Canadian killed by friendly fire in Afghanistan

MrBrian
MrBrian Posts: 2,672
edited September 2006 in A Moving Train
Good thing it was "friendly fire", otherwise i'd be pretty upset.
Updated Mon. Sep. 4 2006 5:13 PM ET

CTV.ca News Staff

Two U.S. warplanes accidentally strafed their own NATO forces in southern Afghanistan on Monday, killing one Canadian soldier and seriously wounding five others.

NATO said in a statement that the International Security Assistance Force provided the support but "regrettably engaged friendly forces during a strafing run, using cannons." It later identified the planes as U.S. A-10 Thunderbolts.

One Canadian soldier was killed, said NATO spokesman Maj. Scott Lundy, while five were seriously wounded and evacuated out of Afghanistan for medical treatment.

"It was a scene of absolute chaos this morning at the airport near the hospital. We were there as helicopter after helicopter ferried in the wounded," CTV's Matt McClure reported from Kandahar.

CTV News has learned that the United States will launch its own probe into the incident, in addition to a NATO investigation currently underway.

"There has not been any official reaction from the United States government, but CTV News has learned Ambassador David Wilkins -- the U.S. ambassador in Canada -- phoned Prime Minister Stephen Harper first thing this morning," CTV's David Akin told Newsnet.

Wilkins expressed the regret of the U.S. government over the tragedy, and also indicated the government would launch its own investigation.
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1

Comments

  • rebornFixer
    rebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    Friendly fire is a reality of warfare, dude. An incident like this could have been a lot worse. Most of the wounded were immediately returned to duty.
  • MrBrian
    MrBrian Posts: 2,672
    reborncareerist wrote:
    Friendly fire is a reality of warfare, dude. An incident like this could have been a lot worse. Most of the wounded were immediately returned to duty.

    yeah, I just figured one death is enough.
  • rebornFixer
    rebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    MrBrian wrote:
    yeah, I just figured one death is enough.

    One is obviously too many, yeah. So is four yesterday.
  • MrBrian
    MrBrian Posts: 2,672
    reborncareerist wrote:
    One is obviously too many, yeah. So is four yesterday.

    or 8? 3 years ago.
    ----

    But Yeah, it really could've been alot worse in this latest one.
  • even flow?
    even flow? Posts: 8,066
    I wonder if they are going to use the same excuse as last time? Our boys were to high on speed and had to make a judgement while whacked on the junk. :rolleyes: Flies with some of the Canucks on the board.
    You've changed your place in this world!
  • Truthmonger
    Truthmonger Posts: 559
    even flow? wrote:
    I wonder if they are going to use the same excuse as last time? Our boys were to high on speed and had to make a judgement while whacked on the junk. :rolleyes: Flies with some of the Canucks on the board.

    Not this Canuck.......
  • vedderfan10
    vedderfan10 Posts: 2,497
    reborncareerist wrote:
    Friendly fire is a reality of warfare, dude. An incident like this could have been a lot worse. Most of the wounded were immediately returned to duty.

    If it were the other way around, we'd never hear the end of it - and the US would probably start bombing the shit out of Canada. This is the 2nd time this has happened...no lame excuse will be good enough for me this time. The Canadian Flag does not have a target on it, dudes...
    be philanthropic
  • Boom The Cat
    Boom The Cat Posts: 482
    Friendly fire isnt very friendly when you think about it.
    no matter where you go,
    there you are.

    - brain of c
  • rebornFixer
    rebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    even flow? wrote:
    I wonder if they are going to use the same excuse as last time? Our boys were to high on speed and had to make a judgement while whacked on the junk. :rolleyes: Flies with some of the Canucks on the board.


    Like who?
  • Derrick
    Derrick Posts: 475
    20% of americans probably don't know what/where Canada is
    95% of americans probably couldn't give two craps about Canada

    Is it any wonder american forces fire upon Canadian forces?
  • Pickr
    Pickr Posts: 161
    Derrick wrote:
    20% of americans probably don't know what/where Canada is
    95% of americans probably couldn't give two craps about Canada

    Is it any wonder american forces fire upon Canadian forces?


    100% of what you just said is totally off base.
    Stix and Stones may break my bones, but More than Words will never hurt me.
  • MrBrian
    MrBrian Posts: 2,672
    By David Ljunggren
    34 minutes ago

    OTTAWA (Reuters) - The rising death toll among Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan is prompting calls for the minority Conservative government to rethink Canada's military mission in the war-torn country.

    The new deaths sparked massive media coverage as well as more questions about why Canadian troops, best known in recent decades for taking part in peacekeeping operations, were involved in a major military mission against the Taliban


    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060906/wl_canada_nm/canada_afghan_canada_col_5
  • even flow?
    even flow? Posts: 8,066
    And Halifax isn't letting the type of plane that kills Canucks fly at their upcoming air show. he he he

    http://www.cbc.ca/canada/nova-scotia/story/2006/09/06/warthog-airshow.html
    You've changed your place in this world!
  • rebornFixer
    rebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    MrBrian wrote:
    By David Ljunggren
    34 minutes ago

    OTTAWA (Reuters) - The rising death toll among Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan is prompting calls for the minority Conservative government to rethink Canada's military mission in the war-torn country.

    The new deaths sparked massive media coverage as well as more questions about why Canadian troops, best known in recent decades for taking part in peacekeeping operations, were involved in a major military mission against the Taliban


    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060906/wl_canada_nm/canada_afghan_canada_col_5

    And pulling out now would send what message? That we are cowards who cannot pull our weight despite making a commitment to NATO? We've lost 20 or so soldiers in combat. The Taliban has lost hundreds ... And we're the ones developing cold feet?
    Quite frankly, Harper's government or anyone else should not embarass this country, and shit all over the troops in the process.
  • RockinInCanada
    RockinInCanada Posts: 2,016
    reborncareerist wrote:
    And pulling out now would send what message? That we are cowards who cannot pull our weight despite making a commitment to NATO? We've lost 20 or so soldiers in combat. The Taliban has lost hundreds ... And we're the ones developing cold feet?
    Quite frankly, Harper's government or anyone else should not embarass this country, and shit all over the troops in the process.

    We should be asking "what are we really fighting for"....heard one soldier say on the news said he "was proud of defending Canadian freedom"....I laughed...seriously I am family with an UN Commander and we both thought it was funny because I have never felt that my livilhood was threatened by the Taliban....

    I respect these boys but really what are we fighting for?????
  • rebornFixer
    rebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    Rockin'InCanada wrote:
    We should be asking "what are we really fighting for"....heard one soldier say on the news said he "was proud of defending Canadian freedom"....I laughed...seriously I am family with an UN Commander and we both thought it was funny because I have never felt that my livilhood was threatened by the Taliban....

    I respect these boys but really what are we fighting for?????

    I think the mission is basically just, although part of me also thinks that it should be up to Afghans to choose a decent government and fight the Taliban off. Either way, I don't think we should comtemplate a pull-out before the agreement we made is up.
  • RockinInCanada
    RockinInCanada Posts: 2,016
    reborncareerist wrote:
    I think the mission is basically just, although part of me also thinks that it should be up to Afghans to choose a decent government and fight the Taliban off. Either way, I don't think we should comtemplate a pull-out before the agreement we made is up.

    Fair enough....although I am one for letting them deal with the Taliaban we can do much more good through non-military support of an elected government than we can with the military prescence in the country.....plus it wouldn't hurt if these American pilots weren't so damn trigger happy.....:)
  • MrBrian
    MrBrian Posts: 2,672
    reborncareerist wrote:
    And pulling out now would send what message? That we are cowards who cannot pull our weight despite making a commitment to NATO? We've lost 20 or so soldiers in combat. The Taliban has lost hundreds ... And we're the ones developing cold feet?
    Quite frankly, Harper's government or anyone else should not embarass this country, and shit all over the troops in the process.

    It's not "developing cold feet", it's developing a sense of understanding, understanding that this war on terror is faux, it's only aim is to expand american power, canada should be embarrassed that it fell for the "fighting for freedom" line from the yanks. Allowing Canadian troops to shoot up and be shot in afghanistan is shitting on them.
  • rebornFixer
    rebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    Rockin'InCanada wrote:
    Fair enough....although I am one for letting them deal with the Taliaban we can do much more good through non-military support of an elected government than we can with the military prescence in the country.....plus it wouldn't hurt if these American pilots weren't so damn trigger happy.....:)

    I think air power is overrated in these kinds of battles, quite frankly. Apparently the Taliban have gotten good at avoiding airstrikes anyways ...

    It doesn't make me happy that Canadians die over there. At all. But I feel that we need to honour this commitment ... What message would a pull-out send now, not just to the enemy but to our allies? That Canadian troops cannot do the job? Clearly they can. I was listening to a veteran on CBC radio the other day. He was amazed that people are freaking out about 32 deaths, 20 in combat ... In his day (WW-II), Canadian units were losing TWO DOZEN A DAY. Times have changed, clearly.
  • rebornFixer
    rebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    MrBrian wrote:
    It's not "developing cold feet", it's developing a sense of understanding, understanding that this war on terror is faux, it's only aim is to expand american power, canada should be embarrassed that it fell for the "fighting for freedom" line from the yanks. Allowing Canadian troops to shoot up and be shot in afghanistan is shitting on them.

    You and I disagree on the extent to which Islamic extremism poses a threat, though. That's our fundamental difference. You think its all American propoganda, and I don't (although I will certainly admit that American rhetoric has blown things out of proportion).

Categories