"Before impugning an opponent's motives, even when they legitimately may be impugned, answer his arguments." - Sidney Hook RE: Mike Yon is totally wrong about the Geneva Conventions First, see the above link to see that we are not in violation of the Geneva Conventions. Next, there is a huge propaganda push to arm Army MEDEVAC helicopters remove the red crosses that identify them as such. The idea being that in arming the helicopters and removing the red crosses, these assets can get to our wounded much faster. The movement has even gained the attention of 17 (out of 535) Congressmen and forced both the Army and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs to respond. Photo by Spc. Austin Berner, Afghanistan The latest story comes out of the Washington Post and I’d like to take a few moments to respond to this particular story since it incorporates many of the inaccuracies of the others. But the rescue aircraft was unarmed, as are all Army medevacs. And the pre-dawn pickup zone in the Zhari district of Kandahar province was considered “hot,” or dangerous, meaning the medevac could not swoop in for the pickup until another chopper with firepower arrived to provide cover. What the story doesn’t mention is that few, if any, choppers will land in a “hot” LZ. The reality of war is that troops are trained in lifesaving measures because during combat, it won’t always be possible to extract the patient right away. Even if the MEDEVAC bird was armed, it wouldn’t have “swooped in for the pickup” until the LZ was cleared. The theory, I suppose, is that the armed MEDEVAC bird would seek out and destroy the enemy prior to landing to pick up its patients. This, for those of us with military backgrounds, is obviously nonsense (as Medevac armament would most likely only be good enough for defense). Once a theoretically armed MEDEVAC lands to extract patients, those guns are no longer a viable presence. Because they are door guns, the patients and friendlies defending the LZ would very well be in the line of fire. So, now you have an armed MEDEVAC chopper sitting there, with fewer resources to treat patients, and gunners idle. Photo by SPC Austin Berner, Afghanistan Even if we arm the MEDEVAC birds, they can’t travel alone. They still need an armed escort. So, assuming all MEDEVAC birds are armed, now you’re using TWO of them to extract patients instead of one with another armed platform. This raises the risk that if another MEDEVAC bird is needed elsewhere, it won’t be available because it’s now providing cover for its own partner. In Clark’s case, the military says there was a delay in determining whether any armed escort helicopters already in the air could be diverted to the scene. It’s unclear how long that lasted and whether it made a difference. Army officials said they could not disclose the time Clark died because of a policy not to reveal medical information about casualties. This is always the case and happens with EVERY combat asset in the military inventory. Any time an event occurs, there are procedures in place to ensure that the right assets are used in responding to the event. In this case, as in all cases, the operators receiving the 9-line MEDEVAC request look to see which assets can get to the scene in the quickest amount of time. Obviously, a chopper in the air is easier to divert than one that needs to dispatch a crew, run up the chopper, and take off – a process that takes an average 10 minutes (yes, even for MEDEVAC birds). Unlike the Army medevacs, which are emblazoned with red crosses, the Air Force, Special Operations Command and the British fly search-and-rescue and medevac missions with armed aircraft. They do not have red crosses, which can be displayed only on unarmed aircraft, according to the Geneva Conventions. Of all the things being written about this issue, this is the one that angers most Army troops and crew members. Army MEDEVAC choppers have a completely different mission than the Air Force and Special Operations. Heck, if we were going to base regular Army assets against everything Special Forces did, we wouldn’t need Special Forces. The Air Force DOES NOT HAVE an organic MEDEVAC asset. The Air Force is assigned the mission of CASEVAC. Here is a great explanation of the difference between MEDEVAC and CASEVAC: CASEVAC CASEVAC uses non standardized and non dedicated vehicles that do not provide en route care. The service exists to transport casualties that are in dire need for evacuation from the battlefield and do not have time to wait on a MEDEVAC, or where a MEDEVAC is unable to get to the casualty. Essentially it is any helicopter or vehicle that can get into an area and evacuate an injured member with or without a medical crew and/or equipment. According to AFTTP3-42.5 Casualty evacuation (CASEVAC), a term used by all Services, refers to the movement of unregulated casualties aboard vehicles or aircraft. MEDEVAC or DUSTOFF The Army has a long history of medevac via helicopter starting with the 57th Medical Detachment back in 1962. The history of the DUSTOFF mission can be found on their website http://www.dustoff.org/history/history.htm DUSTOFF is a standardized and dedicated vehicle providing en route care. They are traditionally on UH-1 Huey’s and UH-60’s Blackhawks. They can be easily identified with the Red Cross symbol on the nose and sides of the helicopter. One other identifiable mark with medevac’s is they do not have gunners aboard like the Air Force medics had. DUSTOFF medics are extremely skilled at what they do and are highly regarded as some of the best medics around. For more information about DUSTOFF, please visit www.dustoff.org. According to AFTTP3-42.5 Medical evacuation (MEDEVAC), on the other hand, traditionally refers to US Army, Navy, Marine Corps, or Coast Guard patient movement using predesignated tactical or logistic aircraft temporarily equipped and staffed for en route care....
Read the complete post at http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Blackfive/~3/3lw7HTwGwZ4/are-the-army-chief-and-the-cjcs-liars-1.html
Posted
Feb 17 2012, 03:44 AM
by
BLACKFIVE