Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

U.S. brings Iraq-like surge to Afghan conflict

DOUG SAUNDERS

From Tuesday's Globe and Mail

Latest comment posted at 3:59 PM EDT 30/04/08

3,500 U.S. Marines bring with them new pressures on Canada and its allies to adapt to U.S. tactics and methods ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Expert Eel from OttaPettaOshawawawawa, Canada writes: The Iraq surge worked so well (or at least, Bush has convinced himself) that the strategy has to be duplicated.
  2. Pamela Achurch from Peterborough, On, Canada writes: It appears that there are multiple strategies in Afghanistan with no clear goal. As the American contribution increases, the impact of Canadian/British approaches will most likely diminish leaving a "shoot them all and leave it up to God to decide" approach to solving the problem in Kandahar. This strategy is not working all that well in Iraq and most certainly leads to more distrust and hatred of foreign occupation. One thing was clear in the article. There is no clear stated objective in Afghanistan.
  3. Reg Anderson from Canada writes: Well, Harper did say we wouldn't recognize Canada once he was done with it.
  4. Peter Kells from Bytown, Canada writes: Ah yes......we Canadians must learn to "kick butt" in US style. That should really win the hearts and minds of the Afghans.
  5. M Warren from Ottawa, Canada writes: "In cooperation with the armed forces of South Vietnam, attacks are being launched this week to clean out major enemy sanctuaries on the Cambodian-Vietnam border." - Richard M. Nixon, May 1970

    Haven't we seen this movie someplace before?
  6. Victor Kozen from toronto, Canada writes: Our government is spending billions of Canadian taxpayers' dollars to have our soldiers kill and be killed by Afghans. What was it exactly that Afghanistan ever did to Canada to cause this?
  7. Gerry Pankhurst from westport ontario, Canada writes: The arm chair military strategists, who have never heard a shot fired in anger and cringe at the very thought of it, will now check in to provide their expert views as to how the Afghan situation must be handled from now on.

    It's time for the detainee hoofraw to rear its head again. Gear up Jackie boy and let your Taliban fans loose again. There should be all sort of opportunities in the coming days. Time for you to make your visit to the front lines and exert your influence, first hand. I'm sure they would make you welcome. Poor Coderre. He is left out in the cold since he's been dumped.
  8. Brendan Caron from vancouver, Canada writes: Nice to know that they will be going into the belly of the pig. Making their mistakes there is better than destroying the Canadian integrity and work in Khandahar. The Americans do seer tha it is impossible to use the troops we have there to cover the entire region. This sad state of affairs means that the Taliban/al Qaeds murdering thugs will not be sleeping too well for a while. Pakistan's hesitance at solving the problem will soon be getting refugees back. The resistace to doing the right thing is palpable.
  9. gerhard beck from Canada writes: His first paragraph perfectly describes Gerry Pankhurst.
  10. Nick Wright from Halifax, Canada writes: "It's a good thing they're going to Helmand first," a Canadian official said. "They can do their learning over there, make their mistakes over there."

    Now there's a vote of confidence from the Canadians. I can see all the careful CF goodwill-building with the locals in Kandahar evaporating after the first few weeks of Marines blowing up homes with people in them and tearing up irrigation systems and crops with their armour.

    I wonder what President Karzai thinks. It seems the Marine approach is the direct opposite of what he has been calling for. Clearly the Americans are not listening to him, a fact that will not be lost on the Afghans, who already see him as a puppet.

    Also, the ranks of the insurgency have been hugely increased by people in the poppy-growing industry protecting their livelihood, and poppy growers have supported the insurgency with cash. My guess is that recruitment and funding are going to increase sharply when the Marines start burning farmers' fields.

    The Taliban must be very pleased to see the Americans further undermining President Karzai, alienating the locals, and making the insurgency stronger. But maybe it's all part of a clever strategy (Marine logic: "They are going to increase attacks on all foreign troops, and that's exactly what we want them to do!").

    I imagine the CF commanding officers are not too pleased to have a seven-month spasm of heavy-handed violence undoing all their patient work, but we did ask for "1,000 more troops"; too bad it wasn't someone else who came through.
  11. Steve D from St. John's, Canada writes: Expert Eel from OttaPettaOshawawawawa, Canada writes: "The Iraq surge worked so well (or at least, Bush has convinced himself) that the strategy has to be duplicated."

    Absolutely right. The success of the Iraq surge is undisputed.

    Victor Kozen from toronto, Canada writes: "Our government is spending billions of Canadian taxpayers' dollars to have our soldiers kill and be killed by Afghans. What was it exactly that Afghanistan ever did to Canada to cause this?"

    I'm glad you asked. A healthy curiousity will be useful in your quest to reduce your ignorance. Afghanistan harboured a group that attacked our ally killing many Canadians in the process triggering our obligation under NATO with UN sanction. Tell your friends.
  12. M Warren from Ottawa, Canada writes: A grave mistake. As I said before, this has happened before, in almost exactly the same way. Does nobody remember?

    "In 1970, the US and South Vietnamese armed forces launched heavy military air and ground campaigns against North Vietnamese soldiers inside Cambodia. Their goal was to capture the headquarters of the Vietnamese communist movement, which was based inside Cambodian territory, but which was never found by the invading forces. THE MILITARY OFFENSIVE PUSHED THE NORTH VIETNAMESE SOLDIERS DEEPER INTO CAMBODIAN TERRITORY. By the end of 1973, the total bombs dropped on Cambodia reached 539,129 tons, three times more explosives than were dropped on Japan during World War II (Ablin and Hood 1988:xxvii). While in exile, with the encouragement and support of China and North Vietnam, Sihanouk formed a united front with the Cambodian communists to fight against the United States-backed government in Phnom Penh. These developments created great opportunities for the Khmer Rouge. With support from North Vietnam and China, coupled with anger over US bombardment, and appeals from Sihanouk to join their cause, the Khmer Rouge were able to build their armed forces from around 800 soldiers in 1970 to a well-organized and well-disciplined force of 40,000 soldiers in 1973 (Ablin and Hood 1988:xxvi). By this time the Khmer Rouge controlled most of Cambodian countryside; over the next two years they advanced and finally took control of Phnom Penh on April 17, 1975"

    SOURCE: http://www.seasite.niu.edu/khmer/Ledgerwood/Part1.htm
  13. Winston Churchill from London, Canada writes: Why don't we just co-opt the Taliban, put members of the payroll, declare victory and end the thing? A western style democracy was never possible: a slightly less unfriendly, more attentive islamic republic with the chance of becoming something better was all that was ever available.
  14. Dan Green from Palm Beach Gardens FL, United States writes: Canadians should be very proud of their forces. Canada has also lived up to their Nato membership. With that said, Canada should get out of Afganistan, asap. Those sweethearts they are up against, is not your typical peace keeping mission. These terroist were trained, amongs other things, how best to cut your throat. Unless we all just give up the effort, allowing the Taliban, to run back and forth into Pakistan, is as ill conceived, as the 49th parrell, in Korea was. With our election on the horizon it looks as if we to will leave both Iraq and Afganizstan. Only US special forces and the CIA will remain. Whatever the mission was , right or wrong, did not work.
  15. Ab Irato from Montreal, Canada writes: 3500 marines = 6000 Taleban reinforcements from Paksitan.

    Good luck
  16. Ted Andrews from Canada writes:
    TROOPS OUT NOW!
  17. Andy Garrett: Parry Sound: June 26 to July 13 from West Palm Beach, United States writes: More Taliban soon to be dead. I guess their mothers and families must not miss them otherwise
    they would be begging for peace.
  18. Ab Irato from Montreal, Canada writes: Karzai wants US to stop arresting Taliban suspects: report April 25, 2008 WASHINGTON (AFP) — Afghan President Hamid Karzai urged US forces Saturday to stop arresting suspected Taliban and their sympathizers, arguing that these arrests and past mistreatment were discouraging Taliban from laying down their arms. The New York Times said the Afghan president, in an interview, also criticized the allied conduct of the war and demanded that his government be given the lead in policy decisions. Karzai said the real terrorist threat lay in sanctuaries of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Pakistan. He argued that civilian casualties needed to end completely. "For the success of the world in Afghanistan, it would be better to recognize this inherent character in Afghanistan and work with it and support it," The Times quoted him as saying in the interview. "Eventually, if the world is to succeed in Afghanistan, it will be by building the Afghan state, not by keeping it weak." Karzai, who has been in office six years, is facing re-election next year. With the polls approaching, some diplomats have even expressed dismay that, for lack of an alternative, the country and its donors may face another five years of poor management by Karzai, the paper said. But the Afghan president was quick to reject such criticism, pointing out "immense difficulties" his government had faced, according to The Times. "What is it we have not gone through?" Karzai was quoted as asking. The president also called for greater respect for Afghanistan on the part of its foreign partners. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The best government opium can buy. What's even better is that the Taleban were behind Sunday's assassination attempt.
  19. The Oracle from Caiman Islands, Canada writes: "I know war as few other men now living know it, and nothing to me is more revolting. I have long advocated its complete abolition, as its very destructiveness on both friend and foe has rendered it useless as a method of settling international disputes." - General Douglas Macarthur

    Perhaps the war newbies on this blog could benefit from the wisdom of those have truly experienced war and learned.
  20. The Truth from Regina, Canada writes: Victor Kozen from toronto, Canada writes: Our government is spending billions of Canadian taxpayers' dollars to have our soldiers kill and be killed by Afghans. What was it exactly that Afghanistan ever did to Canada to cause this?
    --------------------------------------------------
    They harbored terrorist training grounds and were a hotbed for Muslim whackjobs. One of them being Osama Bin Laden who, in case you forgot, masterminded the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center. The same World Trade Center attack that killed CANADIAN citizens.

    So you tell me why we shouldn't be over there.
  21. guy tozer from Saskatoon, Canada writes: Do it the Canadian way and have a friend for life: do it the American way and have an enemy for life. The Yanks have been using this tactic since WW 2. That is why the Canadians are so warmly welcomed in Holland, Belgium and Denmark, whereas the Americans are disliked but tolerated. I've experienced this phenomenon there firsthand. It will do nothing to win the people over.
  22. Ed McMan from TORONTO is just so important that it dictates national policy for the rest of Canada, Canada writes: Ted Andrews from Canada writes:
    TROOPS OUT NOW!
    Posted 29/04/08 at 8:35 AM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    HIPPIE PEACENIC'S OUT NOW!
  23. James S from Canada writes: I don't know about you, but the first mental picture that came to my mind when reading this article was the opening scene (Paris) in "Team America: World Police"...
  24. Gerry Pankhurst from westport ontario, Canada writes: gerhard beck: Thanks for the recognition. That was my intention
  25. The Truth from Regina, Canada writes: Ted Andrews from Canada writes:
    TROOPS OUT NOW

    ------------------------------------
    LOSERS WITH NO BACKBONE OUT NOW
  26. St. Anselm from Mexico City, Mexico writes:
    Surge? They haven't even returned to pre-Iraq levels!

    At least we'll get those 'truly intractable dudes', says US Gen McNeil. Dudes? Is he going to hit them with his surfboard?

    According to wikipedia, 'Dude' Dan McNeil opposes ceasefires and economic development programs. Civilian and friendly fire deaths are certain to increase.

    Americanizing the Afghan conflict will ensure the same level of success they've achieved in Iraq. Zero!
  27. Brad Fgroupthinkn from Canada writes: Our Troops are in more danger than ever before now that the US army and the DEA are working the SW of Afganistan.
    NO partisanship when it comes to this Drug War, NeoLibs and NeoCons are on the same page.
    Canada out now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  28. Allan Eizinas from Simcoe, Canada writes: .
    Great!

    The Americans are here to save the day!

    This war will soon be over and "our boys will be home before Christmas".

    Where have we heard that before?
  29. Ed McMan from TORONTO is just so important that it dictates national policy for the rest of Canada, Canada writes: Brad Fgroupthinkn from Canada writes:
    Canada out now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    YELLOW BELLY INVERTIBRATES OUT NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  30. J. Kenneth Yurchuk from Toronto, Canada writes: Ed McMan, so what is your brilliant strategy to win the war in a'stan?
  31. A H from Canada writes: Can our Canadian boys come home now? If Americans want the war we should let them fight for it. Why should we get involved?
  32. UCant Haveitall from Canada writes: This one really brought out the flower-power gang....I love it! Meanwhile TROOPS STAY TIL 2011 NOW!! Aaaaahhhhh - I feel better
  33. Albin Forone from Canada writes: Re PA, "no clear goal" - but there is a clear goal. The US has for some months been in the "botox" phase of the Cheney Administration, the goal of which is to inject as needed to paralyze current policy, wrinkle free, long enough for the policy-makers to exit gracefully, able to plausibly claim that what goes badly wrong when it inevitably does, will do so next year and is not their fault. This also serves to enhance the McCain campaign for the time needed to complete it. The Iraq "surge" has succeeded wonderfully in quieting the election issue. The elephant in the room is the Republican Party mascot.
  34. UCant Haveitall from Canada writes: Gerry Pankhurst from westport ontario, Canada writes: The arm chair military strategists, who have never heard a shot fired in anger and cringe at the very thought of it, will now check in. Actually there are a few of us who attend these blogs AND have served in the Stan AND have been shot at/IEDd. Do not assume that we are all latte sippers from Yonge & Bloor. Been there and got the t-shirt.
  35. UCant Haveitall from Canada writes: and got the Yugoslavia and Haiti t-shirts as well.
  36. Ab Irato from Montreal, Canada writes: The Truth from Regina, Canada writes: Victor Kozen from toronto, Canada writes: Our government is spending billions of Canadian taxpayers' dollars to have our soldiers kill and be killed by Afghans. What was it exactly that Afghanistan ever did to Canada to cause this? -------------------------------------------------- They harbored terrorist training grounds and were a hotbed for Muslim whackjobs. One of them being Osama Bin Laden who, in case you forgot, masterminded the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center. The same World Trade Center attack that killed CANADIAN citizens. So you tell me why we shouldn't be over there. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Because Afghanistan has their own army and own government. It's the same army that was able to defeat the Soviets. If it could do that, it can surely beat the Taleban. There are nutjob Taleban muslims in Pakistan. Why are we there? There are nutjob muslims in Saudi Arabia, home to 15 of the 19 hijackers. Why aren't we there? Iran is apparantly supplying arms to insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan and they are apparantly the biggest threat in the world if you believe your NATO ringleaders. Why aren't we there? Funny how nobody recall that the Taleban offered to turn over Bin Laden to a third country if the US could provide proof of his complicity in the 9/11 bombings. They never did. USAMA BIN LADEN IS WANTED IN CONNECTION WITH THE AUGUST 7, 1998, BOMBINGS OF THE UNITED STATES EMBASSIES IN DAR ES SALAAM, TANZANIA, AND NAIROBI, KENYA. THESE ATTACKS KILLED OVER 200 PEOPLE. IN ADDITION, BIN LADEN IS A SUSPECT IN OTHER TERRORIST ATTACKS THROUGHOUT THE WORLD. That's from the FBI 10 most wanted list. What's notable is the absence of the 9/11 bombings.
  37. juice orange from Canada writes: If the Russian's couldn't do it in the 80's, what makes you think the Americans can? We should have the Taliban help us grow our own opium in Essex County. - Yeah, that was a joke.
  38. Ted Andrews from Canada writes:
    TROOPS OUT NOW!
  39. Ed McMan from TORONTO is just so important that it dictates national policy for the rest of Canada, Canada writes: J. Kenneth Yurchuk from Toronto, Canada writes: Ed McMan, so what is your brilliant strategy to win the war in a'stan?
    Posted 29/04/08 at 10:12 AM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    simple keep cowards and peaceniks like Brad Fgroupthinkn and others form spewing their left wing decent and self prophesising defeat away from our hard working troops.
    How about getting behind them and actually adding some positive momentum behind the effort rather than criticising the campaign every step of the way.
    How about supporting the government to enable them to put the proper support behind our forces instead of defending the enemy at every turn.

    this would be a good start.
  40. Ed McMan from TORONTO is just so important that it dictates national policy for the rest of Canada, Canada writes: Ted Andrews from Canada writes:
    TROOPS OUT NOW!
    Posted 29/04/08 at 8:35 AM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    HIPPIE PEACENIC'S OUT NOW
    LOSERS WITH NO BACKBONE OUT NOW
  41. Richard Soley from writes: It would appear that the Globe and Mail's reporter Doug Saunders has an anti American bias with alligations to "Charging" let's remember that the American forces are there to support NATO and this operation has to do with helping both NATO and defusing the situation along a dangerous border with Pakistan. SHould any of the armchair generals forget Pakistan is very unstable and is the possessor of nuclear weapons, a potential world endangering situation. If the extremist factions were to get control of WMD they would certainly use them. I suggest that we not be quick to judge as Canada is also a target of these individuals. Support our troops and support our friends in these dangerous operations.
  42. LJ Brody from Canada writes: The last line in the article should have been its headline:

    "It's a good thing they're going to Helmand first," a Canadian official said. "They can do their learning over there, make their mistakes over there."

    Too funny...

    What is next, emulating the winning strategies of the Israelis?

    I recommend we let the Yanks 'Americanize' things by leaving only Americans there to play 'mini-thrust' by themselves

    Troops out now!
  43. William Ross from Victoria BC, Canada writes: Excellent news : and as well the last few days there have been scores of Taliban sent to paradise prematurely which is always good news and I for one am looking forward to a lot more good news in the future!
  44. M Warren from Ottawa, Canada writes: I'm not opposed to the war, I'm opposed to the strategy. We cannot continue to use the same European/North American-style models that failed in Cambodia from 1970-1975.

    HOW LONG ARE WE, NATO, AND THE U.S. GOING TO CONCENTRATE OUR EFFORTS ON HOLDING ROADS AND CITIES???

    If the chickenhawks here think that spending tons of money on armor and defensive fortifications is the way to WIN, they ought to get their heads examined. The ONLY successful counter-insurgencies with western involvement was the Malaya Emergency of the 1950's, and only because the Brits did NOT create highly visible targets for their enemy to exploit.

  45. Cowtown boy from Calgary, Canada writes: Your a funny guy Ed McMan. You have the IQ of a houseplant, but your a funny guy.
  46. My Humble Opinion from Canada writes: just what the world needs...more americans with guns.
  47. J. Kenneth Yurchuk from Toronto, Canada writes: Ed McMan writes: simple keep cowards and peaceniks like Brad Fgroupthinkn and others form spewing their left wing decent and self prophesising defeat away from our hard working troops.
    How about getting behind them and actually adding some positive momentum behind the effort rather than criticising the campaign every step of the way.
    How about supporting the government to enable them to put the proper support behind our forces instead of defending the enemy at every turn.
    ___________________________________________________________

    So your strategy is that we all put on short skirts, get a couple of pom poms and start cheering like mad: GO troops GO! Sounds like a winner to me Ed!
  48. Ted Andrews from Canada writes:
    TROOPS OUT NOW!
  49. Ed McMan from TORONTO is just so important that it dictates national policy for the rest of Canada, Canada writes: J. Kenneth Yurchuk from Toronto, Canada writes: Ed McMan writes: simple keep cowards and peaceniks like Brad Fgroupthinkn and others form spewing their left wing decent and self prophesising defeat away from our hard working troops.
    How about getting behind them and actually adding some positive momentum behind the effort rather than criticising the campaign every step of the way.
    How about supporting the government to enable them to put the proper support behind our forces instead of defending the enemy at every turn.
    ___________________________________________________________

    So your strategy is that we all put on short skirts, get a couple of pom poms and start cheering like mad: GO troops GO! Sounds like a winner to me Ed!
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Thats right! then after I would put you back on the corner where you belong
    You can service our troops when they get back Miss thing!
  50. Ed McMan from TORONTO is just so important that it dictates national policy for the rest of Canada, Canada writes: Ted Andrews from Canada writes:
    TROOPS OUT NOW!

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    HIPPIE PEACENIC'S OUT NOW
    LOSERS WITH NO BACKBONE OUT NOW
  51. Udom Thongpai from Victoria, Canada writes: Forget about the Manley Report, reconstruction, schools for little girls, etc. It's all killing now... Pakistan's new government has surrendered control of the border regions to the Taliban, ensuring that the war will go on forever, and there's nothing we can do about it.... "The marines last night planned to take over an abandoned airfield built in the barren south of Helmand." There is still a good chance that the US will conduct a punitive airwar against Iran in September or October. (This would be done to boost McCain's chances in the November election) The airbase in Helmand would be very useful in launching special forces raids against Iranian targets, and in defending against Iranian counter strikes. Kandahar airfield is more suited to launching strike aircraft, and would be an important target for Iranian missiles. This would put Canadians on the front lines of a US Iranian war. There are 6 French Mirage fighters on Kandahar airbase too, I believe. One big question is, if Iranian missiles hit Nato forces other than american, will Nato join the war? And if not, what will this mean for Nato's future?
  52. J. Kenneth Yurchuk from Toronto, Canada writes: Well Ed, You got the Cheers down pat. I think the troops would like you much better than me though.
  53. Richard Roskell from Canada writes: Is there a cognitively functional human being on the planet who doubts that the war in Afghanistan is going to end badly?
  54. The Work Farce from Canada writes: Americanization of Kanadahar? By Jove, I won't hear of it. That's not quite cricket. Let them practice their huffing and puffing and blowing their house down in Hellmand. That's where the real scoundrels are - insurgents, criminals, terrorists, and "ordinary people". They especially need to concentrate air strikes to clear out the real villains infiltrating from Pakistan - those nefarious intractable "ordinary people". By Jove, the Yanks have got it, eh wot? And give those Canadian troops what for, eh? Six month tours? Why, by Jove, that's just enough time for a cultural exchange program. Increase the military tour time to a sensible 15 months, I say. That'll teach those Canucks how to make war.
  55. capt. peachfuzz from Canada writes: Ok,firstly, to ED McMan,while I do support our troops,just because one wishes our troops withdrawn does not make one a coward,peacenik,hippy,or loser. I believe that our troops should remain if: 1: they are actually achieving positive results,and not just being used as cannon fodder(Americanization),and 2: that the Afghan people want us to stay. If at least one of those conditions are not met,then I believe that tactical withdrawal,or humanitarian withdrawal makes us an honourable people that respect the wishes of the people we are supposed to be helping,and we understand that withdrawal from a quagmire makes perfect military sense. Remember a fellow named Adolf.
  56. UCant Haveitall from Canada writes: SEND TED TO THE STAN NOW!!
  57. UCant Haveitall from Canada writes: SEND RICHARD TO THE STAN NOW!!
  58. UCant Haveitall from Canada writes: The CF soldiers accomplish more in 6 months than many other nations do in their longer tours of duty. Remember quality outweighs quantity. SENS TED TO THE STAN NOW (WITH RICHARD Rascal)
  59. J. Kenneth Yurchuk from Toronto, Canada writes: Wow! I see that Ed has recruited two more cheerleaders. Can you guys do a pyramid. (Ucan't, no fair peeking up Ed's Skirt!) All together now.... GO TROOPS GO! What a great winning strategy! Really great for democracy and freedom of speech in Canada too! Way to go Guys! Sis Boom Bah!!!!!
  60. Catherine Medernach from Winnipeg, Canada writes: The influx of US troops in the Helmand region along the border with Pakistan will help clear out the insurgents that have been free to move about for quite a while. But it makes me laugh to suggest that we should adopt the US approach. While our soldiers assist with some engineering tasks such as building roads and bridges, the main idea is to have Afghans employed rebuilding their own country. Our troops provide protection in order to facilitate that process. At the same time I have often thought longer deployments would make sense. Just as people are getting to know the locals and establish trust they are pulled out and the next group has to start all over again. It is often during these transitions that our troops end up more at risk. From what I understand from speaking with someone who served in Afghanistan, there is some resistance among the decision makers in DND to lengthening the deployment. This spring NATO command in Kandahar is to pass to a Canadian commander - Brig.-Gen. Denis Thompson will lead Joint Task Force Afghanistan after a handover ceremony in May. Other countries have already committed troops under Canadian leadership in the province - Nepalese Gurkhas, Portuguese soldiers, and a British parachute regiment. Hopefully having the problem of people being able to freely cross the border dealt with will make their job a little easier. Support our troops - plan a local event to coincide with National Red Friday event on Saturday May 31st. It is being held on the Saturday because more people can participate and the procession of the memorial drive could not take place on a week day for traffic and safety reasons.
  61. The Truth from Regina, Canada writes: J. Kenneth Yurchuk from Toronto, Canada writes: Wow! I see that Ed has recruited two more cheerleaders. Can you guys do a pyramid. (Ucan't, no fair peeking up Ed's Skirt!) All together now.... GO TROOPS GO! What a great winning strategy! Really great for democracy and freedom of speech in Canada too! Way to go Guys! Sis Boom Bah!!!!!
    ------------------------------------------------
    You might not support the mission but the least you can do is stand up for the troops and stand up to losers trying to discredit these brave men and women who are over there doing their job. If you want to call it cheerleading then I'm guilty. The last thing I'm going to do is allow people to try and discredit the troops' hard work and sacrifice.
    I support our troops, how about you????
  62. UCant Haveitall from Canada writes: Well said The Truth from Regina. Its easy to get drawn into tossing muck at each other, and it accomplishes nothing. I feel sorry for those who cannot see the good that Canada is doing in A-stan. There is plenty to be proud of. The CF, CIDA, et al do amazing well with far less resources than other NATO nations. People really should be proud.
  63. Richard Roskell from Canada writes: Canada: our presence in Afghanistan creates a brutal conflict, just as the American presence in Iraq creates a brutal conflict there. All the good intentions in the world will not change that reality.

    It WILL end badly.
  64. Ken DeLuca from Arnprior, Canada writes: I've heard Brits say that in WWII the yanks had great weaponry anbd fire power and lousy soldiering and this led the US to have the worst 'friendly fire' record.

    Add to that an attitude that all the natives are potentially the enemy and you have a disaster in the making. Someone shoulds end the Americans a copy of the Manley Report, Janice Stein's The Unexpected war and Gwynne Dyer's The Mess They Made. Also try Jimmy Carter's Palestine Peace Not Apartheid. And for good measure the 800 page tome, Robert Fisk's The Great War for Civilization. Also the first chapter of the late Benazir Bhutto's book is insightful.

    None of the above reading will make decisions about war and peace in Afghanistan and the struggle against terrorist factions any the easier. But it does shed light.
  65. UCant Haveitall from Canada writes: Ken - you say "None of the above reading will make decisions about war and peace in Afghanistan and the struggle against terrorist factions any the easier. But it does shed light. WHAT - most of the above does nothing but cloud the issues and cast poo on the good work done by our nation by a much of near-sighted diplo-generals afraid of shadows and the "undefeatable taliban". Pile of baloney - Astan has improved by leaps and bounds. Yet they all race towards the bogeyman.
  66. J Lee from Canada writes: I see that many posters here claim that our participation in the Afghan civil war (Kharzi vs Taliban) is somehow related to the 9/11 attacks in New York. Yet no one claims that the Taliban had anything directly to do with the 9/11 attack. Indirectly yes, if you link the quasi permission/acceptance the Taliban gave for Al Queda bases in Afghanistan. Well, both the Taliban and Al Queda have certainly been punished along with every other living being in the country. I am sure that everyone understands that attacking the US is not such a good thing. I would suspect as a result that the Taliban are not too keen on allowing Osama to reestablish his training bases. So now that we have punished the terrorists and ensured that Afghanistan won't be used as a training ground again all the claims related to 9/11 have been settled. War over, medals for all the generals.
  67. UCant Haveitall from Canada writes: J Lee - what a version of history you paint...
  68. Ted Andrews from Canada writes:
    TROOPS OUT NOW!
  69. Sam Patel from Vancouver, Canada writes: J Lee from Canada writes

    I think you are forgetting that the Taliban also refused to hand Al Queda members over, or allow in US investigators to pursue and capture Bin Laden. They knew their refusal would lead to war. Plus....the Taliban were engaged in a war with the Northern Alliance and only controlled about 75-85% of the country so its not like they were at peace prior to the NATO and Northern Alliance back offensive. Plus the Taliban was hardly a responsible government concerned with the welfare or betterment of its citizens. The Taliban were inept and brutal, placing illiterate peasant preachers in charge of sanitaion and hygeine programs lead to rapid increase in infant mortatlity under their rule, and a further lowering of life expectancy.
  70. Sam Patel from Vancouver, Canada writes: Ted Andrews from Canada

    And what happens to afghanistan when out troops pull out? What if there is a humanitarian disater. Do we send them back? What happens it the Taliban sweep back into power after we leave and begin digging up roads, demolishing hospitals and executing thousands of dissidents and non-pushtun minorities like the last tiem they seized power? What then?

    Let me guess...then you'll protest Canada's lack of compassion to intervene.
  71. Byron Rottweiler from Canada writes: Two US strategies which are being promoted are 'lengthier deployments for soldiers, harder-line opium-poppy-eradication strategies'

    Lengthy deployments are already hurting the US military - Canada should avoid this mistake.

    Poppy eradication? An even worse strategy. Since Afghanistan is a narco-state, it will drive farmers into the insurgency, where they will be killed by the occupying forces.
    Killing the people we purport to help is worse than doing nothing.

    To those who support our involvement NO MATTER WHAT - surely you must realize that an incompetent strategy is worse than pulling out - it will do more harm than good.
  72. Byron Rottweiler from Canada writes: Israeli tank shell kills mother, 4 children in Gaza

    In keeping with the incessant pro-Israel propaganda effort, no comments are allowed.

    And on it goes.

    Question: how many Israeli children and women have been killed by Palestinians this week? Answer: none.
  73. Trillian Rand from Canada writes: Richard Roskell from Canada asks: Is there a cognitively functional human being on the planet who doubts that the war in Afghanistan is going to end badly?

    Richard: The biggest problem might be that we will never know when the war is over. Our own government has never fixed a condition for victory. It prefers timetables, but we'll leave by such-and-such a date is far from an objective. The latest reason, training the Afghan army, is also without a specific goal other than it be done by the time we leave.

    The Americans seem to have a strong desire to defeat the Taleban militarily. Their determination to remain, not only in Afghanistan but also Iraq, "until the job is done" might earn them admiration in some quarters, but we all know this is bluster and not written in stone.

    So what would signal the end of the war? The elimination of anyone espousing Taleban ideals? The elimination of anyone supporting the Taleban? A week without a suicide bomber? An announcement from President Bush that victory has been achieved? Every Afghan girl in school? An end to the drug trade and all corrupt officials in jail?

    No, I think we will see a withering away of interest by even the most ardent supporters of our adventure. NATO nations will slowly withdraw, the US will eventually find it cannot afford to maintain their presence and leave, and everyone will say it's too bad, but at least we gave it a try.

    And the Afghan people will be left to make their own peace, to have their own central government or not, to allow the Taleban into government or not. And we will turn our interest to something else, "If only . . . " resounding in our thoughts.
  74. pik scott from Canada writes: juice orange from Canada writes: If the Russian's couldn't do it in the 80's, what makes you think the Americans can? We should have the Taliban help us grow our own opium in Essex County. - Yeah, that was a joke. _____________________________________ Why do the uninformed bring up the soviets,it is apple and oranges.
  75. Richard Roskell from Canada writes: J Lee, in a recent interview with the Director of the FBI, he was asked why there's no warrant out for the arrest of Osama bin Laden for the attack on the World Trade Center. His answer? 'There's no warrant for bin Laden's arrest because we have no evidence linking him to the attack on 9/11.'

    Yes, I'd say that enough innocent people have been punished for the events of that day.
  76. The Central Screwtinizer from Ottawa, Canada writes: Jesus H...Allah Mohammed is going to be running out of virgins fairly quickly I'm thinkin...here come the Marines...back in yer holes! More snipers, more tanks, more sharpshooters, more A-10 Thunderbolts 'Warthogs', more Cobras, more AH-64 Apaches, more artillery, more firepower...more dead Talibaners and al-Qaida guaranteed! Allah akbar!
  77. J Lee from Canada writes: Sam Patel - So how long do we punish the Taliban? It is now coming on 7 years. Another 7 years if the crops are plentiful or another 7 years if it's drought? And as for humanitarian disasters it may very well be one and it might not either. But surely we as Canadians will want to help at least as much as we have in Darfur, Gaza, East Timor, Rawanda, Somalia, Congo, Burma, North Korea...
  78. Udom Thongpai from Victoria, Canada writes: Sam Patel, Actually, the Taliban offered to hand bin Laden over to a third party state for trial, but not to the US. You say they knew their refusal would lead to war. Nothing.... Nothing would have stopped the US from invading.

    But all that was seven years ago. None of what happened back then has any connection to what is happening now.

    "And what happens to Afghanistan when our troops pull out?" They make a peace deal with the Taliban giving them limited autonomy in the south... "What if there is a humanitarian disaster" You think war would help?... "What happens if the Taliban sweep back into power after we leave" You give them too much credit. They only gained power in the first place because they had popular support. They don't have that now... "Let me guess...then you'll protest Canada's lack of compassion to intervene." Somalia is in the midst of a humanitarian disaster now, as is Darfur, etc, etc and we ignore them. The list is growing thanks to the food crisis. Why would you think bringing them war shows compassion? Is that the only tool we have?
  79. Byron Rottweiler from Canada writes: A censorship observation:

    China jails Tibet rioters - no comments allowed

    Vietnam breaks up rally at Olympic torch run - no comments allowed

    Israel kills women and children - no comments allowed

    We're a free society here, aren't we? Except when military or commercial interests are involved, that is. Can't criticize China, no sir, that might affect the Olympics and cheap imports. Can't raise uncomfortable questions about Israel's illegal occupation, nuclear weapons, etc... - nope, that's not allowed.

    Enjoy your 'freedoms', just like the Iraqis are now. Checked Iraqi opinion polls lately about the democratic nirvana we brought them? Didn't think so.

    I guess with this much corruption of basic human decency it doesn't matter what we do or think - in Canada today, you can't really vote against government policy anyway - the ruling parties are moving in lock-step to ensure that.
  80. Just In from Canada writes: Was this shift the reason why Rick Hillier retired?
  81. Brendan Caron from vancouver, Canada writes: Anyone who thinks that the Afghans could have defeated the Russians without America are, as we say in Canada, a couple of beers short of a two-four. Just like the Chinese could quell the Tibetans with the passage of time, for the truth of the matter (?) is when it comes to truth, true truth... there is no passage of time. Go troops. Go!
  82. Andrew Way from Sydney, Australia writes: As an ex-Paratrooper (UK) I am appalled at the prospect of our boys having to adopt flawed US tactics. Denying locals an income from poppy crops converts allies to enemies. How long will it be before the western world wakes up? Here's a solution: Buy the opium crops at farmers' prices. In the US, UK, Europe and Canada, provide heroin to addicts at cost plus delivery on the basis that they register for a monitored attempted recovery program. It will kill the illegal opium trade, reduce drug related crimes and bring many adicts in out of the cold to receive potential treatment to get clean. And it will deny the Taliban and Albanka mafia a source of valuable income. No cheaper source of opium / heroin will exist and the locals will support the allies. What's more, we can take our time to convert them to eceomic crops.
  83. Udom Thongpai from Victoria, Canada writes: The US has just sailed a second aircraft carrier, the USS Abraham Lincoln, into the Persian Gulf saying that this is a reminder to Iran. AFP reports that the Pentagon has ordered new options be drawn up for attacking Iran and that the State Department has begun drafting an ultimatum that would tell Iran to stop meddling or else. About a week ago Bush said that Iran was a greater threat than al Qaeda.... We're going into May and the most likely time for an attack on Iran would be October.
  84. L.B. MURRAY from Canada L.B. MURRAY from Canada from Canada writes: L J Brody writes : I recommend we let the Yanks 'Americanize' things by leaving only Americans there to play 'mini-thrust' by themselves

    _____________________________

    Won't happen. The ''surging'' U.S. Marines are going home in October, just in time, one month before the U.S. elections. Meanwhile, U.S. generals and various people in the highest places are recommending that our troops get ''extended tours'' to Afghanistan.

    Oh, well.... at least General Dan McNeill is still talking to the press...He had disappeared from the spotlight after his comment that 400,000 troops were needed to ''win'' in Afghanistan...

    -
  85. Brent Beach from Victoria, Canada writes: You gotta love these guys: "It's a good thing they're going to Helmand first," a Canadian official said. "They can do their learning over there, make their mistakes over there."

    This official and the brigadeer general who thinks the billions we are spending in Afghanistan is money well spent. Gawk!

    What are they putting in the food over there?
  86. Denis Salter from Montreal, Canada writes: A discussion of what the US Marines are doing in Afghanistan, and what they will do over the long haul, needs to be discussed in the context of what their presence will mean to the status and duration of the Canadian mission in Afghanistan. The US is committing itself to staying permanently in Afghanistan, just as it has already committed itself to staying permanently in Iraq. These commitments are part of a larger project to stabilize US power throughout the world. So far, it has built approximately 750 permanent bases; others are being planned; others are being built. The motion passed by Parliament on March 13th to continue our mission in Afghanistan to 2011 has been widely and perhaps willfully misunderstood. It provided the federal government with the opportunity to extend our mission in Afghanistan indefinitely, so that we can maintain our pledge to continue to serve our foremost ally, the US. We Canadians are an inherent part of the US “surge” (another example of Orwellian doublespeak) in Afghanistan. Given that the US forces are much larger than ours, no matter how much our military leaders might protest the way the US military does things, eventually our forces and the US forces will be completely harmonized. This is known as the Americanisation of Canada, a historical project in which both Americans and Canadians are complicit. I ask ahead of time that no one accuse me, in light of these remarks, as being “anti-American.” I am expressing objection to this kind of military hegemony. I also ask that you don’t disparage me as a hippie, or a leftie, or any number of similar insults. I don’t want to be assailed with ad hominem arguments. I don’t think anyone should be treated this way and regret that it has happened in so many of the postings here. I welcome comments disagreeing with my arguments and disputing my factual claims.
  87. L.B. MURRAY from Canada L.B. MURRAY from Canada from Canada writes: Denis Salter from Montreal writes: ''...The motion passed by Parliament on March 13th to continue our mission in Afghanistan to 2011 has been widely and perhaps willfully misunderstood. It provided the federal government with the opportunity to extend our mission in Afghanistan indefinitely, so that we can maintain our pledge to continue to serve our foremost ally, the US. We Canadians are an inherent part of the US “surge” (another example of Orwellian doublespeak) in Afghanistan. Given that the US forces are much larger than ours, no matter how much our military leaders might protest the way the US military does things, eventually our forces and the US forces will be completely harmonized. This is known as the Americanisation of Canada, a historical project in which both Americans and Canadians are complicit. I ask ahead of time that no one accuse me, in light of these remarks, as being “anti-American.” I am expressing objection to this kind of military hegemony....'' _______________________________ Thank you Denis. You've said it all. Don't be surprised if the usual ''paid shills'' and ''attack dogs'' on these conversations go after you, more ferociously than ever. They're all waiting for their ''talking points'' and will probably pounce on you the next time you comment on whatever thread on The Globe and Mail. Thanks again, Denis, and please don't change your moniker. We'll be reading you again, we hope... -
  88. L.B. MURRAY from Canada L.B. MURRAY from Canada from Canada writes: Just In from Canada writes: Was this shift the reason why Rick Hillier retired?
    Posted 29/04/08 at 6:03 PM EDT
    ________________________________

    We'll never know, unless our General Hillier decides one day to write his Memoirs.
    -

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.