- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 10
http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2006/09/18/report-soldiers.html
Canadians killed at 'disproportionately' higher rate than NATO allies: report
Last Updated Mon, 18 Sep 2006 13:43:49 EDT
CBC News
Canadian troops in Afghanistan are three times more likely to be killed by hostile activities than a British counterpart and 4½ times more likely than an American, a study says.
"Canadian Forces are incurring a disproportionately heavy burden of casualties among coalition forces in Afghanistan," said a news release that accompanied the release of the report on Monday by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives.
The study from the non-profit research organization also suggests that Canadian troops are six times more likely to be killed than U.S. troops in Iraq.
The report finds that apart from the United States, more Canadians have been died in hostile action than any of the other 46 countries that have contributed to the NATO force.
From the time Canada began the mission in early 2001 to Sept. 8, 2006, it had suffered 27 military deaths from hostile action out of a total of 71 non-U.S. deaths — a ratio of two Canadians for every five deaths.
Further, the researchers calculate that since February, Canadian troops accounted for 43 per cent of the non-American deaths on the Afghan mission: 20 of 47 deaths.
In comparison, Germany — which, like Canada, has slightly more than 2,000 troops in Afghanistan — has suffered no deaths from hostile action since February and only six since 2001.
Is government ignoring dangers, researchers ask
The report's researchers, Bill Robinson and Steven Staples, repeatedly criticize the federal government's decision to have the Canadian troops shift their focus from reconstruction around Kabul to counterinsurgency efforts in and around the southern city of Kandahar.
The redefined mission was approved by the Liberal government under Prime Minister Paul Martin in 2005 and then extended by the Tory government under Stephen Harper in 2006.
"As we examined the troubling data, the question arose as to whether the Liberals misjudged the danger, and if the Conservatives ignored it," Staples said in the news release that accompanied the report, Canada's Fallen: Understanding Canadian Military Deaths in Afghanistan.
108 more Canadians will die, report predicts
The study also averages the number of casualties incurred and projects that average over the remainder of the mission to January 2009.
It predicts there will be another 108 deaths during that timeframe.
The researchers used to a formula to calculate the death rate per soldier.
It takes the number of soldiers who were killed serving in Afghanistan from Feb. 24, 2006 — the day major military operations began in the Kandahar region — to Sept. 8.
It then divides that by the number of soldiers who were deployed by the country, multiplies it by the days they've spent on the mission and divides it by the number of days in a year.
The Canadian study echoes some of the findings of a similar British report that came out earlier in the month.
Canadians killed at 'disproportionately' higher rate than NATO allies: report
Last Updated Mon, 18 Sep 2006 13:43:49 EDT
CBC News
Canadian troops in Afghanistan are three times more likely to be killed by hostile activities than a British counterpart and 4½ times more likely than an American, a study says.
"Canadian Forces are incurring a disproportionately heavy burden of casualties among coalition forces in Afghanistan," said a news release that accompanied the release of the report on Monday by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives.
The study from the non-profit research organization also suggests that Canadian troops are six times more likely to be killed than U.S. troops in Iraq.
The report finds that apart from the United States, more Canadians have been died in hostile action than any of the other 46 countries that have contributed to the NATO force.
From the time Canada began the mission in early 2001 to Sept. 8, 2006, it had suffered 27 military deaths from hostile action out of a total of 71 non-U.S. deaths — a ratio of two Canadians for every five deaths.
Further, the researchers calculate that since February, Canadian troops accounted for 43 per cent of the non-American deaths on the Afghan mission: 20 of 47 deaths.
In comparison, Germany — which, like Canada, has slightly more than 2,000 troops in Afghanistan — has suffered no deaths from hostile action since February and only six since 2001.
Is government ignoring dangers, researchers ask
The report's researchers, Bill Robinson and Steven Staples, repeatedly criticize the federal government's decision to have the Canadian troops shift their focus from reconstruction around Kabul to counterinsurgency efforts in and around the southern city of Kandahar.
The redefined mission was approved by the Liberal government under Prime Minister Paul Martin in 2005 and then extended by the Tory government under Stephen Harper in 2006.
"As we examined the troubling data, the question arose as to whether the Liberals misjudged the danger, and if the Conservatives ignored it," Staples said in the news release that accompanied the report, Canada's Fallen: Understanding Canadian Military Deaths in Afghanistan.
108 more Canadians will die, report predicts
The study also averages the number of casualties incurred and projects that average over the remainder of the mission to January 2009.
It predicts there will be another 108 deaths during that timeframe.
The researchers used to a formula to calculate the death rate per soldier.
It takes the number of soldiers who were killed serving in Afghanistan from Feb. 24, 2006 — the day major military operations began in the Kandahar region — to Sept. 8.
It then divides that by the number of soldiers who were deployed by the country, multiplies it by the days they've spent on the mission and divides it by the number of days in a year.
The Canadian study echoes some of the findings of a similar British report that came out earlier in the month.
Well since the Germans sit on their ass in Kabul its not a shock at all.
