Calgary Herald reporter and 4 soldiers killed by IED in Afghanistan

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by T@T

I say ###### that...drop as many 10,000lb bunker busters as you can so their ears bleed all the way into Pakistan, if that doesn't work drop a couple of mini nukes and turn those mountains into pretty glass sculptures. The longer we fight this crap with their rules the longer the world is at risk from these ######ed terrists and their acts.

So you propose to murder thousands of innocent civilians then because it is the easier path? Following that idiotic suggestion would completely destroy everything that our people have done over there. You might as well just go spit on the grave of one of our fallen soldiers, given that that is effectively what you are trying to do, and it will cost less lives that way.

[Resolute 14]

Incidentally, I'm glad that I'll be at the game and not watching Don Cherry's reaction to this on Saturday. It's surprisingly difficult to even read the news stories on Lang's death.

[HotHotHeat]

I don't mean to sound like a voice of authority, but can we not turn this into a 'Why are we there?' thread..

Incredibly heartbreaking for everyone involved.

[LChoy]

This is from us

December 30, 2009

Health Minister expresses condolences on reporter's passing

Calgary... Alberta Health and Wellness Minister Ron Liepert issued the following statement regarding the death of Calgary Herald reporter Michelle Lang in Afghanistan.

“We are all very saddened to hear this tragic news. Michelle covered health issues with professionalism, accuracy and thoroughness. She was tenacious in her quest to inform Albertans, and for her diligence she was very well respected. I express my condolences to her family, friends and all who knew her. Our thoughts and prayers are with them during this very heartbreaking time.”

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by HotHotHeat

I don't mean to sound like a voice of authority, but can we not turn this into a 'Why are we there?' thread..

Incredibly heartbreaking for everyone involved.

As ironic as it may seem, times like this are when it is most appropriate to discuss why we are out there. It helps give an understanding of what these people gave their lives for. Lang was covering one of the biggest reasons why we are there when she died: reconstruction. The attempts to help rebuild a nation who's people have known only war and oppression. These five died in an effort to help a people that not many in Canada would think to care about. Knowing why we are in Afghanistan will help people understand the significance of their sacrifice.

[Machiavelli]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle1415292/

So sad....she was to be married in 2010

[Mango]

There is going to be a memorial service for Michelle today at City Hall. It starts at 12:30.

[LChoy]

For someone that rarely cries, this story makes my eyes sting

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

The four dead soldiers' names have been made public.

Sgt. George Miok, 28, of Edmonton.
Cpl. Zachery McCormack, 21, of Edmonton.
Sgt. Kirk Taylor, 28, of Yarmouth, N.S.
Pte. Garrett William Chidley, 21, of Cambridge, Ont.





This makes me angry, at the end of the day these men were doing their jobs to make Afghanistan a better place, not by shooting people and not be actively seeking out the enemy - but by assisting in building schools and working to repair the fractured city... and for that they were killed.

He looks like just a kid but he was a bigger man than most.

Edit: Reading the profiles and talking to guys who knew them is pretty rough, Sgt Miok was a grade 7 teacher in in his regular civilian life and had made a few tours overseas already. Stuff (replaced a filtered word) like this shouldn't happen to good men.

[Hack&Lube]

Does anyone know what armored vehicle this was? What is the use of all these armored vehicles if they are so vulnerable?

Can't we get armored vehicles for our troops that will protect them from roadside bombs?

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

I think I read somewhere that it was a LAV-3, it was either that or it was an RG-31 Nyala. It wasn't that long ago that the Canadian Forces was in Afghanistan with G-Wagons, so the vehicle that we are currently using are significantly better than what they had used in years past. But to answer your question, the bombs that they are using are also bigger, they are more complex and they are for lack of a better word, better than the ones that they have built in previous years. At the end of the day no matter what vehicle they build there will always be terrorists who will build a bigger bomb and who will often just get lucky and unfortunately that means another one of our soldiers will come home in a coffin.

That being said, if we invested so much money into GM and other auto manufacturers, I would like to see them build the best armoured vehicle they can, at the best rate possible, get input from every branch of the CF as to what they need and allow the engineers and designers to build the best protection possible. Build it in a Canadian plant and have it a vehicle built by Canadians, for Canadians and our allies.

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard

I think I read somewhere that it was a LAV-3, it was either that or it was an RG-31 Nyala. It wasn't that long ago that the Canadian Forces was in Afghanistan with G-Wagons, so the vehicle that we are currently using are significantly better than what they had used in years past. But to answer your question, the bombs that they are using are also bigger, they are more complex and they are for lack of a better word, better than the ones that they have built in previous years. At the end of the day no matter what vehicle they build there will always be terrorists who will build a bigger bomb and who will often just get lucky and unfortunately that means another one of our soldiers will come home in a coffin.

That being said, if we invested so much money into GM and other auto manufacturers, I would like to see them build the best armoured vehicle they can, at the best rate possible, get input from every branch of the CF as to what they need and allow the engineers and designers to build the best protection possible. Build it in a Canadian plant and have it a vehicle built by Canadians, for Canadians and our allies.

I think the problem with many of these vehicles is that they weren't intended to be protected from underneath but are designed to be mobile with most of the armor on the sides. I think even the Leopard IIs were quite vulnerable to mines and IEDs until some upgrades but I may be wrong.

I recall a few years ago there were stories of US troops welding metal plates on their own vehicles because there was no funding to properly armor them.

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

The RG-31 has a V-Shaped hull in order to defend against IED attacks, the principle of which being that the explosion would be directed outwards (I don't know if this is the right term). That being said as backwater as the Taliban/other fighters are - they are still smart and are able to put together sophisticated bombs and weaponry in order to overcome the technological advantage that we have. It is simply impossible to defeat every threat that we are faced with overseas unfortunately.

[worth]

People adapt as Mean Mr. Mustard has said.

Allies use thermal imaging, insurgents use blankets and other objects to cover up to give off less of a heat signature.

Allies invest in heavier armour and vehicles, insurgents make bigger bombs and know how to target specific areas of vehicles.

These guys aren't stupid, and what you're seeing is an evolution of war. If the tactics stayed the same throughout the war, one side would destroy the other. In an ever evolving war, you can adjust to the challenges.

You put more armour on vehicles, you weigh it down. It's more cumbersome, it's harder to operate, it's less agile, it's not as fast, it requires more fuel it's not as mobile.

There is a trade off there somewhere between safety and efficiency. I don't think you can have both in this situation. It's just not possible.

[CaptainCrunch]

The oldest constant in war is that war heads will always eventually defeat armor.

Someone will always build a more effective bomb. The shaped charge was created to heavily armored tanks. The Russians sloped their armor which made it more effective, sabot anti tanks rounds were created to counter that.

The only way to properly defeat mines and IED's is to find a way to discover them before they can go off. Canada has invested heavily in increasing their surveillance abilities through the use of helicopters and UAV's.

Sadly its not perfect. Look for the Taliban to go even harder after the reconstruction troops and projects as it seems to be gaining traction for them.

[Jayems]

Very sad news. Condolences to everyone's families.

[Redliner]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Look for the Taliban to go even harder after the reconstruction troops and projects as it seems to be gaining traction for them.

100% true, and just another confirmation that these guys are a bunch of gutless pukes. Why attack a genuine military target when you can take out a crew of engineers who are trying to rebuild your country for the benefit of the people you claim to represent? What is even more staggering to me is that this kind of cowardice somehow generates support for the Taliban. What kind of people would gravitate towards an organization that makes a point of killing aid workers and peacekeepers, not to mention the hundreds of innocent Afghans who are killed or injured during the suicide attacks and bombings?

I fear that this is a war we cannot win, but that does not make me appreciate the sacrifice of our soldiers any less.

[Super-Rye]

Originally Posted by T@T

What I don't get is the military know where most of the Taliban are "hiding" but instead of carpet bombing them back to the stoneage they allow them come down from the mountains with bombs.

Stupid

Not stupid. You carpet bomb them back to the stone age and all you do is create martyrs out of these people which leads to more violence in the future.

However it sucks that our people are getting caught in the middle of this. It's very sad news and not something anyone likes to see. My thoughts are with the families of all involved.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Super-Rye

Not stupid. You carpet bomb them back to the stone age and all you do is create martyrs out of these people which leads to more violence in the future.

However it sucks that our people are getting caught in the middle of this. It's very sad news and not something anyone likes to see. My thoughts are with the families of all involved.

Flawed logic in the age of air power.

Carpet Bombing isn't that effective against a dug in enemy and you never get confirmation that you killed your real enemy.

Air power doesn't keep an enemy out of your battlefield they can't be up 24 hours a day.

Carpet bombing while a massive shock to the enemy is in discriminant once you let the bombs go you can't get them back. We've seen international backlash when the American's smoke a taliban base and find out that the Taliban keep their woman and children with them.

Part of me agrees with you, Vietnam and the linebacker campaigns illustrated the use of effective bombing to force an enemy to change its tactics.

The other part of the use of infantry is part public relations, you need the afghan people seeing soldiers with Canuck and Yankee and Brit flags fighting side by side with the Afghan National Army.

This is a different war though. The most effective strategy is to pinpoint and kill the leadership of the Taliban forcing them to put less experienced commanders into roles that they're not ready for while increasing the pressure through the use of heavy armor and infantry, unfortunately if you're going to do that then you have to brace yourself for casualties far more numerous then what we've seen to this point.

[PyramidsofMars]

Originally Posted by T@T

What I don't get is the military know where most of the Taliban are "hiding" but instead of carpet bombing them back to the stoneage they allow them come down from the mountains with bombs.

Stupid

Amazing. I cannot believe that such a brilliant military strategist as yourself isn't working to protect our troops and get as close to winning this war as is possible and is just wasting his time on the internet. Thank you for your deep insight, sir.

Originally Posted by Redliner

100% true, and just another confirmation that these guys are a bunch of gutless pukes.

you needed further confirmation?

I fear that this is a war we cannot win, but that does not make me appreciate the sacrifice of our soldiers any less.

There is nothing- nothing- we should be prouder of as Canadians than the fact that there are Canadians who care enough to put their lives on the line not only for their country, but out of pure human compassion for others, for those of other people as well. They died carrying out one of the most honorable actions possible.