Canadian casualty rates in Kandahar are the highest in Afghanistan or even Iraq. Canadian forces have a higher sustained fatality rate than either the Americans or British forces in Afghanistan, even higher than the US fatality rates in Iraq.
The National Post forced the release of the figures from the Canadian military under a Freedom of Information Act demand.
Canadian soldiers died at a rate 2.6 to four times higher than the British and Americans in Afghanistan and two to 2.6 times higher than U.S. forces in Iraq, according to the April, 2007, number-crunching by Barbara Strauss, an official with the Forces' health services group.
The proportion of Canadian soldiers killed by enemy action is higher even than it was in all but one year of World War Two, the government document indicates.
All manner of explanations are coming out - Kandahar is tougher than anywhere else, not enough transport helicopters, operating in the homeland of the Taliban, etc.
Here's a couple I haven't seen mentioned - when you field one rifle for every 30 sq. kms. of very hostile territory, you're easy meat. When your enemy's numbers multiply from dozens to hundreds and perhaps even thousands and you don't reinforce to meet the growing threat - well, you're easy meat. When you're fighting a kind of war in which the cardinal rule is "go big or go home", there is no third option.
The National Post forced the release of the figures from the Canadian military under a Freedom of Information Act demand.
Canadian soldiers died at a rate 2.6 to four times higher than the British and Americans in Afghanistan and two to 2.6 times higher than U.S. forces in Iraq, according to the April, 2007, number-crunching by Barbara Strauss, an official with the Forces' health services group.
The proportion of Canadian soldiers killed by enemy action is higher even than it was in all but one year of World War Two, the government document indicates.
All manner of explanations are coming out - Kandahar is tougher than anywhere else, not enough transport helicopters, operating in the homeland of the Taliban, etc.
Here's a couple I haven't seen mentioned - when you field one rifle for every 30 sq. kms. of very hostile territory, you're easy meat. When your enemy's numbers multiply from dozens to hundreds and perhaps even thousands and you don't reinforce to meet the growing threat - well, you're easy meat. When you're fighting a kind of war in which the cardinal rule is "go big or go home", there is no third option.
No comments:
Post a Comment