Canada's only casualties in Afghanistan

Thanks to a leak to The New York Times, we now know that the U.S. bomb dropped on the Princess Pats during a nighttime training exercise in Afghanistan that killed four Canadians and wounded eight others, was because the pilot "didn't follow proper procedure."

You mean we didn't know that before? Defence Minister John McCallum says he's now "moving heaven and Earth"(?) to hasten the release of the investigation done by retired Gen. Maurice Baril which, if it differs in essence from the U.S. inquiry, would justify yet another inquiry as to "why." What a waste of effort it all is!

First to McCallum, who seems a rather silly man, a master of the mundane and obvious. What does he mean by "moving heaven and Earth" to release the Baril report? For heaven's sake, he's got it, so just release it. Forget about "moving heaven and Earth." McCallum is concerned about "national security." What national security? The four soldiers are dead - our only casualties in Afghanistan. What "national security" is involved? As for worrying about the effect of the Canadian report on a court martial in the U.S., that's more smokescreen.

The New York Times story reeks with authenticity. There's nothing in any of the accounts that most people couldn't figure out, and haven't already concluded: that it was a dreadful accident with regrets all round.

So-called "friendly fire" incidents happen in war. Any war. All wars. They even happen in training exercises at home, when soldiers inadvertently shoot one another, or a grenade is mishandled, or an explosion occurs in the wrong place. Such accidents are a hazard and an inevitability of soldiering, regardless of precautions taken.

The families and relatives of the Canadian casualties are mostly realistic and resigned to what happened. While hurt and grieving, they are mostly generous, unbitter and understanding.

Not Elsie Wayne, though, the Tory defence critic who, if she's not just exploiting the tragedy for political gain, is a silly woman who shouldn't be commenting on defence matters she doesn't understand. Her statements on this case inadvertently reveal why the federal Tories are a spent force and should be put out of our misery.

She calls the bombing incident "the biggest mistake that I have ever seen done by the USA." Come off it, Elsie! First of all, she wasn't there and didn't "see" it. If she's saying it was the biggest mistake ever made by the U.S., then she's just wrong. And silly. Does she not know (or care?) that almost half the U.S. casualties in the invasion of Grenada were from "friendly fire," as were maybe a third of the American casualties in the Gulf War? In one ghastly case, an American tank shot up another American tank.

In WW II, American planes bombed our 3rd Division - the D- Day division - at Caen, severely wounding the division commander, Maj. Gen. Rod Keller. Elsie is unforgiving of the American pilots: "They must not be allowed to fly again," she says. "Not be allowed to take part in any operation like Afghanistan in the future." As it turns out, the pilot who dropped the bomb, Maj. Harry Schmidt, 37, was one of the hottest, most experienced fighter pilots in the U.S. Air Force, with 100 combat missions in the Balkans and over Iraq.

Yes, he violated orders to leave the area he was flying over, but technically was entitled to retaliate if he felt he was being fired upon. He mistook live firing by the Canadians to be against him. He was wrong, but it was an accident.

Maureen Decaire, mother of one of the injured soldiers, had it right in the National Post: "It was a stupid mistake and it shouldn't have happened, and these guys are responsible. But are they criminally responsible? Did they do it on purpose? Should they be taken out and crucified? No." Would that Elsie Wayne had the perspective of Maureen Decaire.

The soldiers in the field have a generosity that comes with understanding. Garth Pritchard, arguably Canada's best TV documentary maker of the army, witnessed the bombing of the Canadians. He recalled that a short time later, Canadians on night patrol spotted via night goggles activity on their front. It looked like Afghans planting mines. The commander got the okay to blast them, but hesitated. He wanted to make sure.

He waited until first light, then investigated, ready to fire and call in an air strike - and discovered the al-Qaida laying mines were really farmers planting their crop, thinking nighttime was safer than daylight. Would that the U.S. pilot showed the caution of the Canadian officer who averted another tragedy. These things are often the luck of the draw.

The pilot who dropped the bomb is an emotional casualty too. It serves nothing to punish him further. It was an accident of war. Leave it at that, and not turn it into a vendetta or lynching.

Peter Worthington served in korea as an officer of the Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry.

There is only one thing with which I disagree in this column. Canada's BOI has a deal with the US BOI to release the reports simulataneously. That some jackass leaked a part of the US report dows not nullify the deal.

Here is the editorial in today's Toronto Sun:

June 23

Confusion and secrecy over report

Rookie defence minister John McCallum was upfront about his total lack of military experience when he was appointed a few weeks ago: He's a banker, not a solider.

That seemed evident this past week when the report of a U.S. military investigation into the friendly-fire bombing that killed four Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan was leaked to The New York Times.

The report faulted U.S. fighter pilot Maj. Harry Schmidt, who dropped a 227-kilogram bomb on the Canadians during their live-fire exercise, violating his own orders, because he wrongly believed he was being fired upon.

No surprises there - we knew as much in April, immediately after the incident. Yet McCallum will only say he'll "move heaven and Earth" to speed up the release of Canada's own report on the tragedy, which he received last week.

What's the holdup? For that matter, why did we need an entirely separate probe, headed by retired Gen. Maurice Baril, in the first place?

It's baffling. From the moment this awful mishap occurred, the government's response to it has been as confusing as the public's has been sensible and heartfelt.

McCallum should take his cue from the latter.

The rank-and-file soldiers, the families of the fallen and ordinary Canadians have reacted with grace, strength and compassion. They demanded the unvarnished truth about what happened, without excuses or secrecy in the name of "national security" (a reason McCallum is, oddly, citing for the present delay).

From the start, they accepted the reality of war and that terrible mistakes can happen.

Should the American pilot be disciplined for violating orders? Absolutely. Should he be criminally charged for killing our soldiers? No.

As Sun columnist Peter Worthington notes today on page 7 of Comment, it serves no purpose to turn this into a vendetta.

As for McCallum, rather than hang on to Baril's report, he should reread the one released last week by military Ombudsman Andre Marin, who probes thousands of complaints by ordinary soldiers every year.

Marin asks the questions inquiries like Baril's don't answer: Are our troops adequately equipped, paid, housed and clothed? Are they suffering or even dying due to lack of resources?

"The welfare of the little guy, the average soldier, is not being considered," Marin concluded again this year. McCallum should "move heaven and Earth" to find out why - and fix it, in honour of all who serve.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.