• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

No guaranteed protection against IEDs: analyst

GAP

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Mentor
Reaction score
24
Points
380
No guaranteed protection against IEDs: analyst
Updated Mon. Nov. 19 2007 9:27 AM ET CTV.ca News Staff
Article Link

Canada is likely doing all it can to keep its soldiers in Afghanistan protected against roadside bomb blasts, says a military analyst.

However, retired colonel Michel Drapeau told CTV's Canada AM on Monday that "there is no 100 per cent safety margin in there."

Canada lost two soldiers and an Afghan interpreter to a so-called improvised explosive device (IED) just after midnight on Saturday in the Zhari district of Kandahar province.

The bodies of Cpl. Nicolas Raymond Beauchamp, 28, and Pte. Michel Levesque, 25, are en route to CFB Trenton in eastern Ontario.

They are the first Canadian combat deaths since Sept. 24.

Prior to that, two Canadian soldiers and an Afghan interpreter died when their armoured vehicle struck an IED on Aug. 22.

Drapeau said the long period between deaths has largely been a matter of luck. "We could have another incident, God forbid, tomorrow," he said.

That being said, the military has improved how it deals with IEDs, he said.

For example, Canada took delivery of some South African-built equipment for clearing IEDs in late September.

"We have good equipment. We certainly have better techniques now. The troops are maintaining surveillance and vigilance, to the degree that they can," he said.

"Soldiering in this particular part (of Afghanistan) is perilous at the best of times. And on the occasion when you have to move and you have to keep a certain mobility to go and get the enemy, this is one of the risks."

Of the 73 Canadian military personnel who
More on link
 
I'm shocked that tool Drapeau actually said something correct for once. 

The only way to counter IED's effectively is to interdict their emplacement -- and in doing so you need LIGHT troops on the ground in larger numbers that we have there now.



 
True to a point - but still it only reinforces the THEM-US issues -- LI-SOC/SF troops living with the people/around the people will result is lower collatoral damage issues than airpower, and also provides HUMINT.
 
MQ-9 Reaper

071104f2185f131largewq9.jpg
 
"No guaranteed protection against IEDs: analyst"

WOW....what a shocking discovery.

::)

Must be another slow news day
 
CDN Aviator said:
"No guaranteed protection against IEDs: analyst"

WOW....what a shocking discovery.

::)

Must be another slow news day

Agreed.

I'm surprised it took an "analyst", not to mention the numerous years we've been exposed to IEDs, to come up with this 'Gem' of knowledge.

I should become an "analyst"... then I could make money at pointing out the obvious too.
 
Back
Top