Canadian soldier killed in Afghanistan
- Thread starter Mogz
- Start date
C'est sûr qu'il y a des risques à être dans l'armée, beaucoup plus que dans d'autres métiers. Mais à la télé et dans les journaux, on parle juste des soldats CANADIENS qui on été tués et il ne doit pas en avoir plus de 10 en tout! On ne parle pas des gens venant de l'Afganistan qui se font tuer; et ils doivent être au moins 10 fois plus nombreux. Regardons-nous: nos pertes sont 10 fois moins grandes que l'Afganistan! On devrait se compter chanceux et surtout être fiers de cela au lieu de déplorer UN soldat mort, le seul du mois, peut-être?
I don't think it's unreasonable for the news to report more on a Canadian's death than on an Afghani's (we've had 17 soldiers die there so far). I feel sorry for this man's family.
Re: RE: Canadian soldier killed in Afghanistan
I read/write/speak French very poorly, but I caught the general jist of your post. We've lost 17 soldiers KIA since the outbreak of War, not 10. As for Afghan body counts, I assume you're refering to militants. In that case we've killed a lot more than ten times what we've lost. It's not our fault we're better trained and better equipped.
soldat007 said:
I read/write/speak French very poorly, but I caught the general jist of your post. We've lost 17 soldiers KIA since the outbreak of War, not 10. As for Afghan body counts, I assume you're refering to militants. In that case we've killed a lot more than ten times what we've lost. It's not our fault we're better trained and better equipped.
It's a shame that a reservist was on his second tour. Obviously he wanted to and it's good money, but it's indicative of a reg force that doesn't have the strength to meet it's commitments without constant reserve augmentation.
Re: RE: Canadian soldier killed in Afghanistan
Reserve forces are used by most NATO members to supplement their forces. It is not indicative of a country not being able to meet its commitments. In Canada's case it is indicative of well trained and professional reservists who can participate fully with Reg force when asked.
thecdn said:
Reserve forces are used by most NATO members to supplement their forces. It is not indicative of a country not being able to meet its commitments. In Canada's case it is indicative of well trained and professional reservists who can participate fully with Reg force when asked.
Re: RE: Canadian soldier killed in Afghanistan
Eh lineman, i'm inclined to disagree. Our Reg Force relies too heavily on Reserve augmentation whilst overseas. Furthermore our Reserves are by and large poorly trained and technically shouldn't be participating fully with the Regular Force. Our Reserve-Reg Force "total force" concept doesn't work, and as a result we're sending men and women overseas that aren't fully qualified to do the job.
Lineman said:
Eh lineman, i'm inclined to disagree. Our Reg Force relies too heavily on Reserve augmentation whilst overseas. Furthermore our Reserves are by and large poorly trained and technically shouldn't be participating fully with the Regular Force. Our Reserve-Reg Force "total force" concept doesn't work, and as a result we're sending men and women overseas that aren't fully qualified to do the job.
I'm likely out of my lane here but I can't see sending people as poorly trained as you claim into a combat zone. I'm under the impression that they have to meet minimum qualifications before they are accepted for a tasking, in other words they must be as "good" as the reg force. I do understand that reservists are part timers and don't get near the training the Reg force gets but some of them are very good soldiers. Those that do get tasked and do their tour deserve as much respect as any soldier.
Some individual reservists are very good soldiers. The problem being that as part timers they will never be as experienced in their role as their reg counterparts. And, when they join a unit as augmentees, it takes time to mesh with the soldiers that have been with the unit for a long time.
I've been both reg and reserve so I've seen both sides. Most reservists try their best and some are damn good and smart. But some are just going to be their for the money and because they can't find a real job at this point in time. With the reg force as small as it is it gets harder to weed inappropriate people out when all bodies are needed to fill out a unit for deployment.
I've been both reg and reserve so I've seen both sides. Most reservists try their best and some are damn good and smart. But some are just going to be their for the money and because they can't find a real job at this point in time. With the reg force as small as it is it gets harder to weed inappropriate people out when all bodies are needed to fill out a unit for deployment.
Well As I said I'm out of my lane in respects to soldiering and can only give opinions from a civilian's perspective. I'm here at home as safe as can be. I have the utmost respect for anyone who volunteers to go halfway around the world to soldier on in the name of my country, regular or reservist.
You'll find slackers in any work environment and we tend to dwell too much on their inaction and not enough on those who "try their best", In my line of work I would rather see someone putting forth an effort and being "adequate" than sitting on their ass and working hard at doin nothing. Sorry this may not be the appropriate discission for this thread. We should be paying our respects to Cpl. Anthony Joseph Boneca and his family and leave this discussion to another time or thread.
You'll find slackers in any work environment and we tend to dwell too much on their inaction and not enough on those who "try their best", In my line of work I would rather see someone putting forth an effort and being "adequate" than sitting on their ass and working hard at doin nothing. Sorry this may not be the appropriate discission for this thread. We should be paying our respects to Cpl. Anthony Joseph Boneca and his family and leave this discussion to another time or thread.
RE: Canadian soldier kill
My deepest sympathies for the family and friends of Cpl. Anthony Boneca.
"Neither wind nor fire, nor birth or death can erase our good deeds" - Buddha
Every time one of ours goes there's always a "reason". A way it could have been prevented. It was the lightly armoured jeeps or it's the 'lightly armoured' LAV. Or it's the sneaky cleverness and 'marksmanship' of the enemy (hahaha). Or maybe it's the green camo (which doesn't mean shit really; the green ones make black blotches and the desert camo make shiny blotches. Everyone looks the same behind a rock), or it was the Vietnam-quagmire the Americans have gotten us into.
Conflict is lost in two ways: Loss of political will or lack of firepower/equipment. If we lose in Afghanistan it won't be because of the equipment, firepower or training. Poorly equipped as the CF may be, we don't lose people because we lack the equipment or the firepower. It's because we're as well trained as we are and as well equipped as we are that we have lost 17 instead of 170. It's also the reason we've killed or captured so many times more of them than we've ever even had there at any time. We lose people because these are real bullets and this isn't training. The Americans are the best equipped in the world. They die too.
.
My deepest sympathies for the family and friends of Cpl. Anthony Boneca.
"Neither wind nor fire, nor birth or death can erase our good deeds" - Buddha
Every time one of ours goes there's always a "reason". A way it could have been prevented. It was the lightly armoured jeeps or it's the 'lightly armoured' LAV. Or it's the sneaky cleverness and 'marksmanship' of the enemy (hahaha). Or maybe it's the green camo (which doesn't mean shit really; the green ones make black blotches and the desert camo make shiny blotches. Everyone looks the same behind a rock), or it was the Vietnam-quagmire the Americans have gotten us into.
Conflict is lost in two ways: Loss of political will or lack of firepower/equipment. If we lose in Afghanistan it won't be because of the equipment, firepower or training. Poorly equipped as the CF may be, we don't lose people because we lack the equipment or the firepower. It's because we're as well trained as we are and as well equipped as we are that we have lost 17 instead of 170. It's also the reason we've killed or captured so many times more of them than we've ever even had there at any time. We lose people because these are real bullets and this isn't training. The Americans are the best equipped in the world. They die too.
.