Sea, air personnel won't go into combat: O'Connor
- Thread starter CTV News
- Start date
I'm sure O'Conner "intended" to convey the truth when he said "Go check what the French are doing in the north. Go check what the Germans are doing in the north. They are doing the same thing."
interesting sidebar
interesting sidebar
You have it confussed bit....It wont be combat roles.... IE, hey sailor we are going to a town to route out taliban....Its going to be convoy duties and such, so that doesnt mean they will be safe, but it will also free up Engineers and Soldiers to rebuild and provide security.
Also this wont bother sailors or Airmen, why do you ask? They are put through Basic, the same Basic soldiers are put through, And I am sure they will recive aditional training, My neighbour is in the Navy, and he wants to go. They are Members of the Military so its no suprise that they could be used....
So what the big deal?
Also this wont bother sailors or Airmen, why do you ask? They are put through Basic, the same Basic soldiers are put through, And I am sure they will recive aditional training, My neighbour is in the Navy, and he wants to go. They are Members of the Military so its no suprise that they could be used....
So what the big deal?
The fact that he says they wont be in Combat roles is pretty thruthful. Though I agree he could be more stright forward with the nation and say something like...Yes we will be sending htem over to Afganistan, and they will do Convoy duties, where they could face raodside bombs, and some taliban ambush.
But He is right when he says it not a Combat role.
But He is right when he says it not a Combat role.
Why the hell don't we have the airforce there anyways? Never hurts to have support for ground troops. I mean it's not like they would be doing regular bombing runs or anything. Helicopters can move supplies too, and without suicide bombers, granted they have to duck RPG's and shoulder fired missiles, but why should the Infantry be the only ones at risk?
Agreed, WE should send out Griffens over. Recently I have hear the Griffens Squaderns have been training for desseart style combat.
Thing is Griffens dont fair so well with the air or something along those lines, their roaters dont give good lift in places like afganistan, the air isnt as thick....that what I have been told anyway.
But I dont know if I buy it....they should be over there. Also we should send some Hornets too, because the americans have proven to be somewhat unreliable at times, hitting our troops and bombing the wrong positions. At least if we mess up we can take the blame...
Or we could drop submarines filled with torpedoes that don't fit and napalm. I'd like to see that!
And then maybe get some real subs, like the nuclear variety that can stay under longer. We need something in the Arctic besides a few ice breakers.
And then maybe get some real subs, like the nuclear variety that can stay under longer. We need something in the Arctic besides a few ice breakers.
Agreed, our Subs are awful, I have been one one or 2 of them since we have had them. I worked for an Industrial leaning compnay, and DND would contract us for their ships and Subs. They are small, and rusty, very rusty, and have spent most of thier time out of the water than in the water since we have gotten them.
We do need to go Nuclear, If we want to protect our Northern Waters we have to.
Haha, they remind me of some boats I was on when I was a fishery observer. Oh man, this one boat was so rusty, the owner just bought it that week, and fitted it up with all the paperwork. He didn't know if it would make a good work boat or not, but the price was right. Long story short, 6 days without any clean running water, had to use drinking water to clean up and a boat that listed very uncomfortably. By the end of the trip the Captain was swearing and going on about the crappy drum and how the cod end ALWAYS got caught. What a heap. Maybe the Canadian Forces could use a fishing boat...