Donate SIGN UP

'Un-friendly Fire' in Iraq

Avatar Image
Gromit | 13:32 Tue 12th Dec 2006 | News
23 Answers
I know war is a dirty business, but the inquest into Sgt Steven Roberts which concluded he was killed by 'friendly fire' was illuminating. An Iraqi was throwing stones at him and he went to shoot him, his gun jammed, and he and the Iraqi were mowed down by machine gun fire from a tank.

Is it reasonable/acceptable, even in war, to kill someone for thowing stones at you? Is it not an over-reaction? Is it not bordering on a war crime itself?

No wonder the battle for the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people (not the insurgents/Taliban) was lost long ago.
Gravatar

Answers

1 to 20 of 23rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by Gromit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Hmmm, how is the soldier aware that they are stones and not grenades? In the field, you dont get time to make a guess whether they are stones are not. Obviously after an investigation has been carried out, then it has come out that they were stones. And i disagree with your comment about the battle for the hearts and minds. This is just the media blowing things out of proportion. A lot of iraqi's are glad we are there, but you get the odd few who are hell bent on causing as much mayhem as possible. their ultimate goal is to rid the world of any non-believers to their faith. Surely your not naive enough to think that if we just pulled out, then world peace would evolve...
When it said stones how big were they, some of them hurl rocks which in themselves can kill, so why not defend yourself, or would you rather have had the soldier put down his gun an pick up a rock as well, (just to be on an equal footing and to be seen to play fair)?

These people do not play fair, they are not issued with cards with the rules of engagement written on them, as are our soliders. What would you have done?

It is all very well someone sitting down at their computer making comments about a situation that took place in a war zone two thousand or more miles away.
Sgt Roberts, 33, from Shipley, West Yorkshire, with the 2nd Royal Tank Regiment, had been ordered to give his enhanced body armour to another soldier because of a shortage of equipment, when he was hit by "friendly fire" during disturbances at Al Zubayr near Basra. The Iraqi, Zahir Zabti Zaher, was repeatedly shot in the same incident while allegedly throwing stones at the troops. Iraqi human rights activists claimed that he had been "executed" by soldiers enraged at the death of Sgt Roberts
...
He said Sgt Roberts was on a patrol with three Challenger II tanks when Mr Zaher began throwing stones. After signalling him to stop, Sgt Roberts, who was standing alone outside his tank, is said to have fired one shot from his pistol before it jammed. Soldiers in the tanks opened fire and the sergeant was hit by two bullets

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/legal/article 360666.ece

Doesn't sound much like a snap decision to me - sounds like somebody panicked and lost the plot!




"A lot of Iraqi's are glad we're there", yeah riiiiight.
They just love living in the middle of a civil war created by the West because half of the country is scared stiff of the puppet Govt set up by the US/UK and the other half see it as a carte blanche to persecute their neighbours. It must be great being without electric, running water, being too afraid to attend hospital with a child of the wrong Muslim group because the hospitals are controlled by militia. I'm sure the are chuffed to blazes we turned up and turned their beutiful country into a war zone, where you can't collect your dead from the morgues because you'll be killed youself . I could go on but I'm concerned about AB's bandwidth...
noxlumos, don't you worry yourself unduly about AB's bandwidth, I am sure it will cope with yet more of your drivlel as it has done in the past.

I do agree we should not be out there in the first place, what I do take exception to is your constant accusations that it is somehow all the West's fault.

Let's get things into a more all-round true perspective.

1/ It was not all sunshine for some Iraqis when Sadam ruled. Thousands were slaughted, perhaps even more than we will ever know.

2/ Do you think that it would be any better if there was not a Puppet Goverment (your words for a democratically elected goverment) in Power?

3/ Everyday more Iraqis (men, women & children) are now being killed, by their own people, than those killed by the troops, and that is a fact.
Question Author
anotheoldgit - "These people do not play fair" ???

3 tanks with machine guns against man throwing stones - who exactly are not playing fair.

MrBen5 - Sgt Roberts was a few feet away.He could see they were stones. Grenades explode, stones don't and the army is trained to spot the difference. The machine gun on the tank was used at 20ft and at that short distance is not accurate. At the inquest, the patrol commander who was on another tank said "From where I was, I didn't think it was appropriate because it's quite an escalation to open fire with a machinegun'.
AOG. Noxy has written some very astute posts on this website. Its your garbage that is clogging up the bandwidth. Do you read any thing at all. Almost every Iraqi interviewed on brad sheet newspapaers has said 1) they want rid of your troops 2) life was better under saddam. You are a fool to think that any Iraqi would like foreign troops on their soil.
Question Author
Thanks moxlumos for the link. It is interesting to compare that account reported in the Independent with the sanitised version at the inquest

Independent - April 2006
Mr Zaher began throwing stones. After signalling him to stop, Sgt Roberts, who was standing alone outside his tank, is said to have fired one shot from his pistol before it jammed. Soldiers in the tanks opened fire and the sergeant was hit by two bullets.

Mr Zaher was also shot and "severely wounded" in the arm, said Lord Goldsmith. "As soldiers dismounted from their tanks to give assistance to Sgt Roberts, Mr Zaher got up holding a rock and started towards him again.

"One soldier, who had gone to assist Sgt Roberts, said he feared that Mr Zaher was about to attack again so he fired his pistol several times and Mr Zaher again fell to the floor.
"According to some soldiers, despite his injuries, Mr Zaher again got up to advance on Sgt Roberts holding a rock. The soldier who was attending Sgt Roberts perceived that Mr Zaher still posed a threat and directed another soldier to shoot Mr Zaher. On this occasion he did not get up."

Compare with the reporting from the Inquest

Capt Fielder said that Sgt Roberts had dismounted from his tank to check vehicles for weapons when the stones were thrown.
The officer saw him drop to one knee, presumably to change weapons, when the third tank in the group opened fire with its 7.62mm coaxial mounted machinegun.
He said: "From where I was, I didn't think it was appropriate because it's quite an escalation to open fire with a machinegun when I have got one of my soldiers close to the person you are shooting at."
He said he then saw both Sgt Roberts and the Iraqi fall.
hmmm, always some pathetic do-gooders around who say that another cause of action could have been taken. With the people in that part of the world, they are bred to hate anything western. They have no morals and no respect. Their only aim is to eradicate anything that doesnt fit in with their belief. You cant wait around to see if what they are throwing are stones.
And always some idiot who's seen too many Schwarzenegger films and thinks problems are solved by going in all guns blazing.

It's the sort of thinking that kept Northern Ireland ablaze all those years.

Hard man approach didn't work there and it won't work here.

Sadly it seems that if history teaches us anything it's that people don't learn from history
matt66 no I do not read brad sheet newspapaers, I don't know what they are, if you mean broad sheet newspapers then yes I do.

But I am also intelligent enough to know that It is only a live Iraqi that can be interviewed, not all those thousands, that Sadam killed, but even when they were alive, they would never have dared be interviewed by the press.

You also stated that I am a fool to think any iraqi would like foreign troops on their soil. Pardon me but aren't the present iraqi governing powers iraqis? And do they not want us to remain on Iraqi soil until they can take over.

So before you get back into bed with Noxy, stop using the words garbage and fool, unless you are referring to yourself of course. Perhaps you could start by gaining the correct information, if you wish to join in with intelligent grown-up people, who happen to be in possession of the correct inside knowledge and not those drivel answers that have been brain washed into you.
Get real gromit, Grenades explode stones don't. Perhaps not exactly stones (but give them time) but rocks certainly do, have you not seen those road-side bombs made to look like rocks? But then perhaps not.
Question Author
AOG
The patrol had made a roadblock at a place of their choosing, they wouldof course have picked the safest place and the best to defend. There was no question of the Iraqi man stopping the tanks at a place of his choosing where there was a roadside 'rock' to explode, least of all throwing 'a bomb made to look like a rock'. It was a silly protest for which he paid with his life.

Not sure what the point of the Inquest is though. It has already been decided that no one is to prosecuted for the two deaths. These things happen in war, best swept under the carpet, I suppose. Might just be to shut up the poor widow.

I confess I have never seen an exploding rock.
Hmmm, seems like a few on here have been brainwashed. Have any of you actually been to iraq , iran or afghanistan? The place is like a sess pit. Unfortunately a lot of them are not educated enough to know any different. As for the iraqi's liking us, loads of them love the english, but mainly football icons, like beckham and owen. A lot of them know nothing other than what is drummed into their head. Beleve me gromit, you dont want to see an exploding rock. They dont fight to the geneva convention and almost all hide behind women and children. All the cells are under schools and mosques. Read up on on it properly and you will understand what the troops out there are up against...
Question Author
Forgive me for being niave, brainwashed and a pathetic do-gooder. But I believe the UK forces:
Would not have set up a road block in an unsecured place
Would not have approached the Iraqi unless they believed he was unarmed
Would have fired warning (pistol) shots to stop the man throwing stones which Steven Roberts was attempting to do.

MrBen5 you appear to be suggesting that you do not believe our forces would have behaved in this professional manner.

My verdict: Someone panicked (Glad that I have never been in Iraq, Iran Afghan, Gaza, Lebanon...)

Ok, your forgiven Gromit...
Question Author
The people have spoken, the prevailing view would seem to be it is OK to kill a civilian for throwing stones in a warzone.
Yeah, totally agree, the prevailing view would be that it is ok for a soldier to defend himself against an attack from a terrorist.
I think when people are handed guns they become trigger happy and instead of thinking with their heads would rather just pull the trigger and remove the problem altogether.
Its a fact of war, there's little or no accountability in a warzone so soldiers (from any side) take the easy (cowardly) way because they know they can get away with it.
When you invade and occupy someone's country, the people who are native to that country and arm against your occupation are not necessarily terrorists MrBen, and if you think that was a democratic election you have a very strange idea of democracy btw.

1 to 20 of 23rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

'Un-friendly Fire' in Iraq

Answer Question >>