Army chief accused of lying about Britain's readiness for Iraq war

[cal04]

Army chief accused of lying about Britain's readiness for Iraq war
An inquest into the death of a British tank commander killed in Iraq has heard a tape he recorded three days before his death, in which he accuses the Army of telling "a blatant lie" by saying that British troops were ready for war, and tells his wife, "I just want to come home."

Sergeant Steve Roberts, 33, died in a "friendly fire" incident after he was attacked by a stone-wielding Iraqi man while manning a checkpoint outside the southern city of Az Zubayr on 24 March 2003. Had he been wearing the enhanced combat body armour that should have been issued to troops, he would have survived, pathologists found. But he was ordered to give it up three days before his death, due to shortages.

An Army Board of Inquiry into Sgt Roberts' death found that his Browning pistol failed during the attack. He was shot by a soldier in a Challenger tank who was trying to protect him but did not know his gun was inaccurate at short range.

In a audiotape recorded as a letter for his wife, Samantha, Sgt Roberts, from Shipley in West Yorkshire, accuses the then Chief of the General Staff, Sir Mike Jackson, of lying by claiming that Britain was ready for war.

He tells her the military supplies are "disgraceful" and a "joke", and adds he fears being attacked by Americans since his 2nd Royal Tank Regiment does not have the equipment to identify them as friendly forces. He tells her: "Kit we're being told we are going to get, we're not. It's disheartening because we know we're going to have to go to war without the correct equipment."

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/legal/article2079339.ece

[Little Wing]

1. There's a gun that's only inaccurate at SHORT RANGE?

What kind of mind-bending quantum physics do the Brit weapons have?

[Kagemusha]

2. Um it depends, we don't even know it was a hand-held weapon

If it wasn't, that'd explain a lot, fast.

[Little Wing]

3. Regardless, there's no gun I'm aware of that increases accuracy with range

Of course, a tank blast going off near your face is likely to kill you too, even if the round doesn't hit you, but still.

[Kagemusha]

4. It's hard to take this at face value, certainly

Minimum effective ranges are something associated with say, howitzers, not point and shoot weapons. So unless there's a better explanation - certainly not in the above article - I'll concede it sounds completely ridiculous.

[BrotherBuzz]

5. It may be a simple (but tragic) parallax sight mistake

The Challenger tank has an electric controlled sighting firing system for its secondary guns (machine guns). The machine gun is fitted to the left of the main gun, while the sighting system is above it. The gunner sights on the bad guy, but the gun points directly at a good guy. Tragic mistake that can only be attributed to poor training in my opinion.