Commitment in Afghanistan
- Thread starter red
- Start date
..would it have been a good thing sure, would America accept 3,000 casulities to stop the Rwandan sluaghter. Not a hope in heck.
The US strategy in Iraq is clear. Build 4 huge bases with which to hide behind and cut US caualities, rely on US air power and Iraqui troops on the ground. For many reasons, it is a strategy that will not work. You cannot fight an isurgency like that.
The US strategy in Iraq is clear. Build 4 huge bases with which to hide behind and cut US caualities, rely on US air power and Iraqui troops on the ground. For many reasons, it is a strategy that will not work. You cannot fight an isurgency like that.
..if they want a stable Iraq the insurgency has to be defeated. However their presence is what fuels the insurgency and why the average Sunni, Shia supports the insurgency.
Its real simple, until the average citizen picks up the phone and calls down to the poilice station when they see someone planting a road side bomb. The insurgency will not be defeated. And they will not do that as long American troops are occuppying their country.
That is the bottom line, that tanks, bombers, stealth aircraft and probably even nukes cannot overcome.
Its real simple, until the average citizen picks up the phone and calls down to the poilice station when they see someone planting a road side bomb. The insurgency will not be defeated. And they will not do that as long American troops are occuppying their country.
That is the bottom line, that tanks, bombers, stealth aircraft and probably even nukes cannot overcome.
red said:We lost another one of boys. RIP
...I read an interesting article in the Asia times, with the money from all those poppy expect Afhghanistan to really start heating up. Up until now they have been using equipment literally built manually in small shops in Pakistan, in other words crap. Now that they have the cash expect these guys to start being eqipped with real weapons, sniper rifles, ak 47's exct.
Understand this, without the active help of Afghani's/Iraqui's these wars will literally go on on for a thosand years.
And they will never help a white christian army to control their country, period.
There was a bunch of stuff in the Globe today on an interview with Hillier on the Canadian mission in Afghanistan. A couple of the links are below:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060303.wxafghan03/BNStory/National/home
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060302.whilliertrans0303/BNStory
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060303.wxafghan03/BNStory/National/home
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060302.whilliertrans0303/BNStory
And we could have lost another five today. We should all be proud of the risks they take. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060303.wattack0303/BNStory/International/homered said:We lost another one of boys. RIP
I agree. We now have about 2300 members of our armed forces in the Kandahar region of Southern Afghanistan and we could be there for quite a while. With AQ starting to use the same suicide bomb tactics in Afghanistan that they've been using in Iraq, we're going to have more casualties. We're also going to have to get off our asses and educate Canadians about why we're doing this. We're so unlike the Americans when it comes to promoting our military that most Canadians have very little idea of what we're actually doing out there. The Canadian military is virtually invisible in Canada and most of us here are so militarily challenged, we need to have this spelled out for us.someone said:And we could have lost another five today. We should all be proud of the risks they take. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060303.wattack0303/BNStory/International/home
We really need to promote the notion of Canada assuming a leadership role in these types of legitimate joint forces. Whether we help out through our UN membership or through the NATO alliance, we have to get back into the international peacemaking business. It is insane for Canada to continue to let the US call all the shots as the unofficial chief of police to the whole world. If we can bolster the forces of the other NATO and/or UN peacemaking countries we can counter the US' virtual monopoly on the direction of these events. If we don't step up, the US will just fuck it all up for everyone. We can help make that not happen.
Except for the second to last sentance I couldn't agree more.slowpoke said:......
We really need to promote the notion of Canada assuming a leadership role in these types of legitimate joint forces. Whether we help out through our UN membership or through the NATO alliance, we have to get back into the international peacemaking business. It is insane for Canada to continue to let the US call all the shots as the unofficial chief of police to the whole world. If we can bolster the forces of the other NATO and/or UN peacemaking countries we can counter the US' virtual monopoly on the direction of these events. If we don't step up, the US will just fuck it all up for everyone. We can help make that not happen.
OTB
We've both been wrong before. Time will tell. Judging by the US' recent track record as the international arbiter of all that is wise and just, I like my chances of being proven correct better than yours.onthebottom said:Except for the second to last sentance I couldn't agree more.
OTB
Wouldn't it be cheaper to just "recruit" some Afghan SP's? I think we should send them the money (and condoms). Nature will take care of the rest.red said:Lets pool some money together and send the troops some toronto SP's
Local religious sensitivities could create problems in winning hearts and minds.slowpoke said:Wouldn't it be cheaper to just "recruit" some Afghan SP's? I think we should send them the money (and condoms). Nature will take care of the rest.
Yes but they can use the cash. There is also the loftier principle of teaching them all about entrepreneurship and capitalism. If it is OK to sell opium, why not a little pussy?someone said:Local religious sensitivities could create problems in winning hearts and minds.
..while over all the US miltary may have met its enlistment goals, it has failed miserably in the most important area. Combat troops.
A little know fact. During WW2 when Americans enlisted they would oick what they wanted to do. Then the army would assign them wherever they wanted. The next time you are watching a WW2 movie keep in mind, all those combat troops had applied to be something else. Not even in the most patriot war since the revolution were Americans gung ho about going into combat.
Its easy to be John Wayne, sitting on the couch.
A little know fact. During WW2 when Americans enlisted they would oick what they wanted to do. Then the army would assign them wherever they wanted. The next time you are watching a WW2 movie keep in mind, all those combat troops had applied to be something else. Not even in the most patriot war since the revolution were Americans gung ho about going into combat.
Its easy to be John Wayne, sitting on the couch.
News on the latest attack: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060304.wafghanistan0304/BNStory/National/home
He (Lt. Greene) sounds like a very respectable guy.
He (Lt. Greene) sounds like a very respectable guy.
Get your facts straight. 3PPCLI was doing cbt ops starting Mar 02assoholic said:its only in like the last month Canada has begun combat operations.
Wrong. Peacekeepers/makers wear a blue beret, these guys are wearing cadpat keval helmets. Canada never went there in a peacemaking role.zanner69 said:what was Canada's role in Aghanistan in the first place???
oh ya - peacemakers!!!!!
well when Canadian troops start dying - I think Canada should reconsider their role since the troops will be there for a long long time!!!
Perhaps people with weak intestinal fortitude should remeber why we are there in the first place. http://www.crewstart.com/Files/Downloads/911/911.swf
From your comment I take that you are suggesting that if Canada loses more troops, we should put our tail between our legs and run away?
Just to clarify...are you saying that Afghanistan is an illegal/immoral war?assoholic said:...Canadian fortitude is when we tell the US to go stuff themeselves when we are asked to support their illegal/immoral wars.
Should Canadian troops be in Afghanistan?
28/02/06
Canadian troops today took command of NATO combat operations in the Kandahar region of southern Afghanistan.
But Parliament has never given its approval to this deployment.
Ujjal Dosanjh, Liberal: During the election campaign, the Conservative Party promised to hold votes in Parliament on military missions. The Conservative government should follow through on that commitment. The previous Liberal government, it should be highlighted, held a take-note debate in Parliament on Canada`s involvement in Afghanistan.
Dawn Black, NDP: During the election campaign, Stephen Harper promised that serious issues like this would be put before Parliament.
I'm shocked that the Minister has contradicted that commitment.
Although it's not surprising that the Conservatives would back down on this accountability issue after seeing the new government appoint an unelected campaign organizer to Cabinet and persuading David Emerson to cross the floor after being elected as a Liberal.
The men and women in the Canadian military deserve better.
Roger Price, Andorra: In my opinion, all government spending should be prioritized — why not? Tax revenues are limited and governments are only recently adopting a balanced budget policy. So please explain how funding for troops to Afghanistan can get prioritized above all the under-funded items like health care, education etc. Let's recognize our revenue limitations —we do have a $500-billion federal deficit to pay off — so why not prioritize our expenditures within this criteria and solve Canadian problems first?
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060225.wliveafghan0227/BNStory/specialComment
28/02/06
Canadian troops today took command of NATO combat operations in the Kandahar region of southern Afghanistan.
But Parliament has never given its approval to this deployment.
Ujjal Dosanjh, Liberal: During the election campaign, the Conservative Party promised to hold votes in Parliament on military missions. The Conservative government should follow through on that commitment. The previous Liberal government, it should be highlighted, held a take-note debate in Parliament on Canada`s involvement in Afghanistan.
Dawn Black, NDP: During the election campaign, Stephen Harper promised that serious issues like this would be put before Parliament.
I'm shocked that the Minister has contradicted that commitment.
Although it's not surprising that the Conservatives would back down on this accountability issue after seeing the new government appoint an unelected campaign organizer to Cabinet and persuading David Emerson to cross the floor after being elected as a Liberal.
The men and women in the Canadian military deserve better.
Roger Price, Andorra: In my opinion, all government spending should be prioritized — why not? Tax revenues are limited and governments are only recently adopting a balanced budget policy. So please explain how funding for troops to Afghanistan can get prioritized above all the under-funded items like health care, education etc. Let's recognize our revenue limitations —we do have a $500-billion federal deficit to pay off — so why not prioritize our expenditures within this criteria and solve Canadian problems first?
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060225.wliveafghan0227/BNStory/specialComment
