Afghan Ops

[SuddenStop]

why not?

 

around here lately the threads seem to die faster than a fruit fly

[old dog]

VE HAF ZA RULES!

 

Unt (large butt grunt), ...

 

... you vill obey za rules!

 

The point is, we really do not want to hear your opinion.

[SuddenStop]

This is an exerpt from Verticals own story, and the "event" is already over, but the fact that location detail has been written, makes me wonder about the double standard.

Many of you know your own backyards very well, along with special names etc for landmarks, so it goes without saying that the Taliban too have this same knowledge of their backyards.

Clearly the article gives a general location and hints at landmarks and names locals use as well as identifying the place as a hotspot for road side bombs...so this pretty clearly identifies the locations they are focusing on, most taliban regardless of intelligence can figure this out. Not to mention listing all the aircraft and personel involved it gives the taliban an idea on what to expect for the next one. I suspect a Taliban who can read the next issue in the comfort of his mountain hideaway will make a few bookmark notes and try to gather up a little more firepower to contend with the next early morning sorte.

 

So....why can Vertical write this kind of story and still say they're deleting threads to protect the troops? I'm confused.

 

"The Scene

Fish Mountain, a rugged feature called a "gar" in local vernacular, south of Kandahar City, was the area of interest on this mission — a mission that required three Canadian CH-147D Chinooks flying, with two additional Chinooks serving as backup; six CH-146 Griffons; one CC-130H Hercules; and one CU-170 Heron unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) combining to insert 240 NATO and Afghan National Army (ANA) troops into a key area used by Afghan fighters to transit personnel and materials into and out of Kandahar City.

 

Fish Mountain was also a place where IED (improvised explosive device) activity had been high over the previous months, with a significant number of coalition troops being killed. The enemy in the area had been operating with the usual mix of some intimidation of residents, combined with substantial local support, adding to the complexity of the overall operation"

[Mike Reyno]

Sudden Stop,

 

The thread that was deleted was in relation to a civilian company that is flying unarmed helicopters in a war zone. The military on the other-hand is flying armed CH-146 Griffons and armed CH-147 Chinooks. Personnel are also suitably armed, unlike their friends that are flying commercial helicopters that are thumping around Afghanistan.

 

There is no double-standard whatsoever. And, the entire Afghan supplement was sanctioned by the Air Force. The only information that was released is the information that they would allow even though our team was privy to so much more. You will also notice that there were no images that would identify personnel, which again, was another requirement in order for us to visit the Air Wing in Afghanistan.

 

We are trying to play by everyone's rules. We played by the rules that were spelled out by the Air Force, and I am playing into those concerns expressed to me by civilian crews that are flying in Afghanistan right now.

 

Again, not all information that I have been privy to has been posted. I think those posting on the forums would know that I would not arbitrarily delete a post if there was not a good reason for it.

 

Mike

[SuddenStop]

Thanks for the reply Mike, you're one of a few who will take the time to explain your side instead of the select few who'd rather try and trump the poster with tirades and BS that go to a personal level.

 

I'll admit I never read everyone of splitty's links, but did browse a few, and I still don't believe anything was said in the threas to further risk the civilians over than any more than they have themselves in taking the job.

If they (civilian crews) were the ones who requested you remove the thread for their safety, I almost think that fuels Splitties cause more than ever. He was just trying to make sure that any newcomers were well aware this is not, nor ever will be a walk in the park over there, as the company employing them seems to try and portray. The fear of being shot down is very real to them. I hope the newcomers who want to jaunt over there for extra coin take that to heart.

[dashy]

Also hard to explain to the family at home what these threads are about.

[MMike]

This is all making me wish I'd actually opened the original thread. I had no interest until I say "thread deleted" in the subject.

[R22Captain]

I just dont agree is all and feel strongly against letting civilians into the military ops even if the economy pushes operators to capitalize on such opportunities.

 

Don't think the economy "pushed" them into doing this. This was being looked at for a while, and very closely. The right people were brought on board to make sure things were done right. Of the pilots I know that went, none of them felt financially squeezed to go.

 

With that said.....everyone the company and pilots is making a decent chunk of change.

[heliguy1]

Mike,

 

Rarely a poster but wanted to weigh in with support for your position. I was following this thread as there were interesting views and thoughts. But from a high level the content responsibility does in fact rest with you. The buck stops on your desk.

I don't believe you have capitulated to any outside economic leverage.

I do believe you have both a legal and moral obligation in how this site is conducted. Due diligence and perception are huge legal terms these days but more importantly, (in a worst case scenario) even a remote chance of having a family member question the information contained on a site as causal to an event is reason to err on the conservative side.

 

Despite splitpin's good intentions with the thread, you were faced with a risk management decision just as we all do in this industry. You took all the information available to you, assessed your position and potential outcomes, made a firm decision and then stood by it under pressure. Just as a true professional in this industry would. I for one respect your decision, perhaps even you are leading by example?

[Gary Watson]

Don't think the economy "pushed" them into doing this. This was being looked at for a while, and very closely. The right people were brought on board to make sure things were done right. Of the pilots I know that went, none of them felt financially squeezed to go.

 

With that said.....everyone the company and pilots is making a decent chunk of change.

 

There has never been a conflict without civilian support. Not only in the past 200 years but I am sure that Alexander had numerous civilian support companies supplying his forces.