Misplaced Pages

Friendly fire

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Pernambuco (talk | contribs) at 14:54, 23 September 2006 (Incidents and persons: Edson, Boston and Point Dume incident added (Vietnam, 17 June 1969)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 14:54, 23 September 2006 by Pernambuco (talk | contribs) (Incidents and persons: Edson, Boston and Point Dume incident added (Vietnam, 17 June 1969))(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Friendly fire (fratricide or non-hostile fire) is a term originally adopted by the United States military in reference to an attack on friendly forces by other friendly forces, which may be deliberate (e.g. incorrectly identifying the target as the enemy), or accidental (e.g. missing the enemy and hitting "friendlies"). Friendly fire is contrasted with fire originating from enemy forces ("enemy fire"). In a friendly fire incident personnel may be killed, or material assets may be damaged or destroyed. Friendly fire is one kind of collateral damage.

The British military refers to these incidents as blue on blue, which derives from wargaming exercises where friendly forces are "blue" and enemy forces are "red".

In the Philippines, the miltary term for a friendly fire incident is a misencounter.

Fratricide versus Friendly Fire

Some prefer the term fratricide over friendly fire, because they deem the latter to be an unfitting euphemism exemplified by the aphorism "there's nothing friendly about getting shot by your own side." However, the origin and purpose of the term is as a simple distinction to enemy fire. Both terms serve only to identify the source of an attack as coming from enemy (hostile) or friendly forces and not the nature of an attack.

The term amicicide (killing of a friend) has also been used in the same manner as fratricide (Shrader 1982).

Classification

Friendly fire incidents fall roughly into two categories. The first classification is Fog of war which generically describes friendly fire incidents in unintentional circumstances. The second classification is murder where friendly fire incidents are premeditated. During the Vietnam War, this was known as fragging.

Fog of war incidents fall roughly into two classes:

  • the first is due to errors of position, where fire aimed at enemy forces accidentally ends up hitting one's own. Such incidents were relatively common during the First and Second World Wars, where troops fought in proximity to each other and targeting was relatively inaccurate. As weapons have become more accurate in recent times, this class of incidents has become less common but is still possible, the most recent and highly publicized example being Operation Enduring Freedom, wherein a GPS-guided bomb was mistakenly called in on friendly forces, causing massive casualties.
  • the second class is due to errors of identification, where friendly troops are mistakenly attacked in the belief that they are enemy. Highly mobile battles, and battles involving troops from many nations are more likely to cause this kind of incident as evidenced by incidents in the first Gulf War.

Friendly fire in the U.S. military

The Pentagon estimates of U.S. friendly fire deaths, with percentage of total US deaths:

  • World War II: 21,000 (16%)
    • second-highest-ranking U.S. loss of the war, Lt. General Lesley J. McNair
    • Sinking of the Surcouf. This was initially attributed to a collision with the US Freighter Thompson Lykes, but a later report stated that the Surcouf was mistaken for a U-boat and destroyed by US planes. Which event occured is disputed by historians.
    • Sinking of the USS Dorado (SS-248) by US plane.
    • Damage to the USS Atlanta (CL-51) by USS San Francisco.
  • Vietnam war: 8,000 (14%)
  • Gulf War: 35 (23%)
  • Invasion of Afghanistan (2002): 4 (13%) *note* fatalities were Canadian Soldiers, not American. Caused when a US fighter pilot dropped a 500 lb (228 kg) bomb while Canadian soldiers were performing a live fire exercise on April 17, 2002
  • Afghanistan NATO Mission - Operation Medusa (2006): 1 *note* the fatality was a Canadian Soldier, not American. Caused when two U.S. A-10 Thunderbolts accidentally strafed their own NATO forces in southern Afghanistan, killing Canadian Private Mark Anthony Graham, and seriously wounding five others when soldiers were trying to seize a Taliban stronghold along the Arghandab River. Graham was a former Canadian Olympic althlete who competed on the Canadian 4x400 Men's Relay Team at the 1992 Barcelona Olympics.

History

Two French regiments accidentally attacking each other during the Battle of Fleurus led to the habit of attaching a white scarf to the flags of the regiments from 1690 - white being the colour of the kings of France.

Incidents and persons

Cultural Views

Many in other nations - particularly those in Britain - hold the view that the US has a severe record of friendly fire. The popular opinion is that the US is more likely to injure its own or its unfortunate allies, the British, than anyone of an opposing army. However, a more accurate view is that the United States, as a world superpower, is simply more likely to have "friendly fire" events because the US is much more likely to be involved in combat operations. Whether it was the Korean War, the Vietnam War, Operation Desert Shield/Storm, the War in Kosovo and the Global War on Terror (GWOT), the US has provided the overwhelming majority of combat forces. By sheer numbers, the odds are that the US will have more casualties, regardless of whether they are from enemy or friendly fire.

Furthermore, since the Allied forces usually completely annihilate their opposition(citation needed, see talk), little is known about "friendly fire" incidents for non-allied opposition forces. The Allied forces, especially the British and Americans, are able to attain good situational awareness on the modern battlefield and when an unfortunate "friendly fire" incident occurs, the events are much more likely to be investigated, analyzed and adjudicated to learn exactly what happened, and if possible, why.

Distinction

Friendly fire is fire which was intended to do harm to the enemy; a death resulting from a negligent discharge is not considered "friendly fire".

See also

References

  • Shrader, Charles R. Amicicide: the problem of friendly fire in modern war, University Press of the Pacific, 2005. ISBN 1-4102-1991-7
  • Regan, G. Backfire: a history of friendly fire from ancient warfare to the present day. Robson Books, 2002.
  • Regan, G. More Military Blunders. Carlton Books, 2004.

External links

Category: