PDA

View Full Version : Soldier sent to Iraq with five bullets



Flagg
02-26-2004, 02:29 AM
Soldier sent to Iraq with five bullets
26 February 2004

LONDON: A British soldier says he was given only five bullets to last the entire war in Iraq, a claim that could spark more questions for the British Government already accused of sending troops into battle ill-equipped.

The soldier, who served in the British frontlines near the towns of Um Qasr, Az Zubayr and Basra in southern Iraq, said he had been given just five bullets for a five-month tour of duty during last year's war.

"We had five rounds each to defend ourselves. I actually crossed the border with five rounds," he told Channel 4 News, which used an actor in its broadcast yesterday to mask the soldier's identity.

"The magazine held 30 separate bullets but I was issued with five separate bullets to last the entire hostilities of the war."

The soldier's claims are likely to be used by critics to increase the pressure on British Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon who has been lambasted over previous revelations of equipment shortages.

The most serious concerned Sergeant Steven Roberts, who was shot dead near Basra on March 23. He had been asked to hand in his body armour because it was in short supply. His widow Samantha and the opposition Conservative Party said Mr Hoon should have resigned over that case alone.

The families of six Royal Military Police officers who were killed by a mob in Iraq on June 24 have also called for a public inquiry into their deaths.

Mr Hoon has said the invasion was not hampered by equipment glitches, and that the force was deployed twice as fast as in the 1991 Gulf War.

"While the logistics effort as a whole was a tremendous success, some shortages were encountered within individual units," the Defence Ministry said yesterday.

The unnamed soldier, now serving in Germany, said as well as a lack of bullets, there was a shortage of maps and body armour, and his unit's camouflage nets were green and not desert brown.

"You see the defence secretary standing up saying 'they had this kit, they had that'," he said. "I just want . . . somebody from the army to speak out about what the army actually runs like."

A report in December from Britain's public spending watchdog the National Audit Office said the logistics effort had been successful overall but the means of tracking supplies had been ineffective. At the peak of the Iraq War, Britain had about 45,000 troops in the Gulf, its biggest troop deployment since Korea. Fifty-eight British servicemen have been killed.

I just caught this on the news down here......

It doesn't state specifically what his role was.....if he's a REMF it's not as big of a deal...if he's truly "frontline" which implies teeth arms, 5 rounds wouldn't go far in a contact.

I wonder if our Pom friends "in the know" think this is a real story or just a slow news day covering a whinge.

George W. Bush
02-26-2004, 02:38 AM
Those wacky British!

mustamato
02-26-2004, 02:38 AM
I donīt really believe that. 5 rounds :roll: Even a REMF has atleast 4 magazines
or something like that. In a warzone probably more.

martinexsquaddie
02-26-2004, 02:54 AM
some one on this board crossed into iraq without a weapon
let alone rounds :(

oldsoak
02-26-2004, 05:10 AM
I know of one embarassing situation when allegedly ammo got loaded onto ships while the troops got flown out. End result was lots of troops in Q8 waiting for ammo to turn up and hoping the Iraqis didnt decide to come accross the border. Having said that - we've done the gulf war before, so we must have a loading/deployment plan.....please tell me we have..

Javehn
02-26-2004, 05:18 AM
There are logistic schools in Britain army ? How can it be that soldier is sent to Iraq with 5 bullets ? Even if he is a bleedy cook .
What is the reasons for those hard f*ckups ? How can that be ? Someone should pay with his ass on it .

marktigger
02-26-2004, 05:28 AM
some one on this board crossed into iraq without a weapon
let alone rounds

yep me

oldsoak
02-26-2004, 05:50 AM
You were issued with a rock though, werent you ?

marktigger
02-26-2004, 05:55 AM
the basic reason for the logistic **** ups was yep the kit was loaded in the UK and sent to the gulf. More troops and equipment and 1/3 of the ammo sent to GW1 in 1/2 the time. But the kit only started moving at the start of January for an invasion date in March and it takes about 2 weeks for it to get to the gulf. Then it has to be offloaded which the loggies worked round the clock to acheive. Then outloaded to the rear supply dumps were it was ment to be broken down to distribute forward. But then added to that the outload had to be done to get supplies forward. The tracking of stores comming ino theatre totally broke down. And there was not enough time to sort out what was comming in and outload at the same time with the Log regts sent out. They are all experienced having done it in GW1,seirra leone, Oman, Macedonia, Bosnia, and Afganistan. The basic problem was the political desision to go was left far to late. Leaving No time to sort out the Logistic situation and order in for Just in time delivery. And the decision was delayed because Tony Blair didn't want to upset his back benchers.
BTW there is no such thing as a REMF in modern warfare. All logistic chain troops need to be armed and have realistic ammo scales as the Pte Lynch esapade proved. Sending any soldier into a war zone with out the means to protect him or herself is criminal. There is never a garuntee that a soldier will remain in the same role as he/or she is deployed in Eg 12 air defence regt RA were deployed to provide close air defence and ended up as the UK prosoner of war handling orginisation.