Two men armed with a Rocket Propelled Grenade (RPG) launcher and machine-gun have fired on members of the Overwatch Battle Group – West (OBG(W)) during a patrol in Dhi Qar Province.
No Australian soldiers were wounded in the weekend attack.
Anti-Iraqi Forces gunmen fired an RPG round which hit the bar-armour of an Australian Light Armoured Vehicle (ASLAV). The grenade did not detonate and rounds from the machine gun failed to damage the Australian vehicles.
Australian soldiers returned fire with their rifles and the ASLAV responded with its 25mm main armament. The attackers fled the scene.
OBG(W) Commanding Officer, Lieutenant Colonel Jake Elwood said his soldiers reacted well during the brief engagement.
Enhancements to the ASLAV – notably the bar armour, spall liners and curtains, and the Remote Weapon Station (RWS) has increased the firepower and crew survivability of the Australian Army vehicle. These additional safety provisions were part of a rapid acquisition program that the Army undertook in 2004-05.
The spall liner provides additional safety against projectiles and spall that may penetrate the baseline armour. The horizontal hardened-metal of the bar-armour is also designed to trap an RPG round and detonate its warhead at a stand-off distance allowing the explosive energy to dissipate or deflecting the shaped charge from detonating directly against the vehicle’s armour plate.
“In addition to the ASLAV’s bar armour, what saved lives today is the excellent training that Australian soldiers receive. When they came under fire they immediately took cover, returned fire, and pursued the insurgents forcing them to flee,” LTCOL Elwood said.
The attack occurred approximately 50 km north of Camp Terendak during a routine patrol in Dhi Qar Province. The OBG(W) patrol was visiting a town to meet with local leaders and discuss potential future community support projects.
“This incident is another reminder that Iraq remains a dangerous place and that our troops are facing very real threats every day. The OBG(W) will continue their important task supporting the Iraqi Security Forces and working to help the Iraqi people in Dhi Qar and Al Muthanna Provinces improve their lives,” he said.
From Defence Media
Facebook
Twitter
“No Australian soldiers were wounded in the weekend attack”
Thank Christ for that. The ASLAV has saved a few more lives. Dumb question – why do the Yanks persist in using thin-skinned vehicles (Hummers) in the hostile environment in Iraq?
They’re not persisting. In fact, they are spending several billion dollars on armour upgrades to the Hummer and the purchasing of thousands of MRAP vehicles to minimise IED related battle casualties.
http://www.defensereview.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=995
http://www.defensetech.org/archives/003669.html
http://www.defensetech.org/archives/003606.html
CB
This puts it pretty clearly (from the first of your recommended sites) –
“Let’s take a look:
Urban warfare: Humvee
Desert Warfare: Humvee
Jungle warfare: Humvee
Patrolling bomb laden roads: Humvee
Years since it became obvious that unarmored humvee is inadequate: 4
Years since it became obvious that the armored humvee is inadequate: 3
It is good to know our military is flexible and responsive….
By the time the Cougars get to the field we will have been out of Iraq for a year……
Of course that was their excuse for not buying the Cougars 4 years ago.
Such an excuse, we are too slow and stupid to get it done fast, so lets not do it….”
This reminds me so much of their total incompetence in Vietnam. You can’t tell them anything. Why has it taken 4 years to recognise a simple and stark situation – that their equipment is inadequate….?
They may be great “technosoldiers”, and they may have hi-tech air resources, but when it comes to basic common sense and respecting their fighting soldiers, they’re all piss and wind.
As an ex-VC said to me in March 2006 – “You Australians were good soldiers – if you had been fighting on our side, we’d have had the Americans out of here 10 years before we did”.
I don’t agree with his politics, but his assessment of the American military was right on the button.
Urban warfare: Humvee
Desert Warfare: Humvee
Jungle warfare: Humvee
Patrolling bomb laden roads: Humvee
Did the jeep and Landover have some now lost magic armour when they performed those tasks?.
In your Dumb question, 1735099.
“why do the Yanks persist in using thin-skinned vehicles (Hummers) in the hostile environment in Iraq?”
CB showed they aren’t persisting.
Another one of your miss informed talking points demolished.
“As an ex-VC said to me in March 2006 – “You Australians were good soldiers – if you had been fighting on our side, we’d have had the Americans out of here 10 years before we did”.
I don’t agree with his politics, but his assessment of the American military was right on the button.”–1735099
Sharing an anti-American moment with a VC.
Notice your friend didn’t say the Australians were good enough to kick out the VC.
As an ex-VC said to me in March 2006 – “You Australians were good soldiers – if you had been fighting on our side, we’d have had the Americans out of here 10 years before we did”
I can only begin to imagine how that conversation panned out. You and the VC both putting shit on the US.
News Flash…The VC didn’t ‘have anyone out of Vietnam’ in one year or ten. The NVA/VC were flogged to death and forced to the Paris Peace Talks (1972 – 1973) where everyone eventually agreed to declare a truce and go home.
.
They may be great “technosoldiers”, and they may have hi-tech air resources, but when it comes to…… but when they set out to do something they are formidable…When peace talks resumed in Paris on January 8, 1973, an accord was reached swiftly!
Communists being communists of course had no intention of giving up on the invasion and with USSR and Chinese support in the millions and millions of dollars plus hundreds of thousands of troop and advisors; invaded in 1975 and defeated the South Vietnamese. The Democrat controlled house refused to give aid to the Viets and the rest is history.
Nobody won the ‘American War’ and the Communists won the invasion
If the US were defeated, it was by their own media, not the Communists.
Gary
One post will suffice –
“Another one of your miss informed talking points demolished.”
It took four years of casualties before any serious action was taken. (If you check CB’s websites you’ll notice that these superior vehicles are only just being deployed.)
I’d call four years “persisting”. What would you call it?
“Did the jeep and Landover have some now lost magic armour when they performed those tasks”?.
Landovers (sic) are not used in the same way as Humvees. With minor exceptions, I don’t think Australians have used Jeeps operationally since WW2.
“Sharing an anti-American moment with a VC.”
Hardly an anti-American moment – rather a comment from an old soldier who was in a very good position to judge. My “friend” did acknowledge that Phouc Tuy was relatively secure by 1970.
Incidentally, the welcome I received on my return journey to Vietnam in 2006 from this ex-VC and other people who remembered the war was in stark contrast to my reception here on RTA in 1970.
In the bitter 1975 federal election, my father and I went to vote at a polling booth in Newmarket in Brisbane. My dad was never backward in coming forward, and took with him to his grave an enormous burden of anger about my service in Vietnam as a Nasho.
When an over-enthusiastic Liberal staffer pushed a how-to-vote card under my nose, my dad said “You’re wasting your time mate – he’s a Vietnam Veteran and won’t be voting for your lot”.
The response from this bloke was –
“Vietnam wasn’t a real war, and you weren’t fighting for me over there.”
This was an interesting comment from someone who probably voted for the government that sent me there. After thirty-five years there’s still a lot of it about.
Kev
“I can only begin to imagine how that conversation panned out. You and the VC both putting shit on the US.”
We agreed on a few things – mutual respect, sorrow for the victims of the war, and hope for the future. That reference I quoted to the Americans was the only one in the whole conversation.
“Nobody won the ‘American War’ and the Communists won the invasion.”
I have no problem with the first part of this statement. However, to label the NLF and VC simply as “Communists” is only part of the story. The military doctrine was based on Soviet theory, but the characteristics of this force were totally and completely Vietnamese. There was a strong component of Nationalism – they had been fighting foreign invasion since 1859 when the French arrived. In 1944, the Japanese overthrew the Vichy French administration and began to encourage nationalism. They granted Vietnam nominal independence.
Emperor Bao Dai declared independence within the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere on March 11, 1945 and the Japanese army transferred power to the Viet Minh.
On September 2, 1945, Hồ Chí Minh declared independence from France, in what became known as the August Revolution. U.S. Army officers stood beside him on the podium. In a speech in front of an enthusiastic crowd in Hanoi, Ho cited the U.S. Declaration of Independence.(Demma. “The U.S. Army in Vietnam.” American Military History.)
Nor have the Vietnamese held on to collectivism since. It failed as a doctrine in 1986 and was replaced by Doi Moi which (amongst other things) adopted outward orientated policies in external economic relations. Exchange rates and interest rates were allowed to respond to the market There was also a Reliance on the private sector as an engine of economic growth. (Murray 1997:24-25).
The concepts of “won” and “lost”; of “Communist” and “Capitalist” are suspect in this forty-year old discussion. The division is between those who survived and those who didn’t.
You and I are fortunate to belong to the first group, so we can continue to argue.
* These can’t – South Vietnamese – 250,000 dead, 1,170,000 wounded; Americans – 58,209 dead, 2,000 missing, 1,170,000 wounded; South Korea- 4,900 dead, 11,000 wounded; Australia – 507 dead, 2,400 wounded, 4 missing; New Zealand- 37 dead, 187 wounded; North Vietnam and NLF dead and missing – 1,100,000; People’s Republic of China – 1,446 dead, 4,200 wounded, Vietnamese civilian dead – 2,000,000–5,100,000* Cambodian civilian dead – 700,000; * Laotian civilian dead – 50,000*
* These figures are approximations.
What we need to focus on now is reconciliation.
“Dumb question – why do the Yanks persist in using thin-skinned vehicles (Hummers) in the hostile environment in Iraq?”
You are right, it is a dumb question. you can’t gear up production lines to churn out 10s of thousands of armoured vehicles that easily anymore.
In a full scale WW2 style environment its possible, but these days it takes longer because of the amount of testing, haggling with congress and the makers etc involved. to put it another way, with the current systems in place in the USA, the Sherman tank would have been consided inadequate for the task in WW2.
It’s off topic, but for a first hand account of the madness the Junta in Burma is inflicting on its people, go to –
http://ko-htike.blogspot.com/?source=cmailer
This has to be blogging at its courageous best. As of now, there’s no other reporting possible.
In my mind, your roll call of the dead is just another list of communist based tragedies as they struggled to dominate the world. You may as well ad the million in the USSR and China – same war!
There’s no mileage stating the US stood by Ho Chi Minh in the 40s – all did what they had to do to defeat the Japanese first and then counter the communists later. Even during WW2 the communist problem was writ large. The Brits/Aussies in Malaya had the same problems – use the CTs to defeat the Japs first and then get rid of them.
I have no time for Ho as a nationalist as the statement is tainted with his being a founding member of the French Communist Party; his time in Russia (1924) where, no doubt he was drilled in deadly doctrine of world domination; his time in China where he established the Indochinese Communist Party and later acting as advisor for the Chinese -all points to him being an international communist.
The slaughter and incarceration that followed the downfall of South Vietnam could hardly have been the end-plan of a nationalist movement (and yes I know he was dead by then) but he started the deadly ball rolling. The fall was occasioned by an invasion that the South defended against – hardly nationalist
I too have been back to Vietnam this century and acknowledge they are moving forward but as a young mate who works there says; They (the communists) went into what expats call a lockdown from the invasion through to the mid 90s where the nationalist ideals had the people suffering until the leaders reasoned their communist ideals weren’t working. They started by letting foreign investment in but with Party presence on the boards. They eventually let investment flow free with little dogmatic impedence and therein lies their salvation.
In a word, Capitalism.
Kev
I object to the discourse of ideological fundamentalism, the language that divides us into “goodies”, (capitalists) and “baddies”, (communists). By continuing to describe recent history using these labels we are likely to repeat that history.
The security threat facing us now (called Ïslamo-Fascism by some commentators), has developed as a result of decades of cynical western policy in the Middle East, and cloaks itself in religious fundamentalism. The “roll call” as you describe it is being repeated in the Middle East.
I’ll illustrate how language influences institutional behaviour. During the last 200 years the term “disability” has held different meanings. In Victorian times, people with disabilities were seen as people deserving sympathy – charity cases. As a consequence, benevolent institutions were created. By the early 20th century, disability was seen as a medical issue, so people were classified according to their medical diagnosis and “blind” or “deaf” institutions were created. During the seventies, the “rights” discourse developed, and people with disabilities were seen as individuals with rights. The institutions were closed, and laws passed that made discrimination on the basis of disability illegal.
I use this as an illustration of how language determines human and ultimately institutional behaviour. The two-dimensional discourse – capitalism vs communism has done just that. The threats facing the “free” world now bear no relationship to the war against Fascist imperialism (WW2) or the struggle against Communist totalitarianism (the cold war).
If capitalism has been victorious, we have paid a very high price. It has morphed into rampant materialism which offends not only devout Muslims, but anyone who places value in anything other than what can be consumed or exploited.
This materialism, driven by multinational corporate activity, is slowly but surely submerging our national identity. Even something as basic as our capacity to live healthy lives is being undermined – look at the effect that the epidemic of obesity – essentially a symptom of rampant consumerism – is having on our children. Unless something changes, in another twenty years there won’t be enough healthy young men (or women) to form a viable military. Materialism is biting us on the bum.
Just so we are clear here.
Communism= Everyone starves or dies.
Capitalism and democracies= It’s considered gauche to kill the natives.
‘If capitalism has been victorious, we have paid a very high price. It has morphed into rampant materialism which offends not only devout Muslims, but anyone who places value in anything other than what can be consumed or exploited.’
Gads, wouldn’t want to offend the devout or anyone who places value in non-materialistic values, like courage, honour or integrity. Speaking of which, your internet access is clearly powered by a bicycle generator donated by the state, right? Your clean drinking water gets delivered by the state? You gain access to food via ration cards and food stamps?
I’m only being polite because this is Kev’s blog, but quite frankly, you appear to be an ill-informed misanthropist, intent on hanging on the faded glory of a past life. Do yourself, and us, a favour, retire to Cuba.
CB
A – Communism – a political theory favoring collectivism in a classless society.
B – Capitalism, – an economic system based on private ownership of capital.
C – Democracy – the doctrine that the numerical majority of an organized group can make decisions binding on the whole group.
A and C are not mutually exclusive, nor are B and C.
Sorry, but I can’t extract a meaning from Para 2.
Misanthropist – Correct stylistic usage is misanthrope – someone who dislikes people in general. (Sorry about the correction – as an ex-teacher I can’t help it).
I get on with most people, even those who don’t agree with me. Be patient – it comes with maturity.
“Intent on hanging on the faded glory of a past life”- Eleven months as a baggy-arse in SVN – “faded glory” – you’ve got to be kidding!
Might visit Cuba on my way back from the USA next year – it’s becoming popular as a destination. I’d like to spend some time on the Camagüey archipelago, and visit Cayo Coco and Cayo Guillermo, the latter a favorite haunt of Ernest Hemmingway who loved the fishing there.