Army Guy

Although thier are seat belts in armour vehs they are not much good, Lap belts only, as passengers do not sit as they do in cars (across, width wise) but lined downed the sides of the veh to allow for quick mounting and dismounting. That being said the rear sentry (his postion) requires him to stand-up through a hatch in the rear of the veh there is no way to secure him with a seat belt. As for airbags, won't work, remember these vehs are designed to stay within a certain weight, you add something you need to take something off. the only thing that gets considered is armour protection( the skin of the veh plus all of it's add on's, the main wpns, fire control systems,) every thing else is made as light weight as possable, or left off the list...it's not meant as a civilian veh but a wpn of war.

None that were major, the problem of a few roll overs has been noted, but solving this problem will leave the veh without turrent, and with out many of it's other postive attributes. The main reason a wheeled AFV veh was choosen was it was cheaper in price, cheaper to maintain, weight considerations for transport on aircraft,ship, and it's speed. Is it the the perfect AFV, no, But todays DND cannot afford to field an AFV for every situtation like the US army has.

I just want to dispel a few rumours. The Lav III was just purchased in 1999 taking in account distribution which took over 2 years to complete this veh is the one of the newest in DND's inventory. And is ranked among the best wheeled AFV in the world and in service with dozens of countries. Replacing the C-130 earlier models is DND top priority because of thier extreme age. There are no other C-130's in the world that have more hours than Canada's. Thats quite a feat considering there are serveral thousand flying today. Next rumour is driver error, it's easy to boil everything down to driver error, This was an un avoidable accident plain and simply, the driver of the LAV was driving on his side of the road and served to avoid hitting a oncoming veh driving in the center of the road that was driving with no lights on(a common pratice in the arab world) Driving over in Afgan or any Arab country is something that only experiance could describe, ( try toronto on it's worst day, 6 lanes of traffic on a 2 lane road and yes lets not forget the occasional machine gun fire. and would test the mettle of any indy car driver. If you asked Soldiers what Veh they would perfer to be on patrol with they would answer the LAV. This was an accident that happen to kill one of our young soldiers, lets concentrate on that not modifying or changing the equipment.

I think part of the problem is people are voting for parties because they traditionally done so, regardless of party policiesor agendas. or because there is simply no one else to vote for. Maybe we should look at adjusting the regulations that govern the creation of parties.

I found this article on the net. My Webpage

Sparhawk: Actually i thought it would be an interesting topic, and yes i did say he had some interesting pionts. But nor where did i hold it it as a "profound analysis" What i did get from your post was that you are sugesting that Mackenize king had as many scandals as the Crietien liberal goverment. And that today's Canadian is no more tolerant as yesterdays. I researched Mackenize and yes there were a few scandals but unless i'm missing something it is no where near the number that Crietien has had. Even taking into account the instant media coverage that we have today, todays Canadian is more tolerate to the piont it has become normal behavior, expected behavior for politions. And like some of the comments made here the people vote for the lesser evil not the best party, because they know what to expect.

Fleabag: At the time i don't believe that there was an organization in place to put these guys on trial. Hence why i don't believe that it was Illigal, After all they could have just shot them as Eureka suggested. And i still don't know why is was left to the military to punish them. Yes today we have an international court, that has very limited means to handle charging those involved in crimes that the Nazi's committed. This court was a recent subject on 60 minutes, who decribes it as a court with no power. Eureka: Are you saying that you would have not. I have visted Dachau twice once as a child and once as an adult, both times i left the camp very, confussed as to how one person could inflict such pain and humility on another, it also filled me with anger. absence from both vists were the sight, smells, and survivors accounts of what really happend. So yes i would have suspended my humanity, in fact i could not say with certainity i would have not shot them myself.

Black dog: My bone of contention is WHY is there a higher probabilty of impartiality, and WHY do they have a vested interest in obtaining convictions. My piont was do you think this was a group of soldiers taking the law into thier own hands or were these "tribunals" a formal sanctioned event. because i can not find any ref to them .I've found refs to soldiers acting independantly. I believe i've explained this before there is a panal of judges, a prosecuting team and a defense team. Yes there may be evidence that the defense is not privy to due to security etc.etc. and yes the Accused does not have to be present at trial. I don't agree with the last two, however these does not happen in all cases. I'll give you my answer. I think all those charged at numemberg got off lucky. and they got exactly what they deserved. Those killings of death camp guards, i will not make any excuses for them,what they did was wrong according to law. However i was not there, to experiance the conditions, the smell of death, the sounds of the dying, the pure eviliness that was inflicted. And can't say i would have reacted any differently.

The only reason i agree they should have there day in an international court is so there is no finger pionting, the last thing the US needs right now is more negative press or someone or group screaming foul. Capture them, interrogate them then hand them over to an international group for trial and carrying out of sentences. There is no guarantee of impartiality in civilian court either. Rules for admissible edvidence is as shaky in civilian court. not admissable because obtained with a warrent for something else, etc etc or someone made a clerical error etc. evidence is evidence for both sides. it is up to concil to prove it's worth.

Yes i see that now, just how many scandals did the liberal goverment have under comrad crietien. and why did they win a 3rd term. If this was true then it does not back Spar's remarks but rather Mr. Twiss remarks as the Canadian people a far more tolerant of our goverments misdeeds as they are aware of them daily. .

What you are describing sounds like soldiers taking matters into there own hands. And yes there is historical records of these killings by russian, US, British even Canadian troops and to include POWs that took part in the liberation of the death camps. But what i'd like to piont out is there was no formal or informal tribunal when these killings took place. it was individual soldiers taking the law into thier on hands. As for the evidence or witnesses the camp survivors where really all you needed and as for thier innocence please give us a break. However perhaps i misunderstood eurekas comments as i thought they were pionted towards the formal military tribunals held through Europe. Here is where i have a problem, Are you guys suggesting that anyone who was tried at Numemburg recieved punishment that was unwarrented. because you make it sound like revenge. And for that matter are you suggesting that those killings of concentration gaurds by individual soldiers and POW's was unwarrented or unjustified.

I think he has indentified the problems, he is saying in the para below that the qualities listed are not in most of todays Canadain citizens or it's goverment. I think he using the liberals as an example, and a good one, but not the only one. that most of todays Canadian citizens rarely act on our goverments behavior, and consider it the norm now. Just my opinion.

An interesting remark made by a vet. I think he has some valid pionts. VETS OPINION

Look all i'm asking you to do is back up your claim, without a source it is nothing more than your opinion. and from every source i could find they suggest your claim is false. My Webpage My Webpage My Webpage

Eureka: You mean the tribunals that the Allieds used, not just the americans. And correct me if i'm wrong but those Nazi's where charged after the war in Europe was over, not after the liberation of the camps. And the Nazi's were charged for all the crimes they committed not just for the death camps. And what "Mass" murder of germans are you talking about. And are you suggesting that Innocencent Nazi's were convicted. Name one... Perhaps you can back this claim up with a source. Just how many were shot, or hanged. how many were even convicted and served time in jail. I will agre with you that the military should not be involved with proscuting anyone. unless it is thier own people and then only for non capital crimes. It is not thier job or station. That all being said what organization is equiped to handle international trails quickly and efficiently plus carry out sentences and house prisoners.

This is a case of how things get blown out of proportion, some polictical wienie answered a question that should have been directed to his military Aid to answer. and now they are back pedling and the media is making a big deal on how horriable a wpn WP is. Before we start throwing rocks at the white house and pionting our fingers again we should check into who else uses WP munitions. Almost every country in the world uses WP muntions including Canada. WP comes in every size from grenade size to hvy arty rounds, it's primary purpose is to produce smoke, a heavy thick smoke that blinds the enemy personal and equipment. Allowing the user to advance on the postion unseen. It's not a chemical wpn, or incindary wpn, but classified as a smoke wpn. There is no world march to ban them as we tried to ban land mines. it is just a plain wpn of war designed for war.

Military Tribunals have been used in the past, to convict Nazi war criminals, why is this case so different. Or is that we have grown past that stage. We have seen what International courts can do plus other types of tribunals in the case of EX pres of Yugo who's case is still ongoing. So what is the solution ?

BHS: Your incorrect BHS, your using some US grunts interputaion of the WPN, WP comes in all shapes and sizes including grenade size. It's primary job is to create smoke, one of its side effects is it also starts fires. The term shake and bake refs to a dumb bomb of Napalm and HE. WP will not destroy a tank in itself but blind them and prevents them using a laser targeting system. WP wpns are used in alot of different ways one is to provide a thick smoke as cover, blinding the enemy which allows the user to advance or move unseen. other smoke devices do not burn or produce as much smoke as WP does, It also produces a thicker smoke which as BHS has stated causes other problems such as breathing, extreme tearing, etc etc. forcing the bad guys to either pull back, or take protective measures as putting on gas masks. Black dog: WP is not an incendiary device, it may have some incendiary qualities when used in areas that have flammable material, but then again any HE will start fires.

I'm a currently a serving member of the Canadian Armed Forces, some of the posts on this subject are disturbing, and disrespectful to those serving now and to those that have served in the past. Below is from the Veterns affairs web site. My Webpage Veterans: Armed Forces and Merchant Navy veterans who served during the First World War, Second World War or Korean War; Former and, in certain cases, current members of the Canadian Forces, including those who served in Special Duty Areas and in peacekeeping; and Allied veterans who lived in Canada prior to periods of war. Other Clients: Certain civilians who are entitled to benefits because of their war time services; Former and, in certain cases, serving members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police; and Survivors and dependants of the foregoing groups. I think this below para from veterns affairs says it all. Does it really matter what nations flag you serve under? This Nov 11 i had the privilege of attending the ceremony held in our nations capital. There i saw dozens of foriegn military members laying down reefs at our National war momorial, on behalf of thier goverments paying tribute not only to Lost Canadian lives but to thier own as well. Lets not loose sight of why we pay tribute to those who have paid the ultimate sacrifice and to those that served. At Veterans Affairs Canada we value our clients' contributions to the development of Canada as a nation and honour the sacrifices they have made in the defence of freedom and the pursuit of world peace. In expressing Canada's gratitude to them, we strive to exemplify the high principles which they have defended.

Black dog: Correct me if i'm wrong here, but has it been reported what the military tribunal is for. All i've read todate that he is going before a military tribunal but not what for. we assume it is to be charged for his crimes of killing a US soldier, And most of the media is pionting us in that direction. My piont is perhaps the whole process is to find out exactly where this kid fits in, is he a terrorist or combatant, as the Geneva convention states, not to try him for his crimes which should come later.

ERR: Thank you for the complete article. But it sounds like they are comparing the two completely different laws Western Law can not be compared to international law or the Geneva convention as they are two different subjects. If one was to be tried by US law one has to be a US citizen. And they are clearly not.

Below there are a few sites that have photos of FFI fighters wearing armbands or some parts of uniforms. some are dating back to 1940, well before DDAY. my piont is this, there is alot of evidance saying arm bands where in fact worn. I'm not saying "ALL" wore them but they were worn. there are dozens of other web sites with pictures as well showing the same thing. there is also alot of evidance that pionts to the fact they were not all operating indepandently as you suggest by most were organized and controled by a larger organization by Charles de Gaulle as stated below. How does the FFI fit in with the definition of terrorists. On June 18th, 1940, Charles de Gaulle addressed the people of France from London. He called on the French people to continue the fight against the Germans. This message hit hard in occupied France but initially it was less well received in Vichy France. Regardless of what many thought of the Vichy government, the area they controlled was run by French people. However, when the Vichy government began to openly collaborate with the Germans, attitudes hardened. The French Resistance movement is an umbrella term which covered numerous anti-German resistance movements that were based within France. There were resistance movements that took direct orders from the Special Operations Executive, there was the communist resistance, groups loyal to de Gaulle, regional resistance movements that wanted independence etc. In the north, the target was simply the Germans while in the south, the Vichy government was a target as well as the Germans. The first resistance movements were in the north, such as the OCM (Organisation Civile et Militaire) and by the end of 1940, six underground newspapers were being regularly printed in the north. In May 1941, the first SOE agent was dropped into northern France to assist the work of the resistance. Because of the peculiar political complexities of France, the resistance movement got off to a difficult start. However, by June 1941, the resistance movement had become more organised and its work against the Germans increased accordingly. Two dates are important in explaining the work of the resistance movement in France. On October 23rd,1944, de Gaulle was officially recognised by the Allies as the head of the French government and his administration received a similar endorsement. However, de Gaulle’s difficult relationship with Winston Churchill and Roosevelt continued when he was not invited to attend with the ‘Big Three’ (Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt/Truman) meetings at Yalta and Potsdam. My Webpage FFI film FRF 1940 An invasion designed to eleminate the AL quada organzation A terrorist organization.

ERR: Sorry i could not read the entire art ,i don't have subscription. Western Law can not be compared to international law or the Geneva convention as they are two different subjects. If one was to be tried by US law one has to be a US citizen. And they are clearly not.

Sparhawk: I wish it would be that easy, This is taken from Convention IV art 5, as to what rights a POW has then you'll have to read that convention. Art. 5 Where in the territory of a Party to the conflict, the latter is satisfied that an individual protected person is definitely suspected of or engaged in activities hostile to the security of the State, such individual person shall not be entitled to claim such rights and privileges under the present Convention as would, if exercised in the favour of such individual person, be prejudicial to the security of such State. Where in occupied territory an individual protected person is detained as a spy or saboteur, or as a person under definite suspicion of activity hostile to the security of the Occupying Power, such person shall, in those cases where absolute military security so requires, be regarded as having forfeited rights of communication under the present Convention. In each case, such persons shall nevertheless be treated with humanity and, in case of trial, shall not be deprived of the rights of fair and regular trial prescribed by the present Convention. They shall also be granted the full rights and privileges of a protected person under the present Convention at the earliest date consistent with the security of the State or Occupying Power, as the case may be.

Eureka: So i guess those dozens of web pages are a waste of band width because you know a few people. Perhaps you can show me your web site that states this, because a few of those sites i seen on google are by the french goverment and i'm sure they'd like to know there sites are fake. I think you miss the piont of why indentifacation is so important on the battle field. and why following the convention is so important. it is set-up to provide all sides good and bad guys plus the civilians with some degree of protection and rights. You have no idea what this war is all about, your comment above proves that. To you it is your chance to piont your finger at the US, nothing more. Bullshit. This Kid was in Terrorist training camps well before the WTC happen, His father had direct links to Bin Ladin, His mother has been quoted as saying they shared many holidays together with Bin Ladin, do you really think he disapproved ? He was part of an organization that used Terror as a wpn against the people of Afgan on a daily basis. And i'm not saying he had part in that either, but odds are he did. "All he did was resist the invaders" Don't make him sound like anything but what he truely is, a terrorist Scumbag. Who if released would gladly return to Afgan to fight again. Again bullshit. the convention was written for all parties involved in warefare including resistance and independant movements these type of groups existed well before the conventions were written. And how does the last sentences apply to Afgan, Are you suggesting that the Taliban are resisting tyranny, if so i loved to here that explaination.