Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

'Big bomb' killed troops instantly

GRAEME SMITH

Globe and Mail Update

Latest comment posted at 1:09 AM EST 13/04/07

Narrow passage concealed the deadliest bomb to hit a Canadian military vehicle in half a century ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. R C from Canada writes: I don't like where this protracted mission is going. There is little credit the Taliban can take for this particular cowardly assault on Canadian Forces members. "Small bombs" weren't achieving the desired impact so the insurgents move to "Big bombs"; this is hardly original or dignified. As I have stated earlier, Canada has done enough for Afghanistan. Lives have been lost and dollars spend rebuilding it. We can continue to send them financial support to keep our perceived global "dogoodery" image. These 6 brave soldiers should be the absolute last ones to perish over there.
  2. Al MacDonald from Think Green, Canada writes: Helicoptors were used with tremendous effect in Vienam. They are so much faster and safer troop carriers than the Nyala's or LavIII's. Not only do they offer very fast and effetive transport to and from combat zones, but they are incredibly effective gun supports with the ability to absolutely hammer the enemy with overwhelming firepower. Maybe we should be considering more use of this type of airborne troop carrier. Much much cooler than the leapord tanks with a far greater range of operations. Not advocating the end of our tanks, nylas, and lavIII's in Afghanistan, but support them with airborne gunships and troop carriers.
  3. glenn hoefer from forks, United States writes: Al; The US lost over 2000 helicopters shot down, and another 2000 crashed in "accidents" in Vietnam. Sure you want to fly around?

    Russia will give the Taliban all it needs to school western allied forces. Reading up on Iraq lately? Payback is what you would expect it to be. Helicopters are sitting ducks to squad forces with right modern weapons

    Expect more of this as the mission progresses.
  4. jens gessner from Canada writes: Al MacDonald: It seems to me you are watching a bit too much Discovery Channel. Helicopters are not nearly as superior as some of those programs make them out to be, and a lot has happened since Vietnam.

    The Russians were in Afghanistan for eight years, I bet they have a story to tell about their helicopters. Also, the U.S. are losing attack helicopters and troop carriers at an increasing rate in Iraq.

    LAVs were considered relatively safe troop carriers until now. But the Taliban fighters found a way to destroy them, so I am afraid we might see more such incidents in the future.

    I have little doubt the Taliban would adjust their weaponry if we used helicopters instead - just like the Mujahedeen did against the Russians.
  5. Al MacDonald from Think Green, Canada writes: Glen and Jens: So much for that thought. Guess the Romans knew it best afterall. The most effective way to kill your enemy is up close with your sword.
  6. Phil Primeau from Toronto, Canada writes: I am fully behind the mission and the troops, but there is one part of this story that I picked up on that I have a comment about.

    "Chief Warrant Officer Mark Baisley, the battle group's regimental sergeant-major, said the incident has taken a toll on the troops but they're recovering admirably. 'Initially it was shock and disbelief,' CWO Baisley said. 'But they're bouncing back. They're tough. . . . We come over here. We understand the risks we're going into.'"

    Regarding this statement, I really hope the surviving troops of 'H' company wil be given the support and tools needed to recover emotionally from losing 6 of their friends/comrades in thios manner. I would estimate that survivor's guilt, and other such mental health issues could arise from sucha traumatic experience. To me the old "they're tough" line doesn't really cut it - so I hope that message is being deployed as a public image poly rather than an actual reflection of military SOPs in regards to treatment of these men.
  7. agent sixtynine from Calgary, Canada writes: Thank you, Hotel Company.
    The Taliban are cowards and will be defeated if the apologists will let you.
    When ever we have an incident like this my first reaction is, it's not worth Canadian losses. Then I think about how I would feel waching my sons be forced to kneel and memorize the Koran for hours a day. My daughters grow up illiterate and my wife forced into subjugation and starvation should anything happen to me. I look around and see the wealth and freedom enjoyed in the west and realize what it is that you are trying to accomplish in Afghanistan. A worthy cause and I solute those fighting the good fight.
  8. James Clost from chaozhou, guangdong, China writes: " Phil Primeau from Toronto, Canada writes: Regarding this statement, I really hope the surviving troops of 'H' company wil be given the support and tools needed to recover emotionally from losing 6 of their friends/comrades in thios manner. "

    when i served in the military mission to yugoslavia in the 1990s, a system was being put into place to help soldiers who had to deal with trauma, both physical and emotional. i'm quite certain that program has been developed even further in the ensuing years, and that it is available at the camp in afghanistan. anyone who's been to the mission in afghanistan might want to comment further.
  9. Richard Roskell from Naramata, Canada writes: A "cowardly assault" against one of Canada's armoured vehicles? Perhaps those with military experience can explain: Do many modern Western militaries not deploy anti-tank and anti-personnel mines, just as the Taliban used against us? Is it not the case that the Russians planted millions of landmines in Afghanistan during their occupation, and that these same landmines are now dug up and redeployed against our vehicles?

    As far as I know, the Taliban don't have the ability to manufacture weapons. Their weaponry (thus far) comes from all the left-overs from PREVIOUS conflicts in their country. And I understand that it's little exaggeration to say that there's an AK-47 under every bed in Afghanistan. Based on the easy availability of weapons, you'd think Afghans would be fully embracing American-style democracy.
  10. Michael Shannon from Iraq writes: The cowardly Taliban? The Taliban are outnumbered, vastly outgunned and are subject to high tech surviellience at every turn yet they continue to fight despite taking high casualities. This is hardly cowardice. I guarantee that if the tables were turned or if the Taliban had even 50% of the firepower available to the west NATO would never have entered Afghanistan.
  11. Robin Adams from Ottawa, Canada writes: R C and others, I think discussing small bombs vs big bombs is pointless. The Pashtun tribesmen will use both as well as AK 47 bullets, RPGs, suicide attacks, etc. We use standard issue firearms, crew mounted machine guns, mortars, call in airstrikes, helicopter attacks, etc. I don't see what any discussion about "cowardice" or "bravery" has to do with anything. You'll fight with what you've got. We win some, they win some. That's war.

    I've read some interesting articles that suggest Bush may have written off or been actively trying to overthrow Musharref. (President of Pakistan). Also the peace treaty, granted its very shaky, the Pakistanis have negotiated with the tribesman essentially provide them safe haven there so the vast majority of their supplies and such will undoubtedly come from there.
  12. OK from Ontario from Toronto, Canada writes: Al MacDonald: Nice thought (the helo's), but even if it wasn't for the other points raised, we don't have the helo's to do the job. The piece of garbage called the Griffen that the Air Force bought back when the Cretin Govt scrapped the Maritime helo, is only good for reporting on traffic over the 401. Can't lift anything heavy, or many people. It'll be years before we get the new Chinooks into service. The military has all sorts of social workers and religious leaders to help troops come to term with death and destruction. During the Swiss Air Disaster in Halifax, they had mandatory courses on how to recognize Critical Incident Stress, both in yourself and others, and its effects and affects on people. That was in addition to the psychologists and group sessions at the ready for people suffering from the nightmeres that follow picking up pieces of human bodies on the rocky beaches in NS. It's improved since then. As for cowardly attacks, in War the ends justify the means. Not that I'm supporting the Taliban, just that land mines are part of war - a cheap way to achieve your aims. Not very discriminatory, but there you go. Non-guided bombs aren't very discriminatory either. Hopefully we'll be able to get the Afghans on their feet, and able to deal with this insurgency themselves.
  13. Cymro yn byw yma Canada from Canada writes: When the USA and its allies (including Canada) and client states are seen to be hostile to Islam. whether it be in Palestine, Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran or wherever, I suggest that at some time, as was the case with Russia, they will have to either withdraw or seek a peaceful resolution, if this is possible. Somalia, (USA withdraw and now client state Ethiopia continues), Lebanon (US forces withdrew after devastating attacks), Gaza Strip (Israel withdraw after devastating stay but not soon enough) and West Bank (client state Israel still encroaching on Arab lands), Iraq (allies Australia, UK, Canada) results now in defeat or stalemate depending on your point of view..

    The Russians were smart enough to withdraw while there was time but to continue the struggle within the confines of their own borders to the distress of Russians and everybody else.

    The longer these wars go on the more difficult it will become to reach a resoliution. At this time the Taliban is talking peace with the government of Afghanistan. This should be encouraged. There are now a few encouraging voices both in Canada and in the USA.
  14. Cymro yn byw yma Canada from Canada writes: "The Taliban are cowards and will be defeated if the apologists will let you."

    The wish is father to the thought.

    Be real. Think about all the guerilla wars that you have read about. In China (Mao), Nepal, S America (various, some going on now), Cuba, Afghanistan (against the Brits in the 19 th century) There's more; a lot more. Too many to mention. Do you read much history? Any history?
  15. Freddie Fender from Canada writes: OK from Ontario from Toronto, Canada writes: "Al MacDonald: Nice thought (the helo's), but even if it wasn't for the other points raised, we don't have the helo's to do the job. The piece of garbage called the Griffen that the Air Force bought back when the Cretin Govt scrapped the Maritime helo, is only good for reporting on traffic over the 401. Can't lift anything heavy, or many people."

    OK from Ontario - You are correct about the limitations of the Griffon helicopter, however, I would suggest that you check your facts prior to posting. The Griffon helicopter was procured by the Mulroney government obstensibly to replace the Kiowa, Huey and Twin Huey helicopters, aircraft that support the army. The contract was awarded in September 1992. This aircraft had absolutely nothing to do with the Maritime Helicopter cancelled by Chretien in 1993. In reality, the manufacture of 100 Griffons was a sop to the Quebec aerospace industry, the aircraft being assembled in Mirabel. The Canadian Forces are desperate for some good helicopters such as Chinooks and armed helicopters. You can't blame the Liberals for the Griffon, however.
  16. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: According to some here, the Taliban are using "cowardly" tactics and are "terrorists". And yet, the French Maquis, along with all the other European resistance movements that fought the German occupation of their countries during WWII, and used the same tactics, weapons and strategies are "freedom fighters", "heroic" and "upstanding citizens". Historical revisionism and selective amnesia - ya gotta love it! Speaking of selective amnesia, it is useful to recall that nobody has ever conquered Afghanistan. Not Alexander the Great, not the British, not the Soviets and no one in between. While we are on the subject of selective amnesia, it is useful to recall the following: the Soviets had a much larger force in Afghanistan and were much less sensitive about local customs and "collateral damage" than NATO is - the descriptor "extreme brutality" comes to mind for some strange reason. And yet, despite much higher force levels and extreme brutality in the application of that force level, the Soviets got their butts kicked out, and their heads handed to them on a platter. On what basis does anyone assume NATO will do any better? Especially when one considers the trivial detail that the crowd presently in charge in Afghanistan - with US / NATO blessings and support - are the same criminals and warlords that the Taliban was originaly formed to kick out in the first place? Isn't it awkward that the Minister responsible for eradicting the drug trade in Afghanistan happens to be the #3 drug dealer in the country? And that this is what he was making his money off between 1990 and 95? The simplistic logic and mentality of the "mission supporters" here, and the classicly extremist, black and white philosophy of "If you ain't with us, you're agin' us" makes the ideological and political position these people hold clear. Tragically, the world isn't black and white - it's mostly grey. Deal with it. Go away. Don't come back until you come up with something better to sell us.
  17. Paul Rogers from Otttawa, Canada writes: Agent sixtynine - you're joking, right? "... my sons be forced to kneel and memorize the Koran for hours a day. My daughters grow up illiterate and my wife forced into subjugation and starvation ..."

    That's likely to happen - the Taliban navy is at the door, just ask General Fraser. What joke! The Taliban were never threatening to invade Canada. Its the old thing, repeat the lies often enough and people will start to believe them. Like the Iraq 9/11 link. There never was one, but Bush and Co. kept linking them so that the majority of Americans think there is a link.

    Please think for yourself - don't propogate the lies
  18. R C from Canada writes: To plant an indiscriminate explosive device in a road is cowardice. I supported Canada's role in rebuilding Afghanistan and giving respite to those who opposed the Taliban's rule. They were noble efforts carried out by a country who abide by the laws of armed conflict.
  19. Orest Zarowsky from Canada writes: @ R C : Get a grip. Review your history. And stop being a WIMP rascist. If irt was "heroic" for the French, Dutch, Norwegian, Danish, Belgian, Czech, Polish, Ukrainian, Russian and so on Resistances to use exactly the same weapons and tactics against the Germans in WWII, how is it "cowardly" if the Taliban dop the same thing in Afghanistan? especially since they were the actual government when the US invaded? Or is the "Rag-head" issue and non-white skin your justification for calling the Taliban and their assymetrical tactics "cowardly"?
  20. R C from Canada writes: Orest that "assymetrical tactic" killed 6 Canadians who follow the rules of armed conflict. Do you support what happened to our Soldiers?
  21. Richard Roskell from Naramata, Canada writes: R C, consider the following information concerning Canada's actions in Operation Medusa last fall:

    "At around 2am on October 18, [2006] NATO helicopters firing on houses in the village of Ashogo in Kandahar killed between nine and thirteen civilians, including women and children. Almost simultaneously, in neighboring Helmand province, another NATO air strike killed a reported thirteen civilians. Additionally, NATO revealed that just one purported Taliban insurgent was killed in the attacks. In fact, during the attack on Ashogo, there were no Taliban whatsoever in the village, according to local officials. NATO blamed the botched attacks on intelligence failures."

    "Less than a week after the two tragedies of October 18 came an even more horrible event. Before dawn on October 24 -- and on the cusp of Eid celebrations -- NATO air strikes in the Panjwaii district of Kandahar, ostensibly aimed at Taliban insurgents, claimed the lives of numerous innocent civilians. Estimates at the time ranged from 30 to 90 dead villagers; NATO initially conceded only 11 civilian deaths while claiming 48 dead insurgents. Survivors told of their homes being bombed and of fleeing across fields with their families, while NATO planes strafed them. Reportedly, over 50 homes were destroyed."

    (http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=11746)

    Do you support the slaughter of innocent civilians, R C? Of course you don't, any more than Orest supports what happened to our soldiers.

    Orest and others are arguing for an end to the conflict, an end to the carnage inflicted on and by all sides. Surely you don't have a problem with reduced numbers of dead and injured?
  22. Richard Roskell from Naramata, Canada writes: The Road Out

    1. U.N. calls for an immediate cessation of all hostilities by all parties in Afghanistan.

    2. The current illegal status of the Taliban is rescinded.

    3. The Taliban are offered the unrestricted chance to field candidates in the next presidential and parliamentary elections. (No Taliban candidate was permitted to run in previous elections.)

    4. NATO remains in a peacekeeping role until the result of the next elections. The new government will be elected in part on a mandate concerning NATO's role, and will act accordingly.

    5. The UN should promptly examine the possibility of an autonomous region comprised of south-eastern Afghanistan joined to the NWFP of Pakistan.

  23. R C from Canada writes: Richard were these Canadian aircraft?
  24. Mark Orr from Toronto, Canada writes: RC, it makes me laugh when people use the term "cowardly" to discribe the Taliban fighters. We send our troops out in large armoured vehicles, drop bombs from 30,000 feet, wear body armour, used snipers and artillary. Yet when they strap on a bomb and walk to a certain death, they become "cowards". I myself am awestruck by the courage and determination of these people. To take on the most advanced military technology with small arms and guerilla tactics, is incredibly couragous. One has to ask oneself, why do they hate us so much that their determination is so great?
  25. R C from Canada writes: With size of Canada's forces in Afghanistan and complete lack of our own equipment, I would say we are the masters of guerrilla warfare. It is a purely altruistic mission to help the Afghan people who are tired of being bullied. Perhaps the Taliban see this and it drives them to suicidal jealousy.
    Let freedom win the hearts and minds of Afghans not tyranny!

    Is that the answer people expected?
  26. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: @ RC: The IEDs and mines the Taliban are using are hardly what one can call indiscriminate. Based on what has been reported, any objective and rational observer would concede that the Taliban are very discriminating and accurate in the use of these weapons. Suicide bombers, however, are a whole different kettle of fish. But, no matter what one may think of the Taliban's socio-political and religious philosophy and overall performance when they ruled Afghanistan, calling them "cowards" is utterly incorrect. The approach to the opposition you and your fellow-travellers take is an old and classic one. The sole purpose of which is to de-humanize the "enemy", making it much easier to kill them. Not only on an individual level, but on a mass scale. Dresden comes to mind, as does Auschwitz, the artificial famine in Ukraine in 1932, the butchery in China, Cambodia's Killing Fields, Sniper Alley in Sarajevo, Rwanda and Darfur, etc. I note that you didn't actually respond to any of the details and history I raised. Selective amnesia strikes again. Not to mention that brilliant, and "successful", black and white thinking so beloved of extremist morons at both ends of the political spectrum. Funny how you conclude that anyone raising legitimate issues and facts automatically doesn't care about the deaths of our troops in combat, and is a "supporter" of the Taliban and like groups, and all they stand for. This is merely another case of the blinkered and stupid way in which you and your ilk deal with all aspects of reality. For the record, I am extremely unhappy about the woundings, never mind deaths, of our Canadian troops in Afghanistan. I am equally dismayed by the deaths of Afghani civillians - the Taliban are combatants and don't have the same gravitas. Your assertion that Canadian troops are the true "masters of guerrilla warfare" is risable. It only proves how ignorant and stupid you really are. Make sure your brain is engaged before you put your moth in gear.
  27. R C from Canada writes: You Orest are a little worm. Spew your bile at someone else please.
  28. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: @ R C: Hit some nerves, I see. NOTHING you have posted shows that you are anything other than a politically and ideologically driven extremist. You refuse to address history, politics, facts or reality. You persist in pathetic attempts to dehumanize the Afghan people to enable and justify their mass murder. You resort to personal attacks because you are too stupid to do anything else. Here's some of your own medicine. You are a TROLL, just like Karol Karolak. He fabricates material - you are at the same moral and intellectual level. Slither back under your rock.
  29. R C from Canada writes: "You Orest are a little worm"
    -Quoted for truth

    What would you like to discuss Orest. Where have I dehumanized the Afghan people?
    Lets start there ok.
  30. john kordos from london calling, Canada writes: The only cowards in this war left just after it started- and they will soon be leaving from where they went too.(Iraq)
    We as a nation are so going to get are asses kicked over there.
    I support our troops coming home and the insurgency that will bring them back. Why? Because this is not winable -just ask 30 million Pashtuns.
  31. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: @ R C: Let's start with your use of terms like "cowardly". We can then procede to your persistant ad hominem and personal attacks, not only at me, but anyone else that doesn't toe your specific line. We can then continue with your consistent and transparent refusal and failure to actually address any substantive and real historical issues raised - not only by me - but other posters here who have "spoken" to you directly. And then we can add the entire contents of your most recent post, and I quote: "R C from Canada writes: "You Orest are a little worm" -Quoted for truth What would you like to discuss Orest. Where have I dehumanized the Afghan people? Lets start there ok. Posted 11/04/07 at 9:13 PM EDT " Note the following: repetition of the ad hominem and personal attack and slur; the failure to address any of the points / issues I - or others - raised in previous posts; the failure to clarify your own previously posted comments or observations; the continued failure to answer any of the questions asked of you, and most importantly, the evasion of the legitimate comparison to a demonstrable and self-confessed lying troll known as Karol Karolak. Say, R C you wouldn't be a pseudonym poster for Karol, would you? This is the last time I will respond to anything you post R C: You are, out of your own mouth, nothing more than, on your very best day, a lying, last-rate punk-a%s bit$h REMF. Operating in moron-mode by default. Rabid Right Wing as well. Most likely, you are a Calgarian. Your intellectual performance is par for the course for the Calgarians posting in these threads. I tell you again - slither back under whatever rock it is you normally exist under. And don't come back until you can display real evidence of true cognitive function and acceptance of reality. Bitc%% - you is nothing more than a TROLL. And a moron-mode one at that. FOAD!
  32. john kordos from london calling, Canada writes: what he said
  33. john kordos from london calling, Canada writes: R.C did you coin the term "...it drives them to suicidal jealousy.
    "
    just curious, never heard of suicidal jealousy before.
  34. jason davidson from Victoria, Canada writes: Determined . ..formidable . . . fierce . . . organized . . . all these adjectives can describe the Taliban. But cowardly? No - dying in a suicide mission for a cause is not cowardly. The cause, of course, is to get rid of what they perceive to be the occupying, infidel army.
  35. R C from Canada writes: Is this thread turning into a pro-taliban circle jerk? I'm glad I can write a cheeky comment and bring out everyones true feelings on them.
  36. True Canadian from Hamilton, Canada writes: Dropping a 2000 lbs bunker buster on a wedding party from 30,000 feet in the air is "bravery"!
  37. PG from BC from Canada writes: This was not a cowardly act, this was a devious military maneuver. They got us this time. Somebody had to predict that at some time a LAV or other amoured vehicle was going to choose that path. Then they assembled a bomb designed to penatrate amour. They had to bury that device and disquise it's presence so that we would not discover it. This is hard stuff to do, it takes skill and balls to pull it off. Look at it from the taliban point of view, they are up against a formidable enemy. I wouldn't want a Canadian sniper hunting me down. Their Kalaskinovs and RPGs must feel so puny against Canadian LAVs, Nyalas and leopard amour. Give the guys credit where credit is due. Never underestimate your enemy.

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to top