Canadian General in Afghanistan under Investigation

Politics International Politics
1

If accidental mischarge happened to an enlisted man, it would result in an immediate demotion. Wonder if that will happen to an Eastern Establishment military general? Don’t think so. They tend to protect their own.

From what is being reported ‘negligent discharge’ is surely the only accurate description? Too right it should be investigated and appropriate action taken…this was a very serious ‘near miss’. It could have killed a Canadian official or American personnel piloting the helicopter.

Of course, the Canadian press seems to be playing this down. Compare the report from reporter Michael Yon to the Canadian story. And it was only when Yon started investigating the story, did the Canadians hold the conference mentioned below.

Love how Yon uses the word “interesting Canadians” as if to infer that most aren’t. :smiley:

montrealgazette.com/news/Can … z0lQXvYsNU

2

Yon is pretty pissed off right now with them dropping his troop embedding and what happened at the bridge where everyone was responsible yet no one was responsible and when a suicide bomber damaged a vital bridge used for logistics.

I’m waiting to see if he picks up with what the US Marines are doing. I think he might be getting himself in between the current fight between McChrystal and the US Marines over who is the boss. From the current situation it seems like the marines have come to the same conclusion as Yon and acted accordingly.

The Canadian BG probably thought he could get away with covering it up. That’s what’s probably going to destroy his career if this stays in the news.

3

IMO, ADs happen.
It doesn’t lessen the danger and responsibility for them, but they happen.
If this gets any further scrutiny in the current “war by the rules of political correctness” he will pay the price General Officers pay for which established SOP is ‘Up & Out.’ Meaning a promotion, unlikely in this case, and a transfer to an area with a lower profile.
Since no one was hit, the helicopter didn’t crash, it happened in a war zone and the guy is already a General Officer, I don’t like for the mark to last very long.

I don’t think he will get to play with big guns for a while though…just my guess.

4

I’m guessing the military has a lot more invested in a general than a sarg, and that might have something to do with different treatment, rather than whether or not he’s part of Chewy’s boogieman.

5

But shouldn’t leadership be held to a higher standard? I certainly think so. To whom much is given, much is expected, right?

It will be interesting to see if this impacts his career progression. I’m thinking it will not hurt it at all.

Just as the Liberal Sponsorship scandal never hurt Gagliano…he ended up getting federal subsidies for a wine orchard to the tune of half a million dollars. :laughing: Whether its taking care of a former disgraced MP or looking the other way for a general, why such leniency for the political/Mandarin class?

6

Cost/ benefit analysis. Grunt gets his walking papers: what has he lost? What has the military lost to purchase that object lesson? Apply the same logic to the general with a couple decades of experience and training under his belt. He can personally lose a lot more while the miltary retains the benefit of it’s investment in him. Bouncing him proves what?

(I await a thread in which you call for Dick Cheney to face the music for accidentally shooting his buddy after a few too many brewskis.)

7

[quote=“Jaboney”]Cost/ benefit analysis. Grunt gets his walking papers: what has he lost? What has the military lost to purchase that object lesson? Apply the same logic to the general with a couple decades of experience and training under his belt. He can personally lose a lot more while the miltary retains the benefit of it’s investment in him. Bouncing him proves what?

(I await a thread in which you call for Dick Cheney to face the music for accidentally shooting his buddy after a few too many brewskis.)[/quote]

Saying it’s all because of the money/training is an interesting response. When a CEO screws up, he/she is often fired with a package. Give this military person a similar buyout. Given his age, I’m sure he already qualifies for a very generous government pension. Incompetent people shouldn’t continue just because the country has invested a lot in them. In my opinion, that lets people in high positions off way too easily and just gives common people another reason to distrust their officials.

Regarding Cheney, it was with friends on a hunting trip, not on official duty. Big difference.

8

[quote=“Chewycorns”][quote=“Jaboney”]Cost/ benefit analysis. Grunt gets his walking papers: what has he lost? What has the military lost to purchase that object lesson? Apply the same logic to the general with a couple decades of experience and training under his belt. He can personally lose a lot more while the miltary retains the benefit of it’s investment in him. Bouncing him proves what?

(I await a thread in which you call for Dick Cheney to face the music for accidentally shooting his buddy after a few too many brewskis.)[/quote]

Saying its all because of the money/training is an interesting response. When a CEO screws up, he/she is often fired with a package. Give this person a similar buyout. Given his age, I’m sure he already qualifies for a very generous pension. Incompetent people shouldn’t continue just because the country has invested in them. In my opinion, that lets people in high positions off way too easily.

Regarding Cheney, it was with friends on a hunting trip, not on official duty[/quote]

one accidental discharge doesn’t make one ‘incompetent’. you sound like a typical East Coast Elitist commenting harshly on the performance of military personnel in a combat theatre without knowing all the facts or ever having served yourself.

You hate the troops!

9

[quote=“Chewycorns”]
Regarding Cheney, it was with friends on a hunting trip, not on official duty. Big difference.[/quote]
The difference is that Cheney SHOT A MAN IN THE FACE.

The hypocrisy is… well, not at all unexpected.

10

Um, do brig generals usually pack rifles?

Edit:

And the story from CBC reads just a little different from Chewy’s quoted sources. No doubt that’s due to the Eastern elites circling the wagons to protect one of their own. :unamused:

[quote=“CBC”]The commander of Canadian troops in Afghanistan has ordered a special investigation into his own actions.

Brig.-Gen. Daniel Ménard, the head of Joint Task Force Afghanistan, announced Saturday that he has summoned the military’s National Investigation Service to probe the unintended discharge of his gun.[/quote]

11

[quote=“Jaboney”]Um, do brig generals usually pack rifles?

Edit:

And the story from CBC reads just a little different from Chewy’s quoted sources. No doubt that’s due to the Eastern elites circling the wagons to protect one of their own. :unamused:

[quote=“CBC”]The commander of Canadian troops in Afghanistan has ordered a special investigation into his own actions.

Brig.-Gen. Daniel Ménard, the head of Joint Task Force Afghanistan, announced Saturday that he has summoned the military’s National Investigation Service to probe the unintended discharge of his gun.[/quote][/quote]

Any comments on the 43 days between his rifle discharging on Kandahar Airfield and Brig-Gen. Menard mentioning it to the media? Is that what passes for ‘leadership’ in CF command? :unamused:

I’m a huge supporter of the troops, but will always be suspicious of Canada’s top heavy officer corp. This type of story just reinforces that view. 43 days? Surely in the name of transparency, this should have been revealed much sooner, right? And why only after independent reporter Michael Yon was tipped off by one of Canada’s enlisted men? Why didn’t they feel comfortable reporting it to their own brass…hmmm, perhaps it is exactly because of the eastern establishment type of clubiness/reporting structure that ensures such complaints are swept under the carpet (or perhaps sand would be a better word). :laughing: . Surely, this lag time makes the forces look like their hiding something?

Love the end of this telegraph article. Should this type of incident really be happening to someone with so much training?

[quote=“Telegraph”]

In the past 18 months, more than 600 Canadian Forces soldiers have been convicted of negligently discharging their weapons. Most of those incidents involve junior soldiers or recruits and many of them an instance of pulling the trigger prematurely during firing range practice. [/quote]
telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne … -base.html

12

More pointless dribble.

Let me paste again what someone familiar with military weapons as opposed to drooling on a keyboard wrote.

[quote]IMO, ADs happen.
It doesn’t lessen the danger and responsibility for them, but they happen.[/quote]
Stress, exuberance, fatigue, malfunction, there are loads of reasons why this is the case, but suffice it to say, you have enough people walking around with loaded firearms and one will go bang when it’s not supposed to. This is why you never point the bangy end at people unless you mean to kill them. I have no idea what sort of weapon was involved here, or care, really, but there were concerns about the Australian army’s Steyr rifles after several accidental discharges, which unfortunately included some injuries and at least one death.

In my basic training I was halfway down the range to take over scoring when someone let fly with an SLR. I turned back just in time to see the RSM strut around the side of the chap and smack the sucker in the head with the butt of his rifle. No one was court-martialled.

Shit, as they say, happens.

[quote]Army reports more weapons fired by accident
OTTAWA – Cases involving the accidental firing of weapons have risen up to 40 per cent in two years and now comprise a quarter of all military trials in Canada, says the Canadian Forces’ top judge.

In the judge advocate general’s annual report to Parliament, Brig.-Gen. Kenneth Watkin says the total number of courts martial rose 16 per cent to 78 in 2007-08, while summary trials were up 17.6 per cent to 2,035.
Watkin reports that 510 summary trials – proceedings held before a senior officer as opposed to courts martial before a JAG – were held for negligent discharge of weapons offences in 2007-08. That’s an increase of 115, or 29 per cent, over the previous year.[/quote]
HG

13

[quote=“Huang Guang Chen”]More pointless dribble.

Let me paste again what someone familiar with military weapons as opposed to drooling on a keyboard wrote.

[quote]IMO, ADs happen.
It doesn’t lessen the danger and responsibility for them, but they happen.[/quote]
Stress, exuberance, fatigue, malfunction, there are loads of reasons why this is the case, but suffice it to say, you have enough people walking around with loaded firearms and one will go bang when it’s not supposed to. This is why you never point the bangy end at people unless you mean to kill them. I have no idea what sort of weapon was involved here, or care, really, but there were concerns about the Australian army’s Steyr rifles after several accidental discharges, which unfortunately included some injuries and at least one death.

In my basic training I was halfway down the range to take over scoring when someone let fly with an SLR. I turned back just in time to see the RSM strut around the side of the chap and smack the sucker in the head with the butt of his rifle. No one was court-martialled.

Shit, as they say, happens.

[quote]Army reports more weapons fired by accident
OTTAWA – Cases involving the accidental firing of weapons have risen up to 40 per cent in two years and now comprise a quarter of all military trials in Canada, says the Canadian Forces’ top judge.

In the judge advocate general’s annual report to Parliament, Brig.-Gen. Kenneth Watkin says the total number of courts martial rose 16 per cent to 78 in 2007-08, while summary trials were up 17.6 per cent to 2,035.
Watkin reports that 510 summary trials – proceedings held before a senior officer as opposed to courts martial before a JAG – were held for negligent discharge of weapons offences in 2007-08. That’s an increase of 115, or 29 per cent, over the previous year.[/quote]
HG[/quote]
We can have a debate on accidental discharge indefinitely. My points are:
(1) Shouldn’t the same rules that apply to enlisted men also apply to their brass? Aren’t officers and leaders supposed to be setting the best example? Aren’t they supposed to handle stress, exuberance, fatigue issues etc. better than grunts?

To use the excuse that the nation has spent more money on training and thus they should be given an easier ride smacks of elitism that is so prevelant in a military that is Eastern[Quebec and Ontario] officer heavy.

(2) Why did it take 43 days and an American reporter for the story to see the light of day? Is this normal time in the military for such disclosures to be made public? Again, it makes the officer corp look incompetent.

14

Where’s that beating a dead horse emoticon?

A weapon was accidentally discharged. No one was injured. In the last 18 months, more than 600 Canadian Forces soldiers have been convicted of accidentally or negligently discharging their weapons. Shiiit… I don’t know why it wasn’t on page one above the fold.

15

[quote=“Jaboney”]

In the last 18 months, more than 600 Canadian Forces soldiers have been convicted of accidentally or negligently discharging their weapons. [/quote]

How many Brigadier Generals out of this 600? Furthermore, how many incidents that nearly killed a high-level Canadian official and near an allied (US) helicopter? You’d have to admit these are not standard discharge incidents.

It is for precisely this reason that it is newsworthy and also why it should have been reported right away. Again, that it was not reported for 43 days, until an American reporter was told through unofficial channels by a enlisted Canadian soldier, is highly suspect IMHO.

Make no mistake about it, leaving a round chambered in your assault rifle on Kandahar Airfield is a serious violation of military rules. Furthermore, would it really take 43 days to figure out what caused the rifle to fire or if it was malfunctioning? No. So what’s been happening in the intervening period? And why tell the press now?

His competency has also been called into question by independent reporter Michael Yon.

[quote=“Michael Yon”]
I recall meeting Lt. Col. Frank Jenio shortly before he was relieved of command. He seemed to me like a good officer. Soldiers told me he was a good leader. He and his CSM invited me to accompany their unit though I never got the chance. They were under command of BG Menard. Their battalion (2-508th Infantry Parachute Regiment of… the 82nd Airborne) remains in one of the most dangerous places in Afghanistan, under command of BG Menard. This battalion should not be under command of a general who allows a strategic bridge to be blown up. He cannot even control his own rifle. (Why is Menard carrying a rifle anyway? I don’t even carry a pistol while with troops while going into far more dangerous circumstances than most generals venture.) [/quote]

I agree. Not page one material, but for the reasons above, not a Page 25 story either. Considering the scandals with other Canadian officers lately, you’ll have to admit it is newsworthy and anything is going to be examined more thoroughly by the media. Perhaps, that is why they sat on this one for those 43 days. First a serial rapist/murderer air force leader in Trenton and now an incompetent Brigadier General with a C7 that’ll likely escape charges. The rank and file are shuddering.

16

It’s an issue only because he waited to report it. Think a Martha Stuart type scenario.

Yon is pissed because his embed got cancelled.

17

Interesting that the networks in the United States haven’t picked up on this story. After all, as Michael Yon mentions, he leads US forces there.

Again, why would a general be loading a rifle in a US helicopter while escorting a VIP? Totally against the rules. He also reportedly allowed the enemy insurgents to blow up the Tarnak bridge, a bridge very close to the airbase itself.

Perhaps, this is not the first incident of incompetence?

The fact is you are not supposed to be preparing for disembarkation with your weapon loaded and chambered and on “Fire”.

If he were a US Marine, his career would be over. Which is, again, why I am suprised the media in the US isn’t picking up on the story that their sons and daughters are being led by such an incompetent person.

[quote=“Michael Yon”]
Incredible that U.S. media is not talking about Brigadier General Daniel Menard’s recent track record. He leads U.S. forces in combat here. It’s astounding that families of service members are not calling for his removal from command. [/quote]

[quote=“Ottawa Citizen”]
Canada’s top soldier in Afghanistan, Brig.-Gen. Daniel Ménard, has been charged with an offence related to his gun going off unexpectedly in an incident on March 25, the Defence Department said Tuesday. Ménard, commander of Joint Task Force Afghanistan, told reporters on Saturday his weapon went off while he was loading it. No one was injured. Ménard will remain in his post in Kandahar. [/quote]
ottawacitizen.com/news/Afgha … story.html

18

Umm - channeling US media interests, bear with me . . . .BINGO!. Because only you and Yon, both with weird axes to grind, find it even remotely interesting.

HG

19

[quote=“Chewycorns”]If he were a US Marine, his career would be over. Which is, again, why I am suprised the media in the US isn’t picking up on the story that their sons and daughters are being led by such an incompetent person.[/quote]No you aren’t surprised so please stop trolling. When Obama became president, you could here crickets chirping when Afghanistan was talked about and even less about Iraq unless it was glowing praise.

This has become a Democrat “good war” now and that means lots of photo ops very few actual tactical moves and praise beyond belief. Then there will be the withdrawal. It happened in the former Yugoslavia republic after it broke up, this will be deja vu all over again. Who has seen anything about American University in Iraq and the general problems in the Kurdish parts of Iraq? What about a plan on Afghani Opium? The corruption and distrust of the Afghani National Police? Nada, zip, zero, zilchin the way of coverage.

Maybe when the MSM starts reporting the news they might find that they will stop losing money.

20

The verdict is in. Seems appropriate to me.

[quote]The commander of Canadian troops in Afghanistan has been fined $3,500 — the stiffest fine ever levied on a soldier for mishandling a weapon.

Brig.-Gen. Daniel Ménard, head of Joint Task Force Kandahar, was handed the fine after pleading guilty to an offence under the National Defence Act in a court in Gatineau, Que., on Tuesday.
cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/05/ … ne026.html[/quote]

[quote]Brig.-Gen. Menard, who told reporters he was trying to put the weapon on safety when he fired two rounds, was at Kandahar Airfield preparing to board a helicopter with chief of defence staff Gen. Walt Natynczyk at the time of the March 25 incident.

A statement of facts said Brig.-Gen. Menard was holding the weapon waist high and the shots went between two armoured vehicles in the direction of the runway where there were two Blackhawk helicopters. About 10 personnel were within range of fire as well. A weapons inspector later said there was no problem with the rifle.

“If I knew exactly why it got fired, I don’t think I would have been here today,” Brig.-Gen. Menard, commander of Task Force Kandahar, told reporters. “Two rounds were fired from my weapon. That’s what I know for sure.”

The fine was nearly three times the $1,200 maximum fine Brig.-Gen. Menard said he has issued to soldiers for weapons mishandling at summary trials in Afghanistan.
nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=3070468[/quote]