• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Canadians in Kandahar fire shots in self-defence

Status
Not open for further replies.

Armymedic

Army.ca Veteran
Inactive
Mentor
Reaction score
0
Points
410
From CTV:

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1124463532089_119872732/?hub=World

Canadians in Kandahar fire shots in self-defence
CTV.ca News Staff

Canadian soldiers fired their first shots in self-defence on Thursday since arriving in the volatile southern Afghan province of Kandahar late last month.

Troops were patrolling the streets during the country's Independence Day celebrations when a van tried to overtake their convoy from behind.

A military spokesman has said there were concerns that the driver might be a suicide bomber so a gunner fired four rounds into the vehicle's engine block to disable it.

According to initial reports, no one is believed to have been injured during the incident.

On Thursday, a roadside bomb explosion in southern Afghanistan killed two American soldiers and wounded another two, according to U.S. military officials.

The troops were travelling in an armoured vehicle north of Kandahar, part of a convoy supporting a road construction project.

"These terrorists are attacking the very forces working to improve Afghanistan," Brig. Gen. Jack Sterling, a deputy commander of the U.S.-led coalition, told The Associated Press.

"It's unconscionable that the Taliban would do something like this. They only offer death and continued suffering to the people of Afghanistan."

Canada has deployed 250 soldiers to Kandahar, widely known as a hotbed of militant activity, to provide security in the area surrounding their compound for Afghanistan's national elections on Sept. 18.

Canada is also taking over the Provincial Reconstruction Team (PRT) and responsibility for the area surrounding it from an American team that had been in the region for almost two years.

Over the next two months, the PRT will work with other NATO countries on security and reconstruction efforts, while promoting diplomacy in the southern Afghan provinces.

Its mission is the third phase of a NATO expansion that will eventually take over the reins from the U.S.-led Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan.

Col. Steve Noonan, the PRT's task force commander, has acknowledged that the threat level in Kandahar is greater than when troops were in the capital city of Kabul, where they were stationed earlier.

"We acknowledge and understand the risk," he said.

"This is what we have trained for. This is what we've prepared for."

While Afghanistan is considered to be relatively safer for military personnel when compared to countries such as Iraq, Canadians should not discount the fact that some of their soldiers will not be coming home, one defence expert said.

"I think any country, such as our good friends and neighbours the Canadians, sending (more than) 1,500 troops to Afghanistan has to expect a number of casualties in the coming months," said Brookings Institution scholar Michael O'Hanlon, appearing on CTV's Question Period last month.

:cdn:

So,

Tell me why embedded reporters are good?

ROE's - use of deadly force...was it justified?
 
Armymedic said:
ROE's - use of deadly force...was it justified?

Sounds like they handled the situation fine and escalated according to their ROE's to me ......
 
MJP said:
Sounds like they handled the situation fine and escalated according to their ROE's to me ......

I agree.
They didnt shoot the driver, they only used the minimum necessary force to stop the situation. I would have done the exact same thing.
I don't know about you guys but I wouldnt be taking any chances like that, even if it was just some guy in a hurry.
 
From CBC:

Canadian troops fire on vehicle in Khandahar, Afghanistan
Last Updated Fri, 19 Aug 2005 13:43:51 EDT
CBC News
Canadian troops have fired shots in Afghanistan's Khandahar region. Officials report that a Canadian soldier opened fire today to stop a vehicle.

It's the first time since deployment in the region that Canadian soldiers have fired weapons. Lieutenant-Colonel David Anderson, Task Force Afghanistan Chief of Staff in Kabul, says the incident happened during a routine patrol.

The taxi was warned off several times before the soldier fired four machine-gun rounds into the engine, disabling the vehicle.

Officials say nobody was hurt in the incident, though the convoy did not stop to check on the driver, fearing a suicide bomb.

Anderson says the incident was well within Canada's rules of engagement for the Kandahar provincial reconstruction team mission.


 
So,

Tell me why embedded reporters are good?

sorry armymedic - do you mean to suggest that this is a bad thing or a good thing? Just wanted clarification.

cheers, mdh
 
4 in the engine compartment and 2 in the head would "probably" still fall well within their ROE's. The principal of self defence always applies. You think he's a suicide bomber, therefore you are more than okay to send him to meet Allah.
Good one troops, keep alert. Methinks it might just get a little "hotter" in Kandahar.
 
2 Cdo said:
Good one troops, keep alert. Methinks it might just get a little "hotter" in Kandahar.

Sounds like they're up for it.  ;)
 
mdh said:
sorry armymedic - do you mean to suggest that this is a bad thing or a good thing? Just wanted clarification.

cheers, mdh

Indifferent, actually. There are several pro and cons to having reporters in camp.

If this situation went badly, for instance the driver was killed and no explosive devices were found, how do you suppose it would be reported?

Also, why is it reported as "fire shots in self-defence"?

(I am attempting to stimulate conversation, not second guessing the on scene commander, whom I personally think made a wise choice)



 
Without having all the details I think our soldiers reacted well within the ROE's. Firing four rounds into a vehicle's engine block to disable it is a reasonable approach to this incident and it also send a message that the troops are alert. But the suicide bomber is still free to have another shot at the Troops. Dealing with an enemy that blends in with the local population is never an easy situation. You don't want to react to strongly in order to avoid collateral damage.
 
Indifferent, actually. There are several pro and cons to having reporters in camp.

If this situation went badly, for instance the driver was killed and no explosive devices were found, how do you suppose it would be reported?

Also, why is it reported as "fire shots in self-defence"?

(I am attempting to stimulate conversation, not second guessing the on scene commander, whom I personally think made a wise choice)

Ok - gotcha - I would argue embeds are the best practice for reporters and the CF - it provides them with access to the front while allowing the military some control in terms of where reporters go.

It also creates a bond with the unit - it's pretty tough to be blatantly critical of the grunts you're humping it with (well at least for most journalists  ??? .) Compared to pooling reporters - which was the practice in GW1 - I think that's a good compromise.

Moreover pooling tended to irritate reporters who couldn't get the access they wanted - (and their editors often demanded.)  As a result pooling tended to lead to a lot of freelancing around the battlefield as individual journos tried to maintain "independence" and hired whatever local to drive them around.  (The only other alternative would be letting reporters go where ever they want to - a la Vietnam - but we know what kind of coverage that produced.)

As for the "what if" scenario you raised - I would say that such an incident would have been reported anyway whether the journos are with you or not - and that if you have a reporter actually with the convoy - sharing the same potential risk - the reporter isn't likely to make any snap judgements.

Overall, embedding appears to have been fairly successful for the US military in Iraq - especially during the march on Baghdad. 

my two cents,
cheers, mdh
 
I'm glad the boys fired back and quickly. Don't want the locals thinking your just there for show. Johnny Canuck don't take no crap. :cdn:
 
Armymedic said:
It's the first time since deployment in the region that Canadian soldiers have fired weapons. Lieutenant-Colonel David Anderson, Task Force Afghanistan Chief of Staff in Kabul, says the incident happened during a routine patrol.

Hey...wait a second....
 
If you have to ask, you don't need to know....
 
And because of the stupid 'we're the worlds peacekeepers YAY' attitude the public has, the first time our guys injure someone over there while escalating their ROEs their is going to be a huge shit storm.   You know it's going to hit the news and it's going to be a national story.
Our soldiers don't need that kind of pressure when they are making life and death decisions.

Edit: Spelling
 
Ghost778 said:
the first time our guys injure someone over there while escilating their ROEs their is going to be a huge crap storm.   You know it's going to hit the news and it's going to be a national story.

exactly what I was thinking.

One of us has yet to kill one of them (since OP Apollo snipers, but that wasn't reported the day it happened), where the media has reported a Canadian soldier had to kill an insurgent or otherwise. I think once that hurdle is gone over will the "peacekeeper" myth die...

that is once the soldier is cleared of wrong doing by the public inquiry hearings.
 
The last thing a soldier needs to think about is getting charged for doing his job, good way to scare them out of not doing their job and getting injured, or worse.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top