Don White wrote:
Jeff Rigby wrote:
"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...

On Wed, 01 Feb 2006 18:06:54 GMT, Don White
wrote:


Who you gonna believe?

neither - i wasnt and didnt see it happen.

probably a combination of the two stories is more likely the truth. a
stupid trooper over reacting to something the canadians did that they
usually don't do.


If you read the whole article, the reason for the shots was that the
Canadian car was attempting to pass the convoy. This is a usual
practice of suicide bombers. There was a sign on the military
vehicles that said "Do not pass". After hand signals were ignored and
warning shots fired bullets were directed into the engine block and
one missed and went thru the lower portion of the front window. You
know an automatic rifle has a tendency to travel UP as the shots are
fired.

Military vehicles tend to travel very slow (25MPH) allowing them to
avoid many obstacles safely.

My objection to the article is that this information is provided too
far into the piece. Most of you didn't bother to read the entire
article and jumped to the conclusion that it was a trigger happy soldier.





Look again...at the Canadian version.
The convoy had 'pulled over behind a waist high concrete barrier' before
the Canadian vehicle attempted to pass.
http://www.herald.ns.ca/World/481611.html

Here's a cartoon that sums it up...
kinda reminds me of this newsgroup...
http://www.hfxnews.com/index.cfm?sid=3896&sc=10

Don,
I believe that Canada is a great country, an important ally, trading
partner and neighbor. I am surprised that anyone would ever think the
shots were anything more than warning shots, if it was an attempt to
kill the occupants, they would have been dead. Was the mistake the US
soldiers fault or the Canadian Soldiers, may or may not be determined,
but it was definitely a mistake, based upon legitimate fears of the
soldiers.

Hopefully, the inquiry will come up with a better method to communicate
between friendly forces.

The cartoon was funny, but didn't sum up the feelings of the soldiers,
the military, or the opinion of most of the US citizens.

When I have read the responses in the NG, I believe the comments are
based upon a feeling that you believe the attack was intentional. They
may have misinterpreted your post, the same way the solider had problems
communicating.

Now if you don't want us to shot up your computer, you better improve
your communication skills. ; )


--
Reggie
************************************************** *************
That's my story and I am sticking to it.

************************************************** *************

Reggie Smithers wrote:
snip

When I have read the responses in the NG, I believe the comments are
based upon a feeling that you believe the attack was intentional. They
may have misinterpreted your post, the same way the solider had problems
communicating.

Now if you don't want us to shot up your computer, you better improve
your communication skills. ; )


Of course I don't think the US Military is intentionally trying to
'light up' Canadians.
It's the 'trigger happy' mindset of a minority that keeps coming to the
surface. Too many shoot 'em up video games?

"Don White" wrote in message
news
Reggie Smithers wrote:
snip

When I have read the responses in the NG, I believe the comments are
based upon a feeling that you believe the attack was intentional. They
may have misinterpreted your post, the same way the solider had problems
communicating.

Now if you don't want us to shot up your computer, you better improve
your communication skills. ; )


Of course I don't think the US Military is intentionally trying to 'light
up' Canadians.
It's the 'trigger happy' mindset of a minority that keeps coming to the
surface. Too many shoot 'em up video games?

54%