It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by bluemirage5
If the Seals on this helicopter incident had nothing to do with the Pakistani incident then why would officials even mention it? I say the two are VERY much related.
Families among these proud men are already asking questions; another Tillman incident on the horizon but on a much grander scale? Highly probable.....VERY probable. We have'nt heard the last of this yet by a long shot.
Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by randyvs
That’s quite a few assumptions you have made about me, none are true other than that I do expect vast amounts of genuine evidence before I will accept an accusation such as “The SEALS did not kill OBL”. But so should everyone otherwise you would be living in a massive cess pool of ignorance.
But keeping on topic, do you have any views regarding this helicopter crash
Originally posted by the4thhorseman
I was thinking about this and I have some questions maybe someone here can clear them up for me.
1. Since when does a Seal team fly any missions during the day. I though all missions were done under the cover of darkness.
2. Why would the seals be using a Chinook as mode of transport in a mission.
3. Why Seal Team six. I heard that another unit was ready to go and was denied it was either a Ranger unit or another Marine unit altogether.
4. An RPG....I thought those things had a hard enough time hitting a stationary target. Plus I doubt a RPG has the take down power.
Just some questions that DO NOT add up. I smell a snake and its time to strike its head.
1. Since when does a Seal team fly any missions during the day. I though all missions were done under the cover of darkness.
2. Why would the seals be using a Chinook as mode of transport in a mission.
3. Why Seal Team six. I heard that another unit was ready to go and was denied it was either a Ranger unit or another Marine unit altogether.
4. An RPG....I thought those things had a hard enough time hitting a stationary target. Plus I doubt a RPG has the take down power
Originally posted by the4thhorseman
I was thinking about this and I have some questions maybe someone here can clear them up for me.
1. Since when does a Seal team fly any missions during the day. I though all missions were done under the cover of darkness.
2. Why would the seals be using a Chinook as mode of transport in a mission.
3. Why Seal Team six. I heard that another unit was ready to go and was denied it was either a Ranger unit or another Marine unit altogether.
4. An RPG....I thought those things had a hard enough time hitting a stationary target. Plus I doubt a RPG has the take down power.
Just some questions that DO NOT add up. I smell a snake and its time to strike its head.
Originally posted by the4thhorseman
@othersideofthecoin and @macman
Thank you both, for your answers. So it is logical that these things can happen logistically speaking but illogical that they did logistically speaking.
Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
Originally posted by the4thhorseman
@othersideofthecoin and @macman
Thank you both, for your answers. So it is logical that these things can happen logistically speaking but illogical that they did logistically speaking.
Emmmm does that make sense?
Could you expand on that.
**I thought the same exact thing!Knowing the route to be flown and time?They were tipped off makes sense.Still an RPG? Still having a problem with that though.
Originally posted by ANOMALY502
My wife looked at me right after hearing about this, and said what is the chances that the taliban just happened to randomly pick this helicopter to shoot down. I think they definitley got a heads up from someone...But from who, is the question..
Originally posted by ANOMALY502
My wife looked at me right after hearing about this, and said what is the chances that the taliban just happened to randomly pick this helicopter to shoot down. I think they definitley got a heads up from someone...But from who, is the question..
Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by the4thhorseman
It is logical that a helicopter could be shot down.
Originally posted by the4thhorseman
@othersideofthecoin and @macman
Thank you both, for your answers. So it is logical that these things can happen logistically speaking but illogical that they did logistically speaking.
Special operations sources also told The Washington Times that it would have been better to send two helicopters instead of one to reduce risks. “The SEALs do seem to like stuffing a lot of valuable guys in one [helicopter],” said a second special operations officer who also served in Afghanistan. “There may have been an operational reason not to spread them out over two, [but] I just don’t know what that would be.”
They also questioned the type of aircraft dispatched for the mission. The NATO command in Kabul identified the downed helicopter as a Boeing CH-47 Chinook, not the modified version, the MH-47. The MH-47 Chinook is configured for nighttime missions by the 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment, based at Fort Campbell, Ky.
The Army Times said the Chinook was piloted by a regular Army crew, not aviators from the specially trained 160th. “This was a regular Army crew and bird, so the crew would have less experience, training and countermeasures compared to a 160th,” the second special operations source told The Times.