree. I wish you would tell the Army that, instead of trying to parade about Jessica Lynch or even Pat Tillman. Why cannot the Army use a few REAL heros for a change? For example, how about playing up Army Medics whose job is to keeping people alive under that worst conditions. Thats real heroism to me. I also find it disrespectful to Tillmans memory to try and play CYA...
And just because they say something happened, doesn't mean it isn't true.
True, but when you have been caught lying a few times it becomes very difficult for people like me (and perhaps yourself) to believe them at face value. I am skeptical about what happened as the Army already lied once.
It might be fun to dislike the military, assume we're the big bad guys while passing judgement on actions you've no experience with from the safety and security of your home, but it doesn't make it right.
Oh and there it is again, I'm critical of the army so therefore Im automatically labelled some anti-military far left hippie. I deeply regret not signing up, and besides If you really read my post I never once questioned the role of the actual soldier. My family has a long tradition of being U.S Army Officers. So your labelling me anti-military is pure bunk.
My criticism is directed toward Army Politics and Bureaucrats whose sole role is to protect the IMAGE of the army, but not necessrily the army itself. Tillman is case in point.
Anyway, I don't want this to turn into some pissing match, like I said, so I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. :cheers: [/quote]
I'm not sure what exactly what you are disagreeing with me on. You claim that I am a couch potato general, I don't deny that, but I think you are too (to a lesser degree based on your actual military experiance, which I admit is far greater than mine). You claim friendly fire accidents can happen, I agree, they do, and that they Army is playing a game of CYA will Tillman, which I also think is the case.
WTF??? I don't remember me telling you how to do your job? I was merely stating an opinion that I happen to distrust the Army version of events. We are entitled to our opinions are we not? Thats what this forum is for...
Whether me or anybody else was actually there is irrelevent, if you know how things are in combat, you know what types of accidents can happen and just how easily they can happen.
I agree, as I said there are friendly fire accidents going back to ancient days.
If I wanted an armchair, I wouldn't have reupped, I'm a masochist, what can I say.
Hmm, I'll have to try that sometime..
To even assume he was murdered shows very little understanding of how this particular unit operates.
I was refering to another post (and various internet rumours) I never gave it much stock myself, (on the other hand it did happen in Iraq not to long ago). I do wonder about the circumstances of events surrond the death of Corporel Tillman, and why the Army has been less than streightford in this affair. Remember the Army originally stated that Tillman was killed by enemy fire. So right off the bat the Army started off with a lie, not actually off to a good start wouldnt you agree?
You'll have to excuse me, I was busy wading through much of the other crap you wrote.:mrgreen:
I'm confused, is this really lame attempt to flame me your idea of "not wanting to start a pissing match?" I wont respond any further to this.
No one, not even the Pentagon wanted to handle incident by the book, and now because of the media, they want to pretend like they're going to jump in and save the day. Like I said earlier, it's a case of CYA, and it is a complete farce.
Which was precisely what I was saying...
And btw, military has plenty of heros, it doesn't need to shop to find them, they're just there.
I know that, I agree. I wish you would tell the Army that, instead of trying to parade about Jessica Lynch or even Pat Tillman. Why cannot the Army use a few REAL heros for a change? For example, how about playing up Army Medics whose job is to keeping people alive under that worst conditions. Thats real heroism to me. I also find it disrespectful to Tillmans memory to try and play CYA...
And just because they say something happened, doesn't mean it isn't true.
True, but when you have been caught lying a few times it becomes very difficult for people like me (and perhaps yourself) to believe them at face value. I am skeptical about what happened as the Army already lied once.
It might be fun to dislike the military, assume we're the big bad guys while passing judgement on actions you've no experience with from the safety and security of your home, but it doesn't make it right.
Oh and there it is again, I'm critical of the army so therefore Im automatically labelled some anti-military far left hippie. I deeply regret not signing up, and besides If you really read my post I never once questioned the role of the actual soldier. My family has a long tradition of being U.S Army Officers. So your labelling me anti-military is pure bunk.
My criticism is directed toward Army Politics and Bureaucrats whose sole role is to protect the IMAGE of the army, but not necessrily the army itself. Tillman is case in point.
Anyway, I don't want this to turn into some pissing match, like I said, so I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. :cheers: [/quote]
I'm not sure what exactly what you are disagreeing with me on. You claim that I am a couch potato general, I don't deny that, but I think you are too (to a lesser degree based on your actual military experiance, which I admit is far greater than mine). You claim friendly fire accidents can happen, I agree, they do, and that they Army is playing a game of CYA will Tillman, which I also think is the case.
Last edited:
Chief Bones
Forums Grumpy Old Man
PJ
I can buy the possibility of a case of military CYA ... but ... I can also buy the case of information surfacing which raised flags of concern that caused the IG to decide that further investigation was necessary. In order to head off charges of a cover up, the IG decided to remove the investigation from the Army Field Investigator's hands and have the CID do a review and deep investigation of the facts surrounding Tillman's death.
People can kibbutz from the sidelines all day long (and I agree), still NOT really have any concept of the confusion and haze of combat unless they have been there. 'Friendly Fire' deaths have happened in every war since the dawn of time ... but ... I hope people never get into the habit of completely accepting the 'shit happens' excuse when it does.
In this particular case (for whatever reason), unresolved questions have resulted in further investigation into one of those deaths.
AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED THAT IS THE TOP - BOTTOM AND END OF IT.
I can buy the possibility of a case of military CYA ... but ... I can also buy the case of information surfacing which raised flags of concern that caused the IG to decide that further investigation was necessary. In order to head off charges of a cover up, the IG decided to remove the investigation from the Army Field Investigator's hands and have the CID do a review and deep investigation of the facts surrounding Tillman's death.
People can kibbutz from the sidelines all day long (and I agree), still NOT really have any concept of the confusion and haze of combat unless they have been there. 'Friendly Fire' deaths have happened in every war since the dawn of time ... but ... I hope people never get into the habit of completely accepting the 'shit happens' excuse when it does.
In this particular case (for whatever reason), unresolved questions have resulted in further investigation into one of those deaths.
AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED THAT IS THE TOP - BOTTOM AND END OF IT.
PJ24
Active member
Chief Bones said:
Well, there's no point arguing it. I just hope they do the right thing and give the media their dog and pony show and let the incident be exactly as it was without giving them (the media) a sacrficial lamb.
I'm tired of watching innocent guys get strung up because the media thinks they know more about war than the military. And I admit, it's more our top guys fault that that happens than anything else, because they bend to the political pressure and try to cover their own butts, just like with this.
Instead of doing what was right to begin with, they now play innocent and try to let on they didn't know what happened. Guess who is going to pay? The low dogs.
Last edited:
mmarsh
Active member
Agreed
England, Granier and the others should have known better, remember there was several soldiers (to their credit) who refused to take part. One of these soldiers wound up being the whistleblower.
That being said, there doubt in my mind that those convicted were the sacrficial lambs for those higher ups who ought to be sharing a cell with them.
England, Granier and the others should have known better, remember there was several soldiers (to their credit) who refused to take part. One of these soldiers wound up being the whistleblower.
That being said, there doubt in my mind that those convicted were the sacrficial lambs for those higher ups who ought to be sharing a cell with them.
I started a thread about this yesterday, but Tomtom pointed me to this one. Yesterday we had a long article in the newspaper regarding Tillman's demise. The point they were trying to make or at least were hinting at was that Tillman wasn't your ordinary GI. He seemed very opposed to the Iraq war, but got transferred overthere from Afghanistan. They said he encouraged his buddies to vote Democrats out of protest against this war. He also allegedly said he was meeting up with Noam Chomsky and you all know his views on this.
Before he had the chance his head was removed by friendly fire, after he had yelled that they were friendlies, he had popped some smoke and in the end showed himself in a lull of the shooting... This does sound suspicious, then again it might be another example of a tragic death.
Before he had the chance his head was removed by friendly fire, after he had yelled that they were friendlies, he had popped some smoke and in the end showed himself in a lull of the shooting... This does sound suspicious, then again it might be another example of a tragic death.
Chief Bones
Forums Grumpy Old Man
Ted
Before I would buy into your assertions I am going to need a lot more than just you saying it's so ... how about some third party sources to beef up your post .......
Before I would buy into your assertions I am going to need a lot more than just you saying it's so ... how about some third party sources to beef up your post .......