Author Topic: Afghanistan: Why we should be there (or not), how to conduct the mission (or not) & when to leave  (Read 258578 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline PigPen

  • New Member
  • **
  • 0
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 39
What is Canada's Real Role In Afghanistan?
« Reply #25 on: September 12, 2006, 06:35:38 »
What is Canada's Real Role In Afghanistan?
Posted: 09/12
From: Mathaba

On Canadian Television last week, the mainstream media showed our soldiers laying siege to a village in southern Afghanistan. They should be in Darfur where they could perhaps do something to stop a bloody genocide and do some good for a change.

By Mike Hoover

On Canadian television last week, the mainstream media showed our soldiers laying siege to a village in southern Afghanistan. They proudly showed views of American jets bombing and strafing this village. If one looked carefully the hills were barren and dry -- no vegetation to be seen anywhere. Then the television panned over to another province and poppy fields - lush and green as far as the eye could see. The only movement were laconic farm workers slitting the poppy bulbs in anticipation of this years opium harvest.

What's wrong with this picture? The way I see it is our Canadian war of genocide directed at an entirely different tribe and ethnic group than the ones participating in the opium business. We used to be such a peace-loving nation but now our leaders are following George W. Bush and his shadenfreudian policies.

When the reporter takes the time to interview a Canadian soldier, he's told matter of factly that the soldier "believes in his mission". As I understood it, a soldier's mission is to obey orders or face the consequences. The soldier never really gets around to stating what that mission is, in fact, all we hear is the same neocon prattle that the mainstream cheerleading media is foisting on us, ad infinitum.

I would like to personally congratulate Jack Layton, a leader of one of our major political parties for coming out strongly in favour of putting and end to this madness.

I can understand the need for Canadian soldiers to bloody the battalion in order to create heros and give out medals. But not in their present capacity. They should be in Darfur where they could perhaps do something to stop a bloody genocide and do some good for a change. Afghanistan is in serious trouble, it needs help in many ways, body counts seem to be all this presant mission is providing.


Offline Beadwindow 7

  • Life is cruel, and I am but a small slice of life
  • Milnet.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 22,755
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,001
  • ZBM2
Re: What is Canada's Real Role In Afghanistan?
« Reply #26 on: September 12, 2006, 06:46:41 »
Quote
I would like to personally congratulate Jack Layton, a leader of one of our major political parties for coming out strongly in favour of putting and end to this madness.

Well looky....it's a Taliban Jack lackey. Tripe.

Do you have a link to this?
Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical, liberal minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Offline PigPen

  • New Member
  • **
  • 0
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 39
Re: What is Canada's Real Role In Afghanistan?
« Reply #27 on: September 12, 2006, 06:56:11 »

Offline By Jingo

  • Guest
  • *
  • 0
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2
Re: What is Canada's Real Role In Afghanistan?
« Reply #28 on: September 12, 2006, 06:59:02 »
Wow Pigpen, your grasp of the situation in Afghanistan is truly staggering.

Offline x-grunt

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 3,020
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 262
Re: What is Canada's Real Role In Afghanistan?
« Reply #29 on: September 12, 2006, 07:05:36 »
From Global Security:

Al Mathaba
Anti-Imperialism Center (AIC)
Al Mathaba (meaning center) is the Libyan center for anti-imperialist propaganda which has funded third world guerilla groups. The Anti-Imperialism Center (AIC) - also known as Mathaba - is used by the Libyan Government to support terrorist networks and thus plays an important role in Qadhafi's terrorism strategy.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/world/libya/mathaba.htm

Seems like PigPen may be working - perhaps innocently - on behalf of the enemy.


(Edit to correct a misspelled word)
« Last Edit: September 12, 2006, 16:29:34 by x-grunt »
If you can't find a solution, change the problem.

Offline PigPen

  • New Member
  • **
  • 0
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 39
Re: What is Canada's Real Role In Afghanistan?
« Reply #30 on: September 12, 2006, 07:13:42 »
Thanks for that link, very interesting.

Offline x-grunt

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 3,020
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 262
Re: What is Canada's Real Role In Afghanistan?
« Reply #31 on: September 12, 2006, 07:48:44 »
Your welcome. Web sources with extreme right or left views always make me suspicious. Information, or misinformation, can be a weapon too, and the web is a cheap delivery system.
If you can't find a solution, change the problem.

Offline E.R. Campbell

  • Retired, years ago
  • Milnet.ca Subscriber
  • Milnet.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 173,210
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,800
Re: What is Canada's Real Role In Afghanistan?
« Reply #32 on: September 12, 2006, 08:18:26 »
Things might have been a tad less confusing, pigpen, if you had used a couple of Army.ca conventions like the quote function [ quote ] and [ /quote ] (no spaces) to start and end the al Mathaba bit, plus a link to the site from which you extracted it, plus a brief introductory or concluding sentence indicating that you do, indeed, think this is the work of "one more pot smoking freak".

You would still have been called for confusing an enemy propaganda statement with fairly typical NDP 'thinking', but people would not have started to believe that you, maybe unwittingly, are part of the problem.
If all mankind minus one were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind.
John Stuart Mill, On Liberty (1859)
----------
Like what you see/read here on Army.ca?  Subscribe, and help keep it "on the air!"

Offline Beadwindow 7

  • Life is cruel, and I am but a small slice of life
  • Milnet.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 22,755
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,001
  • ZBM2
Re: What is Canada's Real Role In Afghanistan?
« Reply #33 on: September 12, 2006, 10:19:15 »
Bravo Zulu, x-grunt and Edward, on tracking this source down properly.

I think any on line "news" site that brings you such articles as "It's time to end the last "tabboo" and hold Israel accountable for it's actions." ( http://mathaba.net/0_index.shtml?x=539266 ), "Nuke Iran, Blame the Jews" ( http://mathaba.net/0_index.shtml?x=540835 ), and "The shame of being an American" ( http://mathaba.net/0_index.shtml?x=540798&all_ids=1 ), should be taken with a very LARGE grain of salt.

As previously stated....utter tripe.
Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical, liberal minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Offline Patrick H.

  • Paint it all grey.
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • -120
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 629
  • UBIQUE
Re: What is Canada's Real Role In Afghanistan?
« Reply #34 on: September 12, 2006, 10:35:45 »
Quote
They should be in Darfur where they could perhaps do something to stop a bloody genocide and do some good for a change. Afghanistan is in serious trouble, it needs help in many ways, body counts seem to be all this presant mission is providing.


What the hell do they think is going to happen if the Forces showed up in Darfur? They're going to meet us on the run away with flowers, showering us with hugs and kisses? What happens when soldiers die in Darfur? "Oh, well then, let's get them out of there because it's a lost cause now!"

I think the whole NDP party has ADD, can't focus on a mission, can't sit still long enough to understand it.
Some mornings it just doesn't seem worth it to gnaw through the leather straps.

"It isn't what you've lost, but what you have left." - My great Uncle Daniel J MacDonald, Veteran Affairs Minister 1972.

Offline Lost_Warrior

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 40
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 522
Re: What is Canada's Real Role In Afghanistan?
« Reply #35 on: September 12, 2006, 11:38:03 »
Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn't the government of Darfur specifically say that they did not want any Western soldiers in the country? (they only wanted African soldiers)  Had Canada gone anyway, it would have been an invasion and an act of war.

Afghanistan on the other hand.. Canada is there at the specific request of the democratically elected government.   Here Wacko Jacko goes on in front of the camera about what we should be doing in Darfur, when in fact he is advocating for the illegal invasion and occupation of a country.   The irony..
=Non nobis sed patriae=
=Not for ourselves but for our country=

Offline Centurian1985

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • -105
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 698
  • Putting the 'P' in the gene 'ool'...
Re: What is Canada's Real Role In Afghanistan?
« Reply #36 on: September 12, 2006, 11:48:15 »
Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn't the government of Darfur specifically say that they did not want any Western soldiers in the country? (they only wanted African soldiers)  Had Canada gone anyway, it would have been an invasion and an act of war.
Afghanistan on the other hand.. Canada is there at the specific request of the democratically elected government.   Here Wacko Jacko goes on in front of the camera about what we should be doing in Darfur, when in fact he is advocating for the illegal invasion and occupation of a country.   The irony..

Its one of the silly points about people who write these types of articles; they complain about how we 'invaded' Afghanistan, yet expect us to use the same tactics of 'invading' a country in order to stop the Darfur issue.  Their energy would be better used if they organized a letter-campaign to the Darfur government...  ::)

Offline 54/102 CEF

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 4,210
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 873
    • 54th Cdn Inf Bn CEF 1915-1919
Re: Responses to The Afghanistan Debate
« Reply #37 on: September 12, 2006, 15:27:19 »
So far I am not informed about the odds of turning this around - other than it will be a long time changing a viewpoint of the state/village control ends at the camp gates. Refusal of insurgency suggests the local countries jumping past Religious Wars, Civil Wars, Depressions, and World Wars, to arrive at something like Great Britain. To me - I don't look for Deus Ex Machina - or as Len Deighton called it "a conveniant device for ending things." Welcome back to containment.
I see a huge porous border problem similar to South East Asia 62-72 that was never solved. All the SOF and all the Kings Men (REF A) couldn't solve it - because the political will to draw an iron circle around the regions borders wasn't there. Where do we hear the bad guys are? They're probably not that far away from Afghanistan.
A concept for you - the state of Pakistan is not a state and therefore their assistance is very welcome but it may not be sustainable - "Pakistan is generally a weak state. We don't think of it that way -- it's been ruled by military, it has nuclear weapons. But that's a paradox. It's a country that has nuclear weapons and a very proficient military, and is capable of staging coups, but the writ of the government in Pakistan does not run in large areas of the country. The penetration of power in rural areas is very minimal. It has to rely on all kinds of intermediaries in order to exert power." -- ref B. This was written 4 years ago and we keep hearing the same stuff on our admittedly mainstream medias who have an axe to grind.
The Taliban Philosophy has a track record - as nasty as it may seem to us and we've been back in the area for 5 years? Who has momentum? REF C and its financial roots REF D that links back to Saudi Arabia that hasn't seen how to turn its oil wealth into a renewable economy (dated, but I've heard this same story from Max Boot on Conversations with History from the UCAL Berkely Site) REF E
If you've been reading Michael Vlahos - you'll recall that he prescribes kill anyone with a gun and no deer tag who ain't from these parts.
If you haven't read Michael Vlahos REF F- at least try this primer Ref G called "Everything I needed to know about fighting terrorism I learned from George F. Kennan."
And if you read none of the above - there's always REF H the SI Swimsuit issue!  :)
Refs
A The Kingsmen Helo Coy - 101 Airborne Div Vietnam http://www.amazon.ca/Lest-We-Forget-Aviation-Battalion/dp/0804119171
B Pakistan is not a state - http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/people2/Nasr/nasr-con4.html
C Taliban Philosphic Roots http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/2001/Deobandi_Islam.pdf#search=%22deobandi%20islam%22
D Taliban got its funding from a web of Mid East money http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/saudi/interviews/nasr.html
E Max Boot - author of Savage Wars of Peace accuses Saudi Arabia of playing a dangerous double game for several decades now http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/people3/Boot/boot-con6.html
F - Bio of Dr Mike Vlahos - wrote three pieces on dealing with Islamic terrorists - the ones you find in the bush - you kill - those are the dangerous ones. http://www.jhuapl.edu/POW/bios/vlahos.htm Read these - they are excellent.
G US National Intelligence Council Chairman, Robert Hutchings Speech on Why Anti Terror is another spinoff of the what we know as "Containment" http://www.dni.gov/nic/articles_x_+_911.htm
Dare I say? http://www.google.com/search?q=SI+SWIMSUIT
You can visit me when I retire to the Island of Sayonara - but if the tide goes out - you go too - OK?

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Milnet.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 32,075
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,170
  • Two birthdays
    • Currently posting at Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute's "3Ds Blog"
Re: Responses to The Afghanistan Debate
« Reply #38 on: September 12, 2006, 15:56:37 »
Nice piece by Richard Gwyn; his Brit background shows:

Canadian mood growing harder on terrorism
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1158011409583&call_pageid=968256290204&col=968350116795

Quote
...Peacekeeping belongs, sadly, to another age. In the Darfur region of Sudan, where at least 200,000 have been slaughtered, and an all-out genocide threatens, the government is refusing to allow in United Nations peacekeepers.

Aid is most worthy. But without security, it's an exercise in futility. The Taliban, who want people to be as miserable and as angry as possible, have deliberately targeted aid workers and projects...

...If we quit, we'll be turning our backs on our allies (35 nations are in Afghanistan) and on the Afghans themselves.

By going when it suits us, we'll be doing harm to the troops from countries like Britain, Holland, the U.S., that are already under strain there, and we'd do lethal harm to those Afghans left behind who've supported us.

There is, I believe, another factor. This summer, it seemed to me that Canadians were developing a tougher-minded and more resilient attitude toward the war on terrorism.

The discovery of the alleged plot by 18 Canadian Muslims to blow up buildings in Toronto and of the apparent plot to blow up a dozen passenger planes flying out of London's Heathrow have had an effect. In both instances, the targets were innocent civilians, not "occupying" troops...

But even if they fail, as, of course, they might, our soldiers aren't wrong. They are reminding us that some of the older virtues still have value — public duty and societal obligation, sense of solidarity and of comradeship, courage.

The young Canadian men and women in Afghanistan embody those virtues. We may wish they weren't there, but we cannot help but admire them.

As to harder, Churchill on Overlord, May 1944:

Quote
Gentlemen, I am hardening to this enterprise.
http://www.history.rochester.edu/mtv/overview.htm

Mark
Ottawa

« Last Edit: September 12, 2006, 16:01:17 by MarkOttawa »
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Milnet.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 32,075
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,170
  • Two birthdays
    • Currently posting at Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute's "3Ds Blog"
Re: Responses to The Afghanistan Debate
« Reply #39 on: September 12, 2006, 16:03:33 »
As to Darfur, do those who want us out of Afstan want us also to invade Sudan?  Wouldn't we then also be war-mongering as Bush's poodle?

Sudan legislator sees conspiracy in UN move for Darfur mission
http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/09/12/news/darfur.php

Quote
A senior Sudanese lawmaker on Tuesday accused Kofi Annan, the secretary general of the United Nations, of spearheading a conspiracy against the African country over a plan to deploy UN peacekeepers in the war-torn Darfur region.
 
The United States is leading the conspiracy [my emphasis--and it is true that the US is trying, along with the UK, to get something done while other countries are really not doing anything], which "began as a political campaign in the UN and is now taking the form of a military intervention," Ismail Haj Mussa, a senior member of the Sudanese Parliament, told Radio Omdurman, a state-run station.
 
The United Nations has been trying to persuade Sudan to allow the world body to take over an African Union peacekeeping force that has been unable to stop the violence in Darfur. But President Omar al-Bashir of Sudan has repeatedly rejected the proposal, saying that it would violahis ate the country's sovereignty. He has warned that his army would fight any UN forces sent to Darfur [my emphasis]...

Or maybe a little regime change might be in order--but is not that frowned upon too?

What a dilemma.

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline boondocksaint

  • Member
  • ****
  • 20
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 197
  • Sooo...is that a Timex?
Re: Responses to The Afghanistan Debate
« Reply #40 on: September 12, 2006, 18:35:34 »
i dont think the word 'tripe' is used enough, very old school

and good links above, thanks for the info
In the company of soldiers I don't have to pretend to be the person Im not, Or strike that pose, however well intentioned, that is expected by those who have not known me under arms. In the company of soldiers all my crimes are forgiven-I am safe-I am known-I am home-In the company of soldiers.

Offline Beadwindow 7

  • Life is cruel, and I am but a small slice of life
  • Milnet.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 22,755
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,001
  • ZBM2
Re: Responses to The Afghanistan Debate
« Reply #41 on: September 12, 2006, 18:48:35 »
i dont think the word 'tripe' is used enough, very old school

It's true, and we've been seeing a LOT of it on the wires as of late.
Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical, liberal minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Offline Patrick H.

  • Paint it all grey.
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • -120
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 629
  • UBIQUE
We have to stay in Afghanistan - CBC Viewpoint
« Reply #42 on: September 13, 2006, 12:36:18 »
CBC News Viewpoint | September 13, 2006
http://www.cbc.ca/news/viewpoint/vp_storring/20060913.html
also see: A Soldier's Life by Russell Storring - http://www.cbc.ca/news/viewpoint/vp_storring/

Russell Storring is a Sergeant with the Canadian Army, and has been a signals operator for the 15 years he has been in the military. He recently returned from his second tour of duty in Afghanistan, having served there previously in 2003, and with the UN in Rwanda in 1994. His columns give a first-person account from the field and the life of a soldier.

To date, the war on terror in Afghanistan has resulted in 386 coalition deaths, of which, 32 have been Canada's sons and daughters. This statistic tragically places Canada second only to the U.S. in overall casualties.

In addition to those who have paid the ultimate price, 88 more Canadian soldiers have been wounded and will carry the scars of battle and death for the rest of their lives.

This reality, tied with the experience of thousands of soldiers who have served in Afghanistan (many twice or more), has shaped our training. Most training is now centred on realistic scenarios and lessons learned from those who have already been there. For soldiers deploying to this theatre for their first tour, and possibly more so for veterans of Afghanistan, the old saying of "it won't happen to me" quite simply does not exist anymore.

A few weeks ago as I read the morning news, my heart skipped a beat when I saw the name Cpl. Jesse Melnyck, but relaxed slightly when I found out that he was injured but listed in stable condition. Melnyck was one of my command post signallers and drivers on Roto 0 in Afghanistan, and although we didn't go through any events together like he has just been through, he, like all the soldiers who have worked for me in the past, is still "one of my soldiers."

I managed to visit him at an Ottawa hospital just after one of his reconstructive surgeries and found him in good spirits. Like a true soldier, he expressed his desire to go back and finish the job, despite losing an eye and having a scar from his forehead to his temple. Even after what he has gone through, and the surgery he still has to go through, he told me he has no regrets and would do it all again if given the chance. Even after coming so close to death, he was still pissed that he didn't get to stay and finish his part of the job. He, like so many others, has given more than what was expected.

Later as Nathalie and I talked, we both realized I may be headed back to Afghanistan quite possibly as early as summer 2007. Although Nathalie and I don't always see things in the same light, she has taken the time to ask, and I have taken the time to explain why I (like so many other soldiers) am still willing to take the increased risk of a more robust deployment to Afghanistan.

Despite the increase in insurgent activities since early 2006, Afghanistan is still moving forward on the road of democracy and reconstruction. Schools, hospitals, clinics and businesses remain open despite suicide bombings, fire bombings, and rocket attacks. Thousands of Afghanis have been killed in attempts by the Taliban to bring fear to the population, like they did when they were in power. Unfortunately the Taliban have failed to realize that the people of Afghanistan have spoken and voted for democracy and freedom, and the more the Taliban try to terrorize, the more the people will fight back and the more they will support the efforts of the fledgling government and the coalition.

Not an occupation force

Helping them fight back is the coalition. We are not an "occupation force" as some even here in Canada have stated, but backers of the legitimate Afghanistan government, which was voted in by a huge majority of Afghans who wanted their first democracy in 25 years.

Under the Taliban, Afghanistan stepped back in time rather than forward. There were mass executions and beatings, and thousands of Afghans simply disappeared. In an effort to remove anything that did not fall under the Taliban's view of acceptable to Islam, museums, universities and places of culture such as the Bamiyan Buddha statues were destroyed.

One of my interpreters on Roto 4 told me of a professor he knew who had ripped a number of valuable paintings to pieces, hid them to keep them from being burned. Once the Taliban were overthrown, the pieces were then put back together. Had the professor been caught, he would have been executed on the spot for defying a Taliban edict.

The Taliban ruled by the gun, and controlled the population through fear and suffering. This is the only thing they know, and even now as they slowly lose their grip on Afghanistan and their former strongholds in the south, they continue to try to force the population to support them through suicide bombings, the burning and rocketing of schools, and attacks on Afghan and coalition forces.

It is the action of a dying and desperate force. They are not yet ineffective, as witnessed by Canadian and coalition deaths, but are slowly dying as the Afghan people show they no longer want the Taliban — and they show this by simply carrying on. Something so simple, such as picking up the pieces, reopening bombed stores, going to school and to work, speaks a message the Taliban cannot stand, and that is this: They are no longer wanted.

It won't be an easy struggle by any means, but it is something we must finish and see through to the end. If we abandon the Afghan people now, the Taliban will use their tactics of fear and suffering to gain a more powerful hold on Afghanistan and quite possibly create a more dangerous safe haven for terrorists than was witnessed in 2001, putting even more of us in danger in the global war on terror.

Staying the course is the only option. It is what the Afghans need, it is what Canada and the world needs, and it is what our fallen need to ensure their sacrifice was not in vain.
Some mornings it just doesn't seem worth it to gnaw through the leather straps.

"It isn't what you've lost, but what you have left." - My great Uncle Daniel J MacDonald, Veteran Affairs Minister 1972.

Offline AKA Sam

  • Guest
  • *
  • 0
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15
  • Ubique
Letter to the National Post
« Reply #43 on: September 13, 2006, 18:00:50 »
Following is a letter that my husband wrote to the National Post.  They only posted the first two lines in the "Letters" Section of the September 11th edition. I apologize if I've posted it in the wrong area but I thought that you might like to read the entire letter.

Winston Churchill once said that it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open one’s mouth and remove all doubt.  Good advice for Jack Layton and the NDP.  Obviously, Jack Layton is not much of a student of Canadian history.

Canadian soldiers, sailors and airmen have fought and died on foreign soil, to defend our way of life and freedoms for over a century.  From the Boer War, to the First World War, to World War II and Korea, our men and women in uniform have answered the call of duty.  The very right he has, to espouse his ill-conceived views was bought with the blood of much better people.  Canada’s place on the world stage was not claimed by running away at the first sign of blood.  On the contrary, historians have said that Canada’s true nationhood was recognized after our soldiers took Vimy Ridge.  The sacrifice of our young men, in the hundreds of thousands in both World Wars is a testament to the strength of character of previous generations.  Unlike our neighbours to the south, the Canadian Army was mostly a volunteer force.  Unlike today, we didn’t hear about the death of each soldier, five minutes after it happened, on the noon news.  That’s because they were being killed in greater numbers every day, than we have lost in four years in Afghanistan.

Are the people of Afghanistan any less worthy of our assistance than say, the people of Poland?  Was the Kaiser more of a direct threat to Canada than say, the Taliban?  As we approach the anniversary of the September 11th attacks in the USA, can anybody in Canada be naïve enough to believe that it couldn’t happen here?  Allowing countries like Afghanistan, Somalia, Sudan and others to descend into anarchy provides a breeding ground for Islamic militants.  These people have only one interest; the destruction of western civilization.  They don’t differentiate between Americans, Canadians, Brits, Spaniards, or even Russians.  They mean to destroy our way of life.  If we don’t tackle them over there, they will attack us here soon enough.  Conciliatory gestures won’t pacify a rabid dog.

The role of the Canadian soldier as a “peace keeper” is largely the invention of gutless politicians, for whom sacrifice is paying their own way back to their riding offices from Ottawa.  The men and women serving in today’s Canadian Forces are living examples of the values left to us by the “Greatest Generation”.  Ask a soldier which mission he would prefer to be on; Afghanistan with NATO or South Lebanon with the UN and it’s convoluted rules of engagement.  I’m willing to bet that the choice would be overwhelmingly in favour of the former.  Read Romeo Dallaire’s book “Witness to Evil” for a first hand account of our glorious peace keeping record and the joys of UN missions.

If Canada wants to be a full participant in world affairs, we have to be prepared to step up and contribute our share to preserve peace and stability, even when the going gets tough.  Al Qaeda and the Taliban are counting on our lack of intestinal fortitude.  They expect us to cut and run as the images of our soldiers coming home in coffins hits the news on television and the weaker kneed of us, like Jack Layton, start to squirm and squeal.

Our troops know and understand this.  They possess the moral certitude which comes with strength of character.  Each soldier who serves in Afghanistan is a volunteer.  None are forced to go.  All are proud to serve.  If you can’t support their mission, then shut up and stay out of the way.

Sincerely,
Greg and Sam Jxxxxxxx
Proud parents of a Canadian soldier
Brampton, ON


Offline Gronk

  • New Member
  • **
  • 2,505
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 47
Re: Responses to The Afghanistan Debate
« Reply #44 on: September 13, 2006, 18:53:54 »
Very well said.

Offline boondocksaint

  • Member
  • ****
  • 20
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 197
  • Sooo...is that a Timex?
Re: Responses to The Afghanistan Debate
« Reply #45 on: September 13, 2006, 22:15:39 »
excellent stuff, gave me goose bumps
In the company of soldiers I don't have to pretend to be the person Im not, Or strike that pose, however well intentioned, that is expected by those who have not known me under arms. In the company of soldiers all my crimes are forgiven-I am safe-I am known-I am home-In the company of soldiers.

Offline MCG

  • Directing Staff
  • Milnet.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 57,415
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,416
Re: Responses to The Afghanistan Debate
« Reply #46 on: September 13, 2006, 22:47:14 »
Well, I've have sent link to this Ruxted article to all my non-military friends and I've heard back that many have sent it on to their friends.  I am guessing that at least a few other site members have sent out the link, and in this way we are doing a small bit to help educate people.  However, if the PM does not adddress the points (in the Ruxted words or in his own), the message will get out to enough Canadians.  The urgency/importance of this was raised in a post from another thread:

As has been previously said on this board, what is frustrating is that the media can only report on one side of this issue, because both the Prime Minister and his government (including DND) have been useless in actually providing another side to the debate.

As a civilian and as someone continuing to desire a role in our military, I welcome democratic debate. It's healthy.  The problem is that When only one side gets all the airtime (because the other side isnt saying much of anything),  its no longer a debate.

Much as I disagree with Jack, the problem is, Canadians don't care what I think. They want a leader to follow who makes sense.  Jack is appealing to old-school Canadian values, and no-oine with legitimacy is appealing with another angle.

Until someone does, Jack will keep spewing his ideas (warped as they may be to you and I), and the media will keep giving him airtime.  Noone else is asking for any.

Offline x-grunt

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 3,020
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 262
Star article: Expert advice on Afghanistan
« Reply #47 on: September 14, 2006, 09:39:09 »
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1158184237654&call_pageid=968256290204&col=968350116795

Quote
Expert advice on Afghanistan
Sep. 14, 2006. 01:00 AM
HAROON SIDDIQUI

Afghanistan is at a crossroads and, with it, Canada's involvement: "We should bring our troops home." "No, we shouldn't." "We should talk to the Taliban." "No, we shouldn't."

With no easy answers available, I talked to two knowledgeable people, veteran diplomat Lakhdar Brahimi and Afghan Canadian filmmaker Nelofer Pazira.

Pazira's family in Kabul fled the Soviet occupation in 1989 and came to Canada a year later. She has made two movies, Kandahar (2001) and Return to Kandahar (2003), and wrote a book, A Bed of Red Flowers: In Search of My Afghanistan (2005).

Pazira, 33, has just returned from a month-long visit to her native land. Unlike the journalists "embedded" with foreign troops, she travelled widely and talked to the people.

She says the Hamid Karzai government "has lost its legitimacy," given its corruption, incompetence and alliances with the regional warlords.

Afghans, caught between the Taliban and NATO troops, are "frustrated, anxious and cynical," especially in Kandahar, the city and the province of the same name.

In Kabul, the foreign troops are seen as forces of good, because they have been. In the south, they are viewed as incompetent occupiers making things worse.

"I am torn. The Canadian in me says, `What are we doing there?' The Afghan in me says, `What if the foreigners all pack up and leave? Will the country go back to pre-9/11?'"

What about Jack Layton's idea of talking to the Taliban?

"That's the only sensible thing I've heard lately. Realistically, diplomacy is the right way. The Taliban are not a homogeneous group, anyway."

Brahimi, 72, the world-renowned United Nations envoy, is a former foreign minister of Algeria, who in 1990 helped the Arab League end the Christian-Muslim civil war in Lebanon.

Post-Taliban, he organized the Bonn conference (November 2001), then the loya jirga, the traditional gathering of tribes (June 2002), and stayed on until December 2004 trying to turn the failed state into a functioning one.

Since then, he has been a UN envoy to Iraq (2004) and Darfur (2006).

I reached him in his Paris apartment.

"We have expected miracles in Afghanistan but miracles don't happen very often on Earth. A country that has systematically been destroyed for 25 years is not going to become paradise in 25 or 35 months.

"The Taliban had never been defeated. They had been pushed out of Kabul. They scattered all over and were demoralized but now some of them have regrouped and are reminding the world that they exist."

The Taliban are back because of the mistakes made by the United States and the allies.

"One of my own biggest mistakes was not to speak to the Taliban in 2002 and 2003.

"It was not possible to get them in the tent at the Bonn conference because of 9/11 and they themselves were not eager. But immediately after that, we should've spoken to those who were willing to speak to us.

"That I consider to be my mistake — a very, very big mistake."

Should we speak to them now?

"I'm too far to lecture anybody now."

What other mistakes?

"The international force should've gone out of Kabul when people outside Kabul were begging to have them.

"All we were asking for is 3,000 to 5,000 more troops. But we never got them. If we had, we'd have done much better ...

"Then the Afghan administration did not project itself with confidence and care for people outside of Kabul and the main cities. They should have."

What else went wrong?

"The Americans, Donald Rumsfeld in particular, were not interested in nation-building. He said they were there to fight the enemy: `We're going after the Al Qaeda and we're not interested in rebuilding Afghanistan.'

"The Americans turned around slowly in 2003. But by that time, we had lost a hell of a lot of time."

What should be done now?

"Fight drug production better, fight corruption better, and have the much better-qualified Afghans that are emerging to run the local administrations.

"Get along better with Pakistan. It has been ridiculous that the relationship has not been better. I am encouraged that Gen. (Pervez) Musharraf was in Kabul the other day."

What should Canada do?

"I know that Canadians are nervous and are wondering, `Why should our troops remain there?'

"But I think if international solidarity means anything, you have to be there.

"Second, terrorism is a terrible thing and you need to help contain it — not by killing terrorists, which is what's happening now, but by preventing people from becoming terrorists."

Translation: Stay in Afghanistan. But forget the American-style war on terrorism. Concentrate on helping the people. The solution is mostly political, and that might entail talking to the right elements in the Taliban


If you can't find a solution, change the problem.

Offline recceguy

    A Usual Suspect.

  • "Look, I don't know if shooting penguins will help the environment or not. But I do know that the decision shouldn't be in the hands of people who just wanna kill for fun."
  • Directing Staff
  • Milnet.ca Legend
  • *
  • 59,450
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,931
  • doddering docent to the museum of misanthropy
    • Army.ca
Re: Star article: Expert advice on Afghanistan
« Reply #48 on: September 14, 2006, 09:57:56 »
You only have to read a handful of articles by Haroon Siddiqui to spot the agenda he's pushing. You will also pick out the misinformation, skewing of detail and the outright fallacy of his imaginary facts. As soon as I see his name in the by-line, I give the article no more than a cursory glance till I pick up indication of the above, then I quit reading.
"Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end." 2007 winning entry, Texas A&M University - most appropriate definition of a contemporary term.

DISCLAIMER - my opinion may cause manginal irritation.

Offline Kirkhill

  • Milnet.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 40,295
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,490
  • Just plain difficult
Re: Star article: Expert advice on Afghanistan
« Reply #49 on: September 14, 2006, 10:38:48 »
Ditto, recceguy.
Over, Under, Around or Through.
Anticipating the triumph of Thomas Reid.