Why did they not air lift it out is what I don't understand .
[QUOTE=PEn1s lol;20799306]Why did they not air lift it out is what I don't understand .[/QUOTE]
I dont think aussies have chinooks :C
Why not drop the bombs on where they thought the insurgents were at? They've obviously got the air support, they better damn well use it.
Scorched earth is good, but killing the enemy is better.
Wait, but isn't it supposed to be well armored against landmines?
[QUOTE=wikipedia]The Bushmaster is a mine protected vehicle and provides a high degree of protection against land mines, using its v-hull monocoque to deflect the blast away from the vehicle and its occupants. The vehicle's armour provides protection against small arms of up to 7.62mm calibre.[/QUOTE]
Tanks are banned
This just in:
Australian government has now banned the Australian army from using any types of weaponry or vehicles, in order to protect it's people. Conferences are currently being held to decide if banning the entire army will take place.
So why did they blow it up instead of just leaving it?
[QUOTE=raccoon2112;20803544]So why did they blow it up instead of just leaving it?[/QUOTE]
So the terrorists couldn't use it?
Jesus Christ, read the damn article people.
I realized the op is the queen. :angel:
At least they all got out safely :)
They should spend less time complaing and more time training.
Maybe they should just give up like the French
And ban airstrikes
Save the civillians, clear out the troops.
Nuke iraq.
Clean up wasteland, move back in.
No more insurgents, problem solved.
[QUOTE=JETFIGHTER5;20803440]Wait, but isn't it supposed to be well armored against landmines?[/QUOTE]
IED =/= Landmine
A vehicle that is well protected against mines (having thicker bottom armour) may not be as explosive proof all around.
You complain about them blowing it up, but you would also complain if soldiers died trying to rescue a crippled vehicle that they could have just stripped of equipment and blown up.
They should of waited for the insurgents try to get in it. THEN blow it up.
It's very possible there were sensitive materials in the vehicle, also prevents enemy troops from getting their hands on it. The U.S. bombed an Abram when it was knocked out of action.
[QUOTE=capgun;20807913]They should of waited for the insurgents try to get in it. THEN blow it up.[/QUOTE]
yay, murder
just useful...
I wonder why they didn't bomb the people who were shooting them
[QUOTE=TH89;20808591]I wonder why they didn't bomb the people who were shooting them[/QUOTE]
Because their computers where being attacked by adware that was making porn pop up everywhere.
If they didn't blow it up the insurgents might have would fix it.
Then they'd camp the Australian base.
aussie vehicles are trash anyways
[QUOTE=TH89;20808591]I wonder why they didn't bomb the people who were shooting them[/QUOTE]
Because insurgents fight from civilian populated areas, western armies don't kill civilians.
[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;20810814]Because insurgents fight from civilian populated areas, western armies don't kill civilians.[/QUOTE]
lol, how naive of you
[editline]07:45AM[/editline]
fucking lol
[QUOTE=Trotsky;20810843]lol, how naive of you
[editline]07:45AM[/editline]
fucking lol[/QUOTE]
*Australians don't kill civilians. Better?
I hope no-one rips a wire on an Aussie AC130
Because they'll need to airstrike it (Quite literally)
[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;20810850]*Australians don't kill civilians. Better?[/QUOTE]
not really, the insurgents don't "hide behind civilians"
this isn't some fucking semantics we're arguing, this is a serious claim that all western armies don't kill civilians.
Actually, insurgents do hide behind civilians, all the time. But no, you can't say that Western armies never kill innocents.
Except Australians. Because we're simply the greatest at everything ever.
Bushmaster is such a suiting name <3
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
