The four Canadians killed have been identified. From top: Cpl. Matthew Dinning, Lieut. William Turner, Bombardier Myles Mansell and Cpl. Randy Payne. (National Defence)
I say that we should get the hell out of that country!!!!
How many more Canadians have to be killed before we get the message????
Click here for more on this sad story -
target="_blank">Charles
Blog
35 comments:
Would you say the same thing if the Afghans were here defending us??
Huh?
That part of the world have fought among themselves for the last 2,000 years and no Canadian Army are going to stop it!!!!
Protect our soldiers and remove them from suicidal mission.
Our soldiers are doing a noble thing helping these people in Afghanistan. If we pull out now the soldiers have died in vain. My sympathies go to the families. One of my ralatives was seriously injured in Afghanistan and he doesn't regret being there at all. War stinks, our soldiers know that. They need our support.
I think that it is time that we stop debating whether or not our Brave Men and Women in Uniform should or, should be in Afhanistan.
The fact is this; they are there and we need to hold them up in our Prayers and support them. We as a Nation need to stand firmly behind our Military forces, because they are putting their lives on the line for Canada. Anyone who would rant and rave about Great Country being part of the War on Terror, should remember ever so vividly what happened on 9,11 2001, and we all need to ask Ourselves what would we do if that same murdering slime balls bombed a good part of Canada. I think that we would rally the troops and say lets get those Goofs and take them out permanently.
I do not like war and war never solved anything, but there are times when we as peace loving people need to take a stand against crimes against humanity, and this is one of those times. Remember if we don't take a stand against this kind of terrorism, they will sooner or, later come over here and do the same thing to us that they did in New York City.
Michael G. McKay BA.
First, nothing you say or do makes a difference as it isn't your, or our, decision to make. It makes no difference whether you think supporting our troops means bringing them home or keeping them there. As it is a UN rotation there is simply nothing even the PM can do, except make a very blatant refusal and pull out, something that is very unlikely.
The afghanis never asked for help, which makes it an occupation, nothing more. To reply to the 911, first, it wasn't our country. Second, it was Saudi Arabians who attacked, not afghanis. Even a vague memory should recall that the US had plans to invade Afghanistan long before 911.
Anybody who thinks we are 'one big family' should think of the number of lawsuits against the canadian government-which costs you money, the lumber trade wars and mad cow. They would have no trouble suing our asses if we ever tried cutting off oil, even if it was necessary for our own economy.
After 911 even after the Taliban capitulated, Bush said he was invading.
Sorry to be harsh but if you're dumb enough to think Afghanis were sitting over there plotting against Canada, all I can say is take your views and sign up! You are ten thousand times more likely to die in a car accident, pedestrian accident, workplace mishap, or cardiac arrest. You are a thousand times more likely to die as a result of your own governments ineptitude or transgressions than by terrorism.
THe only terrorism Canada has ever faced were first, our ancestors, second, the americans, and third, the FLQ. That says it all right there.
However, the longer we are there, quite obviously the higher are our chances. When you are an occupying force there's usually just a matter of time before those under your thumb realize the best way to affect a country's foreign policy is to attack the homeland. The palestinians do it, the irish did it, the algerians did it. You don't hear the Swiss or the Swedish worrying about whether they are going to be bombed-because nobody has any reason to bomb them. Give somebody a reason and you bear the responsibility. Unfortunately, as said, it makes no difference whatsoever what our political views are because we have no way to exercise them. YOu'll notice even during the election nobody even talked about this issue.
You are living in the past if you think that Canada is a 'peacekeeper' anymore. The Somalia videotapes should have proved that, the Rwanda 'let's stand around and do nothing' experience should teach you that. Do even just a LITTLE reading on Haiti and you'll learn that. Hell, just go read the views of the general in charge, the guy is a racist lunatic.
But when it comes to war, people suddenly line up behind the government they reject in almost every other way. Maybe it's still that christian hatred, maybe it's the 'bravery of being out of range', however, you'll notice that even so called christians never say 'what would Jesus do?'
Very good 8:41. You are so right. I might add that Harper is a toady of bush and nothing more. We have another Mulroney. At least Mulroney had good mandate. Harper is skating on thin ice.
Um...The Liberals sent our troops in not Harper.
Irrelevant of that, it is a noble cause and to pull out now makes everything accomplished up to now for naught.
What 'accomplishments' would that be? And why would they be 'for naught'? They pulled canadian troops out of Cyprus but it didn't make what they had accomplished for naught. You can't negate an accomplishment by leaving, that makes no sense.
And the liberals didn't send them in, the UN sent them in. Please people, its one thing to pull an opinion out of your butt, but how about putting some thought into your opinions once in awhile.
There is nothing noble about it. Its the opposite of noble, it's a war crime. Anybody who thinks war crimes are noble should be on the front line.
Liberals might have agreed to send the troops but Harper made it number 1 priority by visiting Afghanistan and promising more spending on military. Then he uses the same language as Bush to promote and justify war. It is very much Harper issue now and it will bring him down sooner than later.
Remove this pre-approval stuff. It is delaying very good discussion. Overcome your egotism for the sake of issues.
You react badly to any good advice and that is source of your failing in life.
Um Mike (7:38), the Canadian Government can still override the UN. If the Liberals hadn't of wanted us there we wouldn't be there. No need to insult others here on the blog. Your opinion is noted.
Anyway, it's war folks but it is hardly a war crime. As one soldier told me, they train for war. That is what they do even if they hope it never comes to that. I'm not sure what the naysayers think soldiers are trained for but that is what they do. It's not all about giving out stickers to kids and letting them look at tanks. Kudos to our Canadian soldiers for trying to being freedom to Afghanistan.
Nope....I believe this way is much better and I only refuse one comments,
This person was swearing a lot.
Keep those comments coming....
It isn't 'opinion'. I was correcting the remark 'it was liberals who sent them, not Harper'. It WASN"T the liberals who sent them. If you will take some advice and at least READ what people say, you'll note I also said they COULD override the UN and simply say 'we're not living up to our obligations' but that isn't very likely, just like it isn't likely with Harper. So the liberals are no more 'at fault' than the tories.
War crime is fairly accurate. It ISN"T 'war'. There has been no declaration of war against Afghanistan. If there was, then of course we'd expect bombs to be going off in Canada.
Soldiers train for all kinds of things, ever see any killing on recruitment posters? You think a radar tech, doctor, field medic, mechanic, hell, even a munitions specialist train to kill? That's just crazy. In the entire air force there is only one job designed for combat.
It is a war crime since it is an illegal occupation. Afghanistan never attacked anybody, even on the bad argument that maybe terrorists were there that is inconsequential. In fact, most of the terrorists had American citizenship, and did most of their training in the US. 'Bringing freedom' is just ludicrous. Have you even heard of a free vote for Afghanis to VOTE whether we should be protecting them? Again, it isn't 'freedom', it isn't even close. You'll notice that the oil pipeline is going through, as planned, and as said, Bush said long before 9/11 they were going to invade.
Again, do some research for pete's sake. The UN members are trained for peacekeeping, NOT war. Changing to being a warmaker and occupier is far different, and it's no coincidence that none of this has even been debated. No surprise while tories called for referenda on gay marriage, there's no call for one on an activity that gets canadians killed and threatens our safety.
well it high time Canadians wake up because this useless war is only about trying to please the US
those people in afghan do not want us there since they are killing us therefore they do not want our help policing their own so let get out of there now
ah yes you of all persons is imposing censorship on your site now that is bad are you an impocryte ? you say something and do something else you might as well join our politicians
Well....your views did get posted....btter than the Irvings or Rogers Television who will stop you in your track!!!!
That is stupid argument that "your views got posted". It is a blog and people giving good comments and half-witted individual is censoring them. Take the good advice and remove this nonsense.
Oh yes it is your blog and that bull***t. Show some respect and stop this nonsense. You are missing lot of good comments because people do not want to put up with your bull***t.
Backgrounder
Canadian Forces Operations in Afghanistan
BG–06.003a - April 18, 2006
The situation today
As part of Task Force Afghanistan (TFA), approximately 2,300 Canadian Forces personnel are deployed in Afghanistan on the first rotation (ROTO 1) of Canada’s renewed commitment to the international campaign against terrorism, Operation ARCHER.
Canadian Brigadier-General David Fraser, Commander of 1 Canadian Mechanized Brigade Group (Edmonton, Alta.) is now the Commander of the Canadian-led Multi National Brigade for Regional Command South (MNB RC(South)) in Afghanistan.
The majority of personnel at the Multi-National Brigade Headquarters located at Kandahar airfield (KAF) are Canadian, and are deployed for a nine-month period. At the same time, Canada is also fielding at KAF a battle group for two successive six-month rotations, as well as a new rotation for the Provincial Reconstruction Team (PRT) at Camp Nathan Smith, in Kandahar. Canada has committed to maintain the PRT until February 2007.
With the exception of approximately 85 CF personnel serving with various military and civilian organizations in Kabul and Bagram, all CF assets were consolidated with the closure of Camp Julien (previously the Canadian base of operations in Kabul) and relocated to Kandahar, in the southern region of Afghanistan.
For more information on the closure of Camp Julien, visit: http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/newsroom/view_news_e.asp?id=1831
CF personnel deployed with TFA comprise the following units (all figures approximate):
*
Overall 2,300 CF personnel are part of TFA:
o
200 CF members with the Multi-National Brigade Headquarters and Signal Squadron (MNB HQ & Sig Sqn) in Kandahar. Constructed primarily from 1 Canadian Mechanized Brigade Group Headquarters and Signal Squadron (1 CMBG HQ and Sig Sqn) Edmonton, however it also includes many professional and dedicated Regular and Reserve Force members from across Canada. It role is to assist Brigadier-General Fraser in accomplishing his mission and provide him and his Staff with the communications necessary to exercise command and control over the MNB RC (South) in Afghanistan.
o
250 CF members from all over Canada, in Kandahar, who constitute the National Command Element (NCE);
o
300 CF members, shared primarily between 1 General Support Battalion (1 Gen Sp Bn) and 1 Service Battalion (1 Svc Bn) in Edmonton, with the National Support Element (NSE) in Kandahar;
o
250 CF members with the Theatre Support Element (TSE) in Southwest Asia;
o
A Battle Group of about 1,000 members in Kandahar, primarily from the 1st Battalion Princess Patricia’s Canadian Light Infantry (1 PPCLI) Edmonton, which also includes;
+
soldiers from 2 PPCLI;
+
an engineer squadron from 1 Canadian Engineer Regiment (1CER) in Edmonton;
+
an artillery battery from 1 RCHA in Shilo, Man. ;
+
an armoured reconnaissance troop, from 12 RBC in Valcartier, Que. ;
+
a Provincial Reconstruction Team (PRT) from Western Canada;
+
an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) unit from 408 Tactical Helicopter Squadron (THS) in Edmonton;
o
70 personnel at the coalition hospital at KAF, composed of personnel from 1 Field Ambulance (1Fd Amb) in Edmonton, Alta., and from 1 Canadian field Hospital (1 Can Fd H) in Petawawa, Ont.;
o
About 85 CF personnel also serve in Kabul and Bagram. They are from across Canada and they include:
+
the Special Advisory Team to President Karzai’s government;
+
embedded staff officers at NATO’s International Security Assistance Force Headquarters (ISAF) HQ, U.S. Combined Forces Command - Afghanistan (CFC-A), and the Office of Security and Cooperation – Afghanistan (OSC-A) in Kabul,
+
Embedded staff officers at Combined Joint Task Force 76 (CJTF-76) in Bagram; and
+
A small cadre of CF instructors involved in the training of the Afghan National Army (ANA) Staff at the Canadian Afghan National Training Centre Detachment (C ANTC Det) in Kabul.
Task Force Afghanistan’s mission is to improve the security situation in southern Afghanistan, and play a key role in the transition from the United States (US)-led multinational coalition (known as Operation ENDURING FREEDOM) to NATO leadership. In the southern provinces, like the province of Kandahar, this transition is scheduled for the summer of 2006.
Canada’s renewed military commitment in Afghanistan builds on the success of our peace-support operations to strengthen the security situation.
Detainee Transfer Arrangement
In December 2005, the arrangement for the transfer of detainees between the Canadian Forces and the Ministry of Defence of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan was finalized.
This arrangement establishes the procedures in respect to the transfer of detainees from the Canadian Forces in Afghanistan to Afghan authorities, and reinforces the commitments of both participants to meet their obligations under international law. The arrangement is also consistent with one of Canada's objectives in Afghanistan: to support Afghan authorities in strengthening the institutional capacities of the Afghan government.
For more information on the detainee transfer arrangement visit http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/Operations/archer/agreement_e.asp
The story so far
Operation ARCHER (up to February 2006)
On November 29, 2005, Camp Julien, which was the Canadian base of operations in Kabul, officially closed. CF personnel in Afghanistan, were relocated to Kandahar in the southern region of Afghanistan as part of the United States-led campaign against terrorism known as Operation ENDURING FREEDOM (OEF).
Canada’s Operation ARCHER and its participation in OEF had two components:
*
A small cadre of CF instructors involved in training the Afghan National Army in Kabul; and
*
The deployment of the PRT (originally in August 2005), which is expected to be active until February 2007.
Provincial Reconstruction Team (PRT)
Since August 2005, a Canadian PRT has operated in Kandahar, where it is expected to remain until February 2007. The PRT brings together elements from the Canadian Forces (CF), Foreign Affairs Canada (FAC), the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) in an integrated Canadian effort, also known as the All of Government approach.
Under Operation ARCHER, the Canadian contribution to OEF, the PRT reinforces the authority of the Afghan government in Kandahar Province, assisting in the stabilization and development of the region. It monitors security, promotes Afghan government policies and priorities with local authorities, and facilitates security sector reforms.
The PRT is located in Kandahar City with some of its support elements operating from the Kandahar Airfield (KAF). The PRT comprises approximately 200 soldiers, drawn largely from Land Forces Western Area (LFWA) and 1 Canadian Mechanized Brigade Group (1 CMBG) based in Edmonton, Alta. The PRT includes:
*
An infantry company from 1st Battalion Princess Patricia’s Canadian Light Infantry (1 PPCLI);
*
An engineer squadron from 1 Combat Engineer Regiment (1 CER);
*
A combat service support company from 1 Service Battalion (1 Svc Bn) and 1 General Support Battalion (1 GS Bn);
*
Health and medical support from 1 Field Ambulance (1 Fd Amb); and
*
Other specialized elements from various CF units across Canada.
Chronology of Canadian participation in the campaign against terrorism
Since October 2001, Canada has deployed over 20 warships and more than 14,000 sailors, soldiers and air force personnel in the international campaign against terrorism.
Operation APOLLO
After the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 in New York and Washington, Canada made a significant military commitment to the campaign against terrorism to demonstrate solidarity with our allies and our resolve to improve international security.
On October 8, 2001, the then Minister of National Defence Art Eggleton announced the departure of the first CF units to join the international campaign against terrorism. A Naval Task Group of four ships deployed to the Persian (Arabian) Gulf under Operation APOLLO was deployed.
In February 2002, the 3 PPCLI Battle Group commanded by then Lieutenant-Colonel Pat Stogran deployed to Kandahar for a six-month tour of duty that included tasks ranging from airfield security to combat. This mission received airlift support from a Tactical Airlift Detachment, later named the Theatre Support Element (TSE), which was located in Southwest Asia.
For more information on Operation APOLLO visit http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/operations/Apollo/index_e.htm.
Operation ALTAIR
Operation ALTAIR, which began in October 2003, consisted of warships deployed individually to operate with U.S. carrier strike groups in the Persian (Arabian) Gulf region. The Halifax-class patrol frigate Her Majesty’s Canadian Ship (HMCS) Toronto deployed with the USS George Washington Carrier Strike Group from January to July 2004. In April 2005, HMCS Winnipeg deployed for six months with the 5th Fleet of the United States Navy.
For more information on Operation ALTAIR visit http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/operations/altair/index_e.asp
Operation ATHENA
The CF returned to the effort to stabilize and reconstruct Afghanistan in August 2003 under Operation ATHENA, the deployment of a large contingent in Kabul to serve with the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF). Of note, from February to August 2004, then Lieutenant-General Rick Hillier commanded ISAF, which comprised at that point some 6,500 troops from 35 countries.
Over five successive six-month rotations since August 2003, Canadian soldiers deployed on Operation ATHENA routinely conducting foot patrols and surveillance missions in the ISAF area of responsibility and co-operated with other ISAF contingents in a variety of missions and projects. Through these activities, the Canadian contingent provided ISAF with key military presence and capability, intelligence, situational awareness, and helped facilitate rebuilding the democratic process for the Afghan National Assembly and Provincial Council elections.
On October 18, 2005, Operation ATHENA ended with the withdrawal of the Canadian reconnaissance squadron from ISAF, and the end of five deployments of CF personnel to the Kabul area since August 2003, when the Canadian government first made a commitment to help the international community maintain a safe and secure environment in and around Kabul.
On November 29, 2005, the last Canadian material assets were moved and shipped out to Kandahar, and Camp Julien was officially handed over to the Afghan Ministry of Defence.
Conclusion
In its participation in ISAF and Operation ENDURING FREEDOM, Canada’s overarching goal in Afghanistan is to prevent it from relapsing into a failed state that gives terrorist and terrorist organizations a safe haven.
Canadian efforts in Afghanistan have contributed significantly to the overall consolidation of peace and the improvement of human security in the region. The next phase of Canadian operations in Afghanistan will continue to help improve the quality of life for the Afghan people, and to ensure that the progress made is sustainable.
While Canada remains committed to the rebuilding of democracy in Afghanistan, there are significant risks involved in these types of operations, but the Canadian Forces remain one of the best trained, and most experienced and professional militaries in the world. The men and women of the CF are extremely brave, well led, well equipped, and fully prepared for the ongoing mission in Afghanistan.
–30–
This website is maintained by
Assistant Deputy Minister (Public Affairs) / ADM (PA)
What is the purpose of 9:50 AM posting. Would you care to explain.
"In 2004, the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC), a government-funded agency, conducted a nationwide survey of the Afghan people. Their results were published in a report entitled “A Call for Justice,” which showed that a majority of Afghans consider themselves victims of war, whether at the hands of the Mujahadeen, the Taliban, and/or the Soviet Union, and want an end to war, and justice for war crimes. Western governments like Canada could provide constructive help to the Afghan people to bring war criminals and their benefactors to justice.
The trouble is that the main benefactors are the US and its allies, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, who provided weapons, training, and funding for the war criminals.
Another strong desire among Afghans is nation-wide disarmament. In 2004, Human Rights Research and Advocacy Consortium (HRRAC), a coalition of humanitarian organizations, published a report based on another survey called “Take the Guns Away.” When asked what was the most important thing to do to improve security in Afghanistan, 65 percent of Afghans surveyed said disarmament. This number was much higher – 87 percent – in the province of Mazar-e-Sharif where US-backed warlords often clashed. Western nations could fully fund disarmament projects in Afghanistan. Instead, highly selective and politicized disarmament has taken place, leaving intact most of the privately-run warlord militias. Full disarmament would run counter to the US practice of condoning arms proliferation at best, and at worst, actually engaging in arms proliferation.
The most frequently mentioned human rights desired by respondents of the HRRAC survey included “ethnic, religious and gender equality; political rights such as the right to participate in free and fair elections; and the right to education.” Even though the Bush administration often cites that millions of Afghan girls are now attending school, there are very few schools in rural areas, and those that are in operation have curriculums limited to Islamic studies, reminiscent of Taliban-era education for boys. RAWA, the Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan, has been fighting for women’s rights for decades. Their schools, which teach a balanced curriculum based on gender, ethnic and religious tolerance, and women’s rights, are facing closure due to lack of funds. Western nations could greatly benefit Afghanistan by fully funding schools designed and led by Afghan women. To date, only a small fraction of aid to Afghanistan goes toward education."
"Why is Canada involved?
CANADA’S NEW FOREIGN policy doctrine of “responsibility to protect” the people of “failed states” misplaces the emphasis. The doctrine suggests that the reasons for Canada’s intervention are to be found in the countries in which we intervene: Afghanistan suffered from “misrule,” Haiti is a “failed state.” The true reasons for Canada’s interventions, rather, is to be found in the relationship between Canada and the United States.
During the US invasion and occupation of Vietnam, Canadian corporations profited by supplying the American military, and Canadian diplomats ran interference for the US in the “International Control Commission,” a “neutral” body that was supposed to monitor the conflict between the US and the Vietnamese. Then, as now, Canada’s image as more multilateral, less militaristic and imperialistic, was a useful counterpoint to the aggressive posture of the US. Canada could use its good reputation to play the “good cop” to the US “bad cop,” thus providing tactical support in accomplishing US foreign policy goals.
The same relationship holds today. Canada presents itself as a friend to those countries it is intervening in, with a “3-D approach” (defence, diplomacy, and development assistance) as an option over the more unilateral and aggressive approach of the US. If, as a consequence, Canadian corporations like Bell win a one billion dollar contract with the US military to supply helicopters, or CAE wins a $20 million contract to supply combat simulation technology, perhaps that is just another “dimension” to be added to the 3-D approach.
Because the real reasons for intervention are not genuine help and solidarity, Canada’s deployment in Afghanistan has little relationship to what the people of that country actually need. Instead, under the guise of helping Afghanistan, Canada is actually providing a kind face to US contravention of the laws of war. In spite of mountains of evidence exposing US torture and murder of detainees in Iraq and Afghanistan (never mind Canada’s own experience with its troops torturing a youth to death in Somalia in the 1990s), Canadian troops are capturing people and handing them over to the US in Afghanistan. The US, the “detainee authority” in Afghanistan, defines people it captures as “unlawful combatants” and denies them Geneva Convention protections. If pronouncements by Rumsfeld or Bush about “hating our freedom” found their Canadian echo in Hillier and Leslie, US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales’s comment about the Geneva Conventions being “quaint” found its Canadian echo in Brigadier General Mike Ward, who in September 2005 talked to the Canadian Press about how Canadian forces have killed and captured Afghanis in coordination with the US. On the US record of torture of detainees and the use of the “unlawful combatant” label to justify contravening the Geneva Conventions, Ward said, “It’s the fact of the treatment that we specifically get into detail about, not whether in fact their status is identified as ‘prisoner of war’ or ‘unlawful combatant.’”
Where the US military leads in the “war on terror,” Canada follows. The Canadian engagement in Afghanistan enables Canada to be a useful tool of American imperialism, a junior member of the “winning team.” The price of accommodation with empire is high for all involved. Those whose sovereignty is violated get the worst of it, facing hunger, disease, bombs, torture, and death. But for the accomplices, there is a steady diet of fear and racism, as well as the erosion of democracy, ethics, and even basic logic. That Canada is experiencing such erosion is evidenced by Major General Leslie being able to hold up a claim that killing young men overseas is worth dying for. "
The comments are interesting...but how about some brevity folks. That's a LOT of reading which looks like a lot of cut and paste. A link for more info, maybe? Just a thought.
Listen folks, maybe our Troops shouldn't be there, maybe they should, but for gods' sake, suport our Troops who are in harms way, give them our utmost support until they are all safely home...
how by sending a tim coffee
but really the best way to support them is to rally after our stupid government to bring them back home it not our war
ah yes Charles i see that you did have the guts to print it
it gives you an a+ over Irving and rogers
"ON JULY 11, 2005, WITH great nuance and tact, Canada’s Chief of Defence Staff General Hillier described the forces arrayed against the NATO mission in Afghanistan: “These are detestable murderers and scumbags, I’ll tell you that right up front. They detest our freedoms, they detest our society, they detest our liberties.”
This was not Canadian officialdom’s typical line on operations abroad. Canada’s Haiti mission, for example, is framed in terms of “helping” Haitians with democracy. Although the Prime Minister’s Special Advisor on Haiti, Denis Coderre, occasionally uses violent language about “terrorists” (following the normal practice of presenting such labels without evidence) to describe Haiti’s ousted Lavalas government, for the most part Canada’s foreign policy is presented to the public as “peacekeeping,” helping those “failed states” to build “capacity.” Canadian military operations are likewise presented as somehow peaceable.
Hillier was explicitly trying to dispel this image, and not merely with the tactics of demonization (“detestable scumbags”), fear and racism (“they detest our freedoms”), and repetition (“they detest our liberties”). Hillier also wanted to dispel perceptions of the Canadian military as a peaceable, humanitarian force in world affairs: “We are the Canadian Forces, and our job is to be able to kill people.”
Hillier continued the fear campaign: “Osama bin Laden, some time ago, indicated Canada was a target,” he said on Canadian TV. “As a responsible citizen of the world, we have been involved in the campaign against terrorism, and, of course, we try to bring stability to places that are unstable and therefore have acted as hotbeds for supporting terrorism. All that, I think, does make us a target.”
To use military language, Hillier created an “opening” that Major General Andrew Leslie exploited at a conference in August called “Handcuffs and Hand Grenades.” “Afghanistan is a 20-year venture,” he said, but “there are things worth fighting for. There are things worth dying for. There are things worth killing for.” Explaining why Canada had to be in Afghanistan for 20 years, Leslie said it was because “every time you kill an angry young man overseas, you’re creating 15 more who will come after you.”
It doesn’t take a military genius to recognize that Hillier and Leslie are making self-contradictory statements. If every time Canada kills someone overseas it’s creating 15 “angry young men,” does that make those 15 people “detestable scumbags?” If killing is so incredibly counterproductive, does it make sense to proudly announce that “our job is to be able to kill people?” And if every killing of these “detestable scumbags” creates 15 more enemies, should that really be considered a goal “worth killing for?”
Hillier and Leslie’s comments can be understood as media operations intended to legitimize a more aggressive military role for Canada in the world. That their speeches sound like warmed-over propaganda scripts of American neoconservatives should not be surprising, since the US is the only possible contemporary model Canada could have for aggressive militarism. But the comments by the generals are more aggressive than Canada’s official foreign policy doctrine. "
Canada should get out of Afghanistan and not let more of its soldiers get killed. Also if generals say that if we kill one young man 15 take their place then what did we achieve.
Canada is considered a peaceful country compared to sabre rattling cowboy Bush. We must remain a peaceful country. Being in Afghanistan in active war is wrong. Afghanis never attacked Canada and never will.
Explaining why Canada had to be in Afghanistan for 20 years, Leslie said it was because “every time you kill an angry young man overseas, you’re creating 15 more who will come after you.”
then stop killing them and bring our troops back home with their families ......why make orphans for the profit of our government
This was about a war on terrorism, not a war against the Afghani people so in that regard it is our war too. The Taliban were harbouring terrorists. Obviously the war has worked in that regards. # of terrorist attacks on U.S. soil since 9/11 - zero. Canada fotunately has still not been attacked even though Osama himself named us as a target. In fact we're the only one of his named targets not to be attacked. Mike will get on me for this for repetition but it bears repeating in this forum since so few agree. Our soldiers are doing a noble thing.
There is no proof Afghanistan is or was harbouring terrorists. We KNOW the terrorists were trained in SAUDI ARABIA, and had american citizenship. So we should be attacking Saudi Arabia and the US.
As it stands, there is absolutely no way to distinguish between terrorists who may want to bomb other countries, and those who are fighting to get a foreign army out of their country. Say what you want, if Russia dropped bombs on Canada, then sent in the military 'for our own good' because we were a 'failed state', I'd be taking up arms. The russians would call me a 'terrorist', but so what? One sides terrorist is the other sides freedom fighter.
Although Spinks thinks if he repeats it often enough it will make up for having few justifications, we can note that he's right on schedule with his "In fact we're the only one of his named targets not to be attacked."-that comment is currently being thrown around all the anti-anti war blogs.
Canada WAS also the only country that was reluctant to get involved in the war on terror. Other countries, once attacked, got out of america's war and haven't been attacked since.
We are in their country as occupiers so the sad reality is that they are perfectly justified in setting off bombs in Canada. Isn't THAT good news!
It's obvious there is one country interested in world domination, and it isn't a middle eastern one. Charles, welcome to the real 'new germany':
"New Plans Foresee Fighting Terrorism Beyond War Zones
Pentagon to Rely on Special Operations
By Ann Scott Tyson Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, April 23, 2006; Page A01
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has approved the military's most ambitious plan yet to fight terrorism around the world and retaliate more rapidly and decisively in the case of another major terrorist attack on the United States, according to defense officials.
The long-awaited campaign plan for the global war on terrorism, as well as two subordinate plans also approved within the past month by Rumsfeld, are considered the Pentagon's highest priority, according to officials familiar with the three documents who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak about them publicly.
Details of the plans are secret, but in general they envision a significantly expanded role for the military -- and, in particular, a growing force of elite Special Operations troops -- in continuous operations to combat terrorism outside of war zones such as Iraq and Afghanistan. Developed over about three years by the Special Operations Command (SOCOM) in Tampa, the plans reflect a beefing up of the Pentagon's involvement in domains traditionally handled by the Central Intelligence Agency and the State Department.
For example, SOCOM has dispatched small teams of Army Green Berets and other Special Operations troops to U.S. embassies in about 20 countries in the Middle East, Asia, Africa and Latin America, where they do operational planning and intelligence gathering to enhance the ability to conduct military operations where the United States is not at war.
And in a subtle but important shift contained in a classified order last year, the Pentagon gained the leeway to inform -- rather than gain the approval of -- the U.S. ambassador before conducting military operations in a foreign country, according to several administration officials. "We do not need ambassador-level approval," said one defense official familiar with the order. "
what terrorist the one that bush invented ???
it does not exist
terrorist nowadays is a word taken for granted even a reckless driver is called a terrorist
actually i migfht be called one and so would be charles since we are fighting government and their bullshitters
what terrorist the one that bush invented ???
it does not exist
terrorist nowadays is a word taken for granted even a reckless driver is called a terrorist
actually i migfht be called one and so would be charles since we are fighting government and their bullsh@tters
Post a Comment