U.S. 'friendly Fire' Pilot Found Guilty Of Dereliction Of Duty

Let me see now -- 4 Canadians dead, for a cost of $5,672 = $1,418 per soldier.
Now we know how much we as Canadians are worth. Of course, that is US curency. In Canadian dollars that would be $ 1,872.

At this rate, Walmart could buy up the entire country with what it spends for purchases for one year. So tell me - what are you going to do with your $1,800 bucks?

This angers me. Sgt. Leger's widow is OK with this verdict, but I am not.<p> The bulk of frendly fire incidents since WWII have been caused by American hotheads, and it needs to stop. 'Deriliction of Duty' my hiney. He was ordered to hold fire, and instead dropped a bomb that changed the lives of 12 friendlies and their families. Kids do not have fathers now.<p> He cited 'self defence' as his reason. I'm glad the Judge called him on that. An aircraft is more likely to be damaged by a high flying bird than by ground based gunfire at the altitude he was flying at.<p> At least he will never fly again.<p><p>---<br>"History does not repeat itself, but it does rhyme" Mark Twain <br />
"The greatest price of not participating in politics is being governed by your inferiors." Plato

Due to massive military cut backs in the 90's that pilot was flying more than would normaly be allowed. I find the loss of life due to friendly fire tragic but it was an accident and I am sure that pilot will have to live with that for the rest of his life. They may have fined the pilot that much, but the U.S. Government paid alot more. I hate to put peoples live's in dollar amounts, but hopefully it will help the families get on with their lives. And as I recall that pilot had flown four combat sorties that day, that's twice as most WW2 pilots ever saw on average. We apreciate your help in Afghanistan.

Mike

P.S. Did I mispell anythin?

The pilot has not yet apologized, and called the ruling a "farce". He doesn't seem to have much remorse. Maybe a harsher punishment would have woken him up. I hope someday he realizes what he's done.

<i>P.S. Did I mispell anythin?</i><p> So close Mike, so very close <p> It angers me, because I knew two of the men who died. I bought rounds for them on Rememberance day, a couple weeks before they shipped out to Afghanistan. We also served in the same unit, 1 PPCLI, but not at the same time.<p> Sgt Leger was known in Croatia to the locals as "King Marko" for his work to get schools rebuilt after the war. He was known to beg borrow or steal anything or anyone's help to get homes, schools and hospitals rebuilt. His wife keeps this legacy going. <p> And she's never recieved an apology from the pilots, and it took Bush 4 days to apologise to begin with. I'll stop now, before I start foaming at the mouth.<p><p>---<br>"History does not repeat itself, but it does rhyme" Mark Twain <br />
"The greatest price of not participating in politics is being governed by your inferiors." Plato

Sorry but I really fail to see this as an accident; everything I've read tells me that this was pure negligent and total disregard for innocent people. There was a similar incident involving the U.S. pilots with the Brits, I think I posted it here some time ago; the Brits were in a tank clearly marked and the U.S. pilots swooped down and fired on them. Some died, then one wounded was quoted in the press as saying he had been warned not to worry about the enemy but worry about the Americans! I'll search for the story and post it if I find it.

---
If I stand for my country today...will my country be here to stand for me tomorrow?

Here it is on vive; the link for the rest of the story doesn't seem to work anymore but you get the theme of the story;I only posted a bit here, some of the rest is on vive; just search 'cowboy on a jolly' and it wasn't me that posted the original, my apologies Susan.

"Cowboy on jolly" shot Brits

Friday, April 04 2003 @ 01:45 PM MST
Contributed by: sthompson


'The Yank opened up. He had absolutely no regard for human life. He was a cowboy out on a jolly'
Patrick Barkham meets the "friendly fire" victims

THREE wounded British soldiers described yesterday how they survived a terrifying attack by an American anti-tank aircraft that killed one of their troop and destroyed two armoured vehicles.




---
If I stand for my country today...will my country be here to stand for me tomorrow?

Lawyer Charles Gittins claims that this whole trial is "politically motivated to appease Canadians", they've raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for his defense under the pretext that he's being "unfairly singled out"....Perhaps everyone should send Mister Gittens a polite email about just what is motivating our outrage - here's his email address:

cgittins@aol.com

Check it out, this is charles gitten's response to my email questioning his client's inability to acknowledge and offer any regrets to the soldiers and families affected and his comments about things being "politically motivated to appease canadians" - apparently I was so stupid, its all a secret conspiracy drummed up by the Canadian Government and the Command Center in Saudi Arabia... oh its all clear to me now (gag). Here's his response:

I assume you are Canadian, so I take your comments from that perspective. You are entitled to your opinion and your feelings about what I said. However, you have no idea what you are talking about. The Canadians were killed by Major Schmidt because they were performing unauthorized training on a small arms range that was not properly marked as a training range, using rocket propelled munitions that were not authorized on that range. The Candians continued to fire weapons AFTER being told to "check fire." The live-fire training was not reported through the chain of command to the CAOC or the AWACS command and control aircraft. The pilots were not told about the training, a breach of procedures well established in the military. Further, there was no Canadian liaison officer in the CAOC (who might have been able to tell the CAOC what was going on -- this because we permitted the Saudi's to dictate the political makeup of the COAC staff. All of these issues are general officer failures, yet all of the generals involved have been promoted. If you don't think the case is political, you are entitled to your unenlightened view, just like some people actually believe that the moon is made of green cheese.

By the way, General Barile made some of the very points I just made in his report on the accident, yet the Canadian Government has released only the portions of his report critical of Major Schmidt. You have to wonder why the Canadian Government is protecting the failures of US command and control.

Thank you for expressing your views. You are entitled to do so. I am entitled to reject them as uninformed.

<i>The Canadians were killed by Major Schmidt because they were performing unauthorized training on a small arms range that was not properly marked as a training range,. . .</i><p> Prairie Oysters. The range was well known. Whether there was scheduled training on it or not, whether everyone had been told of the training that night, Major Schmidt was told to hold fire and leave the area. Major Schmidt fired a weapon against targets that couldn't possibly have caused his aircraft any damage, and changed a dozen soldiers lives. It's far more than politically motivated now. It's personal. Release a statement of apology to the widows, the orphans, the men who are missing eyes and limbs.<p> <i>. . .using rocket propelled munitions that were not authorized on that range.</i><p> Uhh Huhhh. How can there be an authorized weapons class for an unauthorized training range? I guess the logic on the lawyer planet must be more advanced than ours.<p> "Yes, Lt. we'd like to sign out from the armoury some RPG's, some LAWS and a TOW anti-tank missle, because me and the boys are feeling a might frustrated, and we'd like to go over in that field over there and blow something up real good. Do you have any Stingers (at $1Million a pop) in case the Taliban launch an air strike while we're out there? You wouldn't have a Railgun or BFG-9000 would you?"<p> <p>---<br>"History does not repeat itself, but it does rhyme" Mark Twain <br />
"The greatest price of not participating in politics is being governed by your inferiors." Plato

http://www.ccmep.org/2003_articles/Iraq ... ned_up.htm

There's the full article

An update on this case. Not only is he appealing the decision
http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2004/07/07/wo ... eal_040707

He is now suing the Air Force
http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2004/07/08/wo ... midt040708

What a piece of work this guy is. Its everyone elses fault except his.

This guy is unbelievable - further to his previous email I just recieved this fabulous stereotypical American rebuttal to anyone who even questions the actions of their military:

"You come from a country that has a paper army and little experience in the crucible of combat. You have no idea what you are talking about. "Hold fire" don't mean a thing when someone appears to be firing a rocket propelled munition at your flight lead. You should re-read the testimony because no one said Harry was required to hold fire in the face of the threat he observed. Indeed, even the Canadian apologist, General Sargeant conceded that Harry acted lawfully when he observed a rocket he believed was fired at Major Umbach. You are not required to be hit by the bullet before you are privileged to apply self-defense -- that's the law, not your twisted formulation of self-defense.

I would not expect someone from Canada to understand combat rules; few Canadians have actually served in the military; fewer have actually engaged in combat; far fewer have actually seen shots fired in anger. We in the US will continue to carry the load and do the fighting for freedom because we can and because it is the right thing to do. Don't expect perfect judgment though; you cant give pilots speed and expect that, particularly where a bunch of soldiers are shooting off unuathorized rocket munitions at night in a combat environment without telling anybody about it.

After you have served in combat; or been a police officer and had somone shoot at you, please re-engage. Those who have never been shot at, have no business judging those who have."

Believe me when I say I know what you are going through. I have lost very close friends in combat, I myself have been wounded in combat and playing devils advocate can say that whether you are a "fly boy" or a "ground pounder"' as I was in the U.S. Marines, you are in constant fear of your life. Their were times when I couldn't take a crap for days due to varied situations!

There was obvious failures in the command, and failures of communication. As far as calling U.S. troops abunch of "cowboys" and "hot heads" is degrading and displays a lack of knowledge of combat situations. And I share your disdain for "lawyers" but I do find myself agreeing with what he said concerning what it feels like to be in combat or getting shot at, it changes your point of view, and an "insight" on whats going on inside a persons head who is going through those situatios ( I dislike "officers" as well:)). And we are taking the brunt of combat situations in Iraq, Afghanistan. NATO etc. I am not trying to insult anyone here but that is what the situation is. The fact is that that Brits are not flying thousands of sorties as we are, nor are Canadian forces. I am not sure of how many "cap" flights we are doing a day but I am sure they are in the hundreds a week by over worked pilots in very strenuous conditions.

I think the "friendly fire" incident reflects is that more traing is required in tactics, comand, control, and communications, with our allies. And a sharing of the load.

I might also like to make a comment concerning the adversarial anti- American attitudes that I have seen on this web site that in my opinion does nothing to solve problems, it only creates divisions among us. Although I have said many things from a point of anger, as you are all aware, I have also tried to see your point of view. Unfortunately it seems to me that your minds are closed. Time and time again you take every opportunity to degrade, humiliate your cousins that you "don't like very much". Remember that Canada also has a proud "cowboy" tradition as well.

Mike