NZDF General discussion thread

[steve33]

And I call bull sh*t no NZDF person would go near Nicky Hager with a 30 foot pole, Group guys, support & HQ staff will take the secrets to the grave as will everyone else who has held Top secret & above clearance in regards to the work they carried out.

Dave

It's a chance for certain sectors of NZ society to go after the NZ military and they will take the opportunity for all they can get and don't be surprised to see an attempt made to take a case to the international criminal court people on the left see this as a chance to strike a blow not only to the NZDF but even more so the SAS.

Believe me when i tell you this the left wing see the SAS as nothing more than a bunch of murderers they despise them.

 

[kiwi in exile]

The only Kiwis on the raids would've been NZSAS so the leakers would not be them.

Why not? Sound like his sources were NZSAS (havn't read the book yet).

They claim that their military sources are 20 people comprising of NZ and Afghan military personnel. IMHO the latter's testimony should be regarded as suspect because of doubts regarding where their loyalty lies.

So we don't trust them cause their foreigners? If they are CRU members, our you would assume our SAS trust them.

Both Hager and Stephenson are anti defence and anti US left wing types. Hagar has a habit of muck raking and publishing these great exposes prior to elections and generally they don't achieve anything except give some rabid left wing activists wet dreams. This book has created a slur on NZDF's and NZ's reputation and the CDF is not impressed. He has said that there had "better be some really good, hard evidence"
So Hager and Stephenson may have just picked a fight that they are not going to win.

Stephenson has 'picked a fight' with NZDF before and won. They spent $600k trying to unsuccessfully discredit him relating to this Eyes Wide Shut: The Government's Guilty Secrets in Afghanistan - Metro

NZDF/it's members should not be seen as immune from criticism and above making mistakes or bad decisions (isn't that exactly what this blog is for). Those that raise legitimate questions about NZDF should not be caricatured an 'left wing nut job defence haters' -its not always true and its lazy.
RNZ wasted their time today interviewing Paula Bennet about this and she dismissed Hager as a "Left wing Conspiracy theorist" and said that NZSASs reputation was enough for her even though she had not read the book and read any official documents on the raid, or discussed it with anyone relevant. If you are going to criticize the book or its authors (remember to play the ball not the man), try and do better than this.

 

[steve33]

Why not? Sound like his sources were NZSAS (havn't read the book yet).

So we don't trust them cause their foreigners? If they are CRU members, our you would assume our SAS trust them.

Stephenson has 'picked a fight' with NZDF before and won. They spent $600k trying to unsuccessfully discredit him relating to this Eyes Wide Shut: The Government's Guilty Secrets in Afghanistan - Metro

NZDF/it's members should not be seen as immune from criticism and above making mistakes or bad decisions (isn't that exactly what this blog is for). Those that raise legitimate questions about NZDF should not be caricatured an 'left wing nut job defence haters' -its not always true and its lazy.
RNZ wasted their time today interviewing Paula Bennet about this and she dismissed Hager as a "Left wing Conspiracy theorist" and said that NZSASs reputation was enough for her even though she had not read the book and read any official documents on the raid, or discussed it with anyone relevant. If you are going to criticize the book or its authors (remember to play the ball not the man), try and do better than this.

It's funny that the media never give a shit about the NZDF unless they think they have a chance to attack it and a lot of people on this forum know it.

 

[gf0012-aust]

I can't see kiwi specials talking out of shop - if there was an issue they would follow their concerns through the line/chain of command and to its end state.

 

[kiwi in exile]

I get that Hager rubs people the wrong way and therefore becomes an easy target for lazy criticism.
Stephenson is better. There's a good interview here. If you are interested in this story do yourself a service:

Blanket denial made about claims SAS soldiers killed civilians | Morning Report, 8:11 am on 22 March 2017 | Radio New Zealand

 

[steve33]

I get that Hager rubs people the wrong way and therefore becomes an easy target for lazy criticism.
Stephenson is better. There's a good interview here. If you are interested in this story do yourself a service:

Blanket denial made about claims SAS soldiers killed civilians | Morning Report, 8:11 am on 22 March 2017 | Radio New Zealand

it's not lazy criticism people can see through Hager and can see the big picture haven't you noticed how the media in NZ don't give a shit about the NZDF unless they see a chance to try and attack it.

If there are SAS members who feel so strongly about the issue as Stephenson claims then these peoples identities should be provided to the the NZDF so they can be interviewed about the situation instead of having this story publicized with all the hype surrounding it trashing the SAS reputation but everyone gets to remain anonymous.

 

[kiwi in exile]

it's not lazy criticism people can see through Hager and can see the big picture haven't you noticed how the media in NZ don't give a shit about the NZDF unless they see a chance to try and attack it.

If there are SAS members who feel so strongly about the issue as Stephenson claims then these peoples identities should be provided to the the NZDF so they can be interviewed about the situation instead of having this story publicized with all the hype surrounding it trashing the SAS reputation but everyone gets to remain anonymous.

You are right in your criticism on mainstream NZ media. Maybe those involved in the raid have raised their concerns through the legitimate channels and were not happy with the results. If the allegations are true, you can understand why people have been trying to hush them up (not that that's right).

 

[steve33]

You are right in your criticism on mainstream NZ media. Maybe those involved in the raid have raised their concerns through the legitimate channels and were not happy with the results. If the allegations are true, you can understand why people have been trying to hush them up (not that that's right).

If they have been given faulty intel and gone into the village fast and hard as you would expect them to thinking there were taliban in there and civilians have been killed and from what they are trying to say the majority were killed by the gunships it is fair to say something has gone wrong.

The issue i have is this book being released with all the hype but the key people that Hager and Stevenson are using are able to stay anonymous and the whole time the SAS rep is being trashed.

 

[gf0012-aust]

the expected practice would be for a journo to put in a FOI request on mission specifics

that would either be blessed, come back as redacted or refused

at that point the journos start to have some evidentiary trail

unsupported statements with no qualification and traceability diminish the claims

its poor journalism

 

[steve33]

the expected practice would be for a journo to put in a FOI request on mission specifics

that would either be blessed, come back as redacted or refused

at that point the journos start to have some evidentiary trail

unsupported statements with no qualification and traceability diminish the claims

its poor journalism

That's the issue i have with it you have this book released with all this hype but the people they claim to have based the book around are anonymous and the whole time this is going on the SAS reputation is being dragged through the mud.

 

[gf0012-aust]

That's the issue i have with it you have this book released with all this hype but the people they claim to have based the book around are anonymous and the whole time this is going on the SAS reputation is being dragged through the mud.

yep

I'm cynical as good practice would dictate doing the FOI to test basic dates and details against the claims made by the alleged leakers

if that hasn't been done, then there is not a scintilla of basic evidence from which to even start qualifying the claims made

you test the leakers claims against basic data that could be FOI'd without breaching any security around those.

 

[ngatimozart]

Why not? Sound like his sources were NZSAS (havn't read the book yet).

Any SAS / Commando member, active or retired, would most definitely not speak out of school. They take that knowledge with them to the grave. The only time they will talk is if it's non confidential and very general or if it has been sanctioned by higher authority.

So we don't trust them cause their foreigners? If they are CRU members, our you would assume our SAS trust them.

Yes because of the green on blue incidents that keep occurring in Afghanistan. Their loyalty is something that you cannot take for granted. Who are they most loyal to? The Afghan govt? Their tribe? The insurgents?

Stephenson has 'picked a fight' with NZDF before and won. They spent $600k trying to unsuccessfully discredit him relating to this Eyes Wide Shut: The Government's Guilty Secrets in Afghanistan - Metro

He won a disagreement with a previous CDF who hadn't checked his facts before making a claim which later turned out to be incorrect. Instead of apologizing and correcting his statement said CDF got all stubborn about it and dug his toes in digging himself far deeper into a large manure pile of his own making.

NZDF/it's members should not be seen as immune from criticism and above making mistakes or bad decisions (isn't that exactly what this blog is for). Those that raise legitimate questions about NZDF should not be caricatured an 'left wing nut job defence haters' -its not always true and its lazy.
RNZ wasted their time today interviewing Paula Bennet about this and she dismissed Hager as a "Left wing Conspiracy theorist" and said that NZSASs reputation was enough for her even though she had not read the book and read any official documents on the raid, or discussed it with anyone relevant. If you are going to criticize the book or its authors (remember to play the ball not the man), try and do better than this.

I am playing the ball, not the man, and I am one of the first to criticise NZDF where I feel that it needs to be. I am not one of those who thinks it does no wrong - far from it. I was never commissioned hence I worked for a living when I was in. Having served in two services I saw how things worked in both those services and I will always be a lower deck man when I have to be I will not be wasting any of my hard earned money on that book.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Any SAS / Commando member, active or retired, would most definitely not speak out of school. They take that knowledge with them to the grave. The only time they will talk is if it's non confidential and very general or if it has been sanctioned by higher authority.

I spent about 3 years dealing with the SF community on specific projects

they only talk to their own re work, they don't even talk much to big army. they don't even talk to family

and without wanting to offend the media, they mistrust them to a very significant degree. journos are in the same camp as pollies. NTBT

 

[Cadredave]

It's a chance for certain sectors of NZ society to go after the NZ military and they will take the opportunity for all they can get and don't be surprised to see an attempt made to take a case to the international criminal court people on the left see this as a chance to strike a blow not only to the NZDF but even more so the SAS.

Believe me when i tell you this the left wing see the SAS as nothing more than a bunch of murderers they despise them.

I dont need to believe it been there & got the T shirt to some of those lovely people on RTU to Linton from Afghan, its not about just the SAS to them they view the NZDF in the same lens imo problem is joe public can see right through Hager & Stevenson.

CD

 

[Cadredave]

I spent about 3 years dealing with the SF community on specific projects

they only talk to their own re work, they don't even talk much to big army. they don't even talk to family

and without wanting to offend the media, they mistrust them to a very significant degree. journos are in the same camp as pollies. NTBT

I know personally guys I went through basic, Infantry corps training, Singapore, 2/1, 1RNZIR Linton gone off & been badged and wont say boo to us about the Group or any of its dealing's they are a closed shop period as you say GF I know they rate Journalists lower than pollies.

CD

 

[kiwi in exile]

That's the issue i have with it you have this book released with all this hype but the people they claim to have based the book around are anonymous and the whole time this is going on the SAS reputation is being dragged through the mud.

The anonymous thing is frustrating, but whats the alternative, harger and Stephenson release the names of ex/current members Maybe the anonamity is about protecting their sources. Given that speaking out of school is so verboten

NZDF will know who's involved, IE who was on the mission. Won't be a big list.

 

[steve33]

The anonymous thing is frustrating, but whats the alternative, harger and Stephenson release the names of ex/current members Maybe the anonamity is about protecting their sources. Given that speaking out of school is so verboten

NZDF will know who's involved, IE who was on the mission. Won't be a big list.

They don't have to release the names to the public but they have made series claims that it is SAS members who talked to them and it is even more serious if they are still in the unit and the government/military needs the names so they can get to the bottom of this and sort it out.

The whole units rep is being smeared and the media are going to take this issue for all they can get.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Its shoddy journalism

there are easy ways for the journos to validate whether the people they are speaking to are on the level and have something of merit

from my perspective, I have a significant doubt that they are on to something as significant as claimed.

there may well be something of note, but I don't think that they have gone about this the right way - they have wring it out when there is no need to do so.

if there are claims (and we've gone through similar debates in Oz re similar events), then it will stand on its merits - not on theatre

 

[gf0012-aust]

its now been confirmed by NZDEF.

 

[kiwi in exile]

Link to NZDF press realease
NZDF - NZDF Response To Book

So according to what NZDF and its reps have stated, there has been no internal NZDF investigation, which is strange given the apparent accusations.

Has anyone weighing in on this read the book? Before criticizing the book.
What exactly are the authors claiming NZSAS/NZDF have done wrong?
Most of those killed/hurt seem to have been killed/hurt as a result of apache gunfine.

Wayne Mapp acknowledges civilian casualties:
Former Defence Minister concedes civilian casualty in 2010 SAS raid in Afghanistan - National - NZ Herald News