Oceania Aussie troops in Iraq

Buggered if I know what gun they had. But I saw them again this week, during Howards visit. Big arsed armoured vehicles with Aussie troops in them.

 

ADF troops or SASR? Because I thought the regiment was back here, that's all...

E_S

 

I'd say ADF.

 

Here is a listin gof the ADF troops in Iraq:

HERE

The armored vehicles you saw on the news show were most likely ALAV's, which are light armored vehicles:

Did they look like this?

ALAV

 

Cheers Mr44...

Perhaps we should give a rough breakdown of the US troop presence in Iraq, to give perspective to our 850-strong deployment?

E_S

 

Don't bother, to be honest I couldn't give a fat rats about the US deployment.

I think they were those vehicles, they do look similar but I saw them from the rear. That's a serious weapon on the front though. Is that a .50 cal?

 

Don't bother, to be honest I couldn't give a fat rats about the US deployment.

Geez, mate..

Can I ask why you are always so pucky against the US?

You know, we are all friends and such..

I think they were those vehicles, they do look similar but I saw them from the rear. That's a serious weapon on the front though. Is that a .50 cal?

And yes, that is the famed M2HB .50 cal...

 

I'm not against the US, I just don't really care for their foreign policy.

I also don't really care what the breakdown of US troops in Iraq is. Much like I don't care which Poms are there either, it's not that I don't like them, just that listing a bunch of regiments and personnel doesn't pique my interest.

 

I also don't really care what the breakdown of US troops in Iraq is. Much like I don't care which Poms are there either, it's not that I don't like them, just that listing a bunch of regiments and personnel doesn't pique my interest.

Ah, so you're just whining for the sake of whining?

(Just kidding matey!)

E_S

 

No you aren't and yes I am.

 

Hmmm, I assume that is a picture of the command post version of the Auzzie LAV. A LAV-II not a LAV-III, correct? Cause if it isn't, it's REALLY lacking in fireower when compared to a LAV-25! LAV-25s have a turreted 25mm Bushmaster HMG with a coxial 7.62mm MG and at least a 7.62mm pintle-mounted anti-infantry / AA (aka helos) MG on the commander's side. I have seen them with that mounted next to the other hatch and a M2 .50cal on the commander's hatch. The dual HMGs topside is the same loadout as a M1 or M1A1 Abrams MBT. Pretty sure it's the same loadout anyways.

 

Red Raptor One said:
Hmmm, I assume that is a picture of the command post version of the Auzzie LAV. A LAV-II not a LAV-III, correct? Cause if it isn't, it's REALLY lacking in fireower when compared to a LAV-25! LAV-25s have a turreted 25mm Bushmaster HMG with a coxial 7.62mm MG and at least a 7.62mm pintle-mounted anti-infantry / AA (aka helos) MG on the commander's side. I have seen them with that mounted next to the other hatch and a M2 .50cal on the commander's hatch. The dual HMGs topside is the same loadout as a M1 or M1A1 Abrams MBT. Pretty sure it's the same loadout anyways.

Uruk-hai read:
Hmmm, I assume that is a picture of the command post version of the blah-blah, blah blah, wah wah, wah wah wah, blah-blah.

 

I guess this is the best place to bring it up.

David Hicks, one of the two Australians held at Gitmo in Cuba, is claiming he's been mistreated by the Americans.

Hmmm.

Never claimed this before, but after the abu Grahib photos come out, he's saying he was abused...

Right.

Sorry, Mr Hicks, but I think you're lying and being an opportunist. I mean, the Abu Grahib photos aren't just bad for America, they're bad for a region where homosexuality is considered a sin under Shari'a and so the effect on Arabs is ten times what it is on us to see it. But Hicks? I have alot of trouble accepting he's been "abused"...

E_S

 

I thought he'd complained of abuses before this. I seem to recall his father saying he's been abused and that was last year.

 

It seems the UNSC has approved, 15 in favour, 0 against, a Resolution on Security in Iraq.

Which has done Labor a tremendous favour, in breaking an election promise for them. I imagine the Coalition MP's are upset too, because they don't get easy, lucky breaks when they're in government...

How do we feel about this?

E_S

 

Mark Latham obviously feels horribly embarrassed:

Mr Latham has previously outlined a timetable for Australia's withdrawal from Iraq under a Labor government, saying he hopes to bring soldiers back by Christmas.

However Mr Latham said Labor would take advice from Foreign Affairs Department security experts on what needed to be done to protect Australia's diplomats.

He must be taking backflip lessons from his new mate Peter:

PETER Garrett is either a lying hypocrite or he has had a Damascus Road conversion in which he has rejected every aspect of his previous world view. Those are the only conclusions possible if Garrett accepts Opposition Leader Mark Latham's offer of a safe Labor seat in parliament.

Let's take a couple of issues. Garrett led a campaign to throw out the US bases in Australia, especially the satellite communications base at Pine Gap, the main such base that remains.

Yet when Latham was reassuring us how much he loved the US alliance, he stood in front of Pine Gap and said it was doing important work and he and the ALP supported it.

 

Garrett has said he realises the importance Pine Gap has in the war on terror. The war on terror is new, therefore, new ideas.

Unlike some, he's admitting he can change.

 

He was protesting Pine Gap in the 80's... during the cold war. So terrorist emails are a problem, but who needs to worry about incoming ICBMs?

Right.

 

Well, he was protesting during the cold war, he saw us as being used by the US and making ourselves a nuclear target. Now, the cold war is over, we aren't a nuclear target but we are a target for terrorists already.

I think anyone is entitled to change their opinion. Not everyone gets stuck on the rails like Howard.

 

I think anyone is entitled to change their opinion. Not everyone gets stuck on the rails like Howard.

Yet I'm sure you still commented that Howard back flipped when he changed his opinion on the GST and superannuation.

 

Nope, he just lied to us again.

I do wish Latham would just make up his mind and stick to it though.

I want the troops out, fullstop. Latham might leave some there to look after the diplomats? What is the usual procedure for diplomat security? Why can't we stick to the usual procedure?

 

Generally, line infantry units aren't taught the intregacies (sp?) of VIP protection (cue video montage of Pamela Anderson's tv show 'VIP' ). I assume the same is the norm for Auzzie units, though I'm not a member of the ADF so I wouldn't know for sure. Seems like leaving them there for that purpose would be a smoke screen for something else. The SAS (NZSAS, Auzzie SAS, or the 22nd Regitment at Hereford) has dedicated Troops for just such a thing. The 22nd does a LOT of that kind of thing. They are the instructors for the Royal Family and give them intro lessons on what would happen if there ever was an 'incident' involving them. Pretty sur even the 21st and 23rd Regiments (the 22nd's Reservist brothers) has some sort of VIP detail as well. Is there a detailed list of the Auzzie units over there in 'The Sandbox' at the moment?

 

.

I want the troops out, fullstop. Latham might leave some there to look after the diplomats? What is the usual procedure for diplomat security? Why can't we stick to the usual procedure?

Because it's hardly a normal situation and the normal protocol doesn't apply.

ES

 

I think we should just leave the diplomats there to die

(I'm kidding Mr Echelon! )