v064lnev@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Zerxes Bhagalia) (11/19/90)
From: v064lnev@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Zerxes Bhagalia) There has been much talk lately of a resupply mission for the US embassy in Kuwait. From what I hear, it would likely involve one or two totally unarmed helicopters, filled only with supplies, which would fly over the Kuwaiti border to the US embassy. It is anticipated, by many however, that if such a helicopter resupply mission were attempted, the Iraqi military forces currently occupying Kuwait, would try their _utmost_ to _destroy_ the units. If such a mission was put into action. My question is this: Who chooses who to operate the helicopters on such a seemingly suicidal mission? And on what basis is the selection made? If selected, are the personel given the option to reject the mission? Would selection be totally voluntary? Thanks, Zerxes
sysmgr@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU (Doug Mohney) (11/20/90)
From: sysmgr@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU (Doug Mohney) In article <1990Nov19.001338.8426@cbnews.att.com>, v064lnev@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Zerxes Bhagalia) writes: >There has been much talk lately of a resupply mission for the US embassy >in Kuwait. From what I hear, it would likely involve one or two totally >unarmed helicopters, filled only with supplies, which would fly over the >Kuwaiti border to the US embassy. > >It is anticipated, by many however, that if such a helicopter resupply >mission were attempted, the Iraqi military forces currently occupying >Kuwait, would try their _utmost_ to _destroy_ the units. > >If such a mission was put into action. >My question is this: Who chooses who to operate the helicopters on such > a seemingly suicidal mission? And on what basis > is the selection made? If selected, are the > personel given the option to reject the mission? > Would selection be totally voluntary? Depends. If you do it as a public event in broad daylight, I think they'd ask for volunteers. If they do resupply at night, with an MH-60 Nighthawk (?) or MH-47 (?), you pick some of the best guys you have to do NOE flying, and make the decision to fly them in, but not out. An audacious act, perhaps... :-) Or, if you are the sneaky type, you purchase an Mil-8 chopper (currently available at cut-rate prices from various Eastern European countries), fit in some drop tanks, paint it in Iraqi colors, and brashly resupply the embassy in broad daylight. Just get out of town before someone figures out what is going on....
olorin@wam.umd.edu (11/22/90)
From: olorin@wam.umd.edu () In article <1990Nov19.001338.8426@cbnews.att.com> v064lnev@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Zerxes Bhagalia) writes: >There has been much talk lately of a resupply mission for the US embassy >in Kuwait. From what I hear, it would likely involve one or two totally >unarmed helicopters, filled only with supplies, which would fly over the >Kuwaiti border to the US embassy. >It is anticipated, by many however, that if such a helicopter resupply >mission were attempted, the Iraqi military forces currently occupying >Kuwait, would try their _utmost_ to _destroy_ the units. >If such a mission was put into action. >My question is this: Who chooses who to operate the helicopters on such > a seemingly suicidal mission? And on what basis > is the selection made? If selected, are the > personel given the option to reject the mission? > Would selection be totally voluntary? I would think that the pilots would be volunteers, both for the practical reason that you would want them to be your best people doing their best, and for the political reason that starting a war over the bodies of impressed pilots would not look good. You'd be surprised what you can get people to volunteer for; there's an excellent book by James Leasor called _Green Beach_ that recounts a secret mission to Normandy in WWII. Seems the Allies wanted information on German radar units in France, but the only people that knew enough about German radar to be useful also knew too much about Allied radar to be captured. So they sent their expert off on the Dieppe raid with a squad of ten bodyguards, with orders to shoot him rather than allow him to be captured. And yes, he volunteered in full knowledge of that. Xerxes does bring up a question I've wondered about for a while. Under military law, are there any grounds on which an order can be refused because of its suicidal (or stupid) nature? Is there any point at which a soldier can say, "I'm not going to get myself and my men killed for no reason?" Clearly, an officer can order you to do suicidally dangerous things ("you are going to cross that nice open field of fire and take out that machine gun") but can he, for example, order you on a kamikaze mission? Or do you just refuse orders and hope you can convince the court-martial that you were acting reasonably? This is actually not really a sci.military question, but there is no soc.military... Laura Burchard
fred (Fred Brooks) (11/26/90)
From: uunet!sma2!fred (Fred Brooks) Why have a manned flight. If all you want is to drop supplies a remote controlled helo or drone is the way to go. We have many devices that can be guided over the embassy for a drop of goods. Some I would guess have stealth features -- Defend your 2nd amendment rights. Fred Brooks Portland Oregon Life is too too short to live in California
bjohnson@e40-008-7.MIT.EDU (Brett W Johnson) (11/27/90)
From: bjohnson@e40-008-7.MIT.EDU (Brett W Johnson) In article <1990Nov21.223913.22989@cbnews.att.com> olorin@wam.umd.edu writes: > >Xerxes does bring up a question I've wondered about for a while. Under >military law, are there any grounds on which an order can be refused because >of its suicidal (or stupid) nature? Is there any point at which a >soldier can say, "I'm not going to get myself and my men killed for >no reason?" Clearly, an officer can order you to do suicidally >dangerous things ("you are going to cross that nice open field of fire >and take out that machine gun") but can he, for example, order you >on a kamikaze mission? Or do you just refuse orders and hope you can >convince the court-martial that you were acting reasonably? Well, I'm not a military lawyer (but I play one on TV :), but you can be ordered to do damn near *anything* in a combat situation. There are some 'illegalities' that can be refused (like shooting prisoners). In general, if it comes down to a judgement call the officer wins. And can shoot you for disobeying his legal (stupid maybe, but legal) order. Volunteers are traditionally asked for suicide missions... And remember that the men are "armed and dangerous" and not above shooting there own idiot officers, if said stupidity becomes too blatant. In fact, when I was in the Army, some friends of mine had a bet that a certain officer was likely to die from *friendly* fire... "Yes sir, it was an accident. I emptied a 30 round magazine into him. On semi-auto, no less. Really, it was an accident..." -- -Brett These opinions are my own and bjohnson@athena.mit.edu do not neccessarily reflect bjohnson@micro.ll.mit.edu those of my employer or MIT.
major@uunet.UU.NET (Mike Schmitt) (11/29/90)
From: bcstec!shuksan!major@uunet.UU.NET (Mike Schmitt) In article <1990Nov19.001338.8426@cbnews.att.com>, v064lnev@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Zerxes Bhagalia) writes: > > > From: v064lnev@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Zerxes Bhagalia) > Re your questions about a helicoptor resupply mission for the US embassy in Kuwait: The answers to your questions could be very complicated - however, for simplicity, how 'bout a simple answer and a brief explanation - in military terms: > My question is this: > Who chooses who to operate the helicoptors on such a seemingly > suicidal mission? Commanders do. The first question is - who is in the best position to resupply - and protect the resupply elements. Army? Navy? Marines? So, based on a 'brief estimate of the situation' (mission vs capabilities vs availability vs readiness) one service is picked. To "resupply" usually means "heavy lift" Chinooks (CH-47) or the heavier Marine CH-53s. I'd probably give the mission to the Marines - remember - it's not a 'suicidal mission' until AFTER YOU COUNT THE SCORE. So, after the "Senior U.S. Commander designates the Marines as the resupply force, he simply "tasks" the senior Marine Commander with the mission. The Marine Commander and his staff then "plan" and select the 'best capable unit' and simply "task order" them to conduct the operation. > And on what basis is the selection made? First, the mission and requirement - how much stuff - how many helicoptors to lift that much stuff - how many gunships to escort and protect - how many troops to provide security on the ground - how much air power to 'cover' etc etc. Then the unit is selected based on its readiness and capabilities (and to a lesser extent but also important - who the commander is) > If selected, are the personel given the option to reject the mission? Nope - they don't get a vote! The military, by its very nature, is autocratic and dictatorial. Semper Fi! > Would selection be totally voluntary? Not likely. If there were 2-3 'like' units capable of the mission - a commander might ask "Who wants this one?" It would probably be more like "Colonel, the General want to see you - he's got a job for you....." "No mission too difficult. No sacrifice too great. Duty first!" - motto of the 1st Infantry Division The Big Red One mike schmitt