# 27 Nov 04:  Canadian Patrol Shot at in Afghanistan



## scm77 (27 Nov 2004)

Weapons fire near Canadian soldiers in Kabul under investigation: Defence

Canadian Press

November 27, 2004

ADVERTISEMENT

OTTAWA -- Weapons fire near a Canadian military patrol in Afghanistan caused no injuries but is still under investigation, says a spokesman for federal Defence Minister Bill Graham.

A Canadian patrol, part of the NATO security force, reported that an unidentified helicopter "fired near it" while it was on operations near an air weapons range several kilometres east of Kabul, the spokesman said Saturday.

None of the eight soldiers in the patrol was injured in the incident, which occurred at about 9:10 p.m. local time Friday, the spokesman added.

The soldiers returned to their Canadian camp to report the incident.

It is now under investigation by NATO's International Security Assistance Force and Kabul multinational brigade headquarters' authorities, the spokesman said.
© The Canadian Press 2004
http://www.canada.com/national/story.html?id=d8fbb17d-706e-4139-90dd-ed0a9ee4f6b1
-------------------------
Strange.  Good thing they are all alright.


----------



## canuck101 (27 Nov 2004)

Yup


----------



## 043 (27 Nov 2004)

Just another day..............sigh!


----------



## sgt_mandal (27 Nov 2004)

Have there been any recent injuries or deaths involving Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan? May sound like a stupid question, but you hardly hear anynews of them over there or should i watch a different news show.


----------



## stukirkpatrick (27 Nov 2004)

in this case no news is good news...there have been no recent Canadian deaths in Afghanistan since the suicide bomber at the beginning of the year.  If one is killed, it would definitely be on the news.  There are people in Canada who still care about the military.


----------



## Armymedic (27 Nov 2004)

I saw this earlier, and felt it was barely worthy of printing. They sure sensationalize it with the title.


----------



## sgt_mandal (28 Nov 2004)

That's good to hear then


----------



## Franko (29 Nov 2004)

I tried to see what the CTV or CBC would have to say about it......

Nothing

It didn't even make a blurb on the national news.  :

The leading story was IIRC, about Dubbia comming to Ottawa  :

Oh....they care about the troops when someone gets killed and gets headlines....

Regards


----------



## KevinB (1 Dec 2004)

Nothing new - if they printed every time a Cdn was shot at overseas the public might think we were a real Army...


----------



## HollywoodHitman (1 Dec 2004)

Canada has an army?

(You have no idea how many times I have heard that) :threat:


----------



## soldiers301 (3 Dec 2004)

People who said that are definitly stupid.


----------



## cbt arms sub tech (5 Dec 2004)

Thank god there are forum's, I'm sure the gov't definitely doesn't want too much press being printed about Canadians being shot at...


----------



## Whiskey_Dan (6 Dec 2004)

Well you think a helicopter firing in the vicinity of an "air weapons range" would signal that it was firing on the "air weapons range" but regardless, the media only wants to portray what they see as news, not what really matters. I wish they would publicize Canada's military more, then we'd have more public support.


----------



## Armymedic (6 Dec 2004)

Scuttlebutt is the helo fired a little closer then "in the vicinity"...

Rumour is that the patrol is glad the gunner was a poor shot.


----------



## pbi (8 Dec 2004)

The helicopter did not fire its weapons inside the impact area of the range:this was the problem: it discharged outside the template. It is unlikely that the patrol would have been planned (or authorized) through a range danger area. The Cdn patrol was transiting a well known and well used patrol route outside (but near) the range when this incident happened. The patrol vehicles were also displaying three different night marking systems. Cheers.


----------



## Whiskey_Dan (10 Dec 2004)

pbi said:
			
		

> The helicopter did not fire its weapons inside the impact area of the range:this was the problem: it discharged outside the template. It is unlikely that the patrol would have been planned (or authorized) through a range danger area. The Cdn patrol was transiting a well known and well used patrol route outside (but near) the range when this incident happened. The patrol vehicles were also displaying three different night marking systems. Cheers.


Alright, thanks for the extra info there.


----------



## RCnapalm (11 Dec 2004)

HollywoodHitman said:
			
		

> Canada has an army?
> 
> (You have no idea how many times I have heard that) :threat:



LOL, because of the Winnipeg Flood and the Halifax Hurricane, whenever i'm out with a corps of cadets
the most common one I get is : ''Jesus bad weathers comin' in''     :fifty:


----------

