First Canadian female combat death in Afghanistan

[Temagami Scourge]

Will this death change the vote? I believe we should stay the course in Afghanistan, but a female KIA is a lot harder to swallow than a male KIA. If that makes me a chauvinist, then so be it.

[Temagami Scourge]

I just want to say that I do not know Captain Goddard personally, but I am proud for the service she has done for this country in assisting those who need it. It is our best interests to realize that there is a price to pay for being a part of this war, and that we are still in the honeymoon stage when it comes to casualties. We need to prepare for more, and this i'm not looking forward to.

My heart goes out to those who will have to deal with a huge hole in their lives; her family, friends and compatriots.

[Wilber]

People have to ask themselves whether what these people are doing is worthwhile. By all accounts, those who are there putting themselves at risk do believe it. If you also believe it is, do you walk away because a female is killed? Do you cut the rug out from under them and make all their efforts and sacrifices mean nothing? Do you make them even more of a target because the bad guys know the folks at home have no balls and it won't take much to make them cave?

She went there to do the same job and take the same risks as the guys. Wouldn't treating her death differently actually be showing less respect for her than the men who have died?

[betsy]

It is a tragic loss for each and every soldier we lose in the battlefield. Gender makes no difference.

[Nocrap]

It is a tragic loss for each and every soldier we lose in the battlefield. Gender makes no difference.

Normally gender would not make a difference, but she will go down in history as the first Canadian female soldier to lose their life in battle.

I expect a great deal of backlash from this and the media will have a field day; especially since it falls at a time when war-mongering Harper has signed on for two more years of following George Bush wherever he leads us. Tragic.

[Black Dog]

It is a tragic loss for each and every soldier we lose in the battlefield. Gender makes no difference.

Why is it tragic? Is it more tragic than the construction worker who falls off a scaffolding and dies? the soccer mom who rolls her mini-van after dropping the kids off at school? The miner who succumbs to cancer after years of breathing chemical dust? These are tragedies because, though some jobs are dangerous, unlike soldiering, death is not an expected outcome. A soldier's job is to die, so why are we surprised or upset when they do?

[Wilber]

It is a tragic loss for each and every soldier we lose in the battlefield. Gender makes no difference.

Why is it tragic? Is it more tragic than the construction worker who falls off a scaffolding and dies? the soccer mom who rolls her mini-van after dropping the kids off at school? The miner who succumbs to cancer after years of breathing chemical dust? These are tragedies because, though some jobs are dangerous, unlike soldiering, death is not an expected outcome. A soldier's job is to die, so why are we surprised or upset when they do?

Didn't Patton say, "It's not a soldier's duty to die for his country but to make the other poor bastard die for his"? Or something like that. A soldiers job is to protect his/her country and carry out his/her governments policies, not to die.

[Temagami Scourge]

I would like to know how the Captain was killed, given the recent issues with friendly fire. From what I know, a FOO (Forward Observation Officer) is in an LAV following close to the CO's LAV, and handling fire direction calls/requests to arty and planes on tap.

This means that the Captain's LAV would (should) have been in the middle of a group of armoured vehicles, acting like a "quarterback" for all the units involved.

If she left the vehicle, then that is another story, as anything can go in that circumstance. However, I can't see an FOO removing themselves from visual contact with the CO in a firefight. As I understand, she was the sole casualty in this event, so I hope this isn't a case where some Taliban got off a lucky shot.

From her press coverage, this soldier was a true pro, and that impresses me. It sounds like we lost a good one.

[Black Dog]

Didn't Patton say, "It's not a soldier's duty to die for his country but to make the other poor bastard die for his"? Or something like that. A soldiers job is to protect his/her country and carry out his/her governments policies, not to die.

Correction: a soldier's job is to protect his/her country and carry out his/her governments policies and, if neccesasry, to give his or her life to do so. In other words, the possibility of death is a big part of the job. Given this expectation, I again have to ask why the death of a single soldier is such a tragedy.

[Temagami Scourge]

Ok...there was no chance of this being a friendly-fire incident. The media are reporting an RPG, so it is fortunate that only one person was KIA, as an RPG going through a LAV usually creates casualties among everyone in the vehicle.

Still, that must have been a once-in-a-lifetime shot for the enemy. Those RPG's aren't that accurate, and you'd have to be within fifty yards to get off a good penetration shot. However, these Taliban don't like to get within fifty yards of a Western enemy to make a shot...they like to keep as much room between them and the Yankees, Canadians, Brits or Aussies because they know that western killing zone can extend with accuracy for a long distance...even in the mountains.

[politika]

Her death was tragic, she died for what she believed in and she died in serving her country and for that I am proud of her along with the 15 others who have died in Afganistan doing what they believe in.

We should push on and keep fighting until this war is over, that is what the Captain would have wanted.

Keep on pushing Canadian forces!

[Leader Circle]

Didn't Patton say, "It's not a soldier's duty to die for his country but to make the other poor bastard die for his"? Or something like that. A soldiers job is to protect his/her country and carry out his/her governments policies, not to die.

Correction: a soldier's job is to protect his/her country and carry out his/her governments policies and, if neccesasry, to give his or her life to do so. In other words, the possibility of death is a big part of the job. Given this expectation, I again have to ask why the death of a single soldier is such a tragedy.

I hate to say this, but I find myself agreeing with you BD!

I haven't looked back, but do you support the mission BD?

Nocrap, why do you feel the need to slander PM Harper every chance you get? DId Greg not tell us to refrain from name calling and slanderous comments? Yet, you continue to spout your garbage about Bush following & war mongering(did you forget who sent the troops?)and I start asking myself why Greg has not put a stop to someone so useless to this forum?? Maybe you should grab your soapbox and head for Young & Bloor and go preach to some like minded Harper haters like yourself!!

[geoffrey]

Nocrap, why do you feel the need to slander PM Harper every chance you get? DId Greg not tell us to refrain from name calling and slanderous comments? Yet, you continue to spout your garbage about Bush following & war mongering(did you forget who sent the troops?)and I start asking myself why Greg has not put a stop to someone so useless to this forum?? Maybe you should grab your soapbox and head for Young & Bloor and go preach to some like minded Harper haters like yourself!!

While I don't agree with Nocraps comments and the way he presents arguments, that comment isn't helping. Throwing around comments like that is equally bad, don't sink to those types of levels.

--

Male, female, what's the difference. I thought the catch phrase of the year was gender equality, lets have it equal and not really care if its a man or a woman.

It's a solider that died for our safety and freedom, and let's live it at that. A hero, nothing more, nothing less.

[Black Dog]

I haven't looked back, but do you support the mission BD?

Nope.

It's a solider that died for our safety and freedom, and let's live it at that. A hero, nothing more, nothing less.

I'm very curious to know how she was defending our safety (let alone our freedom). When I last checked, Afghanistan was very far away and no threat to Canada.

Her death was tragic, she died for what she believed in and she died in serving her country and for that I am proud of her along with the 15 others who have died in Afganistan doing what they believe in.

We should push on and keep fighting until this war is over, that is what the Captain would have wanted.

Keep on pushing Canadian forces!

"You smug-faced crowds with kindling eye

Who cheer when soldier lads march by,

Sneak home and pray you'll never know

The hell where youth and laughter go."

-Siegfried Sassoon

[geoffrey]

I'm very curious to know how she was defending our safety (let alone our freedom). When I last checked, Afghanistan was very far away and no threat to Canada.

Preventing Afghanistan from falling back to the grips of the Taliban is in Canada's security interest. al-Qaeda wants to attack us too.

[Army Guy]

geoffrey:

Male, female, what's the difference. I thought the catch phrase of the year was gender equality, lets have it equal and not really care if its a man or a woman.

It's a solider that died for our safety and freedom, and let's live it at that. A hero, nothing more, nothing less

Well said.

[Army Guy]

Black dog:

Correction: a soldier's job is to protect his/her country and carry out his/her governments policies and, if neccesasry, to give his or her life to do so. In other words, the possibility of death is a big part of the job. Given this expectation, I again have to ask why the death of a single soldier is such a tragedy.

The death of any Canadian citizen that has signed on as unlimited liability ( may be asked to give thier life while performing thier job) is a great tragedy. regardless of them being a soldier ,police officer, fire fighter etc... They are performing jobs that need to be done so that the Many, can enjoy lifes pleasures that we all take for granted.

In todays times the loss of any soldier is a great deal and should concern all of us. now if you are comparing the loss to the losses suffered on D-Day or any otther great battle you may have a piont, but we are not talking about that are we.

So i ask you why today the loss of a soldier is not a tragedy?

[scribblet]

It is a tragic loss for each and every soldier we lose in the battlefield. Gender makes no difference.

I agree, a male death is no less worthy than a female death. However, it happened at an opportune time for the opposition to use it to political advantage.

As for the crap comment about 'war mongering Harper', I guess Martin isn't a warmonger for originally sending them in. Interesting how liberals are going to twist this and turn into a Harper problem. Also interesting is the fact that Martin was missing in action yesterday.

To leave now would be cowardice in the face of international terrorism, and of course our soldiers would have died in vain.

[betsy]

I expect a great deal of backlash from this and the media will have a field day; especially since it falls at a time when war-mongering Harper has signed on for two more years of following George Bush wherever he leads us. Tragic.

Field day of what? Same-old, same-old? Of course a lot of Canadians are going to clamor to get out of there (some already did at the first sign of casualties). Consecutive years under confused Liberal leaderships had only bred a similarly confused public. Flip-flopping Liberals only bred flip-flopping supporters. And the supporters are still confused. THAT's what's really tragic.

Anything new to that?

[scribblet]

The National Post says it better than I could; contrived outrage, how appropriate.

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/ed...43-3d7dad43e7d4

Stephen Harper was not required to hold a vote on Canada's military commitment in Afghanistan. He had the authority to extend and expand the mission until February, 2009, without consulting Parliament. Had he done so, however, opposition MPs would have been heaving with collective indignation over the Prime Minister's disrespect for our democratic institutions.

As it is, the opposition parties had to contrive another kind of outrage, portraying the vote that narrowly passed 149-145 on Wednesday night as a cynical and partisan trick to force them to choose between sharing culpability for the mission and being labelled spineless and unpatriotic. They complained that they were rushed, that 36 hours' notice for the vote didn't give them enough time to understand what was being asked of them. They wanted briefings, they wanted committee hearings, they wanted consultations with constituents, they wanted elucidation on foreign policy alternatives. This is, of course, nonsense. What they really wanted was another excuse to attack the government.

The MPs know perfectly well why Canada is in Afghanistan, and why its commitment must be prolonged. They know that once you start a mission, you have to finish it. They know Canada is there to advance freedom, democracy and human rights, and to ensure that al-Qaeda terrorists, and their Taliban supporters, don't use Afghanistan as a base to launch terrorist attacks worldwide. Finally, they know that both the Netherlands and the United Kingdom -- Canada's two primary partners in southern Afghanistan -- have renewed their commitments.

The MPs also know that no amount of debate or consultation would have altered the votes of Bloc Quebecois and NDP members, the former having back-pedalled on their original support for the mission to distinguish themselves from the Tories, who are enjoying a surge of support in Quebec, and the latter having opted to pander to their anti-American base........

[PocketRocket]

Back to the initial spirit of the thread, Rest in Peace, Captain Goddard.

Thank you for your service to Canada, and the supreme sacrafice you have made.

[Black Dog]

Preventing Afghanistan from falling back to the grips of the Taliban is in Canada's security interest. al-Qaeda wants to attack us too.

I've been questioning the titanic number of assumptions in this line of reasoning and so far, no one has been able to provide a satisfactory answer. Again: what evidence do we have that Taliban are a force? There's enough factions in Afghanistan right now with an vested interest in opppossing western intervention, be it tribal warlords, bandits, Taliban loyalists, jihadists or drug traffikers (or any combination thereof) that chalking every bit of violence up to the Taliba, seems like nothing more than a pat answer. IOW it flies in the face of the reality of a fracticious, violent society. Then there's the assunmption that "Al Qaeda wants to attack us to". First, there's no proof of that either, nor is there evidence that Al Qaeda is a viable organization naymore. As London and Bali have shown, the greatest threat scome, not from overseas, but from homegrown elements inspired by the AQ philosophy and angered by "western imperialism". Finally, even if the Taliban are the sole perpatrators of anti-western violence in AFghanistan and even if Al Qaeda i still the threat that we're told they are, it doesn't logically follow that a western withdrawl will result in a Taliban victory or Al Qaeda's resurgance. In short, the statement that "Preventing Afghanistan from falling back to...the Taliban is in Canada's security interest" etc. is propaganda.

AG:

So i ask you why today the loss of a soldier is not a tragedy?

Because hundreds, thousands of people around the world die every day without any accolades or post-mortem tributes. Many of them are doing work that is equally, if not more, important than the work done by a soldier or policeman. For example, none of the 143 workers killed on the job here in Alberta last year will receive so much as a tenth of the ink that this one soldier will. Are their deaths less tragic? Are their lives less worthy of attention because they didn't carry a gun? The way I see it, there's two options here: either every death is a tregedy of front-page proportions, or the death of someone who's job involves a considerable element of personal risk is not really worth noting. You sign up, you pay the price, so be it.

Frankly, the praise and absolute reverence people seem to hold for the military is most unseemly in a democracy.

[Army Guy]

Black dog:

Again: what evidence do we have that Taliban are a force?

There is plenty of evidence, Capture insurgents have claimed they are fighting on behalf of the taliban same as AL Quada. Intelligence gather in the field suggests that the taliban are alive and well, and in numbers to openly attack Nato and US forces in the open. What more do you want, besides do you have evidance that they do not exist, or is this some theory.

There's enough factions in Afghanistan right now with an vested interest in opppossing western intervention, be it tribal warlords, bandits, Taliban loyalists, jihadists or drug traffikers (or any combination thereof) that chalking every bit of violence up to the Taliba, seems like nothing more than a pat answer.

Again those that have been captuere have no problem telling you whom they are fighting for. The taliban or Al Quada have no problem claiming responsibility for bombings, attacks,etc. yes there is many different groups with separate agendas and all the attacks have not been blamed on the taliban. Of course there is the locals themselfs who will piont out whoms whom,

"Al Qaeda wants to attack us to". First, there's no proof of that either, nor is there evidence that Al Qaeda is a viable organization naymore.

Have you watched a bin laden tape, i think they make it pretty clear, that all the western countries are a target Canada included. But thats the problem with some Canadians they simply refuse to believe that someone would want to attack Canada. "they will leave us alone if we leave them alone"...but when some terrorist blows something up in Canada they'll be the first to scream "what do i pay you for"

Viable terrorist threats have already happened in Canada. Time to wake up.

Because hundreds, thousands of people around the world die every day without any accolades or post-mortem tributes. Many of them are doing work that is equally, if not more, important than the work done by a soldier or policeman.

What could be equal or more important than than defending your freedoms that you have right now. Police soldiers have signed on not only to risk thier lives on a daily basis but to die if nessicary to ensure we keep those freedoms. Yes there are some nobel occupations or deeds that are done every day, but those persons are also recongized.

Are their lives less worthy of attention because they didn't carry a gun?

Is that what this is all about carrying a gun ? Or is it that these persons are willing to risk everything to bring alittle more peace to the world, that they are willing to die for thiers and Canadian moral values. How many Canadians would do that.

or the death of someone who's job involves a considerable element of personal risk is not really worth noting. You sign up, you pay the price, so be it.

I'm just assuming here but i don't think that the majority of Canadians feel the same way you do. The fact that there is somebody out there in Canada that is willing to sign up so they do not have to, to ensure that you and them can maintain the same level of freedoms and rights you have now,is worth the 2 seconds it takes to turn over the front page or listen to a 30 second news bite on one of our soldiers.

I'm just curious BD were did you stand on the government not allowing the media on the tarmac in trenton ? As it is the media and the people that make it so news worthy or note worthy and if the majority felt differently then i would agree with you.

Frankly, the praise and absolute reverence people seem to hold for the military is most unseemly in a democracy.

Frankly your wrong, Canadians may have some praise for the military( a recent development) but absolute reverence now thats funny...perhaps that could explain the reason our military is in shambles.

And perhaps you can explain the praise and ABSOLUTE reverence that the soviet union used to have for it's military, lets talk about China, and Japans military prior to the end of WWII. the list gos on...in fact it's in democratic countries that a military is seen as poor third cousin and just barely tolerable. Yes the US is perhaps an exception.

[Black Dog]

There is plenty of evidence, Capture insurgents have claimed they are fighting on behalf of the taliban same as AL Quada. Intelligence gather in the field suggests that the taliban are alive and well, and in numbers to openly attack Nato and US forces in the open. What more do you want, besides do you have evidance that they do not exist, or is this some theory.

I never said they do not exist, only that the danger they pose is overblown. BTW, can you clarify your first statement? I'm not sure what you mean by " insurgents have claimed they are fighting on behalf of the taliban same as AL Quada".

Again those that have been captuere have no problem telling you whom they are fighting for. The taliban or Al Quada have no problem claiming responsibility for bombings, attacks,etc. yes there is many different groups with separate agendas and all the attacks have not been blamed on the taliban. Of course there is the locals themselfs who will piont out whoms whom,

I'm sur ethey have no problem claiming responsibility, but that doesn't mean they are actually responsible. And I'm sur ethe locals are happy to tell you who's at fault and hand people over. It's not as though Afghanistan is a tribal society with longstanding fueds between tribes...

Have you watched a bin laden tape, i think they make it pretty clear, that all the western countries are a target Canada included. But thats the problem with some Canadians they simply refuse to believe that someone would want to attack Canada. "they will leave us alone if we leave them alone"...but when some terrorist blows something up in Canada they'll be the first to scream "what do i pay you for"

Viable terrorist threats have already happened in Canada. Time to wake up.

I'm sure here are people who want to attack Canada. But I'm not convinced what we do in Afghanistan is going to make a difference (except maybe to makes the odds of some homegrown wingnuts doing something stupid a little shorter.)

Is that what this is all about carrying a gun ? Or is it that these persons are willing to risk everything to bring alittle more peace to the world, that they are willing to die for thiers and Canadian moral values. How many Canadians would do that.

Dying or killing for what you belive in is not an inherently noble act. But the real irony is that no one's dying in Afghanistan for our values. In fact. the majority of Afghanis would probably find our values repugnant.

But in this, as in all other wars, the rhetoric about peace, freedom and girls going to school is a sop. Great powers seldom are concerned over such trivialities.

I'm just assuming here but i don't think that the majority of Canadians feel the same way you do. The fact that there is somebody out there in Canada that is willing to sign up so they do not have to, to ensure that you and them can maintain the same level of freedoms and rights you have now,is worth the 2 seconds it takes to turn over the front page or listen to a 30 second news bite on one of our soldiers.

I know this is hard to believe, but my freedoms are no more or less endanger today than they were when Cpt. Goddard was still alive. My freedoms and rights are in absolutely no danger from some madman in a cave half a world away. Quite frankly, my own government is probably a greater threat than Osama bn Laden and his band of fanatics.

I'm just curious BD were did you stand on the government not allowing the media on the tarmac in trenton ? As it is the media and the people that make it so news worthy or note worthy and if the majority felt differently then i would agree with you.

This is what I said about that controversy:

I don't believe we should be in Afghanistan. I certainly don't buy the party line about why we're there. But I don't see the need to kick up such a fuss over the deaths of people who's job it is to kill and die (how's this for perspective: the four day battle for Vimy Ridge cost more than 3,950. More than 900 died in one day in the raid on Dieppe). But the reality is we're there right now and people are going to die. Emotional debates about flag-draped caskets and the proper position of a piece of fabric on a stick won't change that.

In other words, all the stuff about funerals and flags is a sideshow. The real issue is that we're on what is IMO, a fool's errand.

Frankly your wrong, Canadians may have some praise for the military( a recent development) but absolute reverence now thats funny...perhaps that could explain the reason our military is in shambles.

I was referring mor eto the folks on this board.

And perhaps you can explain the praise and ABSOLUTE reverence that the soviet union used to have for it's military, lets talk about China, and Japans military prior to the end of WWII. the list gos on...in fact it's in democratic countries that a military is seen as poor third cousin and just barely tolerable. Yes the US is perhaps an exception.

Thanks for provig my point. The more militarized the country, the scarier it is.

[Army Guy]

Black dog:

I never said they do not exist, only that the danger they pose is overblown. BTW, can you clarify your first statement? I'm not sure what you mean by " insurgents have claimed they are fighting on behalf of the taliban same as AL Quada".

Those Insurgents "meaning afganis, and foriegn fighters" that have been captured in combat have readily confessed that they are either taliban or Al quada.

I'm sur ethey have no problem claiming responsibility, but that doesn't mean they are actually responsible. And I'm sur ethe locals are happy to tell you who's at fault and hand people over. It's not as though Afghanistan is a tribal society with longstanding fueds between tribes...

For these extremists it is a great honor for them to kill western troops, that being said laying claim is also part of that right. so when nobody else claims responsibilty. it is can be assumed that they in fact did what they claimed .

Locals are pionting out members within there own tribe as you call them. other claims are investagated, keep in mind this is not Iraq, we must have proof and that is done through survailence and investagation before arrests are made..

I'm sure here are people who want to attack Canada. But I'm not convinced what we do in Afghanistan is going to make a difference (except maybe to makes the odds of some homegrown wingnuts doing something stupid a little shorter.)

Correct me if i'm wrong but it was al quada that flew into the trade towers right, and thier are no garentees that they will not bring thier fight to North America again, so why not fight them in afgan on thier home turf. instead of in our streets.

Dying or killing for what you belive in is not an inherently noble act. But the real irony is that no one's dying in Afghanistan for our values. In fact. the majority of Afghanis would probably find our values repugnant.

That is a matter of opinon i guess, but i personal think that our present freedoms are worth fighting for and defending. As for dying in afgan for our values your wrong Canadain soldiers are dying for our values, without these values i don't think we would be there in the first place.

Your right a majority of afgan do not share all of our values, but there are some they do share like the right to freedom, to raise they're families with out war, to work and feed thier families, to be able to attend school, to have the basic human rights...and because of our Canadian values we as Canadians are willing to risk our lifes to help them get some of what we take for granted.

But in this, as in all other wars, the rhetoric about peace, freedom and girls going to school is a sop. Great powers seldom are concerned over such trivialities.

Your right great powers are not so concerned about trivialities, but then again they are not on the ground we are and those things are what drives soldiers to do what they do.

I know this is hard to believe, but my freedoms are no more or less endanger today than they were when Cpt. Goddard was still alive. My freedoms and rights are in absolutely no danger from some madman in a cave half a world away. Quite frankly, my own government is probably a greater threat than Osama bn Laden and his band of fanatics.

Not true your freedoms are being eroded every day, with the nation trying to keep the scumbags out. longer waiting lines at the airports, more tax dollars being spent on security measures, tougher imigration rules, How many laws have changed in the name of national defense in regards to our personal freedoms look how many rights in the US and Canada are being bent in the cause of national defense..., listening to personal phone calls, with out warrents...etc etc. So are you being effected Yes, it all change on 9/11, and Bin Ladin crew.

Thanks for provig my point. The more militarized the country, the scarier it is.

Come on BD, out of a nation of 36 million we have a military of 62,000 military personnel including 9,500 sailors, 19,500 soldiers, 14,500 air force personnel and 20,000 administrative and support personnel. There are also about 22,000 reservists. Not enough to fill a national hockey rink, NY city has more police officers, there are more female marines than our entire military machine ..Shit how many canadians even seen a military person in uniform up close... I will agree with you that the military must be be hald accountable to the people and must be of reasonable size. and i think all would agree our military is far to small for any of it's missions that canadians want to do.