Via Guns and Coffee.


  1. Yea! That’s what I’m talking about! LOL!

    Not many people are aware of our military’s advanced capabilities in dealing with the many ecologically significant issues facing the peace loving Afghan people. Fortunately, ecological sensitivity training provided by the Al Gore Initiative to save the barren wasteland (a noted hot bed of eco diversity), has enhanced Americas ecological leadership world wide, while simultaneously providing Afghans enhanced recycling options (commonly referred to as scavenging), such as using scrap metal to fabricate high efficiency roofing for rural multi family dwellings, and native art objects for sale at bazaars, and armor plating for family vehicles.

    Article by DOD Partners in Green Dept.

  2. That, in 32 seconds, is the state of the US military’s “Discipline” and “Training”.

    It seems nobody thought to build a protective berm to take cover behind, and everyone stood around in the open, cheering like exited teenagers while tens-of-thousands of shards of rusted metal were spewed hundreds of feet in every direction at supersonic speeds.

    War is NOT a recreational activity, and the battlefield is NOT an amusement park — and “relieving boredom” is NOT an excuse for incompetence.

  3. I guess they are just cleaning up, before civilians get there and take fuel and die in an air strike.
    Good thinking.

  4. As a Canadian infantry soldier, I just shake my head in disgust. Hope I don’t have to work with too many troops like that when I get there. Luckily my military has something called “fire-control”.


  5. Some observations that popped into my mind:
    – The fireball is indicative of a substantial amount of fuel in the tanker.
    – Tankers like this, along with broken/sabotaged fuel lines, have a habit of making it into the news when hundreds of civilians blow themselves up trying to steal the gas while smoking.
    – I seem to remember the last time there was a tanker incident, all the taliban there were suddenly innocent civilians turned crispy critters on CNN.
    – Leaving POLs for the enemy to capitalize on is a patently bad idea.
    – We don’t know that the troops weren’t ordered to deny the tanker and it’s contents to anyone else. We also don’t know the time frame they were operating under. We don’t know where the tanker was located.

    Any one of these could be a good enough reason to slag that tanker and keep moving. POLs are military equipment whether we like it or not, whether it says so on the side of the tanker or not. If these were my men and securing that tanker wasn’t their primary mission, I would have no problems at all ordering its destruction before they moved on. It seems like we’re being somewhat harsh on the men when we know essentially nothing about why this took place.

    By the way: question their fire discipline if you feel you must. Its you prerogative. You can’t, however, question their accuracy…

  6. So how would a Canadian Infantry team destroy a fuel tank? Call in a mine/IED detecting team, and kick back and relax while a path to the tank is cleared? And hope that one of those guys doesn’t lose a leg, or worse. Or maybe you don’t care, because they’re Germans or Americans or just somebody else’s ass that’s on the line instead of your own.

    And then when a path is cleared, have a demolition team go in and blow the tank? All the while hoping the delay doesn’t give the enemy time to get some snipers into position. But again, it’s somebody else’s ass on the line, so maybe that’s no problem either.

    Or maybe you call in a jet to drop a JDAM on it. Probably safer, but how many thousands of dollars would that piss away?

    Yes, maybe these dudes should have run behind the carrier after the grenade was launched. But lobbing in a grenade from 500-1000 meters or whatever seems like a reasonable way to handle the situation.

  7. judging the situation is impossible without more context. Though I doubt troops are allowed to just wander around and blow up tankers for the fun of it.

    Either way, looks like it would have been a hoot.

  8. That was a good shot. It isn’t easy hitting with a grenade from that kind of range, although I guess the target was pretty large.

    I assume there was a reason to destroy the tanker, it wasn’t just some random vehicle they decided to blow up…

  9. Wow! Gotta admit I didn’t anticipate the frowns of disapproval.

    I certainly don’t want to diss anyone’s rightful assertion there are correct and incorrect ways to handle haz mat, EOD, and weapons discharge………………on the other hand, all that has to be balanced against the benefit of the lads morale improvement (if only for a bit) by blowing off a bit of steam in a relatively harmless manner (no camels were harmed in the making of this video). While remaining very cognizant of command responsibility to ensure your troops proper conduct and weapons usage is adhered to; my likely response to this frivolous and wasteful use of taxpayer munitions would have been:

    Sergeant! Getcher ass over here!


    Damn good shootin, son! I’m sure you conducted a proper pre demo recon to ensure no troops, indigenous personnel, or their property were in the vicinity of your improvised demo!

    Yes Sir!

    Carry on, Sergeant!

  10. Blacktail AKA Mikes Sparks the chances of a piece of metal from that tanker injuring either of them were extremely slim. Gasoline or diesel fuel isn’t going to be hurling metal like a 155mm shell anyway.

    Most officers rightfully wouldn’t make a big issue out of this in a war-zone. Yet judging from your reputation you would be the type of guy to use such an incident to suck up to somebody.

    1. Blacktail AKA Mikes Sparks…
      I’ve told you before that I’m not Mike Sparks, and it would be best if you stopped referring to me by any unconfirmed name.

      …the chances of a piece of metal from that tanker injuring either of them were extremely slim.
      The chances of being hit by shrapnel are nil if you DON’T shoot a grenade at a tanker truck, while standing about in the open; that’s why they SHOULDN’T have.

      Most officers rightfully wouldn’t make a big issue out of this in a war-zone.
      If that’s the case, then it’s time for a purge. Playing with grenade launchers is all fun and games, until somebody loses a limb.

      Yet judging from your reputation you would be the type of guy to use such an incident to suck up to somebody.
      You mean like “Most officers”?

  11. Hey Jaymaster,
    I would totally respect what you have to say and all that, you almost sound professional enough. Yet at the same time, it’s hard to appreciate someone’s take on a situation involving an M203 if they know absolutely dick all about M203s. We like to say that the max eff. rnge of an M203 is 3-4000 metres (furthest range possible is 400). Even in the video its pretty obvious that, while the shot is at the farther end of the max eff rnge, it still ain’t anywhere close to 500-1000 m’s. Fine shooting no doubt, not that the target isn’t particularly large or anything like that…lot harder to hit a human at that range with the weapon system. As well, if you’ve ever worked with us you would prolly hold your tongue. As for us calling in a jdam…ya right that’s a laugh haha – it would only be American money being wasted, no Canadian bombs there.
    All I’m sayin is that we handle warfare with solid discipline. We have fun sometimes, but always in a disciplined and controlled manner. WE are warriors, NOT cowboys.
    Come back when you’ve fired multiple rounds accurately on an M203. Come back when you’ve seen it take off someone’s head and leave pink mist at 50 metres…

  12. good shot with the HEDP….. and since the explosion obviously vented out the ends the long way, as demonstrated by the caps flying off, that’s the way the “tens-of-thousands of shards of rusted metal” from that bright, shiny, unrusted tank were going too…… which is why “nobody thought to build a protective berm”.

    if you’re not mad mikey 5parks, you’re his cousin: arrogant, condescending, opinionated and wrong.

    HTH, HAND…..

Comments are closed