Hillier flown from Afghan village after bomb blast

[Armymedic]

Yeah, whatever... More importantly the blast hit a Bison Ambulance.

If you look weaker then the rest, they will attack you. The target was a logistic convoy a short distance away.

http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2006/03/10/canadians-mission060310.html

Hillier flown from Afghan village after bomb blast
Last Updated Fri, 10 Mar 2006 06:05:31 EST
CBC News
Canada's top soldier was whisked away from an Afghan village Friday after a nearby Canadian convoy triggered a roadside bomb, which blew a wheel off the armoured vehicle.

Chief of Defence Staff Rick Hillier had been in southern Afghanistan to take part in a large Canadian mission in the area. Troops are fanning out in the area north of the city, visiting villages and tribal elders to establish a Canadian presence in the region, a former Taliban stronghold.

Hillier had been meeting with a village elder when the Canadian supply convoy, travelling about 800 metres away, triggered a roadside bomb.

No one was injured in the blast, but the wheel of the armoured Bison was damaged.

Hillier was first taken by armoured convoy to a Canadian operating base in Gumbad, about 70 km north of Kandahar, and then flown by U.S. Blackhawk helicopter. It's not clear where he was taken.

The Canadian mission, which involves several hundred soldiers, armoured vehicles, artillery and helicopters, is expected to last through March. it comes after a deadly week in the war-ravaged country that saw two Canadian soldiers killed and eleven injured in a road accident and two attacks.

Troops are pushing out from Kandahar in southern Afghanistan into areas where the Taliban has returned after being defeated by U.S.-led coalition forces in 2001, the CBC's Kas Roussy said from the Kandahar base.

They intend to pacify the area, a necessary first step to improve local governance and people's lives.

Part of the forces' work involves opening a road from Kandahar City to the north.

"It is a dangerous mission," Roussy said. She added that the area the Canadians are moving into "is still very insecure."

U.S. officers who know the area said there are dozens of militants operating in several bands. Six U.S. soldiers and 18 Afghans, including civilians, were killed on duty in the area in 2005.

Few details are available for security reasons, but Roussy described seeing vehicles and soldiers preparing to leave the base over the previous 24 hours.

There are 2,200 Canadians in southern Afghanistan, part of a multinational force led by Canadian Brig.-Gen. David Fraser.

A battle group from Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry took over frontline duties in Kandahar from a U.S. task force in late February.

Since then, two Canadians have been killed in an accident, and five have been hurt. Five more were wounded in a suicide attack, and a sixth received a severe axe wound to the head from a Taliban militant, who was shot dead by other Canadians.

That was believed to be the first engagement between Canadians and the Taliban.


Copyright ©2006 Canadian Broadcasting Corporation - All Rights Reserved

 

[Blakey]

How do you know it was a Bison Amb that was hit?

 

[Sig_Des]

from the article

No one was injured in the blast, but the wheel of the armoured Bison was damaged.

 

[Caleix]

Or if you watched the news you would have seen a big VR picture of a bison for Fld Amb purposes.

Caleix

 

[George Wallace]

Not all the Bison Fleet are Ambs.  They are used for a wide variety of purposes.  Ambs are just one.

 

[Franko]

How do you know it was a Bison Amb that was hit?

We know guys in theater.....

Regards

 

[DFW2T]

How do you know it was a Bison Amb that was hit?
[/quoGood question........???????WTFte]

 

[3rd Horseman]

Oh shame the media again blowing things out of context.


It is not an engagement nor is it under fire (as reported by the media) if you hit a mine its a normal day in a war zone.

Nice to hear the troops are ok and just another tire blown off for the umpteenth time.

 

[Patrolman]

From what I heard it was not a mine but a remote detonated IED . In which case it would be an attack. Generally Ambs are in a location where  other vehicles would have passed through before the blast was detonated. Am I right?

 

[3rd Horseman]

A remote detonated IED is just a mine by other name, IED is a new fancy highspeed word for "MINE" I don't consider it to be an attack in the formal sense of what attack means, but I guess for the sake of argument within the CF we could say it was a form of attack. The issue for me and the media is that the Canadian public does not define between the impersonal one off isolated attack of a mine be it remote , homemade or pressure detonated. Attack to them means fighting.

As for the Amb there is a tactical position for Ambs to be in a convoy I don't think we should comment on its place in the battle field as it may give info to the EN of how to attack one next time.

 

[a_majoor]

The nature of warfare and the various metrics used for success and failure are changing. While a "professional" army would use a mine or IED as the trigger for a larger action or series of actions (i.e. spring an ambush, or at least have the position covered by fire), fighters like the Taliban, AQ, Farah Adid's Militia in Somalia and so on operate by a different rule set.

A constant stream of attacks like the suicide bombs, IEDs and so on are designed primarily to sap the morale of our side; not just the soldiers (who would probably be the hardest nut to crack, being well trained, well equipped and well motivated), but the general public back here in Canada. Their "victory condition" is simply to grind down our forces with constant low level attacks, knowing this is highly publicised at home by the MSM. Eventually (they hope), the public will weary of the constant expenditure of blood and treasure (Bison's, G-wagons and LAVs are not cheap) with seemingly no visible change in conditions over there, and demand the politicians bring the troops home and disengage from the theater. (A particular danger is a manipulative MSM with its own agenda; notice the American press almost never, EVER reports on reconstruction efforts in Iraq or Afghanistan, reinforcing the preception there is no change happening despite the heroic efforts of the troops.) Unless the politicians are made of stern stuff like George W Bush, Tony Blair and John Howard, the siren song will become irresistible.

Linking to several other threads and the Ruxsted Group editorial, we need to go on a full press sales job so people know and understand what we are doing, why we are doing this and what we hope to achieve. Prime Minister Harper has a tough job ahead of him, this is one area we can help.

 

[Patrolman]

3rd Horseman you are right I would not want to give away parts of our tactics to the enemy so I changed my last post. I am sure Al-Quieda and the Taliban will figure out Canadian tactics on there own soon enough. In fact they probably already have.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Linking to several other threads and the Ruxsted Group editorial, we need to go on a full press sales job so people know and understand what we are doing, why we are doing this and what we hope to achieve. Prime Minister Harper has a tough job ahead of him, this is one area we can help.

Agreed, but I think that we must be careful of appearing to be shills for the current governing party. There are already journalists who are beginning to say that CDS is straying into "political" territory with his defence of the Afghan mission.  Luckily, there are all kinds of good and moral reasons for us to be in Afghanistan without the average soldier having to risk looking like the media spokesperson for the PMO.

 

[ErorZ]

This article has spin written all over it, the news has this down to an art, by using key words.

No whisking of Gen Hiller from the explosion site was made.  This is not first hand accounts by myself, but it isnt from the rumour mill either.

Gen Hiller just did an interview 5 minutes ago, I didn't listen in so I don't know if he makes things clearer or anything but it should start airing in the next few hours.  Let me know what he said, I don't really have easy access to a TV

 

[Drawoh]

A remote detonated IED is just a mine by other name, IED is a new fancy highspeed word for "MINE" I don't consider it to be an attack in the formal sense of what attack means, but I guess for the sake of argument within the CF we could say it was a form of attack. The issue for me and the media is that the Canadian public does not define between the impersonal one off isolated attack of a mine be it remote , homemade or pressure detonated. Attack to them means fighting.

As for the Amb there is a tactical position for Ambs to be in a convoy I don't think we should comment on its place in the battle field as it may give info to the EN of how to attack one next time.

Land mines generally refer to devices specifically manufactured for purpose, as distinguished from improvised explosive devices.
An IED typically consists of an explosive charge, possibly a booster charge, a detonator and a mechanism either mechanical or electronic, known as the initiation system. IEDs are extremely diverse in design, and may contain any type of firing device or initiator, plus various commercial, military, or contrived chemical or explosive fillers.An improvised explosive device (IED) is a formal name for explosive devices as often used in unconventional warfare by terrorists, guerrillas or commando forces in a theater of operations. Since the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the press has often referred to these devices as roadside bombs.

Wow are you misinformed.

 

[George Wallace]

Land mines generally refer to devices specifically manufactured for purpose, as distinguished from improvised explosive devices.
An IED typically consists of an explosive charge, possibly a booster charge, a detonator and a mechanism either mechanical or electronic, known as the initiation system. IEDs are extremely diverse in design, and may contain any type of firing device or initiator, plus various commercial, military, or contrived chemical or explosive fillers. An improvised explosive device (IED) is a formal name for explosive devices as often used in unconventional warfare by terrorists, guerrillas or commando forces in a theater of operations. Since the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the press has often referred to these devices as roadside bombs.

Wow are you misinformed.

A Land Mine typically consists of an explosive charge, possibly a booster charge, a detonator and a mechanism either mechanical or electronic, known as the initiation system.

Land Mines are extremely diverse in design, and may contain any type of firing device or initiator, plus various commercial, military, or contrived chemical or explosive fillers.

Land mines generally refer to devices specifically manufactured for purpose, as distinguished from improvised explosive devices.  Both are 'manufactured' to kill or maim through the use of an explosive device. 

WOW!  Who is misinformed?

For anyone interested, SEARCH Mines, Landmines, IEDs, VBIEDs and Booby Traps to have a look at what we have discussed in other Topics on these devices.  In many cases it will boil down to pure semantics.

 

[Kat Stevens]

Land mines generally refer to devices specifically manufactured for purpose, as distinguished from improvised explosive devices.
An IED typically consists of an explosive charge, possibly a booster charge, a detonator and a mechanism either mechanical or electronic, known as the initiation system. IEDs are extremely diverse in design, and may contain any type of firing device or initiator, plus various commercial, military, or contrived chemical or explosive fillers.An improvised explosive device (IED) is a formal name for explosive devices as often used in unconventional warfare by terrorists, guerrillas or commando forces in a theater of operations. Since the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the press has often referred to these devices as roadside bombs.

Wow are you misinformed.

Yours is a text book definition of a mine.  As i understand it, the term IED came into vogue during that nasty business in Ulster, when the en used absolutely anything lying about and made a booby trap out of it.  A remote detonated "IED" in Iraq differs from an M-18 how, exactly?  Both are constructed to spew death at the push of a button. Only difference, M-18 is directional doom, "RDIED" is a 360 degree killer.  O'course, I was wrong once before.... 8)

 

[Kirkhill]

O'course, I was wrong once before....

O'Course that was only when you thought you were wrong and turned out to be right all along. ;D

IIRC at the time of the Warrenpoint bombing in 1979 (a patrol of Paras in Landrovers blown up as they passed a culvert full or Semtex or ANFO - 18 fatalities) the IED in question was also known as a "command detonated mine".   Similarly in World War 1 tunnels dug under trenches, filled with Amatol (TNT and AN), and detonated were also known as mines, as in Coal mines.  

Or even earlier, digging tunnels under castle walls and having them fall down when you "pull the props out from under them" was undermining.

Trivia of the day....

Cheers.

 

[Kat Stevens]

yes, I thought I was wrong once, but I was mistaken.  If I'm ever wrong, I'll be the first one to admit it. I think this whole IED thing was a ball that the media picked up and ran with.  It sounds like a much cooler army acronym than "command or remote detonated mine".  Whatever the nomenclature, people die

 

[tomahawk6]

I am not sure it was wise for Hillier to depart the AO so quickly after the IED went off. The blast was 800 meters away after all.