Frontline troops 'had only five bullets to defend themselves'

adrates.telegraph.co.uk.../news/2003/06/18/wirq218.xml

Can anyone confirm this?

There was a similar article in the Daily Mail today.
However it only said ONE person had 5 bullets, not a whole lot.

edit: Maybe more will come to light tomorrow

[Edited on 25-2-2004 by browha]

I can't confirm it, but I do remember seeing something on CNN or MSNBC, where they were interviewing UK troops and this one guy was saying that the equipment sucked etc etc

Originally posted by browha
There was a similar article in the Daily Mail today.
However it only said ONE person had 5 bullets, not a whole lot.


I hope you paid attention to the part where it says "troops," and not "a soldier."

I know.
I said the article said that one soldier had a lack of bullets.

Why is it that I cannot find that article online anywhere, but I easily found this one doing a basic search.

Blame your searching skills, not the internet.
Page 37, Daily Mail, FebruarY 25th 2004.

Can you post a link? I can't seem to find the article online.

It may not be online, I'll have a look on the dailymail website, but I bought the hard newspaper...

--
Reading through it, it does say 'A British Soldier revealed last night that he and his comrades were issued with just five bullets each.'

--
Reading through it, it does say 'A British Soldier revealed last night that he and his comrades were issued with just five bullets each.'




So now you are saying that it was more than one soldier?

Yes, that is what the article says and I have got any proof against

So, that just proves that you made an earlier post without doing any research.

I saw the article, didnt read it. Just saw the title 'My five-bullet war, Soldier says he was sent into action in Iraq with virtually no ammunition'
and the caption o fthe picture, 'Widowed: Sgt Robert's wife Samantha'.
We all make mistakes, if you're gonna get critical then it shows how low you are.

If this is the case then that is really, really sad.


You go as a soilder to fight and and you have nothing to fight with.....how terrible.

That is true..
also having to spend thousands of your own money to buy equipment you should have been supplied

If this turns out to be true the officer responsible should be publicly flogged and hung by his privates from the minute hand on Big Ben.

I agree...
At the very least you'd expect them to have 3-4 magazines each, but 5 bullets is outrageous...

This reminds me of when Russian troops had no weapons (guns) to fight with in WWI. A weapon without bullets is just about as bad. This was because Russia was about ready to fall to pieces. I would sure hope the same couldn't be said about the UK. It must have been from lowsy planning.

Originally posted by Mandalorianwarrior
This reminds me of when Russian troops had no weapons (guns) to fight with in WWI. A weapon without bullets is just about as bad. This was because Russia was about ready to fall to pieces. I would sure hope the same couldn't be said about the UK. It must have been from lowsy planning.

Yeah, I heard they would give every second soldier a gun and the other one just bullets and told him to take the other guy's gun when he was killed or to take a dead ennemy's gun

That was in Enemy at the Gates :X
it may have been true, not sure