Safety Inside/Outside Wire - Re: Peoples Attitudes/joining

[Meridian]

I don't know about you, but I consider there to be a risk of death in all things in life, but especially in ALL trades in the military. Granted the pointy end is that farther out there into high-risk land,  but (those who know, please correct me if Im wrong) I would wager that an RMS clerk in Camp Wherever is still in quite the high-risk environment.  So high that civilian life insurers would not cover them.

May want to rethink the "combat versus non-combat" statement ref. probability of death.




(Modified to change the title a bit - pc)

 

[GO!!!]

May want to rethink the "combat versus non-combat" statement ref. probability of death.

Not really.

Check the unit affiliations of the men and woman who have been killed in Afghanistan since 2002. All are infanteers or attachments to infantry units, full stop.

The support trades do their valuable work from the larger camps, which is extremely well protected. I am only aware of one casualty as a result of enemy fire inside KAF, a reservist from Ottawa who was injured.

You have an extremely remote chance of being killed if you hold a job "inside the wire". So extreme, it has'nt happened yet. Casualties are taken in the jobs that involve exposing yourself to the enemy either while looking for him or acting against him.

 

[Meridian]

Hi GO.

But what about those problems the US had a few back with the grenades and stuff inside the camps?  I believe one was in a mess tent?
I know the odds are less.. but would you say someone inside the wire is better protected there than say, well.. in Canada?

 

[Strike]

GO!!!

Although the risk to those support trades is less than those whose work is primarily outside the wire, the risk is still high.  Mortar attacks that reach inside the camp don't discriminate.  I dare say it is only a matter of time.

 

[exsemjingo]

Anyone that afraid should not go on deployment, in or out of the wire.
I for one chose infantry.

 

[aesop081]

I for one chose infantry.

Congratulations......whats your point ?  :

 

[paracowboy]

Anyone that afraid should not go on deployment, in or out of the wire.
I for one chose infantry.

what are you babbling about?

 

[GO!!!]

GO!!!

Although the risk to those support trades is less than those whose work is primarily outside the wire, the risk is still high.  Mortar attacks that reach inside the camp don't discriminate.  I dare say it is only a matter of time.

Indirect fire attacks have been happening in and around KAF since we were first involved. One has yet to kill anyone on the base.

Please stop propagating this myth that all troops overseas are in dire danger and constant risk of death. They're not. Places like KAF are extraordinarily well guarded, protected and surveiled.

The only people killed have been the combat troops operating outside the wire, and saying "well, it will happen sometime" is just playing devil's advocate.

 

[George Wallace]

Indirect fire attacks have been happening in and around KAF since we were first involved. One has yet to kill anyone on the base.

Please stop propagating this myth that all troops overseas are in dire danger and constant risk of death. They're not. Places like KAF are extraordinarily well guarded, protected and surveiled.

The only people killed have been the combat troops operating outside the wire, and saying "well, it will happen sometime" is just playing devil's advocate.

Well GO!! you are way off base on this one.  I wonder if you would like to use the above spiel on the young MBdr from Ottawa who is lucky to be alive after suffering shrapnel to his lungs and punctured heart from that one lucky Rocket attack to cause injuries inside the Camp.  Your little rant is right out of it.

 

[Strike]

Well GO!! you are way off base on this one.  I wonder if you would like to use the above spiel on the young MBdr from Ottawa who is lucky to be alive after suffering shrapnel to his lungs and punctured heart from that one lucky Rocket attack to cause injuries inside the Camp.  Your little rant is right out of it.

No change there...

 

[GO!!!]

Well GO!! you are way off base on this one.  I wonder if you would like to use the above spiel on the young MBdr from Ottawa who is lucky to be alive after suffering shrapnel to his lungs and punctured heart from that one lucky Rocket attack to cause injuries inside the Camp.  Your little rant is right out of it.

I see.

So the one person who has been injured on KAF is suddenly comparable to the 27 killed and what, 80 wounded that happened outside the wire. I've yet to see any double amputees (theres two now) come from an attack on KAF.

This is about honesty, not ranting, at/with prospective members and their families.

The proof is in the pudding. Your chance of being killed overseas is extremely slim (one in a few thousand) if you are the holder of a job that does not actively patrol or attack the enemy, and remains inside the wire. The numbers prove it, full stop.

If you have some alternate numbers, which can demonstrate the high numbers of casualties due to enemy fire inside KAF, I'm all ears. The stats prove who is right out of it in this case.

 

[Korus]

IIRC a KBR worker was paralyzed, and another injured in a rocket attack on KAF in July '05, right when Archer 0 was starting to hit the ground. So it can happen, but I'm going to tend to agree with GO!!! on this one. It's bad ass luck if you get hurt by a rocket, and yes people do occasionally get hurt, but considering the many thousands of soldiers and civilians on KAF, for the number that get hurt by rocket attacks, there is nowhere near the risk to those on KAF that there is to those leaving the wire.

 

[George Wallace]

Just to be clear GO!!, I agree with you and in RoKo's finishing line here:

........... there is nowhere near the risk to those on KAF that there is to those leaving the wire.

I just felt you trivialized the others just a bit too much.

 

[Meridian]

there is nowhere near the risk to those on KAF that there is to those leaving the wire.

Indeed. But a civilian will immediately ask how it compares to being back home here, working a civilian job.
The arguments here from families and friends is that you are going to a war zone. The risks are thus infinitely higher than they would be if you worked an office job or on a base in Canada, even. At least that is the perception.  If that is entirely untrue, then please state that, but comparing inside the wire and outside the wire really doesn't relate to the core thoughts of most civilian parents and others,  which is "people get killed in Afghanistan more than they do here".   

I will concede that the in-wire types obviously are much safer than the out-wire, based on your expert testimony and pure logic...  but is being in-wire actually as safe as being in Canada?  I don't know?

 

[Fyuri]

Indeed. But a civilian will immediately ask how it compares to being back home here, working a civilian job.
The arguments here from families and friends is that you are going to a war zone. The risks are thus infinitely higher than they would be if you worked an office job or on a base in Canada, even. At least that is the perception.   If that is entirely untrue, then please state that, but comparing inside the wire and outside the wire really doesn't relate to the core thoughts of most civilian parents and others,  which is "people get killed in Afghanistan more than they do here".     

I will concede that the in-wire types obviously are much safer than the out-wire, based on your expert testimony and pure logic...  but is being in-wire actually as safe as being in Canada?  I don't know?

In my (expert, of course) opinion, you answered your question before even asking it, stating that it is, indeed, a war zone.

 

[paracowboy]

Indeed. But a civilian will immediately ask how it compares to being back home here, working a civilian job.
The arguments here from families and friends is that you are going to a war zone. The risks are thus infinitely higher than they would be if you worked an office job or on a base in Canada, even. At least that is the perception.   If that is entirely untrue, then please state that, but comparing inside the wire and outside the wire really doesn't relate to the core thoughts of most civilian parents and others,  which is "people get killed in Afghanistan more than they do here".     

I will concede that the in-wire types obviously are much safer than the out-wire, based on your expert testimony and pure logic...  but is being in-wire actually as safe as being in Canada?  I don't know?

WHAT?

 

[Zell_Dietrich]

Wow,  kinda splitting hairs here. (inside / outside wire )  Every soldier can be asked to stand in harms way, regardless of trade, rank, years of experience.  How about this we agree that being a soldier has unique dangers and unique opportunities. 

    I know myself I had overall indifferent responses by those who found out except for one guy.  Not to get too political but he was a candidate for one of the major parties in the last Federal election.  I got an earfull about how Afghanistan was a civil war and we have no right to be there. And that we were just there to take their oil. Then he started going on about how Darfur was a just cause that had legitimate UN support.  I felt like I just steeped on a landmine;  I'd known this guy for over a year and I had no idea he ... well was a freak.  I couldn't even begin to point out the holes in his logic or his fundamental assumptions.  Now he was simply espousing his party's official stance.  Suddenly I lost all respect for the political party I'd feverishly supported since I was 10.  So I just smiled and realised that I still can't support that party anymore, on their foreign policy stance alone.

But on the bright side I will save hours a month by not volunteering on the phones!  :-D  Whoo hoo

 

[paracowboy]

here's a crazy idea: how about (and let's just see if it works) anybody who has never actually been anywhere near any wire (either side of it) stay the hell out of the conversation? You're just de-railing a good discussion. It's the whole "Small child walking into a theatre" thing.

 

[GAP]

As someone who spent a large amount of time inside the wire and a shorter, but comparable time outside the wire, there is no comparison in the mind of the soldier. On an average day we received 10-15 incoming rounds of 122mm rocket or comparable mortar fire on the compound....it was just a daily fact of life. Sometimes they hit something, mostly not. People got injured (myself included) by shrapnel, some killed, but it was unusual, and we actually became pretty disdainful of the accuracy of the shooters.

Outside the wire is a whole different world. Death and destruction, plodding, sodding hard work, high temps, fear, etc. the whole ball of wax. Not war movie stuff, just everyday tension and you got used to that also...you adapted.

Going back inside the wire was considered safe. The 10-15 rounds were a nuisance, but nothing to fear.

That's the difference....the soldier's perception of where he is safe. The civilian will never understand it, yet will go out and drive his car into another car or pole to tally up the weekend statistics, not realizing that his world is equally dangerous, just that the soldier has learned to deal with perception of danger, the civilian never thinks it's going to happen to him.

 

[Korus]

Indeed. But a civilian will immediately ask how it compares to being back home here, working a civilian job.
The arguments here from families and friends is that you are going to a war zone. The risks are thus infinitely higher than they would be if you worked an office job or on a base in Canada, even. At least that is the perception.  If that is entirely untrue, then please state that, but comparing inside the wire and outside the wire really doesn't relate to the core thoughts of most civilian parents and others,  which is "people get killed in Afghanistan more than they do here".   

I will concede that the in-wire types obviously are much safer than the out-wire, based on your expert testimony and pure logic...  but is being in-wire actually as safe as being in Canada?  I don't know?

I feel more likely to get shanked walking 15 minutes from where I park my jeep to my respectable civvie electrical engineering job downtown and back every day than I did getting hurt on KAF when I was there. Maybe that's just my perception having been there, both inside and outside various wires in southern Afghanistan. (Admittedly more time inside than outside). Sure we got rocketed in camp, but I could get hit by a bus on the way to work (Mindthatbuswhatbussplat)

Obviously a civvie back home won't have a bloody clue about what it's like to roll out from the safety of the wire knowing that recently a suicide bomber had succeeded in killing or wounding your friends, or allied soldier, etc, and to deal with those feelings and get on with the job.

But, on the other hand, one of the toughest things for a soldier, wether inside or outside the wire is that separation from family and loved ones back home. That sacrifice and hardship on the family exists regardless....

That's the difference....the soldier's perception of where he is safe. The civilian will never understand it, yet will go out and drive his car into another car or pole to tally up the weekend statistics, not realizing that his world is equally dangerous, just that the soldier has learned to deal with perception of danger, the civilian never thinks it's going to happen to him.

I think you put it very well there, GAP.

(Edited for grammar. Added what's in italics. I hoped on a red-eye flight to Kelowna this morning and I'm on a much needed vacation mode this weekend.. Brain doesn't function well in that mode.)