View Full Version : Friendy Fire
I am not gonna bang on to much as I am not the world greatest expert on wars,But who came up with the term "FRIENDY FIRE " I am sure that the family's or these brave soldiers would not approve of this term as there is nothing friendly about about loosing a member of their family .Its just annoys me when this term is used in the news [evil]
Fair comment, any ideas what it should be called instead though?
I have been trying to think of a alternative but the only one that springs to mind but best not say as it involves BAD words
Yoda the flump
18-Feb-10, 22:20
As the saying used to go:
'When the Germans flew over, we ducked.
When the RAF flew over, the Germans ducked.
When the Americans flew over, we all ducked.'
Ahhhhhhhhhhhh these poor Yanks/ what would we do without them!!
Ahhhhhhhhhhhh these poor Yanks/ what would we do without them!!
Well in the first three weeks of the Iraq war they killed more British soldiers than the Iraqis did.
Long time no see BTW, wasn't it soc.culture.scotland we met once before?
We make mistakes too:
Even before the British state came into existence, the English in particular were making deadly gaffes. In 1471, during the War of the Roses, the Lancastrian division under the command of the Earl of Warwick - out of position in the poor light and mist of early dawn in Barnet, Hertfordshire - fired at a division led by the Earl of Somerset, a division that was similarly on the Red Rose side, inflicting severe casualties.
During the Napoleonic wars, as a consequence of the Prince Regent having changed the British Light Dragoons’ headdress to a broad-topped model that resembled the French light cavalry shako, the Light Dragoons were fired upon by their own side at the 1815 Battle of Waterloo.
Much worse was to come in the Second World War. Indeed, the very first planes to be shot down by Spitfires in that conflict were two Hawker Hurricanes, mistaken for Messerschmitt 109s.
In 1939 the submarine HMS Triton sank fellow Royal Navy submarine HMS Oxley, mistaking it for a U-boat.
In 1941, HMS Sheffield, misidentified as the Bismarck, was torpedoed by Fleet Air Arm.
The following year, the Polish submarine ORP Jastrzab was sunk by HMS St Albans and HMS Seagull.
In 1944 a British flotilla was attacked by RAF Hawker Typhoons near Le Havre, and one, HMS Salamander, incurred such damage that it had to be scuppered.
Let us also not forget the most ghastly incident of friendly fire of the Second World War, when on 3 May 1945, only a day before the German army capitulated, the RAF bombed three ships moored in Lübeck Harbour, which contained 7,000 French Jews and Russian and Polish PoWs.
Many of those lucky enough to escape to dry land were murdered by the SS, and only 350 victims of RAF incompetence made it home alive.
We make mistakes too:
Yes, we accidentally sank the entire French fleet in 1940.
Oh and we shot down Amy Johnston too.
Yes, we accidentally sank the entire French fleet in 1940.
So the Germans did not use them against us - or is this something else you did not know?
So the Germans did not use them against us - or is this something else you did not know?
1,300 Frenchmen died.
better them than us... anyway Fred: YAWN, I'm off, go and bore someone else...
Yes, we accidentally sank the entire French fleet in 1940.
sorry fred it is was no accident, they were casualties of war, they were given the chance to surrender.
on July 1, Churchill was finally able to get the backing of the War Cabinet to sink the ships if they would not be surrendered.
On July 3, the British surrounded the French Fleet at the port of Mers-el-Kebir right outside Oran, Algeria. Churchill's message was clear: sail to Britain, sail to the USA, or scuttle your ships in the next six hours. At first, the French refused to speak to negotiators. Two hours later, the French showed the British an order they had received from Admiral Darlan instructing them to sail the ships to the USA if the Germans broke the armistice and demanded the ships.
British Navy surrounds French Fleet
Meanwhile, the British intercepted a message from the Vichy Government ordering French reinforcements to move urgently to Oran. Churchill was done playing games and ordered the attack to his commanders, "Settle everything before dark or you will have reinforcements to deal with."
An hour and a half later, the British Fleet attacked. In less than ten minutes, 1,297 French soldiers were dead and three battleships were sunk. One battleship and five destroyers managed to escape.
sorry fred it is was no accident, they were casualties of war, they were given the chance to surrender.
on July 1, Churchill was finally able to get the backing of the War Cabinet to sink the ships if they would not be surrendered.
On July 3, the British surrounded the French Fleet at the port of Mers-el-Kebir right outside Oran, Algeria. Churchill's message was clear: sail to Britain, sail to the USA, or scuttle your ships in the next six hours. At first, the French refused to speak to negotiators. Two hours later, the French showed the British an order they had received from Admiral Darlan instructing them to sail the ships to the USA if the Germans broke the armistice and demanded the ships.
British Navy surrounds French Fleet
Meanwhile, the British intercepted a message from the Vichy Government ordering French reinforcements to move urgently to Oran. Churchill was done playing games and ordered the attack to his commanders, "Settle everything before dark or you will have reinforcements to deal with."
An hour and a half later, the British Fleet attacked. In less than ten minutes, 1,297 French soldiers were dead and three battleships were sunk. One battleship and five destroyers managed to escape.
They were our allies.
They were our allies.
The Vichy French were our Allies? Thats a new one on me Fred, the things we learn on the Org wow.
Well in the first three weeks of the Iraq war they killed more British soldiers than the Iraqis did.
Long time no see BTW, wasn't it soc.culture.scotland we met once before?
Yes by gosh it was/ Lybster....east end/ top o the harbour??
Yes by gosh it was/ Lybster....east end/ top o the harbour??
That's right.
Kevin Milkins
19-Feb-10, 08:12
I am not gonna bang on to much as I am not the world greatest expert on wars,But who came up with the term "FRIENDY FIRE " I am sure that the family's or these brave soldiers would not approve of this term as there is nothing friendly about about loosing a member of their family .Its just annoys me when this term is used in the news [evil]
I suppose in modern day terms it does sound a bit daft, but I would think it came from the "keep it simple brigade" of the day.
Who goes there, friend or foe?
If one of us you were a friend and if not, you were a foe, and the enemy.
northener
19-Feb-10, 10:36
They were our allies.
Golachs' right in what he says, Fred. If the French fleet had gone under Vichy orders it would have tipped the whole naval power balance in the Med.
Ruthless? Yes.
Justified? Well, looking at the potential for large scale Allied losses if this course of action wasn't taken - yes.
Hardly a glorious moment in British naval history, but sometimes the right path isn't the one laden with honour.
Friendly fire is an expression meaning fire from one's own side or allied forces, as opposed to fire coming from enemy forces, and was a term originally adopted by the United States Military.
Friendly fire occurs when there was intent to do harm to the enemy which causes injury to one's own side.
And nor is deliberate firing on one’s own troops for disciplinary reasons classified as friendly fire as in these cases there is no intent to harm the enemy. Similarly, inadvertent harm to non-combatatants or structures, usually referred to as "collater damage" is also not considered to be friendly fire.
Many North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) militaries refer to these incidents as blue on blue, which derives from military exercises where NATO forces were identified by blue pennants, hence "blue", and Warsaw Pact forces were identified by orange pennants.
Golachs' right in what he says, Fred. If the French fleet had gone under Vichy orders it would have tipped the whole naval power balance in the Med.
Ruthless? Yes.
Justified? Well, looking at the potential for large scale Allied losses if this course of action wasn't taken - yes.
Hardly a glorious moment in British naval history, but sometimes the right path isn't the one laden with honour.
If the fleet had gone under Vichy orders, at the time they hadn't and had said they wouldn't.
I made no comment on the morality of it, I just stated what happened.
Yes, we accidentally sank the entire French fleet in 1940.
If the fleet had gone under Vichy orders, at the time they hadn't and had said they wouldn't. I just stated what happened.
You said initially that we accidently sank the entire French fleet, we did not sink them all, a Battleship and 5 Destroyers got away. And it was not accidental.
northener
19-Feb-10, 17:31
If the fleet had gone under Vichy orders, at the time they hadn't and had said they wouldn't.
Given the situation current at that time and the location of the fleet, prevarication and conflicting orders would not make for a happy outcome. There has to be a cut-off point to talking somewhere.
I made no comment on the morality of it, I just stated what happened.
Fair comment, I wasn't passing judgement upon your post, just stating that it's probably one of those 'victories' you wish you hadn't had to be involved with - if you were there.
Can't say they were not given a fair warning:
“ It is impossible for us, your comrades up to now, to allow your fine ships to fall into the power of the German enemy.
We are determined to fight on until the end, and if we win, as we think we shall, we shall never forget that France was our Ally, that our interests are the same as hers, and that our common enemy is Germany.
Should we conquer we solemnly declare that we shall restore the greatness and territory of France. For this purpose we must make sure that the best ships of the French Navy are not used against us by the common foe.
In these circumstances, His Majesty's Government have instructed me to demand that the French Fleet now at Mers el Kebir and Oran shall act in accordance with one of the following alternatives;
(a) Sail with us and continue the fight until victory against the Germans.
(b) Sail with reduced crews under our control to a British port. The reduced crews would be repatriated at the earliest moment.
If either of these courses is adopted by you we will restore your ships to France at the conclusion of the war or pay full compensation if they are damaged meanwhile.
(c) Alternatively if you feel bound to stipulate that your ships should not be used against the Germans unless they break the Armistice, then sail them with us with reduced crews to some French port in the West Indies — Martinique for instance — where they can be demilitarised to our satisfaction, or perhaps be entrusted to the United States and remain safe until the end of the war, the crews being repatriated.
If you refuse these fair offers, I must with profound regret, require you to sink your ships within 6 hours.
Finally, failing the above, I have the orders from His Majesty's Government to use whatever force may be necessary to prevent your ships from falling into German hands.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Mers-el-K%C3%A9bir
Can't say they were not given a fair warning:
...
If you refuse these fair offers, I must with profound regret, require you to sink your ships within 6 hours.
Finally, failing the above, I have the orders from His Majesty's Government to use whatever force may be necessary to prevent your ships from falling into German hands.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Mers-el-K%C3%A9bir
Bad luck for the 1,300 Frenchmen then.
Good job that 330,000 British soldiers (not on the same side) were allowed to escape from Dunkirk by Chancellor Hitler.
Bad luck for the 1,300 Frenchmen then.
Good job that 330,000 British soldiers (not on the same side) were allowed to escape from Dunkirk by Chancellor Hitler.
C'est la guerre Stavro
Good job that 330,000 British soldiers (not on the same side) were allowed to escape from Dunkirk by Chancellor Hitler.
Harmon re-examined the on-going controversy concerning Hitler's order of 24 May, halting for two days the German advance in the direction of Dunkirk. After the war some German officers claimed that they were "shocked" when they received the order to stop their tanks at the river Aa, which permitted the French to establish a defensive line on the west side of Dunkirk.
At the time, however, Panzer General Heinz Guderian visited his leading units on the approaches to Dunkirk and concluded that General Von Rundstedt had been right to order a halt and that further tank attacks across the wet land (which had been reclaimed from the sea) would have involved a useless sacrifice of some of his best troops.
In his post-war memoirs and discussions with Sir Basil Liddell Hart, Guderian tried to blame Hitler for the suspension of the advance.
From his discussions with Guderian and other German generals, Liddell Hart concluded that Hitler permitted the British Army to escape on purpose, hoping that this generous act would facilitate the conclusion of peace with Britain.
A number of years ago it became clear that the order to stop the advance of the German Panzer units had been expected for some time. General Von Rundstedt finally issued that order on 24 May which Hitler simply confirmed.
The troops were allowed to rest and local repairs were carried out on the armored vehicles. When the offensive resumed on 26 May the German priorities had shifted and the focus of the attack was Paris and the heartland of the country where a large body of French troops remained. Dunkirk was regarded as a sideshow.
German Air Force units were assigned to bombard Dunkirk, but the weather there was generally unsuitable for flying and during the nine days of the evacuation the Luftwaffe interfered with it only two-and-a-half days-27 May the afternoon of 29 May and on 1 June.
A long departed family friend who was in the D Day landings once told me the story of when they landed in Normandy and the comrade to his left was shot and killed and the comrade to his right was shot and killed. Both were shot in the back. Shot accidentally by their own men.
Any mention of "Friendly Fire" always brought a tear to his eye.
The Loafer
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.