The Afghan burden
Come hell or high water, Canada’s mission in Afghanistan should not be extended (NATO Boss Wades Into Canadian Politics With Afghan Plea – front page, Aug. 7). We’ve already sacrificed 127 of our brave soldiers without making any significant change in Afghanistan. In fact, NATO’s presence is indirectly helping the gunrunners and poppy growers. The Taliban are also getting bolder by the day. Enough is enough!
Jalaluddin S. Hussain, Brossard, Que.
............
While I remain a strong supporter of the Afghan mission and believe we should stay the course until Afghans feel secure in their own country, I think NATO’s secretary-general displays an incredible amount of gall to suggest that Canadians, along with American and British troops, carry the load. Canadians continue to die in Kandahar while our “allies” hide out in the relatively quiet northern provinces. Why do we keep getting the sharp end of the stick?
David Snider, Rossland, B.C.
............
Your editorial After 2011, A Lighter Burden (Aug. 7) raises the possibility of a continuing Canadian non-combat presence in Kandahar with “teams focused on local development, and on the training of Afghan soldiers and police.” Perhaps Canada’s air force could play a continuing role. A Canadian air wing has now been established at Kandahar. It has Chinook (transport) and Griffon (escort) helicopters, and unmanned aerial vehicles for surveillance; it also supports supply flights by Hercules and C-17 transport aircraft. Why not keep the wing at Kandahar after 2011 to support our allies?
Mark Collins, Ottawa
The ‘terror’ burden
Re Fighting Words In Washington As Obama Official Declares The ‘War On Terror’ Is Over (front page, Aug. 7). I wasn’t wild about the “war on terror” label, either, but I suspect it’s going to be difficult to get people to fight for Barack Obama’s “broad philosophical approach.”
Irwin Silverman, Toronto
............
Senator Colin Kenny (Moon The Balloon? Or Better Security Soon? – Aug. 7) makes some prescient points for Canada’s participation in the U.S. surveillance web of the Great Lakes. But he undercuts his argument when he questions the “pattern of boats running from Oshawa to Syracuse very early in the morning.” The boats would certainly attract the attention of the American authorities, but it would be the New York State Highway Patrol whose interest would be aroused: Syracuse lies about 50 kilometres south of the Lake Ontario shoreline.
George Werniuk, Toronto
Antiviral sense
Alan Cassels and Arthur Schafer (What Do We Know About The Vaccines’ Safety? – Aug. 6) dismiss the effectiveness of antiviral drugs, while Shelley Scriver (Vaccine Volley – letter, Aug. 7) counters that they reduce illness duration by 1.3 days. Both arguments play down the value of antivirals for individuals prone to becoming critically ill.
Those at greatest risk from pandemic influenza – not for infection, but for serious consequences – are young, healthy adults. Why is the disease hardest on those with relatively strong immune defences? It may be their immune responses go too far. When infected with a virus such as influenza, our bodies produce chemicals called cytokines. Usually, they drive an inflammatory response needed to fight the invader. But, in some cases, this response gets out of control and a destructive “cytokine storm” results. Eventually, multiple organ systems fail and the patient may die.
Chances of a deregulated response happening may be reduced if the amount of virus in the body can be minimized. Such control of viral levels is the goal behind the early use of antiviral drugs. So, for some, the timely use of antiviral drugs may mean much more than a day or two less spent in bed.
Wendy Tamminen, Toronto
Honduran humph
Letter writer Todd Gordon (Honduran Hubbub – Aug. 7) referred to “Canada’s strong investment interests in Honduras, particularly in mining.” While two mines managed by Canadian companies continue to operate in Honduras, all activity to develop or explore for new mines has ceased since the Honduran government suspended all applications for, or transfer of, mineral licences a number of years ago. This suspension is still in place, so “Canada’s strong investment” is actually zero.
Peter Bradshaw, Vancouver
Harmonizing exemptions
Your editorial’s claim that harmonization will provide “billions of dollars in tax savings on machinery, equipment and other expenses” (Sales-Tax Momentum – Aug. 7) overlooks the exemptions that provincial sales taxes already provide for machinery and equipment. The billions saved by business will be on office supplies, construction materials and other inputs currently subject to sales tax in some provinces. While specific tax exemptions for “new investment” make sense, it is doubtful that exempting all business inputs from sales tax is a cost-effective way of promoting investment.
