Black Hawk Down .. how lucky were they?

Trytostaydead · Post by **Trytostaydead** » 2003-07-03 09:29pm

I was just watching Black Hawk Down for the umpteenth time but I was just wondering.. how lucky were they that they didn't lose much more men?

Granted, this is just a movie and re-creation of the events.. but there was so much massed fire coming at them at short ranges from all sorts of rifles and machine guns sometimes even catching them out in the open in the middle of the street.. you just kinda scratch your head.

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2003-07-03 09:31pm

Well the movie did say they were really bad shots.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-07-03 09:46pm

neoolong wrote:Well the movie did say they were really bad shots.

A lot of Somalia fire wasn't even aimed in the general sense, descriptions of weapons being held around corners and fired on full auto are common. They also where very poor at ambushing, hitting the lead vehicle with everything and then getting creamed rather then attacking all or several points at once.

Plus it was Rangers and armed helicopters vs. untrained third world Militia with a kill loss ratio that may have been higher then one hundred to one.

Post by **weemadando** » 2003-07-03 09:52pm

According to a lot of the interviews etc with survivors, half the time the local militia's were out of their heads on the local narcotics, which explains just why the shooting was so appallingly average.

Pablo Sanchez · Post by **Pablo Sanchez** » 2003-07-03 09:56pm

weemadando wrote:According to a lot of the interviews etc with survivors, half the time the local militia's were out of their heads on the local narcotics, which explains just why the shooting was so appallingly average.

They were also untrained and for the most part unprepared for what happened. It's interesting to read the book, because the impression I got was that it was like 99% of the gunmen were behaving as unwitting shields for a more competent 1% which actually scored the kills.

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2003-07-03 09:57pm

Khat or something if I remember correctly.

Kitsune · Post by **Kitsune** » 2003-07-03 10:03pm

I have to give the rangers alot of credit, they wanted to go back in the next day and kick butt

Agent Fisher · Post by **Agent Fisher** » 2003-07-03 10:10pm

Of course they wanted to go back in. They still had men out there form the second crash site. The rangers and the Delta unit that fought there, when they saw the mobs mutalting the dead soldiers wanted to go and kill the whole lot of them and land and retreive the bodies. In the bok as one of the wounded was loaded on a chopper for the flight back to base, was told by one of the medics that they felt sorry for them. The wounded replied that they should feel sorry for the skinnies because they whopped their ass.

damn skinnies

Trytostaydead · Post by **Trytostaydead** » 2003-07-03 10:12pm

How come after that first horrific day all hell wasn't let loose upon those mobs? Send in the tanks, heavy armor.. AC-130 gunships.. have a field day on those mobs.

Agent Fisher · Post by **Agent Fisher** » 2003-07-03 10:14pm

cause the policticans didn't have the guts to carry through

Kitsune · Post by **Kitsune** » 2003-07-03 10:24pm

I think this can be placed in front of one specific politician

Agent Fisher · Post by **Agent Fisher** » 2003-07-03 10:26pm

::cough:: Clinton

skinnies

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2003-07-04 12:50am

Trytostaydead wrote:I was just watching Black Hawk Down for the umpteenth time but I was just wondering.. how lucky were they that they didn't lose much more men?

They weren't lucky at all.

Pablo Sanchez · Post by **Pablo Sanchez** » 2003-07-04 02:14pm

Agent Fisher wrote:::cough:: Clinton skinnies

Yeah. Because going back into Somalia was really going to further US strategic interests in an important region.

Like it or not, strategic decisions are not made on the basis of national pride--not good ones anyway. The mistake we made was being there in the first place.

Kitsune · Post by **Kitsune** » 2003-07-04 09:31pm

Pablo Sanchez wrote: Yeah. Because going back into Somalia was really going to further US strategic interests in an important region.

Like it or not, strategic decisions are not made on the basis of national pride--not good ones anyway. The mistake we made was being there in the first place.

You are right, we really should not have been in there without a clear set goal. The problem is that when the Politicans send you in there, you have the right to expect their support.

Pablo Sanchez · Post by **Pablo Sanchez** » 2003-07-04 10:12pm

That was the problem. Clinton shouldn't have been there, he knew it, but he doublethought his way through the enterprise and tried to waffle it. Half-in, half-out.

But even if he had gone in full bore and won an overwhelming victory in Mogadishu and shattered Mohammed Fara Aidid, the place still would have been a war-torn shithole and we would have declared victory and left it behind in embarrassment.

Kitsune · Post by **Kitsune** » 2003-07-04 10:18pm

I still do not consider it as bad as the Liberty Incident under Robert McNamara where the ship called for help and the secretary called the fighter sent to protect the ship back to the carrier.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-07-04 10:26pm

Kitsune wrote:I still do not consider it as bad as the Liberty Incident under Robert McNamara where the ship called for help and the secretary called the fighter sent to protect the ship back to the carrier.

No such thing occurred, and I have no idea were you could have picked it up.

Kitsune · Post by **Kitsune** » 2003-07-04 10:38pm

From USS Liberty website

USS LIBERTY REPORTS UNDER ATTACK BY UNIDENTIFIED JET AIRCRAFT. HAVE LAUNCHED STRIKE AIRCRAFT TO DEFEND SHIP. It seemed only seconds later that a new voice radio circuit was patched into the room that was now becoming a nerve center for Liberty communications. This was a high-command Pentagon circuit manned by a Navy warrant officer, but once contact was established the voice on the circuit changed. Every man in the room recognized the new voice as that of the Secretary of Defense, Robert S. McNamara, and he spoke with authority: "Tell Sixth Fleet to get those aircraft back immediately," he barked, "and give me a status report."

http://www.ussliberty.org/
http://www.ussliberty.org/chapter6.htm

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-07-04 10:55pm

I should trust a site put up by the survivors who have constantly alleged there a huge conspiracy against them why exactly? The USN didn't even know where Liberty was, they thought she was 60-100 miles north of Egypt, and she lost all communications during the attack.

Fighters could not have aided her during the attack regardless. You can't help what you can't find.

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2003-07-05 02:38am

To be honest, I think Clinton made the right decision. We should not have been in Somolia in the first place, and escalating the conflict was not the right answer. I would have supported a mission to recover Durant and the Delta bodies, but no more.

Kitsune · Post by **Kitsune** » 2003-07-05 07:37pm

Sea Skimmer wrote:I should trust a site put up by the survivors who have constantly alleged there a huge conspiracy against them why exactly? The USN didn't even know where Liberty was, they thought she was 60-100 miles north of Egypt, and she lost all communications during the attack.

Fighters could not have aided her during the attack regardless. You can't help what you can't find.

Without other evidence, I tend to t least give some crediance to the guy on the spot. I have also watched teh same information on the history chanel and while on subjects they get their conclusions wrong in my opinion, the bare facts are correct. There are also many cases, one even personally tied to me, where Military Intelligence or related groups screw up completely and cover up events so that someone or something can be protected. In my time in that area of the med, there were few non military ships in the area where the Liberty was which were around her size, Th merchants I saw around Haifa were pretty small for example. A search would not be impossible. I nothing else, send an E-2 Hawkeye to do a volume search

Kitsune · Post by **Kitsune** » 2003-07-05 07:39pm

Howedar wrote:To be honest, I think Clinton made the right decision. We should not have been in Somolia in the first place, and escalating the conflict was not the right answer. I would have supported a mission to recover Durant and the Delta bodies, but no more.

That is what I am referring to, There is a basic oath (not actual but unwritten) that your guys will always come back to get you.

Agent Fisher · Post by **Agent Fisher** » 2003-07-05 07:48pm

Pablo Sanchez wrote:
Agent Fisher wrote:::cough:: Clinton skinnies
Yeah. Because going back into Somalia was really going to further US strategic interests in an important region.

Like it or not, strategic decisions are not made on the basis of national pride--not good ones anyway. The mistake we made was being there in the first place.

by the US actions we showed that we would run away if they killed some of our troops. Colin Powell said the deaths of 19 soldeirs back in veitnam would not have rated a press release. Aidid could and did claim that he drove off the american military.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-07-05 08:15pm

Agent Fisher wrote: by the US actions we showed that we would run away if they killed some of our troops. Colin Powell said the deaths of 19 soldeirs back in veitnam would not have rated a press release. Aidid could and did claim that he drove off the american military.

It left because it was ordered to, not because it was militarily incapable of continuing the mission. In fact the months that followed where very quite because the militia had been decimated and there was little fighting until the last western troops left.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Black Hawk Down .. how lucky were they?

Black Hawk Down .. how lucky were they?

Re: Black Hawk Down .. how lucky were they?