frat⋅ri⋅cide  /ˈfrætrɪˌsaɪd, ˈfreɪ-/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [fra-tri-sahyd, frey-] Show IPA –noun

1. a person who kills his or her brother.
2. the act of killing one’s brother.

The word is derived from Latin.

Fratricide (from the Latin word frater, meaning: “brother” and cide meaning to kill)

It is often used in a military context to refer to a variety of things:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fratricide

The term may also be used to refer to friendly fire incidents. In a United States military context, it may also refer to an incident where the catastrophic failure and disintegration of one jet engine in a twin-engined fighter aircraft causes the damage or destruction of the second engine, and possibly leads to the loss of the entire aircraft.[citation needed] It also refers to the possible destruction of one MIRV warhead by another.

See: http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA088843

Accession Number : ADA088843

Title : Reentry Vehicle Fratricide Constraints on Attack Planning,

Corporate Author : DEFENSE NUCLEAR AGENCY WASHINGTON DC

Personal Author(s) : Moulton,James F. , Jr

Report Date : 20 JAN 1978

Pagination or Media Count : 27

Abstract : At the present time, reentry vehicle (RV) fractricide can be a constraint in multi-burst (N-ON-1) attack planning involving an array of hard targets, such as a minuteman wing. If, however, total attack time, time on target, and other constraints of an operational nature can be met, it would appear that RV fratricide can be eliminated for 2-on-1 attacks. With continued improvements in RV accuracy, the constraints associated with mult-burst attack may ultimately become inconsequential. (Author)

Descriptors : *REENTRY VEHICLES, *FRATRICIDE, NUCLEAR EXPLOSIONS, ACCURACY, NUCLEAR CLOUDS, TARGETING, SURFACE TO SURFACE MISSILES, GUIDED MISSILE TARGETS, HARDENED STRUCTURES, LAUNCHING SITES, MULTIBURSTS.

Subject Categories : GUIDED MISSILE REENTRY VEHICLES

Distribution Statement : APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE

I have also heard it used in terms of “friendly fire” or “blue-on-blue” when used to describe conventional weapons targeted on friendly forces. I think this became a more commonly used term after Gulf War I.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fragging

Also, dictionary.com:

frag  /fræg/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [frag] Show IPA verb, fragged, frag⋅ging, noun U.S. Army and Marine Corps Slang.
–verb (used with object)

1. to kill, wound, or assault (esp. an unpopular or overzealous superior) with a fragmentation grenade.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/frag?jss=1

However, in MM’s defense (though she is sometimes wrong), the term seems to have evolved in common usage to refer to fratricide.

Back in the 70s NCOs wouldn’t enter barracks alone or unarmed. I used to have to read and file MP reports and you would NOT believe some of the stuff that was going on with draft-era soldiers in the 70s.

The Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines do a good job of weeding out misfits. This John Kerry, liberal idiot mantra about “ignorant, uneducated troops” needs to be put down once and for all. The draft is not the answer to problems like this.

On May 12th, 2009 at 8:20 pm, Ragspierre said:

Simcoe said:
byproducts of eliminating the draft and lowering the acceptance into service to the lowest common denominator… which seems to be: “…take a breath in, now let it out, OK, your 1A”.

As a draft-era soldier, I don’t have any idea where you get any support for this statement.

Today’s uniformed services are VASTLY better qualified and trained than we were in my day. You can’t have the military we have today by taking the dregs, which, I can assure you, was what we got via the draft.

It seems to have evolved in it’s usage though. I blame the video game “DOOM”.

Fragging = Fratricide

Yes they can use grenades to do it, but that is NOT where the term comes from. You might want to learn the actual meaning of the terms before bashing others on them.

Lets wait for some more details to emerge.

Your readers are literate and you need to be more accurate in your headlines and reports.

On May 12th, 2009 at 9:28 pm, rocketman

is right.

Fragging = grenade

This was not a fragging incident.

I don’t believe in PTSD.

Serviced in the first Gulf War and Somalia.

IMHO he’ll get what’s coming to him.

Nobody said the military was a representation of society. They are indeed part of our society. Thanks to those who served and who continue to. In my experience there is no excuse for criminal acts like intentional murder. No “need to know” there. Simple as pie.

On May 12th, 2009 at 8:20 pm, Ragspierre said:

byproducts of eliminating the draft and lowering the acceptance into service to the lowest common denominator… which seems to be: “…take a breath in, now let it out, OK, your 1A”.

As a draft-era soldier, I don’t have any idea where you get any support for this statement.

Today’s uniformed services are VASTLY better qualified and trained than we were in my day. You can’t have the military we have today by taking the dregs, which, I can assure you, was what we got via the draft.

Ragspierre you are correct on this one. Today’s military has a higher education on average than any other time in history. They are motiviated and they want to be here.
The draft, even if they are “screened” as Simcoe puts it, would still place people where they don’t want to be. That is hardly motivating to either the individual or the ones in charge of them.
As for this:

The murders and rapes and other stories that have been hitting the news lately, over seas and here at home at various locations

You are safer, by far, in the military than you are on city streets or college campuses.

Since the intelligentsia wants illicit drugs legalized any and all stories involving the down side of drugs will get the “this wouldn’t happen if they were legal” treatment or completely swept under the rug.

Oh come on! How is it that you guys always manage to turn a topic I agree with you on into an issue that I don’t? Despite supporting legalization of MJ, I still understand and accept the reasons why drugs; even legal ones like alcohol; need to be restricted in a combat area.

Jangar:

zeroangel said:

…something I agree with.

LOL! It happens from time to time. I need to periodically remind you guys that despite being a wacky social lib who doesn’t believe in God, wants MJ legalized, and doesn’t care what the word “marriage” means; I still think bad guys should be killed and we shouldn’t be ashamed of using lots of lead and fire to do it.

Zyzzyg:

Sounds like rationalizations to me. After reading that, I can’t help but think this guy was a f*ck-up who couldn’t hack it and when he was told to, “man up, stop wasting our time, and let us treat people who are actually suffering from PTSD” he got pissed off and figured he’d, “teach them” and then later be able to claim it wasn’t his fault because of “combat stress.”

Anyhow, how’s that work in a firing squad again? Who gets the blanks…?

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003972329

Mind you it is second hand, from his Father, and it addresses a few of the questions MM has raised.

There is one word that the Father repeats, and you can read and see for yourself.

I feel for Sgt. John M. Russell and his victim’s.

Hangfire said:

When PC affects those who protect us and the Constitution, we’re screwed…to the wall…dirty. And now our benevolent dictator-in-chief will see to it that this is the standard M.O.

…screwed…to the wall…dirty.