I recently read an article about videos being posted on http://www.youtube.com that were taken by soldiers and the military. Whether they were leaked on the net or released intentionaly to show what it is really like over there it really is incredible video. It was actually super easy to find on the site.
This is definetly not the kind footage that you'll see on the evening news. After seeing it I now have even more respect for our troops over seas than I did before.
Good job and God speed.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaC-w2dIxZc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2r3C0PJ1LM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_S9P1kMNuM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UpWyuZDDl4
Videos of Canadian troops in Afghan fire fights
Moderators: lilfssister, North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako
Raise a glass to our lads and remind them of their front sight.
"FLY THE AIRPLANE"!
http://www.youtube.com/hazatude
http://www.youtube.com/hazatude
-
monkeyspankmasterflex
- Rank 7
- Posts: 517
- Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 1:12 pm
The article that prompted me to search for these vids.....
Web of Danger?
Troops' Internet postings pose security risk, warns military official
By BROOKES MERRITT, EDMONTON SUN
Unauthorized videos taken by Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan and posted on the Internet could threaten the safety of troops, warns an Edmonton military official.
And judging by some of the footage found at youtube.com, it could also be embarrassing, says a former commander.
"Something soldiers find innocent might be beneficial to enemy intelligence," said Brian Hillier, top spokesman for Land Force Western Area.
"Policy is that all video and pictures taken on service duty must be approved by Chief of Defence staff ... to ensure operational security and soldier safety is not compromised."
Concern over videos going public arose after military officials learned Edmonton reservist Cpl. Darcy Ressler recently returned from Afghanistan with alleged footage of an attempted suicide bomb attack and a nighttime firefight.
A military source said Ressler may already be in hot water over public disclosures he made about operational tactics, and he could face charges for sharing video footage.
Ressler, who has said he has no intention of sharing the video, declined comment until officials have seen his footage and decide whether to release it publicly.
A Department of National Defence spokesman said despite policy dictating all such material be vetted before being made public, "some stuff will always end up online, given advances in technology."
Dozens of unapproved Canadian Forces videos can be found at youtube.com, including one of a soldier at a Canadian artillery range impersonating an Arab.
"I'm going to die soon because of ball bearings in my face," he says, as a claymore detonates behind him.
The soldier appears to speak in a phoney Arab accent, and can be heard laughing along with the cameraman.
Another video shows a platoon of Edmonton-based soldiers in a frenetic daytime firefight in Afghanistan's Helmand province, lobbing grenades and shouting "I want that f--king hole cleared!" and "I can't believe that guy's not dead."
Neither video appears to have been approved by Combat Camera, the government's official military video website.
The proliferation of Internet communication makes retired Maj.-Gen. Lewis MacKenzie glad he's "not a commander these days. When I was in charge I could shut down all communications ... now I just shake my head.
http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/World/2 ... 25827.html
An editorial posted a few days ago......
Why we can live with battlefield home videos
ERIC MORSE
From Thursday's Globe and Mail
The nearly real-time videos that are often posted to the Internet by soldiers, journalists, insurgents and pretty well anyone else in the vicinity of the Iraq and Afghanistan fighting are a truly new phenomenon of war. They raise questions of security unknown to the military censors of previous wars.
The recent appearance of clips apparently filmed by an American-embedded journalist of Canadian troops in close action in Afghanistan's Helmand province has raised a hue and cry from those who claim the images could endanger the safety of our troops or operational security. The fact that this sort of thing can be done at all is probably more alarming to many commentators than what is actually being shown -- or capable of being shown -- in what is basically a "home video" made under combat conditions.
So, is "battlefield home video" really much of a security threat?
First of all, whatever is shown is after the event in a fluid theatre, and so troop locations are pretty much of academic interest at best. If you were a Nazi intelligence officer, you might be interested that "Alpha Company, 2nd Platoon, 'Red Devils' [of the Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry] from Edmonton, Canada" were in a certain sector at such and such a time. If you were an Allied intelligence officer in France, it might come as something of a shock to see similar videos of 2 Company, 1st Panzer Regiment, 10th SS Frundsberg Division anywhere in the Arnhem area. If you had been lucky enough to view them before Allied parachutes had opened, you would still need some positive location identifiers, which is usually more than most camera angles can provide.
Related to this article
Latest Comments
Start a conversation on this story
But in our real-life case, close-ups of mud walls and grape arbours don't tell us much that's useful. In this war, everyone knows what units are in theatre and where. The insurgents almost certainly know who is where with what almost before they get there.
Perhaps close-ups of equipment might reveal details that would be better not displayed. But details of most Canadian field equipment are easily obtainable, and we are talking about journalistic video, as distinct from filming with intelligence-gathering intent. Once again, if this were the Second World War and the video showed a German Panther tank where it had no business being, or with a previously unknown external modification, that might be useful intelligence, but everyone on both sides knows what equipment the Canadian Forces use in this theatre.
What do the Afghan clips surfacing on-line really tell us?
They tell us that Canadian troops in small-unit action tend to bunch up a little too much. Human psychology being what it is, that's been happening since the Romans invented organized small-unit actions, and is not very important unless the opposition has artillery.
They tell us that Canadian and Afghan troops are working together apparently quite cohesively.
They tell us that the Canadian infantry is supported by Canadian medium artillery, and that attacks that take place before dawn use airborne artillery illumination shells above the Taliban positions, so our infantry can see them and engage them with direct fire.
They tell us that the Canadian soldier is skilled in the delivery of certain words that would be explosive in his mother's kitchen, but which the insurgents have doubtless learned evasive measures for.
They tell us that Canadian soldiers are very much aware of their own high quality as fighting troops and are poised under fire.
There is no question that, in some circumstances, what appears on the Web -- especially if edited with malice -- could have adverse effects. But the most probable impact is likely to be on public opinion at home and abroad -- for instance, by the visual association of Canadian troops with ghastly images of civilian casualties (whether or not said troops had anything to do with the images), or by the depiction of one's own battlefield dead.
But governments and militaries have lived with these factors since at least the American Civil War, and they can no more be kept from the citizen who wants to see them than the media can be kept from the tarmac at CFB Trenton. They must live with it still.
Eric Morse is a member of the Defence Studies Committee of the Royal Canadian Military Institute, and assistant editor of its journal, SITREP.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com//servlet ... mment/home
"(Modern) commanders must cross their fingers and cringe when something happens, hoping it doesn't get back home. But with the Internet ... I really feel for (them)."
MacKenzie conceded however, that such footage - while perhaps tasteless - can also be positive by sparking public discussion of Canada's role in Afghanistan.
An Edmonton military mother whose son is in Afghanistan says Canadians should find the videos and watch them "to better appreciate and understand what's going on there.
"But it should only be released after a (specific skirmish) is over," said the woman, who asked to remain anonymous.
"No one wants the soldiers' safety compromised, especially not families with loved ones there."
Web of Danger?
Troops' Internet postings pose security risk, warns military official
By BROOKES MERRITT, EDMONTON SUN
Unauthorized videos taken by Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan and posted on the Internet could threaten the safety of troops, warns an Edmonton military official.
And judging by some of the footage found at youtube.com, it could also be embarrassing, says a former commander.
"Something soldiers find innocent might be beneficial to enemy intelligence," said Brian Hillier, top spokesman for Land Force Western Area.
"Policy is that all video and pictures taken on service duty must be approved by Chief of Defence staff ... to ensure operational security and soldier safety is not compromised."
Concern over videos going public arose after military officials learned Edmonton reservist Cpl. Darcy Ressler recently returned from Afghanistan with alleged footage of an attempted suicide bomb attack and a nighttime firefight.
A military source said Ressler may already be in hot water over public disclosures he made about operational tactics, and he could face charges for sharing video footage.
Ressler, who has said he has no intention of sharing the video, declined comment until officials have seen his footage and decide whether to release it publicly.
A Department of National Defence spokesman said despite policy dictating all such material be vetted before being made public, "some stuff will always end up online, given advances in technology."
Dozens of unapproved Canadian Forces videos can be found at youtube.com, including one of a soldier at a Canadian artillery range impersonating an Arab.
"I'm going to die soon because of ball bearings in my face," he says, as a claymore detonates behind him.
The soldier appears to speak in a phoney Arab accent, and can be heard laughing along with the cameraman.
Another video shows a platoon of Edmonton-based soldiers in a frenetic daytime firefight in Afghanistan's Helmand province, lobbing grenades and shouting "I want that f--king hole cleared!" and "I can't believe that guy's not dead."
Neither video appears to have been approved by Combat Camera, the government's official military video website.
The proliferation of Internet communication makes retired Maj.-Gen. Lewis MacKenzie glad he's "not a commander these days. When I was in charge I could shut down all communications ... now I just shake my head.
http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/World/2 ... 25827.html
An editorial posted a few days ago......
Why we can live with battlefield home videos
ERIC MORSE
From Thursday's Globe and Mail
The nearly real-time videos that are often posted to the Internet by soldiers, journalists, insurgents and pretty well anyone else in the vicinity of the Iraq and Afghanistan fighting are a truly new phenomenon of war. They raise questions of security unknown to the military censors of previous wars.
The recent appearance of clips apparently filmed by an American-embedded journalist of Canadian troops in close action in Afghanistan's Helmand province has raised a hue and cry from those who claim the images could endanger the safety of our troops or operational security. The fact that this sort of thing can be done at all is probably more alarming to many commentators than what is actually being shown -- or capable of being shown -- in what is basically a "home video" made under combat conditions.
So, is "battlefield home video" really much of a security threat?
First of all, whatever is shown is after the event in a fluid theatre, and so troop locations are pretty much of academic interest at best. If you were a Nazi intelligence officer, you might be interested that "Alpha Company, 2nd Platoon, 'Red Devils' [of the Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry] from Edmonton, Canada" were in a certain sector at such and such a time. If you were an Allied intelligence officer in France, it might come as something of a shock to see similar videos of 2 Company, 1st Panzer Regiment, 10th SS Frundsberg Division anywhere in the Arnhem area. If you had been lucky enough to view them before Allied parachutes had opened, you would still need some positive location identifiers, which is usually more than most camera angles can provide.
Related to this article
Latest Comments
Start a conversation on this story
But in our real-life case, close-ups of mud walls and grape arbours don't tell us much that's useful. In this war, everyone knows what units are in theatre and where. The insurgents almost certainly know who is where with what almost before they get there.
Perhaps close-ups of equipment might reveal details that would be better not displayed. But details of most Canadian field equipment are easily obtainable, and we are talking about journalistic video, as distinct from filming with intelligence-gathering intent. Once again, if this were the Second World War and the video showed a German Panther tank where it had no business being, or with a previously unknown external modification, that might be useful intelligence, but everyone on both sides knows what equipment the Canadian Forces use in this theatre.
What do the Afghan clips surfacing on-line really tell us?
They tell us that Canadian troops in small-unit action tend to bunch up a little too much. Human psychology being what it is, that's been happening since the Romans invented organized small-unit actions, and is not very important unless the opposition has artillery.
They tell us that Canadian and Afghan troops are working together apparently quite cohesively.
They tell us that the Canadian infantry is supported by Canadian medium artillery, and that attacks that take place before dawn use airborne artillery illumination shells above the Taliban positions, so our infantry can see them and engage them with direct fire.
They tell us that the Canadian soldier is skilled in the delivery of certain words that would be explosive in his mother's kitchen, but which the insurgents have doubtless learned evasive measures for.
They tell us that Canadian soldiers are very much aware of their own high quality as fighting troops and are poised under fire.
There is no question that, in some circumstances, what appears on the Web -- especially if edited with malice -- could have adverse effects. But the most probable impact is likely to be on public opinion at home and abroad -- for instance, by the visual association of Canadian troops with ghastly images of civilian casualties (whether or not said troops had anything to do with the images), or by the depiction of one's own battlefield dead.
But governments and militaries have lived with these factors since at least the American Civil War, and they can no more be kept from the citizen who wants to see them than the media can be kept from the tarmac at CFB Trenton. They must live with it still.
Eric Morse is a member of the Defence Studies Committee of the Royal Canadian Military Institute, and assistant editor of its journal, SITREP.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com//servlet ... mment/home
"(Modern) commanders must cross their fingers and cringe when something happens, hoping it doesn't get back home. But with the Internet ... I really feel for (them)."
MacKenzie conceded however, that such footage - while perhaps tasteless - can also be positive by sparking public discussion of Canada's role in Afghanistan.
An Edmonton military mother whose son is in Afghanistan says Canadians should find the videos and watch them "to better appreciate and understand what's going on there.
"But it should only be released after a (specific skirmish) is over," said the woman, who asked to remain anonymous.
"No one wants the soldiers' safety compromised, especially not families with loved ones there."
-
corporate joe
- Rank 8
- Posts: 754
- Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 8:18 am
- Location: the coast
Ran across this one of British troops on the news......
http://www.dumpalink.com/media/11589156 ... fghanistan
http://www.dumpalink.com/media/11589156 ... fghanistan
-
Springbok 3
- Rank 3
- Posts: 138
- Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2006 9:21 am
- Location: Edenvale ON
- Contact:
Watching the news this morning on CBC, they showed a recent roadside bombing of a convoy and luckily the main force of the blast was absorbed by one of the new South African manufactured Nyala vehicles. Boys all came out OK and it goes to show that we need to move away from soft skin vehicles for convoy movement as much as possible.
Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war
-
bob sacamano
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1680
- Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 6:26 am
- Location: I'm not in Kansas anymore
Why don't you go there and fight tough guy?Springbok 3 wrote:Watching the news this morning on CBC, they showed a recent roadside bombing of a convoy and luckily the main force of the blast was absorbed by one of the new South African manufactured Nyala vehicles. Boys all came out OK and it goes to show that we need to move away from soft skin vehicles for convoy movement as much as possible.
ah wait, you're afraid of the little iraqi boys chasing you around?
-
Springbok 3
- Rank 3
- Posts: 138
- Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2006 9:21 am
- Location: Edenvale ON
- Contact:
Can the Mods not do something about this prick and his incessant hard on for me 
Old Bobby boy never has much intelligent to say and he is now hounding each and every post I make...sad really.
Bobsackofmanure, why not keep your personal feelings for me off the board and PM me rather. You are making it decidedly unpleasant by fucking up posts for those who enjoy this forum.
Old Bobby boy never has much intelligent to say and he is now hounding each and every post I make...sad really.Bobsackofmanure, why not keep your personal feelings for me off the board and PM me rather. You are making it decidedly unpleasant by fucking up posts for those who enjoy this forum.
Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war
I think the videos are great.
Most Canadian see our military only when they are somberly carrying home another coffin, which I suppose pleases the left-wing media.
Personally, I think it's great when our military kicks ass. These videos are the best work our military has done in decades. Of course, because HQ isn't controlling it, they probably are shitting bricks about it
Not because of security, but because it might make them look bad.
If I had my way, the Communist Broadcast Corp would show stuff like this. They never will, of course. They don't want Canadians to be proud of their military - they'd far prefer to interview Margaret Atwood about her latest piece of crap.
Most Canadian see our military only when they are somberly carrying home another coffin, which I suppose pleases the left-wing media.
Personally, I think it's great when our military kicks ass. These videos are the best work our military has done in decades. Of course, because HQ isn't controlling it, they probably are shitting bricks about it
Not because of security, but because it might make them look bad.If I had my way, the Communist Broadcast Corp would show stuff like this. They never will, of course. They don't want Canadians to be proud of their military - they'd far prefer to interview Margaret Atwood about her latest piece of crap.
Geez Bob, why the constant anger?? Learn to let things go, you will be a lot happier for it!!bob sacamano wrote:Why don't you go there and fight tough guy?Springbok 3 wrote:Watching the news this morning on CBC, they showed a recent roadside bombing of a convoy and luckily the main force of the blast was absorbed by one of the new South African manufactured Nyala vehicles. Boys all came out OK and it goes to show that we need to move away from soft skin vehicles for convoy movement as much as possible.
ah wait, you're afraid of the little iraqi boys chasing you around?
Yeah! Let's hear it for war! Rah Rah Rah! I love war! Stupid lefties and their damn peace.... @#$! that! Let's have a war! I wanna see someone's brains like all splattered over their moms face or something That would be pretty sweet! Man, I hope they're like black or arab too cause those people explode real good. I hope we never stop having wars, cause that would be like boring or something. Go War Go! Kick Ass! Praise Jesus. (Oh, and let our boys come home safe, cause I'm not like a monster or anything.)
Bart: how old are you?
Have you ever wondered why soldiers are issued rifles instead of, say, flowers? Ever wondered why tanks have cannons instead of, say bidets?
Hey, I heard Peter Mansbridge is sucking off David Suzuki on the Communist Broadcasting Corp! Better turn it on
Have you ever wondered why soldiers are issued rifles instead of, say, flowers? Ever wondered why tanks have cannons instead of, say bidets?
Hey, I heard Peter Mansbridge is sucking off David Suzuki on the Communist Broadcasting Corp! Better turn it on
-
Springbok 3
- Rank 3
- Posts: 138
- Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2006 9:21 am
- Location: Edenvale ON
- Contact:
Bartbandy,
This is not about agreeing or disagreeing with the war. This is also not about agreeing or disagreeing with the political issues or government policies surrounding the conflicts.
THIS IS ABOUT SUPPORTING OUR CANADIAN TROOPS!
It is a pity that you don`t get it. Maturity my son, maturity
This is not about agreeing or disagreeing with the war. This is also not about agreeing or disagreeing with the political issues or government policies surrounding the conflicts.
THIS IS ABOUT SUPPORTING OUR CANADIAN TROOPS!
It is a pity that you don`t get it. Maturity my son, maturity
Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war
-
niss
- Top Poster
- Posts: 6745
- Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2005 8:54 pm
- Location: I'm a CPL trapped in a PPL's Body.
- Contact:
I can see why he would be upset and annoyed but still, that blows that he can belittle the contribution....just because our country hasnt been at an war with india on and off for the last 60 years dosnt give him the right to say this:
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/reuters/0609 ... kistan_colWe have suffered 500 casualties. The Canadians have suffered four or five. What are you talking about? Who are you talking to? Who are you talking to?
OTTAWA (Reuters) - Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf bluntly told Canadians on Tuesday to stop complaining about the number of soldiers they were losing in Afghanistan, saying Canada's death toll was far less than Pakistan's.
Canada has 2,300 troops based in the southern Afghan city of Kandahar. In the last three months, 20 soldiers have been killed in clashes with Taliban militants, prompting calls for the mission to be brought back home.
Musharraf told the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. that if Canada was worried about soldier fatalities, it should not be in the war-torn country.
"When you get involved in places like Iraq or Lebanon or Afghanistan, yes indeed you have to suffer casualties, and the nation must be prepared to suffer casualties. So if you're not prepared to suffer casualties as an army, then don't participate in any operation," he said in an interview.
Since Canada joined the U.S.-led war on terror in late 2001, about 35 of its soldiers have died in Afghanistan. Musharraf, whose country neighbors Pakistan, dismissed this as a mere handful.
"We have suffered 500 casualties. The Canadians have suffered four or five. What are you talking about? Who are you talking to? Who are you talking to? You are talking to the president of a country that has suffered 500 casualties," he said.
"You have suffered two dead and there is crying and shouting all around the place that there are coffins. Well, we've had 500 coffins."
Prime Minister Stephen Harper's chief spokeswoman said she was unaware of the comments.
Musharraf also dismissed a suggestion by Canadian Defense Minister Gordon O'Connor that Canadian troops might be based in Pakistan to help the fight against militants.
"I can assure you our troops are more effective and we have more experience of war. This (suggestion) shows a lack of trust in Pakistan," he said
She’s built like a Steakhouse, but she handles like a Bistro.
Let's kick the tires, and light the fires.... SHIT! FIRE! EMERGENCY CHECKLIST!
Let's kick the tires, and light the fires.... SHIT! FIRE! EMERGENCY CHECKLIST!
How much more supportive could I be? I'm actually pretty dissapointed that my comments were somehow construed as being against the Canadian men and women oversees who are in harms way. They have my complete support, and if I had my way they'd be home with their families right now.Springbok 3 wrote:THIS IS ABOUT SUPPORTING OUR CANADIAN TROOPS!
I was simply commenting on the mindset of folks who enjoy war-porn, thats all. If thats your thing, then go for it and pass the handgrenades. I find war sickening, and am offering a dissenting viewpoint while it's still legal.
How very noble of you. I'm glad to hear that you are morally above the conflict in the rest of the world that exists outside your parent's basement.I find war sickening
Quite seriously, I understand your position to be that we should not have a military - we do not need a military, because the military only does "bad things" - am I correct?
When you get older, you will find that as an adult, you have to do many other sickening things. Taking out old garbage, paying taxes, etc.
Hedley, you would equate killing human beings by the thousands with taking out the garbage? Damn. Thats cold.
Speaking of parent's basements, when do you ship out to Afghanistan?
Our men and women do the best job of any military in the world with the most respect for locals and the innocents. Of that I'm sure. But do I have to pump my fist while they're doing it? I refuse to accept that fighting wars will always be a part of life. Am I being naive? Probably, but as long as there are those who get off on combat we'll have it, so I choose differently.
Speaking of parent's basements, when do you ship out to Afghanistan?
Our men and women do the best job of any military in the world with the most respect for locals and the innocents. Of that I'm sure. But do I have to pump my fist while they're doing it? I refuse to accept that fighting wars will always be a part of life. Am I being naive? Probably, but as long as there are those who get off on combat we'll have it, so I choose differently.
-
scubasteve
- Rank 5
- Posts: 326
- Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2004 2:05 pm
- Location: BC
- Contact:
I also heard the Pakistani pres on tv last night and could not believe his comments. To say that the resources of more countries could not benefit the search for bin laden and taliban etc is in my mind ludacris. I have also seen the interviews of the afghan pres and was pretty impressed. Sure some of it may have been political bs but he seemed to get it.
As for the other comments here, I would love to have no more wars but it is far from a reality. Our troops are there and they are good at what they do and I agree an informed public, that sees exactly what goes on, is best. No matter your position, the more info you have to make a decision is always better.
As for the other comments here, I would love to have no more wars but it is far from a reality. Our troops are there and they are good at what they do and I agree an informed public, that sees exactly what goes on, is best. No matter your position, the more info you have to make a decision is always better.
