6 Canadians injured in Afghanistan mortar attack

[daleo]

A mortar attack on a Canadian outpost in southern Afghanistan injured six soldiers Tuesday.

One soldier was treated at Forward Operating Base Wilson. Five others were flown to a military hospital at the Kandahar airfield, where three soldiers were treated and released, and two others were kept for observation.

None of the injuries was considered life-threatening.

The base is about 30 kilometres west of Kandahar in Panjwaii, an area where there have been several recent Taliban attacks.

http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2006/08/15/afghanistan-mortarattack.html

[Spazito]

1. I believe the 4 NATO soldiers injured on Monday were also

Canadians. The news has been very quiet on the number of Canadian soldiers being injured, I would sure like to see those numbers too.

[daleo]

2. CBC website has a running list of deaths and wounded

In their "In Depth" section. I don't know if it is exhaustive, especially for "less serious" incidents. I did a count a few days back, based on this info (it is now out of date by at least 6 wounded):

Killed:
2002=4
2003=2
2004=1
2005=1
2006=18 (including the diplomat)
-------
Total=26

Wounded:
2002=8
2003=3
2004=3
2005=8
2006=64
--------
Total=86

From my reading a breakdown of about 3 or 4 seriously wounded for every soldier killed is pretty standard (e.g. in WWII). This fits that pattern.

For 2006 that gives over 100 casualties from a force of about 2000, or about 5%. I have read that a level of 10% is considered to be the point at which military units really start to suffer (morale problems, manpower shortages, etc.). This has become quite a serious military engagement.

[Spazito]

3. Thanks for the info!

It will be interesting to watch closely how they change the recruiting criteria as it seems that is in the works. I suspect they are not reaching their "numbers" using the old criteria.

[Posteritatis]

4. Remember to factor in rotation too

I think there's 2000 troops in-country at any given time, though a lot more have been there at one point or another.

Also, a number of those wounded weren't considered serious enough injuries to keep the soldiers out of action for more than a brief period if at all. The press has reported and listed some pretty light injuries before; I think the actual serious, hospitals-and-lots-of-recovery WIA count has been in the same neighborhood as the KIA count.

Not to understate the suck factor of the whole thing, of course - I've got friends serving over there and would like to see them come back in as few pieces as possible - but be careful about reducing the way folks are feeling and operating over there to simple number-crunching. In practice, it's almost never that simple.

For those wondering, here's the CBC page tallying those killed and wounded.

[daleo]

5. I don't think the CBC shows the really "lightly wounded"

I agree that the really seriously injured (e.g. loss of limbs, brain injury) are probably about the same number as KIA. The remainder are probably in-between, but even moderate wounds (e.g. broken limbs, soft tissue damage) can reduce unit effectiveness and have an enervating effect on morale.

Rotation is relevant, although the vast majority of the casualties reported have been within the past 6 months, so mostly they would be within one rotation (I have heard six months, is that your information too?).

I don't know anyone over there, but my dad was in Italy during WWII so I was raised with a healthy respect for military service coupled with a healthy skepticism of military bureaucracy. Things are never as simple as number-crunching, but numbers do have an important story to tell.

[Posteritatis]

7. Point

I forgot to factor in that most of them have been on the most recent tour, yeah; should have kept that in mind. :P

I saw the tally update on a few incidents; they did update the count for a couple of "X soldiers were lightly injured, treated and returned to duty" sorts of things. I do think they're at least trying to list everything reported by DND.

I've talked to quite a few people who've been there on past tours - I'm in Halifax, so there's a lot of military and ex-military, even on the university campuses. There's some Stories at times, to say the least, though I'm not keeping on top of them nearly so well as I'd like yet.

[MrPrax]

6. They should leave if they

don't want to be killed...

Oh right...Canada's desertion laws are draconian and I believe it's a 10 year sentence...and NO provisions for CO status.

Imagine living a country where the so-called Left is far more interested in making life easier for American deserters from American wars, but have little interest in pointing out this bit of hypocrisy regarding their own country's soldiers' involvement in another American war?

Must be a bit much to stand at a refugee hearing pleading that returning an American to the US with much more lax desertion laws is persecution and making this argument in a country with far more onerous desertion laws...

Boggles the mind...

But like I said, if the troops don't want to be killed, then they should leave...if not...I got no sympathy for so-called men volunteering to kill largely innocent people for an imposed American puppet dictatorship.

Don't care which country the invader hails from either...

[Canadian_moderate]

8. The UN and NATO..

supported the action in Afghanistan. Germany, France and many other countries are/were also involved. I'm not a fan of Bush or his misguided adventures in Iraq, but Afghanistan is not Iraq. If the Taliban were some crazy fundamentalist Christian group I'm sure you'd be 100% in favour of the mission.

The Taliban are crazy fundamentalist nutcases and I am glad that Canada is trying to help the people of Afghanistan. Would you prefer an Afghanistan of pre-2001 where the regime destroyed historic monuments and faced women to be sub-humans?

I hate bloody hypocrites! You either support human rights or you don't. Sometimes you have to fight for them. Maybe the Taliban resistance was right about the cowardice of the Canadian people? They predicted a few casualties would turn public opinion in Canada and they seem to be right. Maybe we are a nation of cowards?

[MrPrax]

9. Yo Macho Man!

Fuck You...stupid fascist

[Canadian_moderate]

10. wow

What an articulate response. According to you I'm a fascist for supporting Canada's role in assisting the people of Afghanistan in their fight against the fundamentalist/fascist Taliban.

This is what you sound like to me...
"I'm alright Jack, as long as I have my freedom. Fuck the people of Afghanistan. They don't really need freedom because a violent bunch of fundamentalists are putting up a bit of a fight we should turn around and head home."

You fucking hypocrite!

[MrPrax]

11. That's right, bozo

Freedom is Slavery...:eyes:

You should go help liberate them...please

[laundry_queen]

12. Wow, I just don't know

what rightwing talking points to go after first!
Should I go with "If you don't support the war in Afghanistan you are FOR the Taliban" or maybe "If we do not stay the course, we are a nation of cowards" should be first.
:crazy: