Canadians urged to send fighter jets to Afghanistan

[teacher]

In these tight economic times I don't see this becoming a reality until maybe after 2011 when our other forces begin to reduce their numbers. I'm sure the fighter pilots have been a little jealous of their transport colleagues.

Canadians urged to send fighter jets to Afghanistan
U.S., NATO want CF-18 Hornets supporting mission, general says

By Matthew Fisher, Canwest News ServiceApril 20, 2009

The United States and NATO have "expressed a desire" for Canada to deploy CF-18 Hornet fighter jets to Afghanistan, according to the Canadian general who leads the coalition's air war in Afghanistan.

"I can tell you from the senior Canadian in this headquarters that I have been asked on several occasions by AFCENT (United States Air Forces Central) and CENTCOM (Central Command), 'How can we get Canadian F-18s into the game over here?' " Maj.-Gen. Duff Sullivan said. "And I've told them that that is a political decision back in Canada."

Sullivan, 52, flew sorties in CF-18s over the Balkans and during the first U.S.-led war against Iraq in 1991.

"What has been highlighted to me as the director of the air element here, the commander of AFCENT has said that it would relieve the pressure on his American squadrons if we could have Canadian F-18s come in. I haven't commented one way or the other, but passed it back to Canada to the chief of defence and I know that issue is well known in his office."

But on Sunday evening, Defence Minister Peter Mac-Kay's director of communications, Dan Dugas, disputed the notion it was a "political decision."

"The general is somehow mistaken on this issue," he said. "This is something that has not gone through a chain of command and then to the minister's office ... so it can hardly be a political decision.

"If the chain of command believes this is worthwhile, they would make a recommendation to the minister. As far as I know, this has not happened."

Sullivan has been described by U.S. Gen. David McKiernan, the top NATO commander in Afghanistan, as his "air czar." The Cornwall, Ont., native is a graduate of the U.S. air force's most prestigious combat school and flew NATO missions in Germany for Canada for seven years.

"Whenever our troops are in trouble and taking casualties, every single time they call for air support -- armed overwatch -- that is what the Canadian F-18s would do," Sullivan said, noting that Canada alone contributes combat ground forces in Afghanistan without also providing close air support.

"This is what I think that other allies are noticing and pointing out to me," Sullivan said. "Canada is the only nation that has not yet done a tour of duty with its fighter force. ... If we brought our F-18s, it would allow us to be fully involved in the air/land operation."

The questions being asked about Canada's CF-18s were "interesting in the NATO environment because before officially asking a country to fill a capability they will unofficially ask them to feel them out about where they are," said Sullivan, who is also deputy director of air and land operations for NATO's International Security Assistance Force.

Lt.-Gen. Michel Gauthier, who commands all Canadian troops overseas, said during a visit to Kandahar last month that the air force was already making a major contribution in Afghanistan and that Canada had no plans to deploy CF-18s to Kandahar.

"You have to recognize that Canada is contributing in a very, very significant manner with the more than 3,000 troops we have on the ground," Sullivan said, echoing some of Gauthier's comments. "We have (also) plussed up with our Chinooks and Griffons (helicopters) and Herons (unmanned surveillance drones), so there is no doubt Canada is shouldering quite an impressive contribution."

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/somni ... story.html

[WJflyer]

I could see this happening when our ground commitment winds down. However, I do remember that the major coalition airfields in Afghanistan are very clogged with air traffic anyways, and usually, if someone is arriving with their jets, someone else is packing to go home. Most likely they will be based outside of Afghanistan in a neighbouring country.

[AuxBatOn]

I could see this happening when our ground commitment winds down. However, I do remember that the major coalition airfields in Afghanistan are very clogged with air traffic anyways, and usually, if someone is arriving with their jets, someone else is packing to go home. Most likely they will be based outside of Afghanistan in a neighbouring country.

Do you have 1st hand knowledge? Or is it pure speculation?

[Hedley]

I'm not sure anybody really cares, but some rotary
wing airlift would probably save more Canadian lives
than F-18's.

How many Canadians have died from IED's during
ground supply runs? Some or all of them would still
be alive if those supplies had been moved by helicopter.

Also, I will probably be pissed on from a great height
for mentioning this, I thought the F-18 was supposed
to be an air superiority fighter - a role which Canadians
have actually not actively performed in since the Korean
War, and even then, they were not flying for the RCAF
but rather on loan to the Americans, whom as smug
Canadians we are all supposed to despise.

Airmen other than USAF pilots also flew the Sabre with the 4th and 51st Wings. Several of these exchange pilots scored victories over the MiGs. Four Royal Canadian Air Force pilots were credited with eight MiGs, and five Royal Air Force fliers destroyed another eight MiGs

Last I heard, the Taliban wasn't putting many MiGs
into the sky over Afganistan.

I suppose you can use a fast-moving F-18 for close
air support, the same way you can use pliers as a
hammer. But something purpose-built for CAS
might do the job a whole lot better - like an Apache,
etc, especially at night.

[AuxBatOn]

How many Canadians have died from IED's during
ground supply runs? Some or all of them would still
be alive if those supplies had been moved by helicopter.

We do have Chinooks over there! 6 of them

Also, I will probably be pissed on from a great height
for mentioning this, I thought the F-18 was supposed
to be an air superiority fighter - a role which Canadians
have actually not actively performed in since the Korean
War, and even then, they were not flying for the RCAF
but rather on loan to the Americans, whom as smug
Canadians we are all supposed to despise.

The F-18 is actually a multi-role fighter and does the A/G role pretty well (Irak 1, Kosovo, Irak 2) The F-15A to D are Air Superiority Fighters.

We use the Hornet daily on Air Sovereignty, for NORAD alert.

I suppose you can use a fast-moving F-18 for close
air support, the same way you can use pliers as a
hammer. But something purpose-built for CAS
might do the job a whole lot better - like an Apache,
etc, especially at night.

Close Air Support is basically, the fighter orbiting at mid-high altitude waiting for a call from FAC. Then someone of the ground guides your eyes on a target you are to attack with some weapons (Gun, Bombs, Rockets, etc). I don't see why the Hornet can't do that job efficiently.

[Rockie]

The CF-18 is a purpose built multi-role fighter that is very good at ground attack. But you're absolutely right about close air support using a fast moving aircraft. It is very difficult to roll in on the "third tree to the left of the pond" at 480 kts, expecially when there are no trees or ponds and everything on the ground looks the same.

That's not to say they wouldn't be very useful though. Given coordinates or marking the target in some way the airplane can deliver weapons very very accurately.

[Mitch Cronin]

[...] and even then, they were not flying for the RCAF
but rather on loan to the Americans, whom as smug
Canadians we are all supposed to despise.

"Smug Canadians"? "Supposed to despise"?
Speak for yourself Hedley.
I think the majority of us were taught to respect our neighbors.

[2R]

WHY ?
Without foot soldiers the Taliban cannot be dominated,they cannot be made to shave their beards ,walk backwards and drink Coca-Cola

[Hedley]

re: "Smug Canadians":

Mitch: you know very well that anti-Americanism runs very
strong in Canada amongst the young, chic and the left-wing,
and it is frequently and strongly reflected on this website.

Gordon Sinclair said it all, years ago, and his words ring
truer with each passing year:

http://www.broadcasting-history.ca/news ... _text.html

"LET'S BE PERSONAL" Broadcast June 5, 1973 CFRB, Toronto, Ontario

Topic: "The Americans"

The United States dollar took another pounding on German, French and British exchanges this morning, hitting the lowest point ever known in West Germany. It has declined there by 41% since 1971 and this Canadian thinks it is time to speak up for the Americans as the most generous and possibly the least-appreciated people in all the world.

As long as sixty years ago, when I first started to read newspapers, I read of floods on the Yellow River and the Yangtze. Well, Who rushed in with men and money to help? The Americans did, that's who.

They have helped control floods on the Nile, the Amazon, the Ganges and the Niger. Today, the rich bottom land of the Mississippi is under water and no foreign land has sent a dollar to help. Germany, Japan and, to a lesser extent, Britain and Italy, were lifted out of the debris of war by the Americans who poured in billions of dollars and forgave other billions in debts. None of those countries is today paying even the interest on its remaining debts to the United States.

When the franc was in danger of collapsing in 1956, it was the Americans who propped it up and their reward was to be insulted and swindled on the streets of Paris. And I was there. I saw that.

When distant cities are hit by earthquake, it is the United States that hurries into help... Managua Nicaragua is one of the most recent examples. So far this spring, 59 American communities have been flattened by tornadoes. Nobody has helped.

The Marshall Plan... the Truman Policy... all pumped billions upon billions of dollars into discouraged countries. And now, newspapers in those countries are writing about the decadent war-mongering Americans.

Now, I'd like to see just one of those countries that is gloating over the erosion of the United States dollar build its own airplanes.

Come on... let's hear it! Does any other country in the world have a plane to equal the Boeing Jumbo Jet, the Lockheed Tristar or the Douglas 10? If so, why don't they fly them? Why do all international lines except Russia fly American planes? Why does no other land on earth even consider putting a man or a woman on the moon?

You talk about Japanese technocracy and you get radios. You talk about German technocracy and you get automobiles. You talk about American technocracy and you find men on the moon, not once, but several times ... and safely home again. You talk about scandals and the Americans put theirs right in the store window for everybody to look at. Even the draft dodgers are not pursued and hounded. They are right here on our streets in Toronto, most of them... unless they are breaking Canadian laws... are getting American dollars from Ma and Pa at home to spend here.

When the Americans get out of this bind... as they will... who could blame them if they said 'the hell with the rest of the world'. Let someone else buy the bonds, let someone else build or repair foreign dams or design foreign buildings that won't shake apart in earthquakes.

When the railways of France, Germany and India were breaking down through age, it was the Americans who rebuilt them. When the Pennsylvania Railroad and the New York Central went broke, nobody loaned them an old caboose. Both of them are still broke. I can name to you 5,000 times when the Americans raced to the help of other people in trouble.

Can you name to me even one time when someone else raced to the Americans in trouble? I don't think there was outside help even during the San Francisco earthquake.

Our neighbours have faced it alone and I am one Canadian who is damned tired of hearing them kicked around. They will come out of this thing with their flag high. And when they do, they are entitled to thumb their noses at the lands that are gloating over their present troubles.

I hope Canada is not one of these. But there are many smug, self-righteous Canadians. And finally, the American Red Cross was told at its 48th Annual meeting in New Orleans this morning that it was broke.

This year's disasters... with the year less than half-over... has taken it all and nobody... but nobody... has helped.

[29chev]

Well posted Hedley

Well said Mr.Sinclair

[bmc]

I post this not to start a flame war, but as a Canadian living abraod for a long time and not really paying attention to what's going on. What is the strategic reason for Canada being involved in Afghanistan? Again, I emphasize that I am detached from this and want to know.

[teacher]

What is happening in Somalia is a small taste of what would happen if we left Afghanistan without completing the job.

[2R]

I post this not to start a flame war, but as a Canadian living abraod for a long time and not really paying attention to what's going on. What is the strategic reason for Canada being involved in Afghanistan? Again, I emphasize that I am detached from this and want to know.

Ask this Liberal,He made the decision not to help in Iraq ,so he sent troops to peaceful Afghanistan instead.Troops that were sent in unprotected vehicles and poor clothing choices .

FrançaisJohn McCallum MP


7750 Birchmount Road, Unit 21-22
Markham Ontario L3R 0B4
Tel: 905 479-8100
Email: john@johnmccallum.ca House of Commons
Room 209 Justice Building
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0A6
Tel: 613 996-3374
Fax: 613 992-3921
Email: mccalj@parl.gc.ca


At least the Afghanies are not eating our dead soldiers like they did the British Soldiers in the 19th century,some guy called Kipling wrote a peom about the slaughter

Rudyard Kipling , Barrack-Room Ballads ,The Young British Soldier

The Young British Soldier

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When the 'arf-made recruity goes out to the East
'E acts like a babe an' 'e drinks like a beast,
An' 'e wonders because 'e is frequent deceased
Ere 'e's fit for to serve as a soldier.
Serve, serve, serve as a soldier,
Serve, serve, serve as a soldier,
Serve, serve, serve as a soldier,
So-oldier of the Queen!

Now all you recruities what's drafted to-day,
You shut up your rag-box an' 'ark to my lay,
An' I'll sing you a soldier as far as I may:
A soldier what's fit for a soldier.
Fit, fit, fit for a soldier . . .

First mind you steer clear o' the grog-sellers' huts,
For they sell you Fixed Bay'nets that rots out your guts --
Ay, drink that 'ud eat the live steel from your butts --
An' it's bad for the young British soldier.
Bad, bad, bad for the soldier . . .

When the cholera comes -- as it will past a doubt --
Keep out of the wet and don't go on the shout,
For the sickness gets in as the liquor dies out,
An' it crumples the young British soldier.
Crum-, crum-, crumples the soldier . . .

But the worst o' your foes is the sun over'ead:
You must wear your 'elmet for all that is said:
If 'e finds you uncovered 'e'll knock you down dead,
An' you'll die like a fool of a soldier.
Fool, fool, fool of a soldier . . .

If you're cast for fatigue by a sergeant unkind,
Don't grouse like a woman nor crack on nor blind;
Be handy and civil, and then you will find
That it's beer for the young British soldier.
Beer, beer, beer for the soldier . . .

Now, if you must marry, take care she is old --
A troop-sergeant's widow's the nicest I'm told,
For beauty won't help if your rations is cold,
Nor love ain't enough for a soldier.
'Nough, 'nough, 'nough for a soldier . . .

If the wife should go wrong with a comrade, be loath
To shoot when you catch 'em -- you'll swing, on my oath! --
Make 'im take 'er and keep 'er: that's Hell for them both,
An' you're shut o' the curse of a soldier.
Curse, curse, curse of a soldier . . .

When first under fire an' you're wishful to duck,
Don't look nor take 'eed at the man that is struck,
Be thankful you're livin', and trust to your luck
And march to your front like a soldier.
Front, front, front like a soldier . . .

When 'arf of your bullets fly wide in the ditch,
Don't call your Martini a cross-eyed old bitch;
She's human as you are -- you treat her as sich,
An' she'll fight for the young British soldier.
Fight, fight, fight for the soldier . . .

When shakin' their bustles like ladies so fine,
The guns o' the enemy wheel into line,
Shoot low at the limbers an' don't mind the shine,
For noise never startles the soldier.
Start-, start-, startles the soldier . . .

If your officer's dead and the sergeants look white,
Remember it's ruin to run from a fight:
So take open order, lie down, and sit tight,
And wait for supports like a soldier.
Wait, wait, wait like a soldier . . .

When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains,
And the women come out to cut up what remains,
Jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains
An' go to your Gawd like a soldier.
Go, go, go like a soldier,
Go, go, go like a soldier,
Go, go, go like a soldier,
So-oldier of the Queen!


Literature Network » Rudyard Kipling » Barrack-Room Ballads » The Young British Soldier

[Rog]

Send in the Twin Otters! (with rockets)

[Rockie]

I post this not to start a flame war, but as a Canadian living abraod for a long time and not really paying attention to what's going on. What is the strategic reason for Canada being involved in Afghanistan? Again, I emphasize that I am detached from this and want to know.

Afghanistan at the time was ruled by the Taliban who provided Al Qaeda the resources of the country to train and provide shelter for their organization. You know who Al Qaeda is. In order to deny Afghanistan to Al Qaeda Nato first had to drive out the Taliban. If Nato leaves Afghanistan before a more moderate government is capable of running the country and keeping the Taliban out, both it and Al Qaeda will return in very short order and we will be back to where we were in 2001.

Iraq was not the problem, Afghanistan was.

[iflyforpie]

I don't know why industrialized First World nations feel the need to send high performance fighters to Third World nations in an attempt to bomb them to peace. I say bomb because what else are they going to do? It's not like there is a Taliban Air Force!

So I will say it right now.

IT WON'T WORK!!

It has never worked. Even in the cases of bombing industrialized countries the results have been marginal. Annual German fighter production reached its peak in 1944 under the heaviest Allied bombing. The Japanese fought on after the fire bombing of Tokyo, which killed more people than Hiroshima or Nagasaki. The populations of Madrid, London, Berlin, and many other cities never changed the people's will to resist; it only strengthened their resolve.

Haven't we learned the lessons of Vietnam, Afghanistan 1, former Yugoslavia, and hundreds of African bush wars? These people have nothing worth a fighter sortie to destroy. They are few, scattered, and well dug in. They purposefully avoid direct confrontation with a superior foe, in order to harass them and bleed them white.

What is it with western society that thinks we are actually making progress with risky and expensive air attacks? Like enforcing the no-fly zone over over Kosovo--as if ethnic cleansing was being carried out by fighter jets.

Using fighters in their intended role, you increase the risk of friendly fire incidents, you expose the jets to far more danger than they can inflict on insurgents, and they are a waste of resources when air superiority (meaning that any type of aircraft can be flown without risk of being shot down air-to-air) was achieved virtually day one of the conflict.


I remember reading this years ago during the Cold War. One Russian General asks another, while sitting outside of a cafe in Paris, "I wonder who won the air war?"

[Rockie]

Fighters in Afghanistan are used to provide support to the troops on the ground. Ask Nark how much value an infantry places on that.

[Hedley]

ummmm ... I am not sure that I would try to wage a
ground war without air superiority. The army might
get pissed, and we can't have that.

Who won the last Iraq war?

Some video for you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlshVTn1APE

P.S. I'm not sure you could be this effective at
night CAS with an F-18, but I might be mistaken.

[iflyforpie]

Air superiority against what?

[Hedley]

The only sane answer to your question is, "You're welcome"

IIRC every time an Iraq aircraft took to the air, it ran as
fast as it could away from a fight, to the safety of Iran.