SF takes out 7 with knife in Afganistan

Mystery solved!

s-l1000.jpg
 
Danke42 said:
It's more likely some of those dudes were a couple hills away with a designator. Still hairy as heck to pull off.
Click to expand...
It could well have been, but I feel like they (Jane's) had reasons why they didn't think it had been from distance, something to do with it being a trestle tower, so no large targets to lase. In any case it was a story pieced together from press reports and speculation. As far as I know the USAF took full credit for the airstrike. Also, I feel like at the time there was rampant speculation on which airstrikes were F117, but I'll be honest, I'm going off memory and I was not very old then.
 
gadgetgeek said:
I think there is a reason why in Blackhawk Down the "Delta" guys are just inhuman unstoppable killing machines. Everyone watches movies.
Click to expand...

BHD was quite accurate in it's depictions and of course two Delta guys were overrun and killed by "skinnies" so I didn't personally come away with anything but the knowledge they are some of the very best we have and capable of acts of heroism (the Delta guys were dropped in knowing they'd have no backup and no one coming to get them, but were determined to save the pilots) few will measure up to. I spoke at length with member who was in the thick of it from that unit and he was quite a character. He's mentioned on the BHD book. Not super human, but if anyone can get something done that seems super human, those are the guys. Yes, after returning from a very long day and, did that gent grab something to eat, kit up, and go back to the fight per the movie. Lesser known, there were also 4 SEALs in the middle of all that. One is the Director of the UDT-SEAL Museum, Richard (Rick) Kaiser, a DevGru sniper.
 
gadget geek. No need to place a beacon on the target, stand off a long ways and "Paint" the target, which the plane acquires the painting beam and there bomb follows the beam to the target. John
 
gadgetgeek said:
It could well have been, but I feel like they (Jane's) had reasons why they didn't think it had been from distance, something to do with it being a trestle tower, so no large targets to lase. In any case it was a story pieced together from press reports and speculation. As far as I know the USAF took full credit for the airstrike. Also, I feel like at the time there was rampant speculation on which airstrikes were F117, but I'll be honest, I'm going off memory and I was not very old then.
Click to expand...
There was a lot to lase on and around that tower.
 
WillB said:
BHD was quite accurate in it's depictions and of course two Delta guys were overrun and killed by "skinnies" so I didn't personally come away with anything but the knowledge they are some of the very best we have and capable of acts of heroism (the Delta guys were dropped in knowing they'd have no backup and no one coming to get them, but were determined to save the pilots) few will measure up to. I spoke at length with member who was in the thick of it from that unit and he was quite a character. He's mentioned on the BHD book. Not super human, but if anyone can get something done that seems super human, those are the guys. Yes, after returning from a very long day and, did that gent grab something to eat, kit up, and go back to the fight per the movie. Lesser known, there were also 4 SEALs in the middle of all that. One is the Director of the UDT-SEAL Museum, Richard (Rick) Kaiser, a DevGru sniper.
Click to expand...
I think it also comes down to when you saw the movie and how much background you have going in. I only half remember the movie and was fairly young when I saw it. So the main thrust of my point is that, yes these guys are damn good, but also that the stories told are going to make them seem like the kind of guys you don't want to fight. Remember that these movies get seen around the world, and not everyone can wiki or talk to someone who knows how things really work. I seem to recall reports of various groups practicing tactics that were lifted straight from hollywood. That doesn't take anything away from how good these guys are at what they do. We can all accept now that Top Gun was a feature length recruitment ad for the USN, but that isn't seen by many as a bad thing, or demeaning to carrier pilots.

Danke42 said:
There was a lot to lase on and around that tower.
Click to expand...
My understanding what that the targeting was controversial due to its location, and the overall precision of the strike. I'll admit, that it could have been done from farther away and all that. Just that at the time, the story had secret squirrel elements as part of the "narrative". All parts of it were part of the psy-op, both to help bolster the Canadian public's view of their purpose of being involved, as well as demoralizing the op-for. I don't recall the direct order of events, and couldn't find much at first glance, but we would be talking when I was in middle school. So not the demographic anyone wanted to admit to influencing, but kids a few years older, it would have paid to make sure they thought the military was a good career choice.
 
gadgetgeek said:
I think it also comes down to when you saw the movie and how much background you have going in. I only half remember the movie and was fairly young when I saw it. So the main thrust of my point is that, yes these guys are damn good, but also that the stories told are going to make them seem like the kind of guys you don't want to fight. Remember that these movies get seen around the world, and not everyone can wiki or talk to someone who knows how things really work. I seem to recall reports of various groups practicing tactics that were lifted straight from hollywood. That doesn't take anything away from how good these guys are at what they do. We can all accept now that Top Gun was a feature length recruitment ad for the USN, but that isn't seen by many as a bad thing, or demeaning to carrier pilots.
Click to expand...

None of which changes the fact the BHD book and movie were pretty spot on to what took place, and the Delta aspect of it, well documented by various sources. Top Gun and BHD are as apples and oranges as it gets.
 
WillB said:
None of which changes the fact the BHD book and movie were pretty spot on to what took place, and the Delta aspect of it, well documented by various sources. Top Gun and BHD are as apples and oranges as it gets.
Click to expand...
I will agree to your point, 100%. I first saw Top Gun when I was 5? BHD came out when I was 16. Yes the movies could not be much farther apart in terms of accuracy, one is pure fantasy, just at mach 1.4. They were never meant to be documentaries though. Yes there some truths in BHD, but there are composite characters, narratives that had little to do with what was really going on, a killer soundtrack... You see where I'm going with this. I don't think that takes anything away from what those men did, but to say that the movie was made with no eye to how the various people would be seen in the general public (internationally) is also not quite true. There were multiple reasons to tell the story, and one of the reasons is "there is a boogieman, and he wears the triangle and dagger patch". I got no problems with that nighttime story.
 
gadgetgeek said:
I think it also comes down to when you saw the movie and how much background you have going in. I only half remember the movie and was fairly young when I saw it. So the main thrust of my point is that, yes these guys are damn good, but also that the stories told are going to make them seem like the kind of guys you don't want to fight. Remember that these movies get seen around the world, and not everyone can wiki or talk to someone who knows how things really work. I seem to recall reports of various groups practicing tactics that were lifted straight from hollywood. That doesn't take anything away from how good these guys are at what they do. We can all accept now that Top Gun was a feature length recruitment ad for the USN, but that isn't seen by many as a bad thing, or demeaning to carrier pilots.

gadgetgeek said:
I think it also comes down to when you saw the movie and how much background you have going in. I only half remember the movie and was fairly young when I saw it. So the main thrust of my point is that, yes these guys are damn good, but also that the stories told are going to make them seem like the kind of guys you don't want to fight. Remember that these movies get seen around the world, and not everyone can wiki or talk to someone who knows how things really work. I seem to recall reports of various groups practicing tactics that were lifted straight from hollywood. That doesn't take anything away from how good these guys are at what they do. We can all accept now that Top Gun was a feature length recruitment ad for the USN, but that isn't seen by many as a bad thing, or demeaning to carrier pilots.

My understanding what that the targeting was controversial due to its location, and the overall precision of the strike. I'll admit, that it could have been done from farther away and all that. Just that at the time, the story had secret squirrel elements as part of the "narrative". All parts of it were part of the psy-op, both to help bolster the Canadian public's view of their purpose of being involved, as well as demoralizing the op-for. I don't recall the direct order of events, and couldn't find much at first glance, but we would be talking when I was in middle school. So not the demographic anyone wanted to admit to influencing, but kids a few years older, it would have paid to make sure they thought the military was a good career choice.
Click to expand...

Do you have any links to the story of Canadians directing the strike? I'm a big fan of the CF of course but I can't find a thing about this in a few searches. I was out at that point but I did have friends in Bosnia at the time but they were regular infantry.
Click to expand...
 
gadgetgeek said:
I will agree to your point, 100%. I first saw Top Gun when I was 5? BHD came out when I was 16. Yes the movies could not be much farther apart in terms of accuracy, one is pure fantasy, just at mach 1.4. They were never meant to be documentaries though. Yes there some truths in BHD, but there are composite characters, narratives that had little to do with what was really going on, a killer soundtrack... You see where I'm going with this. I don't think that takes anything away from what those men did, but to say that the movie was made with no eye to how the various people would be seen in the general public (internationally) is also not quite true. There were multiple reasons to tell the story, and one of the reasons is "there is a boogieman, and he wears the triangle and dagger patch". I got no problems with that nighttime story.
Click to expand...

Actually, many of them are not composite characters, but based on specific people.
 
Yonose said:
SF could mean anything from an army ranger to a spec.activities.div. operator to a green beret and anything in between, including a SEAL, Delta, etc., but most don’t disclose operations ever or for many years.
Click to expand...

My retired gunsmith was a Vietnam era 1st Cav lrrp ranger, he and his buddies would talk tools and techniques but they never discussed specific missions. Jim was an extremely gifted gunsmith, he specialized in American SxS shotguns and Colt SAA wheelguns.


KR
 
I'd like to see this thread respectfully closed. It's ventured pretty far from knives anyway. As to the original subject, it strikes me as extraordinarily insensitive to blithely discuss the make and model knife used to kill, without much acknowledgement to the resulting trauma that soldier must have to deal with.

I know a Vietnam veteran who used a knife in combat and killed only once with it. 50 odd years later he remained really effed up over it. I can't imagine it, quite honestly, and certainly can't imagine being simply asked someday, "So, what knife didja use?"
 
TRfromMT said:
I'd like to see this thread respectfully closed. It's ventured pretty far from knives anyway. As to the original subject, it strikes me as extraordinarily insensitive to blithely discuss the make and model knife used to kill, without much acknowledgement to the resulting trauma that soldier must have to deal with.

I know a Vietnam veteran who used a knife in combat and killed only once with it. 50 odd years later he remained really effed up over it. I can't imagine it, quite honestly, and certainly can't imagine being simply asked someday, "So, what knife didja use?"
Click to expand...
Very well said, sir. :thumbsup:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top