1
   

Fury at RAF Kamikaze plan

 
 
Reply Tue 3 Apr, 2007 10:15 am
sun.co.uk

RAF Top Guns were stunned last night after being asked to think of being Kamikaze pilots in the war on terror.

Elite fliers were shocked into silence when a senior RAF chief said they should consider suicide missions as a last resort against terrorist targets.

Air Vice Marshal David Walker put forward the attacks ? like those flown by desperate Japanese pilots in World War Two ? as a "worst case scenario" should they run out of ammo or their weapons failed.

He asked aircrews at a conference: "Would you think it unreasonable if I ordered you to fly your aircraft into the ground in order to destroy a vehicle carrying a Taliban or al-Qaeda commander?"

Such an order would mean certain death for a pilot who cost £6million to train ? and the loss of a £50million jet.

Last night pilots slammed the suggestion as "utter madness". One ? summing up a flabbergasted "After you, Sir" reaction ? said: "I'm prepared to give it a go but only if the Air Vice Marshal shows me how to do it first."

Another added: "The idea of officers ordering personnel to commit suicide is disgusting."

more
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 868 • Replies: 17
No top replies

 
Noddy24
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Apr, 2007 10:54 am
Doesn't The Sun put circulation-boosting material on the front page? In large type?
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Apr, 2007 11:02 am
Noddy, this will sell a lot of copies and probably outrage a bunch of people. Others may die laughing.
0 Replies
 
malek
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Apr, 2007 11:20 am
The Sun is owned by one Rupert Murdoch, an Australian speaking American citizen who isn't averse to his Sun editor taking things out of context, blowing them up out of all proportion and plastering it across the front page in order to boost sales.
The actual comment was made during a "what if" session with some RAF personnel. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6521311.stm



This Sun article is media sensationalism at its best (or worst).
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Apr, 2007 11:34 am
malek, the Sun is only reporting what happened. It aint like you cant find the same story elsewhere. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/04/03/nsuicide103.xml
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Apr, 2007 11:43 am
malek wrote:
This Sun article is media sensationalism at its best (or worst).


Well, I suppose, all British media are similar to that today re this event.

The RAF and the Ministry of Defense are trying their best to minimize damage ...
0 Replies
 
malek
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Apr, 2007 11:44 am
Blueflame, you've got to realise that the Sun thinks that David Beckham changing his hairstyle is considered front page news.

The Sun is about as serious and balanced as Fox news when it comes to just reporting the actual facts in FULL context.
People buy the Sun because they just want to skim read something for two minutes in order to relieve the boredom of their day, or look at the tits that are shown each day on page three. Simple as that. Nobody actually buys the Sun because they are looking for indepth investigative journalism.

The guy asked one theoretical question during what was a long talk given to RAF personnel, many of whom weren't even pilots. When taken in proper context, it was quite a pertinent question, in my opinion.
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Apr, 2007 11:49 am
malek, you've gotta realize that attacking the messanger and ignoring the message is like a cover-up or something. The story is widely reported and should be a wake up call. http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&ie=ISO-8859-1&ncl=1115022315 Why not try addressing the substance of the article that as I've shown has been reported by mainstream media around the world.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Apr, 2007 11:59 am
malek wrote:
The guy asked one theoretical question during what was a long talk given to RAF personnel, many of whom weren't even pilots. When taken in proper context, it was quite a pertinent question, in my opinion.


The guy is Air Vice Marshal Walker, a former fighter pilot and the commander of Number 1 Group - commonly known as Air Combat Group - which controls the RAF's fast-jet aircraft, including Tornado, Typhoon and Harrier fighters and bombers.

Speaking to air crews (including newly qualified Typhoon pilots) and senior pilots during a training exercise, he said: "Would you think it unreasonable if I ordered you to fly your aircraft into the ground to destroy a vehicle carrying a Taliban or Al Qaeda commander?"

(All above acknowledged by the RAF and MoD.)
0 Replies
 
malek
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Apr, 2007 12:03 pm
By using the word kamikaze in your thread title, you appear to be in grip fthe same bugthat is afflicting the world press, blueflame. Nowhere in his tak did he use such a word, or give the order that pilots should take such action. He merely asked a rhetorical "what if" question, as part of his talk.

I can understand people getting upset about the whole thing if a direct order, or even a hint of a direct order had been issued, but this appears to have only been a point for discussion, as far as I can tell. Training sessions use theoretical situtions all the time, in order to make people think or discuss certain things. Are you really trying to suggest that you believe the press when they take one small question and use it out of context in a headline in order to boost their sales?

Personally, I would like to see proof that he ndeed issued such an order before passing any judgement on the man. The press simply saw a wonderful sentence to extract, change around, sensationalise and stick in large print on the front pages. A big story about nothing, really.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Apr, 2007 12:10 pm
malek wrote:
By using the word kamikaze in your thread title, you ...
[...]
A big story about nothing, really..



http://i3.tinypic.com/4hdcehc.jpg
0 Replies
 
malek
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Apr, 2007 12:12 pm
Walter Hinteler wrote:
malek wrote:
The guy asked one theoretical question during what was a long talk given to RAF personnel, many of whom weren't even pilots. When taken in proper context, it was quite a pertinent question, in my opinion.


The guy is Air Vice Marshal Walker, a former fighter pilot and the commander of Number 1 Group - commonly known as Air Combat Group - which controls the RAF's fast-jet aircraft, including Tornado, Typhoon and Harrier fighters and bombers.

Speaking to air crews (including newly qualified Typhoon pilots) and senior pilots during a training exercise, he said: "Would you think it unreasonable if I ordered you to fly your aircraft into the ground to destroy a vehicle carrying a Taliban or Al Qaeda commander?"

(All above acknowledged by the RAF and MoD.)


According to the BBC (more reliable than the Sun, I believe) the group talk also included weapons instructors?

And how is his question (I would love to see the full transcript) in any way to be regarded as a direct order, as the Sun would seem to presume.

"KAMIKAZE IN THE RAF - TOP GUN CHIEF: Prepare for suicide missions"
http://www.thesun.co.uk/
0 Replies
 
malek
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Apr, 2007 12:14 pm
And did he actually use the word "kamikaze"?

Proof please.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Apr, 2007 12:20 pm
Didn't he? Can YOU prove that?
0 Replies
 
malek
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Apr, 2007 12:23 pm
Surely, rather than take the guy's theoretical question out of context and judge him harshly for it, the question should be considered seriously.
If a terrorist controlled passenger jet was well off course and nearing a British city, what would or should an RAF intercept pilot do if his weapons failed?

Interesting question, eh?
0 Replies
 
malek
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Apr, 2007 12:28 pm
Walter Hinteler wrote:
Didn't he? Can YOU prove that?


No, but it wasn't ME that blazed the word across a front page, was it.

The word "kamikaze"is very emotive, and has a totally different interpretation in the minds of people, who regard it as more of a fanatical attack tactic rather than a split second decision to defend. Kamikaze pilots took off with one intention, to commit suicide by crashing their plane into a target. That could never be said for RAF pilots, wouldn't you agree?
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Apr, 2007 02:03 pm
It is also worth noting that the Sun article contradicts its own headline. According to the story in the Sun, the officer in question was asking air crew how they would feel about a suicide mission--but the headline alleges that pilots have been told to prepare for suicide missions, and that is an intentional misrepresentation on the part of the newspaper.

Nevertheless, people's attitudes can vary significantly based upon a perception that an act is noble or despicable. At the beginning of the Second World War, Colin Kelly was alleged to have dived his aircraft into the stacks of the Imperial Navy battleship Haruna. This, however, was not true:

[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colin_Kelly][b]Wikipedia[/b][/url] wrote:
On December 10, 1941, Kelly's plane lifted off from Clark Field in the Philippines. During its bombing run, Kelly's bomber hit the Japanese cruiser Ashigara. On its return flight the bomber came under attack by Zeros, one of which was piloted by famed Japanese flying ace Saburo Sakai. Kelly stayed at the controls of the badly damaged aircraft so that the surviving crew members could bail out. Just after the last crew member escaped the plane exploded. Early reports misidentified the Ashigara as the battleship Haruna, and also mistaknely reported that he had crashed his plane into the smokestack of the Haruna, becoming the first suicide pilot of the war.


The legend of Colin Kelly and a suicide attack was so persistent that it was still being taught in high school history classes in the U.S. when i was a student, 20 years after the event. Kelly was considered a hero--while the subsequent attack of kamikazes against American shipping at Saipan and Okinawa was condemned as the action of a brutal and barbaric people who did not value human life. A classic example of Luther's conundrum about whose ox has been gored.
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Apr, 2007 02:15 pm
"Air Force pilots have slammed the suggestion as "utter madness".

One flabbergasted pilot suggested that he was "prepared to give it a go, but only if the Air Vice Marshal shows me how to do it first." http://go.sciflicks.com/movies/dr_strangelove/dr_strangelove_01.jpg
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Fury at RAF Kamikaze plan
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.38 seconds on 04/28/2024 at 09:53:42