Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Switchboard >

Canadians Bombed by F-16

14:55 / 23.04.02

I'm sure by now everyone's aware of this incident. Last Thursday and F-16 dropped a 500 lb laser-guided bomb on a Canadian unit conducting nightime training manuevers (sp?). Four were killed and eight wounded. The pilot claimed he was being fired upon.

Now, I've just read an article in today's Toronto Star in which the claim is made that he thought he was being fired upon by Canadian troops. And Donal Rumsfeld says that it was okay for him to drop the bomb if he was acting in self-defense.

My question is this: If the pilot thought that it was Canadian troops firing on him, wouldn't it have made more sense to get out of there and find out what the hell was going on, rather than drop a bomb on people who may have thought he was unfriendly? But no. His commmanders said it was okay for him to drop the bomb if he thought it was self-defense. Against troops that he apparently knew were allies.

What're your thoughts on this?

Zoom.

solid~liquid onwards

15:15 / 23.04.02

its just like canadian bacon and south park the movie all over again

wembley can change in 28 days

15:29 / 23.04.02

Except maybe not as funny?

15:29 / 23.04.02

Well, has anyone asked the Canadians who were wounded whether they were firing at the plane? They were on an exercise, so it seems unlikely that they would have been firing anywhere other than at exercise targets (if at all - I would have thought that firing at night might not be the most sensible thing to do in Afghanistan at the moment). Sounds like a botched and nasty attempt at an excuse to me.

I think it is probably 'OK' to drop a bomb in genuine self-defence, but if this chap thought he was defending himself... the US army might need to review its recruitment policy (I understand that some of the US pilots in Afghanistan at the moment are not used to flying some of the planes they're using out there - that might account for a degree of edginess on the part of the pilot, but in that case one has to blame the command).

15:29 / 23.04.02

And yes, not funny in the slightest.

wembley can change in 28 days

15:33 / 23.04.02

Rex Murphy on the CBC gave a rather interesting rant on CBC last night.

"And last week after the tragedy of Canadian soldiers being bombed accidentally by an American pilot which sent such a pulse of shock and grief through this country, President Bush wandered through at least three public appearances without a reference to the episode or even one sentence acknowledging that it had happened. It was only a question by our own David Halton that got him going out of a room to tossback that he had talked about the episode and offered his condolences to Mr. Chretien the previous evening. When the President finally on Friday directly addressed the incident, it was impromptu and informal."

16:02 / 23.04.02

cz - My question is this: If the pilot thought that it was Canadian troops firing on him, wouldn't it have made more sense to get out of there and find out what the hell was going on, rather than drop a bomb on people who may have thought he was unfriendly? But no. His commmanders said it was okay for him to drop the bomb if he thought it was self-defense. Against troops that he apparently knew were allies.

What're your thoughts on this?

My thoughts are that the article was poorly phrased, and probably more accurratly would read, "the pilot believed he was being fired on by the troops, who turned out to be Canadians." I'm not seeing any indication that he knew who they were, if we're reading the same article.

16:04 / 23.04.02

According to reports, the pilot was told repeatedly not to fire unless acting in self-defense. Also, it is believed that the pilot may have been National Guard, and may not have been entirely competent in a situation like this to respond correctly. One of the things that gets me is that the report so far seems to suggest that the pilot took two or three passes over the area before dropping the bomb. If this is true, and he was able to leave the area and find out the situation more fully, how could he possibly use self-defense as an excuse?

I'm willing to wait for the report before passing full judgement, though I somehow doubt the Canadian soldiers would think that a passing jet was from the enemy forces and shoot at it. This situation stinks of incompetence at a number of levels. Don't the allied forces keep each other informed of training sessions and the like?

Like Wembley pointed out, the anger towards this incident largely seems to stem from the initial lacklustre response from the US government. The first few things I heard stateside was that friendly fire is a way of life for the military, and we should just stop whining and get over it. Fair enough, and I think if this were to happen in actual combat and not from some undertrained hotshot dropping bombs indiscriminately without reason, most people would understand. I can appreciate holding off apologizing until the investigation is completed, but that doesn't preclude offering condolences. If this horrible accident has accomplished one thing, it's to remind Canadians that the current US government really couldn't give a goddamn about us or our friendship and is ready to steamroller over Canada at a moment's notice.

And all because Dubya hates our Prime Minister. What a schmuck. Clinton would have been all over this.

16:54 / 23.04.02

MJ-12 - it was the one on the front of today's (Tuesday) Star. Did I read it wrong? I don't have it with me now, but it certainly sounded like he knew. It's the first I've seen of that, too, so perhaps it is just a poorly phrased article.

I love that Bush offered condolences to Chretien. Did the PM lose a family member? Didn't think so. Jerk.

Zoom.

17:26 / 23.04.02

I'm reading this one which may differ from the print version

includes tidbits such as
Also unsolved is why U.S. air combat control officials didn't radio to the pilot that the Canadians were participating in a nighttime live ammunition training exercise at a designated site. U.S. and Canadian military officials have stated that the Canadian soldiers gave proper notification of their intention to conduct the training exercise and were doing so properly.

A colossal fuck-up in any case, but at the moment i see it as a pilot who just really wanted to kill some "bad guys" & thought he had a target, rather than getting in practice for the second invasion of Quebec.

18:26 / 23.04.02

True, but this, coupled with the Northcom thing (which still gives me the willies) is showing a huge lack of respect from the US towards Canada.

Zoom.

18:33 / 23.04.02

Air National Guard is Bush's old branch, if memory serves.

wembley can change in 28 days

18:34 / 23.04.02

A colossal fuck-up in any case, but at the moment i see it as a pilot who just really wanted to kill some "bad guys" & thought he had a target, rather getting in practice for the second invasion of Quebec.

MJ-12, I don't think anyone out there believes the pilot dropped the bomb knowing they were Canadians. That's just ridiculous. The point is that he fucked up enough to think that they were "bad guys" and was possibly a little trigger-happy.

I've heard some news coverage of this in Canada (which I find unsurprising to say the least); that some of our troops consider some of their American counterparts to be a little revved-up and dying to act out their favourite scenes from Top Gun. Is this just typical American-Canadian differences peeking through, or are these soldiers really far too ready to kick some ass?

18:47 / 23.04.02

wembley, cz's original post had this

But no. His commmanders said it was okay for him to drop the bomb if he thought it was self-defense. Against troops that he apparently knew were allies.

that is what I'm responding to.

19:07 / 23.04.02

This is the bit that causes me a bit of confusion. I'm sure you're right and it is improperly worded, but you'd think they wouldn't have let that slip past:

Even after being denied permission to fire on Canadian soldiers, a U.S. F-16 fighter pilot had the right to drop his bomb if he felt it was self-defence, Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld says.

That top line. That's the one that makes it sound like he knew.

I'd like to hear a statement of apology from the pilot himself, but I'd wager we'll never find out who he was.

Zoom.

19:33 / 23.04.02

That initial sentence is all mangled. There's no way in Hell that guy knew it was Canadians. Any chance we can agree on this being the Star's error and move on?

From what the US military is saying, the pilot may not even be questioned in the upcoming inquest because he has a right to not incriminate himself in the event that there is a criminal investigation.

19:35 / 23.04.02

My favourite part about all of this is that, the day after the story broke in all of the newspapers, there was nothing about it on CNN.com. They had full coverage of the fact that Robert Duvall had broken two ribs while filming his most recent movie, though... (Not that I should've been surprised.)

I've been a bit torn over the whole thing, myself. On the one hand, I agree with moriarty:
"If this horrible accident has accomplished one thing, it's to remind Canadians that the current US government really couldn't give a goddamn about us or our friendship and is ready to steamroller over Canada at a moment's notice."
However, the whole thing has become an exercise in patriotism that I'm not particularly comfortable with (as things are likely to do when one's at war, I suppose...)
The bottom line for me is that I'm profoundly irked by the hypocrisy inherent in the fact that we're collectively beating our breasts and weeping over these four dead soldiers because they were killed by "friendly fire" and not "honourably" in combat. Call me an idealistic peacenik, but I don't see the difference: If you don't want to have your soldiers killed, don't send them in the first place. The way I see it, we should be questioning our involvement in this (and any) war at the same time as we're supposedly doing all this collective soul-searching about our relationship with the U.S.A.

22:03 / 23.04.02

The way I see it, we should be questioning our involvement in this (and any) war at the same time as we're supposedly doing all this collective soul-searching about our relationship with the U.S.A.

Good point there.

It is a tragedy of course, but when you go to war with the US, it seems it would be better to offer them your factories and some moral support and stay away from their soldiers; They love that friendly fire. Assuming the Chinese embassy in Sarajevo was an accident, there was also the little matter of bombing a caravan carrying members of the NEW Afghan government (oops).

Regrettable Juvenilia

15:11 / 24.04.02

Serves 'em right for being in Afghanistan in the first place, if you ask me.

And no, I'm not kidding.

15:14 / 24.04.02

Do you mean the Canadians or the new Afghan government? If the latter, seems a bit harsh...

Regrettable Juvenilia

15:21 / 24.04.02

The Canadians. Yeah, er, probably should have clarified that.

wembley can change in 28 days

15:40 / 24.04.02

That's a really good point. I didn't think we should have sent any troops in the first place. A great many Canadians felt/feel the same way. I don't know exactly why we did send them, except that if the US wants us to do something, we do. Or if we feel like the US wants us to do something, we do. For those in the UK, if you remember how gung ho Tony Blair was in supporting Bush in the days after 9/11, imagine what Chretien was like. We're more frightened of the Americans than of terrorism!

The only possible good thing I can think of that could possibly result from our sending troops would stem from the Canadian military's reputation as peacekeepers. I've seen footage of them helping rebuild Afghan communities, and that's not bad.

16:16 / 24.04.02

Yeah, I have to say that I'm a little bit more accepting of our role as peacekeepers, although I have some reservations about being involved in other peoples' disputes at all (see anything Michael Ignatieff has written on the Former Yugoslavia for more on this, 'cause I don't have the time right now...)

It's such a complicated proposition, getting involved in the wars of other countries, and I think that the Taliban are a really good example of what makes it so difficult for us, as (relatively) privileged North Americans, to get involved. I mean, the Taliban were obviously a monstrously awful regime, who brutalized Afghan women and pretty much destroyed Afghan culture, and I'm glad that they were tossed out of power, BUT I'm not entirely convinced that implementing a puppet Capitalist/'Democratic' State is the solution, either. The globalization of culture is a really big, messy topic, and it makes me really uncomfortable that liberation means buying Coke and wearing Levi's. Y'know?

I've been mulling this over a lot the past few years, especially in light of the massive NATO fuck-up in Kosovo, and I seem to have reached an impasse. What do you think about international policing and intervention? Is it another form of cultural imperialism? Are there options?

Nietzsch E. Coyote

20:39 / 24.04.02

I am a Canadian.
We should not have had troops in Afghanistan.
We should not have had troops in Afghanistan.
(I'll finish my lines later)

To the pilots.
We should not bomb indiscriminately.
We should not bomb indiscriminately.
We should not bomb indiscriminately.