Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Most Canadians say Afghan mission too costly, poll suggests

MURRAY BREWSTER

THE CANADIAN PRESS

Latest comment posted at 5:07 PM EST 04/09/08

The Canadian Press-Harris Decima survey shows a majority of Canadians believe the country is paying too high a price in blood and treasure for its involvement in Afghanistan ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Bernard Bomers from Canada writes: Enough already. Propping up a narco state to suck up to GW Bush is a waste of lives and money.

    Think of the alternatives.......
  2. Yvonne Wackernagel from Woodville, Canada writes: I found some of the questions 'tricky'. In my opinion I do not think the majority of Canadians are satisfied with the amount of casualties suffered by our country to appease the Americans. Having to carry out the mission (because of pressure from the U.S. for strategic reasons) was bad enough but to extend it by Harper at a critical time for the Liberal opposition was downright fraudulent in my opinion. And I hope he is punished for his sleaze. But, unfortunately, he cannot bring back the lives of our young people. Just think that unless a new Liberal Govt. makes a decision to reverse the extension, we could lose three times the casualities already suffered. Imagine!
  3. Bobby Dy from Canada writes: Meanwhile, the reports are leaking out that NATO could actually lose in Afghanistan.
  4. Building an Ark from Eastern Slopes, Canada writes: Yvonne Wackernagel from Woodville, Canada writes: ... And I hope he is punished for his sleaze. But, unfortunately, he cannot bring back the lives of our young people. Just think that unless a new Liberal Govt. makes a decision to reverse the extension, we could lose three times the casualities already suffered. Imagine!

    Yes Yvonne Imagine girls who can not attend school, who have no choice like you do in your perfect life. Imagine Folks who warlords control imagine how easy life was for you in secondary school. Ask tthe troops who hae been there, ask the troops who say we make a difference every day...never mind - go order your Latte....
  5. R. Carriere from Maritimes, Canada writes:

    ' The results show that the public understands there is a global terrorism threat and it's centred in Afghanistan....'

    Unfortunately, that is clearly an erroneous statement. Global terrorism is NOT centered in Afghanistan-that only happened to be the country that housed Bin Laden (where is he, anyway?) and his training camps before 9/11, and is now occupied.

    Global terrorism is what it is-Global!

    Shut down Afghanistan, and Pakistan's western regions pop up! Shut that down and any one of several Middle Eastern countries come to life. Shut that down, and the north & eastern African countries come to life such as, Algeria, Lybia, Egypt, Sudan, Somalia, Yemen.....see where I am going with this?

    Can anyone truly believe that if we 'win' Afganistan, that global terrorism is over? That if we 'win' Pakistan, that global terrorism is defeated?

    The only way to beat global terrorism, is to address the 'root causes' and 'motivations' that were clearly asked by Lee Hamilton to the expert CIA intelligence during the 9/11 hearings, but were NEVER published.

    Address the Palestinian problem and oppressive ME governments!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1bm2GPoFfg
    .
  6. sue boohoo from Canada writes: Of course bloc quebecois is oppossed-after all they are not Canadian as they like to say, but' quebecoi's. Just wait until trouble returns to their corner--Who will have the Canadian Armed Forces protecting them before any of the Provinces---
  7. Ruth Walker from Edmonton, Canada writes: The cost is too high.
    The payoff is never going to happen.
    Canada is sacrificing lives to prop up a government of thugs, torturers, and big-time criminals, people who are barely distinguishable from the Taliban.
    Meanwhile, our government treats us like mushrooms by keeping us in the dark and feeding us crap.
    Sorry, no little girls are going to school in Afghanistan, and the situation for women is deteriorating.
    Human rights in Afghanistan??? You must be joking.
  8. Anti Fascist from Canada writes:
    The majority also know that it is WRONG.

    The majority also knew it was wrong when it was started.

    Bring the troops home ASAP, no more help to the criminal enterprise of George W Bush.
  9. Is there anybody out there? from Salt Spring Island, Canada writes: This is so much fun let's all vote Conservative again
  10. Anti Fascist from Canada writes:
    I agree with poster above- end the conflict between the zionists and the Palestinians. End the collusion with the oppressive dictators in the ME.

    Also end USA government agencies involvement in narcotics trade.
  11. Is there anybody out there? from Salt Spring Island, Canada writes: Harper is G.W.'s poster boy for unending war.
  12. R. Carriere from Maritimes, Canada writes:

    Yvonne Wackernagel writes: ....In my opinion I do not think the majority of Canadians are satisfied with the amount of casualties suffered by our country to appease the Americans. Having to carry out the mission (because of pressure from the U.S. for strategic reasons) was bad enough but to extend it by Harper at a critical time for the Liberal opposition was downright fraudulent in my opinion. And I hope he is punished for his sleaze.

    Yvonne: I don't know how old you are, but selective memory is also tricky. You know who (LPC) got us in there and who (LPC) could have stopped the extension.

    That said, it is NOT Liberals or Conservatives who are dieing, but precious young CANADIAN folks for the 2000 version of Vietnam-only worse!

    Is the mission honourable? Once upon a time I believed it was-but no more.

    We are fighting for a criminal Afghan government to supposedly rule by democratic process. That will never be the case!

    1 question: How can you have a Minister of Anti-Corruption rule, when he is a concicted felon in the USA having spent almost 4 years in a Nevada prison for heroin dealing?

    Does that make any bloody sense to you? Sacrifice for that?
  13. Building an Ark from Eastern Slopes, Canada writes: Ruth Walker from Edmonton, Canada writes: ...Sorry, no little girls are going to school in Afghanistan, and the situation for women is deteriorating.

    Really Ruth is that a fact? Do you have information from the NGO's no-one else is aware of? Do you have first hand accounts from front-line people who aid, or Soldiers that say otherwise? Or are you making this up???
  14. Lucien Pignon from Quebec city, Canada writes: Costly??? No at all... so far the soldiers were from outsite Quebec. I am ok with it! In the end, the ROC can do whatever it wants when it is time to go to war. Quebec is culture, French, chill.
  15. who's your daddy from Canada writes: R. Carriere

    'The only way to beat global terrorism, is to address the 'root causes' and 'motivations' that were clearly asked by Lee Hamilton to the expert CIA intelligence during the 9/11 hearings, but were NEVER published.'

    You got it right! When Bush was asked why they attacked us on 9/11 his answer was 'they attacked us because of our freedom .'
    The worst thing about this answer was that some of us actually believed him and Harper seems to be one of them.
  16. Theo from Thule, Ontario. from Canada writes: Was it too costly to wage war against a fascist state such as Hitlerite Germany? Yes, the cost was tremendous, but what then, would have been the result if that cost wasn't paid?
    Likewise, the cost to wage the fight against the base,feudalistic Taliban and their primitive followers who's aim is to attack and destroy any modern enlightened civilization, is necessary.
    As it was then, it is so NOW!
    And we all, as a culture should be doubly on guard for those elements in our society who would allow this pestulance to thrive amongst us.
  17. Brenton E. from Canada writes: once upon a time an evil group of men attacked the capital of the western world (new york not washington). This attack murdered men and women, Jew, Muslim , Christian etc.. Our world was outraged and we responded to this proclaimation of war and we defeated the taliban. Then instead of securing the gains the whole thing has gone bad. There was Iraq, there was the pipe line deal from the Caspian to Karachi. There was no way to gage success, only death and destruction. Once again the West is missing a glorious opportunity and once again our young and brave are paying the price.
  18. siren call from Canada writes: Building an Ark from Eastern Slopes,
    Yes Yvonne Imagine girls who can not attend school, who have no choice like you do in your perfect life. Imagine Folks who warlords control imagine how easy life was for you in secondary school.
    ......................

    What's to imagine.

    Your scenario is the status quo that we have been fighting for for 7 years. Karzai's government is full of war lords.

    Hillier set up a propaganda wing in the military and since then, every dead solider has been described as supporting the deployment. Just the law of averages should preclude us from believing that story.
  19. Ann Ig Norant from I want global warming and grow bananas in my backyard, Canada writes: Bobby Dy from Canada writes: Meanwhile, the reports are leaking out that NATO could actually lose in Afghanistan.

    The NATO will lose in Afghanistan It never happened in history before that an occupying force stayed longer than a generation, usually only lot shorter.

    However when a whole nation descends on an area then they were there to stay.
  20. Chairman Meow from Catalina Catamaran, Canada writes: HOW MUCH MORE BLOOD?!?! Do I have to give this history lesson again? Obviously. The Brits tried to get the Afghani people to do things their way in the 19th Century and failed miserably (at least twice). The Soviet Russians tried in the 20th century with the same result. What's different in the 21st century?As long as this keeps happening I am going to pop up with this mini-history lesson.This most recent incident seems to be 'direct fire' instead of an IED.Can you say recoiless rifle?As before, the Afghanis wait for the foreign intruder to finally leave, whilst harrassing them the whole time they're there.I certainly disagree with many aspects of how things are run in Afghanistan, left to their devices but such was the case in the last 2 centuries.How many more for The Highway of Heroes?
  21. Interested Observer from United States writes: 'THEY HATE OUR FREEDOMS' Palin said it again in her speech to the faithful in Denver.

    Newspeak. Orwellian. harper is straight out of 1984 - WAKE UP - we used to detest the 'fictional ORWELLIAN world with the ubiquitous party and slogans for the masses - guess what - NAZI like drones bleeting out the COUNTRY FIRST slogans and ignoring the reality is ALIVE!!

    $200 million PER MONTH - the least BURN RATE amount that has been acknowledged to date - reality may find that number shy by 80 percent.

    The ONLY HOPE for Canadian sovereignity is to exit NATO.
  22. Sammy Whammy from Jail time for Harper! see Crim. Code s. 119, Canada writes: Get us out of Afghanistan NOW.

    We have no proper business there.

    Our efforts will not be rewarded.

    We should never have stuck around after toppling the Taliban government (thanks for screwing us, Rick Hillier!).

    Instead we should have tacked a note to the country with a nice big knife: 'Don't make us come back.'
  23. WO MG from Halifax, Canada writes: People keep bringing up the Afghanistan pipeline in these threads. Could somebody link us some pictures. And if you can't, then what the hell are you people talking about?

    Reality as a way of getting into the tin foil crowd's way.
  24. Archie 1954 from Vancouver, Canada writes: Our activities in Afghanistan are an outrage. they defy rational thought. No-one, not the US, USSR, Britain or anyone else has ever sucessfully invaded and occupied that area. It simply isn't doable. Why are we there? The US is on one of its imperialistic binges and sucked the Liberals in, but our vaunted Conservatives are readily accedeing to more and more death and destruction. Every time they show the latest US travesty as with the recent deaths of 90 villagers including 60 children I cringe and pray that none of our soldiers were doing the killing. WE don't belong there and neither does NATO. In fact we don't even belong in NATO. The EU is sufficiently mature to be able to take care of itself, our membership is an anachronism as is the US membership. Let's mind our own store and let others mind their's
  25. E. Coli from Canada writes: It's hard to win a war against a verb. Since from the very beginning the term 'War on Terror' was doomed to fail simply because the powers that be could not define who the enemy was.

    The word 'Terrorist' is being used so widespread in the US that many loyal Americans are being branded with the same wide brush.

    Looks to me like a war on common sense.
  26. Jack Sprat from Bug Tussle AB, Canada writes: While I'm sipping on my Latte Mr. ARk Builder I couldn't help but think of you mentioning warlords. Do you really think what the West is doing is going to change centuries of evolution. Others have tried and it's always been the same result.

    The fact is that Afghanistan has been ruled by warlords for generations. Unless the west is willing to commit 20 million troups, so we can be everywhere, all the time, life will continue to go on as it has. Since that's not going to happen then it's time to get out and let them run their own affairs.
  27. Yvonne Wackernagel from Woodville, Canada writes: 'Building an Ark from Eastern Slopes, Canada writes: Yvonne Wackernagel from Woodville, Canada writes: ... And I hope he is punished for his sleaze. !
    Yes Yvonne Imagine girls who can not attend school, who have no choice like you do in your perfect life. Imagine Folks who warlords control imagine how easy life was for you in secondary school. Ask tthe troops who hae been there, ask the troops who say we make a difference every day...never mind - go order your Latte.... '
    =================================

    This situation exists in many parts of the world where Canadians could be working to bring about a better world for those citizens. We went into this mission on a lie. You are quite probably a young soldier who with all the others have been brainwashed to fit the occasion. Brotherhood, democracy, etc. etc.. I have a very large military family, I know!
  28. R. Carriere from Maritimes, Canada writes:

    Instead of listening to our MSM spin on everything, I enjoy listening to an actual elelcted Afghan MP...a brave and courageous woman none the less.

    Her name is Malalai Joya. She has been suspended, and had water bottles thrown at her in Parliament and other death and r a p e threats.....

    See what she has to say about the 'elected democratic' Afghanistan govt. and who and what they exactly are:

    http://www.thestar.com/News/article/273564
  29. R. Carriere from Maritimes, Canada writes:
    Is this what you want Canadians to die for? To spend $ 100 MILLION a month?

    Here is part of Afghan MP Malalai Joya speech:

    'Let me list few of the key power-holders of Afghanistan:

    - Karim Khalili, the vice-president, is leader of a pro-Iran party called Wahdat, responsible for killing thousands of innocent people, and named by Human Rights Watch as a war criminal.

    - Ismael Khan, another killer warlord and lackey of the Iranian regime is the minister of water and power.

    - Izzatullah Wasifi, Afghanistan's anti-corruption chief has been a convicted drug trafficker who has spent around 4 years in a Nevada state prison in the US.

    - General Mohammed Daoud, Afghanistan's deputy interior minister in charge of the anti-drug effort, is a former warlord and famous drug-trafficker.

    - Rashid Dostum, the chief of staff of the Afghan army, is a heartless killer and warlord, named by Human Rights Watch as a war criminal.

    - Qasim Fahim, former defense minister and now a Senator and adviser to Mr. Karzai is the most powerful warlord of the Northern Alliance, and accused of war crimes.'

    http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/04/12/468/

    An almost must read!
    .
  30. aging oldtool from Canada writes: Now that US troops are invading Pakistan, perhaps it's a very timely opportunity to reconsider this bad decision.

    As it stands, we are the patsies who pinch hit for others as they head off for greater adventure elsewhere.

    We saw it when the US split from Afghanistan and invaded Iraq, now we are seeing it once more with Pakistan and fully expect it once again when the US opts to run at Iran or will Bush continue his interference in Georgia and get drawn into yet another battlehe can't win?

    Regardless, this is no longer Canada's war, it is not about 'global terrorism', in fact, it's yet another 'root cause' for so much hate and terror directed at the US and subsequenly, it's lackies such as England and Canada.

    When the US begins to acknowlegde it's interference in the middle east and provides an honest answer for why it is so anxious to keep the region unstable, then perhaps the American people will finally rise up and chase the charlotans, thiefs and crooks from Washington.
  31. ryan . from Regina, Canada writes: This board makes me sad. My best friend fought and lost friends there in 2006. My little brother is set to go over in January. They know why we're fighting and volunteered to do what they could for this noble cause. We're not there because of Bush, we're kind of there because of 9/11, but mostly we're there to prevent the conditions that could cause something worse than 9/11. You can kid yourselves all you want about if it isn't in Afghanistan, it would be somewhere else. Pakistan is a concern. But make no mistake about it: being in Afghanistan is the right mission at the right time. Every Canadian soldier knows this. They know that being there now will save more blood down the road. Think of how many Canadians died in WWI. We surely have to be helping ourselves more in Afghanistan per each death than in that war. You arm-chair generals and diplomats have absolutely no strategic sense; your blind hatred of Bush would have you do anything to see the U.S. fail, even if that meant making the world a far more dangerous place. And the thing that I (and many soldiers) find most galling is the fact that all this blood—blood that they willingly put up, knowing the importance of the fight—might be in vain because people who aren’t risking anything and have no more than a glance’s knowledge of the conflict feel that we are sacrificing too much.
  32. garlick toast from Canada writes: Those three dead soldiers were just kids.Put the military command on the front lines and see how fast it ends.Send a couple of arms dealers over to ride around in LAVS.We're sending soldiers who haven't had enough life experience to form a valid opinion about world politics.All they have is their innocence.
  33. Fake Name from Canada writes: 'WO MG from Halifax, Canada writes: People keep bringing up the Afghanistan pipeline in these threads. Could somebody link us some pictures. And if you can't, then what the hell are you people talking about?
    Reality as a way of getting into the tin foil crowd's way. '

    It's not built yet, so you won't find any pictures. But after the NATO defense chieftains denied such plans even existed for the last three years, then Peter McKay trots out this admission that it actually is being planned after all, it becomes a bit hard to take his word that we aren't particularly interested in its strategic importance unless the taliban are immediately attacking it.

    theglobeandmail.com
  34. Fake Name from Canada writes: 'Jack Sprat from Bug Tussle AB, Canada writes: The fact is that Afghanistan has been ruled by warlords for generations. Unless the west is willing to commit 20 million troups, so we can be everywhere, all the time, life will continue to go on as it has. Since that's not going to happen then it's time to get out and let them run their own affairs.'

    I'd amend that to leaving a big f___ing minefield all around their borders, and smashing the heck out of anything flat enough to launch a plane from, to make sure no more insanity gets exported from afghanistan in the future.
  35. Still Learning at 78 from Canada writes: Its about pipelines for big oil. Get out Now we have enough Oil.
  36. scott thomas from Canada writes: 'The results show that the public understands there is a global terrorism threat and it's centred in Afghanistan....' Really? What's Afghanistan done globally? The public understands that this undeclared war is not worth the lives of our troops. Bring them home safe and sound.
  37. Robin and Christine from Tory Hill, Canada writes: Anyone who actually thinks that we could 'win' in Afghanistan is dreaming in technicolour. 150,000 russians couldn't win so how could anyone expect a handful of Canadian KIDS could 'win'??????
    Harper is a lunatic who will keep our CHILDREN in that war forever, remember that when you go to the polls. Harper is nothing but a yankee neocon in an Alberta cowboy outfit.

    Robin
  38. Casual Observer from Ridgetown, Canada writes: Go ahead and call me cold-hearted, but no way one of my sons is going to get killed in a godforsaken backwards hellhole so their girls can go to school. Not my problem. And no, I don't care. The Taliban can wait forever to get the place back and they will. Those of you who care so much and think its justified to sacrifice our young men - go on over there yourselves. If you believe in it that much then go spill your own blood. The deaths of our young men is permanent. Pass the latte.
  39. western thought from Calgary, Canada writes: You have to hand it to the Taliban. They are patient long-term people who have always understood that the decadent West would never be able to sustain the political will to stay. When the Canadian will was strong, they turtled. As it weakened, they grew more bold and will no doubt aim to accelerate the body count during the election campaign. In the end, they will win because their assumptions about us and our predispositions are correct and were easily manipulated. We are decadent and quickly grow bored with things that are hard and don't offer short term satisfaction. We have all kinds of excuses (it's not our fight; no one can win there; the gov't is corrupt, etc.) but if we really looked in the mirror we know, don't we?
  40. True North from Canada writes: NATO wants an active, indefinite military presence in Afghanistan for purely strategic reasons - it is right beside China, Russia and Iran - and appeals to terrorism on the right and human rights on the left as a smoke screen.
  41. Brad Fgroupthinkn from Canada writes: The only way to keep Canada forces committed to Afghanistan for the remaining time the human race has on earth will be a Harper majority.
    Kick out all incumbents now!!
  42. Toxic Planet from dead zone USA, Canada writes:
    'Most Canadians say Afghan mission too costly'

    Canada needs to spend more and send more troops and fight harder if ever NATO is to win the war. The war is not over yet, several more years might be what it takes to win. Just keep sending more money and more troops and equipment, there is light at the end of the tunnel. Canada needs to tackle the enemy more often, fighting harder will set you free.
  43. CC Nurse from London Ontario, Canada writes: Someone make an odd remark (I'll keep them nameless), who said that it was the liberals who first supported this war in Afghanistan. Consider this though: On October 2002 the Liberal Government announced the Canadian Armed forces would be going to Afghanistan. December 2002, 40 Joint Task Force (JTF2) Operators where deployed to Afghanistan.

    Stephen Harper became Prime Minister February 2003, two months after the OPERATORS were deployed.

    In March 2002 Stephen Harper sent the Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry to fight in Afghanistan. It's now 2008. We've been in Afghanistan for for hold long under the CONSERVATIVE government?? Come on do the math.

    You can hardly blame the Liberals for this- unless you got the parties confused for a second???
  44. The Wight from Canada writes: ryan from Regina:

    'Every Canadian soldier knows this. They know that being there now will save more blood down the road.'

    Temporarily, yes. A military solution can only ever be a temporary success, though. Unless you remove the poverty and ignorance that make large portions of the world ripe for the radicals to recruit from, you won't fix anything long term.

    What about a multi-pronged approach? The NGOs work to improve the education and fiscal situation of Afghanis, the military provides the basic security and removes the worst of the radicals, the diplomats provide avenues for the less radical within the Taliban camp to come back into the fold via negotiation ... with the entire thing hinging on a long-term, permanent solution that removes the root causes for radicalism.

    Keep even one generation safe enough for them to get some skills and education and that might be enough to break the cycle (at least in this part of the world).
  45. Jay Brezny from Downtown, Canada writes: Wars of occupation almost always end badly, and in Afghanistan they have a 100% failure rate. If history is any guide (and it is), the only realistic option for winning in Afghanistan is annexation. If we're willing to make Afghanistan a Canadian province, and if we're willing to run an ethnic-dilution campaign, i.e. resettle mass quantities of people and ship millions of Afghans to Canada and millions of Canadians to Afghanistan (the model China used with Tibet), then we have a shot at winning this thing. People, you can't win wars of occupation with politically correct, humanistic half-measures. You go into a foreign country by military force, you either slaughter like Attila or you go home defeated. That is historic reality.
  46. Skeptical Realist from Canada writes: Sadly, after years of social engineering, Canadians have accepted a culture of defeatism. Like it or not, the world is a dangerous place. Are we to be mere spectators?
  47. CC Nurse from London Ontario, Canada writes: Someone made an odd remark (I'll keep them nameless), who said that it was the liberals who first supported this war in Afghanistan. Consider this though: On October 2002 the Liberal Government announced the Canadian Armed forces would be going to Afghanistan. December 2002, 40 Joint Task Force (JTF2) Operators where deployed to Afghanistan.

    Stephen Harper became Prime Minister February 2003, two months after the OPERATORS were deployed.

    In March 2002 Stephen Harper sent the Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry to fight in Afghanistan. It's now 2008. We've been in Afghanistan for how long under the CONSERVATIVE government?? Come on do the math.

    You can hardly blame the Liberals for this- unless you got the parties confused for a second???
  48. James Tod from Vancouver, Canada writes: All I will say is that my sentiments are well represented in this poll.
  49. Barry Turner from Ottawa, Canada writes: I want to add my voice to those who call for a withdrawal from Afghanistan. I am anti-Harper, but I don't blame him for our continued presence there. He inherited the situation from the Liberals, but they had little choice, given the events of 9/11/2001 and the presence of Al Queda there and the support they enjoyed from the Taliban. The war had to be fought. The fault in the strategy lies in NATO's failure, as well as that, principally, of the US, to put adequate forces there to keep the Taliban out. The Europeans, apart from the Brits, are shirkers, just as they were in the Balkan wars. Invading is fine but then you have to put sufficient forces on the ground to make it impossible for the enemy to continue. Today, that means containing the enemy across the Pakistan border and making sure they stay there until the Pakistani government does the right thing. Pakistan certainly have the forces to do it but lack the courage. The US is trying to put the ball forcibly in Pakistan's court with their recent incursion, but that is only playing a nuisance game. What NATO needs is another 100,000 pairs of boots on the ground and time to build the Afghan Army into a Taliban-hating, highly paid force that will destroy anyone who gets in the way of a good army pension. But that isn't going to happen. With recession overtaking them, the Europeans don't want and can't afford to send significantly more troops to Afghanistan for the next ten years. Given that, it's time we began the measures to pull out our small force. Start by cancelling any firther masjor weapons purchases, give NATO a full two year warning and start planning the withdrawal. We did our bit. Whan the Taliban take over Pakistan, the West will have to nuke them because they will have nuclear weapons of their own. And that will be the end of the Taliban and Pakistani civilization as we know it. Teheran will be nuked at the same time if not sooner by the Israelis, soving that problem.
  50. Robin and Christine from Tory Hill, Canada writes: In case anyone has missed it, the tories blame EVERYTHING on the Liberals. That happens when idiots like Harper get elected and ruin the country with their redneck policies so have nothing to say about their achievements, because there are none.
  51. West Virginian Albino Mexican from Canada writes: Is there anybody out there? from Salt Spring Island, Canada writes: This is so much fun let's all vote Conservative again

    ==================================================

    The LPC, led by Stephane Dion fully supported the current extension after saying they would not support involvement past 2009.

    They are as complicit in this as Harper is.
  52. I Think I know what is really happening but nobody would listen anyway from NS, Canada writes: I agree with Fake Name from Canada. This thing has to be about a pipeline and don't forget the poppy seed.. If we are protecting an oil pipeline just tell me and I would ask if the Canadian taxpayers are paying for the rich again. If I received an answer that they were protecting Canadian taxpayers interests then I would say keep them over there.
    There must be many a person in this world who has a hard time sleeping at night. Again and again we are lied to so the people at the top can make the money and the government eventually takes the rap or blames someone else.
    I wish the globeandmail would start asking these questions instead of talking about the ills of organic farming. What happened to investigative journalism? Toeing the line!
  53. western thought from Calgary, Canada writes: Umm, CC Nurse: Stephen Harper became prime minister in the election of January 2006, not 2003. If it was the latter he would have led a minority government for more than five and a half years.
  54. Phillip W. from Canada writes: CC Nurse,

    Spin it and blame Harper all you want.

    Did you forget it was LPC Minister of National Defence that warned Canadians months beforehand of the upcoming mission to the south where Canadians needed to be prepared for casualties?

    My, how quickly we forget what really led-up to the deployment of the soldiers.

    And for others, please stop blaming Hillier for manipulating things. The ultimate decision maker was and is a civilian, who was Bill Graham in concert with Jean Chretien at the time, both members of the LPC last time I checked.

    Either BG and JC have to accept responsibility for their decision to deploy in the first place, or you are forced to admit they were 'bullied' and made 'gullible' by an employee (Hillier).
  55. ryan . from Regina, Canada writes: Robin and Christine from Tory Hill, Canada writes: Anyone who actually thinks that we could 'win' in Afghanistan is dreaming in technicolour. ' First off, the Russian's oppressive tactics alienated the general population. But what I want to know is: What do you think is going to happen when we leave? Decades of all out war between the ANA and the Taliban. A resurgence of Al-Qaeda inspired training camps and large-scale operations planning. The inevitable acquiring and of a chemical/biological/radiological/nuclear weapon (don't fool yourself, they were close in 2001). Perhaps the destabilization of nuclear-armed Pakistan. The loss of Western credibility and the credibility of Western-backed regimes that are in precarious domestic situations. Realistically, though, Canada will withdrawal and the US and Afghans will be left to pick up the slack--which really isn't much. As American's draw down in Iraq they will transfer to Afghanistan. With years and years of support, the ANA will eventually grow to the size needed to defeat the insurgency. And we should be ashamed at this. When the time came, it turns out were all talk. It turns out we don't believe in spreading liberal values, we don't even believe in using force to better our safety. Why do we have an army again???
  56. Skeptical Realist from Canada writes: Perhaps it may be time for Canada to rethink the utility of being a member of NATO. This defence alliance is supposed to work collectively in defence of western, democratic ideals. As mentioned by someone above, many of the NATO countries are shirking their responsibilities in Afghanistan. Has NATO outlived its usefulness?
  57. San Tomas from Kelowna, Canada writes: And are our politicians listening? Not!! Canada shud tell NATO to go pound salt. Why are we wasting human lives and billions of dollars on this hell hole?
  58. R. Carriere from Maritimes, Canada writes:
    ryan . from Regina: I hope your little brother and friends are safe and stay safe!

    Allow me to quote a few of your thoughts:
    ' But make no mistake about it: being in Afghanistan is the right mission at the right time. Every Canadian soldier knows this. '
    ' You arm-chair generals and diplomats have absolutely no strategic sense;'
    ' blood that they willingly put up, knowing the importance of the fight—might be in vain because people who aren&8217;t risking anything and have no more than a glance&8217;s knowledge of the conflict feel that we are sacrificing too much.'

    I write this with great respect:

    The Canadian Army is a volunteer Army and responds to the will of politicians via the orders of military leaders. They are there to act. While they may have a front row view of actions in the theatre, that does not necessarily give them exclusive and all-knowing knowledge of geo-political and sometimes convoluted 'bigger' plans.

    While as you state, many believe in the mission, is it possible many have come to NOT believe in it?

    Is it possible that those who believe MAY be wrong? That they have been sold a bill of false goods?

    Is it possible?
    .
  59. Casual Observer from Ridgetown, Canada writes: Skeptical Realist from Canada writes: Sadly, after years of social engineering, Canadians have accepted a culture of defeatism. Like it or not, the world is a dangerous place. Are we to be mere spectators?

    Yes - let's just be spectators. Canadians don't have a culture of defeatism. We have a culture of peace and live-and-let-live. That's what people here enjoy and what new immigrants come here for. We have no business being there. We don't need to be sending our young men to get killed for nothing. And it is nothing. No matter how long we stay there and how many get killed, in the end it will be for naught.
  60. charlie brown from Canada writes: Interesting. We lost 900 in one day at Dieppe, 5000 dead in two years in Italy etc. etc. Few if any called for a pull out. How times have changed. Apples and oranges perhaps.
  61. Robin and Christine from Tory Hill, Canada writes: ryan from regina says Why do we have an army again??? ``

    Exactly ryan, NOW you`re thinking.
  62. Skeptical Realist from Canada writes: San Tomas: You ask why we are wasting our time in that 'hell hole'. All one has to do is look at a map and note what countries border or are close to Afghanistan. It is a key strategic piece of real estate surrounded by some of the most populated, anti western nations on earth. Check out the map in the link.

    http://www.nationalgeographic.com/landincrisis/political.html
  63. West Virginian Albino Mexican from Canada writes: Robin and Christine from Tory Hill, Canada writes: In case anyone has missed it, the tories blame EVERYTHING on the Liberals. That happens when idiots like Harper get elected and ruin the country with their redneck policies so have nothing to say about their achievements, because there are none.

    ==================================================

    In case you missed it, Stephane Dion and the LPC FULLY SUPPORTED the current extension until 2011, after saying they would not support involvement past 2009. Prior to that the LPC supported the extension until 2009.

    Dion wants Afghanistan mission to end in 2009

    http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070704/laytonndp070704/20070704/

    Canadian Liberals Support Afghan Extension Until 2011

    http://www.afghanconflictmonitor.org/2008/02/liberals-suppor.html

    Wake up!
  64. Misery No one from Angus, Canada writes: Will someone please explain the mission to me. I am of feeble brain so make it simple.

    In the mean time refrain from sending any more boy soldiers to be slaughtered in that far off country where we are definitely not welcome.
  65. western thought from Calgary, Canada writes: I agree with San Tomas. It's not like Afghans are human beings or anything and that as people living in the most prosperous society in the history of humankind we have any sort of obligation to help people. And if you think hard enough about it, what's really the point in fighting HIV/AIDS and corruption in Africa? Everyone who's tried it so far has failed and gosh it's so expensive and it's so hard and we all know that poverty can never really be cured so why bother? It's too hard. The death toll is too high at 96 in six and a half years. 101 people were murdered in Manitoba in 2006-2007.
  66. ryan . from Regina, Canada writes: The Wight:

    I completely agree. And in addition to this, we will also need to solve the corruption problems in the Afg. gov't. And where possible, I hope we work at improving all three. But security is key to development. Schools are no good if the Taliban burn them or take them over as in Panjwai.
  67. C Dione from Canada writes: Typical selfish self centered canadians. As long as we can still watch Hockey Night in Canada in are cozy homes!! Where are the political leaders in this country who have put their support behind this mission (Harper, Dion both supported this mission yet I haven't heard much from either especially Dion.
  68. R. Carriere from Maritimes, Canada writes:

    CC Nurse from London Ontario, Canada writes: Someone make an odd remark (I'll keep them nameless), who said that it was the liberals who first supported this war in Afghanistan.

    Stephen Harper became Prime Minister February 2003, two months after the OPERATORS were deployed.

    In March 2002 Stephen Harper sent the Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry to fight in Afghanistan. It's now 2008. We've been in Afghanistan for for hold long under the CONSERVATIVE government?? Come on do the math. You can hardly blame the Liberals for this- unless you got the parties confused for a second???

    CC Nurse:You are truly a JOKER! Funny stuff!

    Never seen that name before. IT was ME! I know you must be a trol or just having fun as a new changed name from something else. No one is that il-informed. Buy if you are NOT, I hate to break the news to you but Harper was elected for the first time in January 2006!

    Just remember this:

    --Bush tells Chretien to go to Afghanistan in 2002. Chretien bows to the Bush order.

    --Liberal Bill Graham does the 'body bag' tour in 2004

    --Dion votes FOR the A-Stan extension and BACKS Harper!

    Cute, and nice try....and....!
    .
  69. western thought from Calgary, Canada writes: Casual Observer has it right on too. We've got it good here kids. No need to worry our pretty little heads about that brother/sisterhood of humankind stuff. Lets just sit back, pour another cold one and wonder what they poor people are doing . . . . yah!
  70. C Dione from Canada writes: Misery......its about improving the way of life of a peoples who have been in a country that has been decimated by fanatics. Its about giving people a chance in a part of the world that has very littel to look forward to. Its about spreading Freedom to trouble nations around the world. After Afghanistan its somewhere else. In todays world we must not sit on are hands while selfish power hungary dicatators hold on to power with every peice of thugery they can comand.

    If that doesn't do it for you try reading a book or watching the news in between episodes of 90210 and Desperate Housewives!
  71. Karin Pasnak from North Vancouver, Canada writes: Afghan Mission too costly and it will never be won.
  72. steve allan from Canada writes: If the Conservatives win the election, you can bet they will bow before their American master and extend the mission.

    Bring them home in July 2009....not a minute later no matter how well or bad the occupation is going.
  73. Skeptical Realist from Canada writes: Casual Observer from Ridgetown, Canada writes: Yes - let's just be spectators. Canadians don't have a culture of defeatism. We have a culture of peace and live-and-let-live. ---------------------------------------------------------- We were very fortunate as a nation in WWI, WWII, and Korea that an overwhelming majority of the people in Canada did not agree with your way of thinking. Canadians, like it or not, fought gallantly for freedom in far off corners of the world. This culture of 'peace and live and let live' that you refer to is exactly what years of socialist governments brainwashed you to believe. We live in peace in this country, but this freedom was bought and paid for with the blood, sweat and tears of our ancestors. Canadians are comfortable, and complacent as a general rule. This culture of 'live and let live' as you say is a utopian liberal fantasy. Like it or not, we must be engaged internationally, both with flowers and with guns.
  74. West Virginian Albino Mexican from Canada writes: R. Carriere from Maritimes, Canada writes: CC Nurse from London Ontario, Canada writes: Someone make an odd remark (I'll keep them nameless), who said that it was the liberals who first supported this war in Afghanistan. Stephen Harper became Prime Minister February 2003, two months after the OPERATORS were deployed. In March 2002 Stephen Harper sent the Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry to fight in Afghanistan. It's now 2008. We've been in Afghanistan for for hold long under the CONSERVATIVE government?? Come on do the math. You can hardly blame the Liberals for this- unless you got the parties confused for a second??? CC Nurse:You are truly a JOKER! Funny stuff! Never seen that name before. IT was ME! I know you must be a trol or just having fun as a new changed name from something else. No one is that il-informed. Buy if you are NOT, I hate to break the news to you but Harper was elected for the first time in January 2006! Just remember this: --Bush tells Chretien to go to Afghanistan in 2002. Chretien bows to the Bush order. --Liberal Bill Graham does the 'body bag' tour in 2004 --Dion votes FOR the A-Stan extension and BACKS Harper! Cute, and nice try....and....! ================================================= Nice try isn't the word. Evening R...hope all is well in your area during the current monsoon season. Bill Graham conducted his 'bodybag' tour in the autumn of 2005, AFTER CF had been deployed to Kandahar that summer. Graham warned - those who would listen anyway - that the Kandahar deployment was now a COMBAT deployment, and casulties WERE to be expected - not COULD be expected. The following spring (2006), EXACTLY as Graham had warned, CF losses began to mount as they took the fight to the Taliban.
  75. E MacM from Canada writes: I have to admit i don't understand the politics involved in the terrorists etc. but i was totally against the iraq war and the killing of innocent children and people so the usa could steal their oil.....I don't trust bush. when he went to war againt iraq without nato's approval i had a problem with that and i was proud of the reigning canadian government for being strong and not buckling under to his pressure to join him. At the time i figured it wouldn't have mattered what government was in power they would have stood strong, but I don't think harper would have. No I don't understand the way of life over there i'm sure, submissive women is not something i'm use too. lol but why are we there, if the people of afgahnistan want our help them they have to pitch in and help themselves and help the troops help them. otherwise we have no right going over there and forcing our ways of life on them. and we are loosing our young people to fight a war that had nothing to do with us. If we need to be there then give it our all and spare no cost but if we dont' need to be there then bring our young people home before we loose another life fighting over something that has nothing to do with us. CANADA IS A PEACEKEEPING COUNTRY we are not aggressors. But if we have to be aggressive then cost isn't important when it comes to protecting our military.
  76. western thought from Calgary, Canada writes: I like the Steve Allan strategy: This is hard, let's run away and really quickly too!
  77. CC Nurse from London Ontario, Canada writes: I like how the Conservatives are on here saying misleading things like the Conservative Government inherited the problem of Afghanistan from the Liberal government. Excuse me??? Are you paid by the Conservative government to write this stuff in this comments section or are you just really....???? AHHHH ignornant?????

    This isn't an inherited problem. This is the Conservative government who has expanded Canadian involvement in Afghanistan. CANADA has been in Afghanistan since December 2001 when the Liberals sent 40 Joint Task Force (JTF2) Operators (not OPERATORS) to Afghanistan.

    Stephen Harper became Prime Minister February 2002 and wasted no time when in March 2002 he sent the Princess Patricia's Canadian Light INFANTRY to fight in Afghanistan. We've been sending soldiers to FIGHT in Afghanistan ever since the Conservative government took office. So how is this the LIBERAL'S fault??? Please use some common sense...please????
  78. Heidi Weber from Canada writes: My heart goes out to the families of our casualties. I would like to say that its been worth it but deep down we all know this mission is futile. NATO is trying to impose western values and standards on a region that isn't interested. We've blown $4 billion on this mess and devastated nearly a hundred families among our fellow Canadians and things are just getting worse. What else could that money have been spent on? - more food inspectors maybe? Our NATO partners are content to let Canadians die while they stay in the safer areas - what - the Germans don't know a thing or two about fighting? NATO doesn't want to lose face here but the issue of Canadian participation should stop being debated. Make it official - absolutely no extention of the Canadian mission. The Taliban can all go to hell. Let them keep that pile of rocks - they are not worth the lives of our young people.
  79. western thought from Calgary, Canada writes: CC Nurse: Please check your facts because you are embarrassing yourself with this Stephen Harper became prime minister in 2003 (2002 in your last message). This link is as helpful as any: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadianfederalelection,_2006
  80. R. Carriere from Maritimes, Canada writes:
    West Virginian Albino Mexican from Canada writes: Nice try isn't the word. Evening R...hope all is well in your area during the current monsoon season. Bill Graham conducted his 'bodybag' tour in the autumn of 2005, AFTER CF had been deployed to Kandahar that summer. Graham warned - those who would listen anyway - that the Kandahar deployment was now a COMBAT deployment, and casulties WERE to be expected - not COULD be expected. The following spring (2006), EXACTLY as Graham had warned, CF losses began to mount as they took the fight to the Taliban.

    Hi WVAM and thanks for the note the other day. I had a feeling....

    OOPs, bad me. I said 2004 body bag tour and you are 100% correct. It happened under the Liberal govt. in 2005.

    On another note, and way off topic, keep an eye on Hurricane Hanna-supposed to arrive here mid day Sunday-skirting up the eastern coast.

    The site below is the most incredible tracking detailed hurricane site I have ever come across. Media is getting better, but this is the best-beats the NHC in detail.

    http://www.stormpulse.com/
    .
  81. Skeptical Realist from Canada writes: CC Nurse, get your nose out of the nitrous oxide. It is impairing your judgement and your brain function.
  82. Prairie Duststorm from Edmonton, Canada writes: Canadians do not have the stomach for war that does not pose a direct threat to their way of live. They do not want to hear about the cost of lives or money unless it directly benefits them. We should stick to nice safe peace keeping jobs like defending our border against the evil Americans.
  83. Casual Observer from Ridgetown, Canada writes: Skeptical Realist from Canada writes: --------------------------------------------------------- Canadians are comfortable, and complacent as a general rule. This culture of 'live and let live' as you say is a utopian liberal fantasy. Like it or not, we must be engaged internationally, both with flowers and with guns. Disagree - not brainwashed by liberals, tories or any other political dogma. Not complacent. There is no 'must'. As a parent I can state categorically, without shame, that there is no way on earth that my sons will be going to risk their lives for the wasteland of Afghanistan. I don't know where you get the nerve to speak on behalf of the 'majority' of Canadians. Frankly I don't care what the majority or minority feel. I am only speaking for myself and I am totally against our involvement in Afghanistan and the needless bloodshed and loss of life. I am sick and tired of people suggesting that Canadians are complacent and by inference that we take our peace and freedom for granted. Those that I know most certainly do not. Some of us don't want to risk our peace and freedom by sticking our noses in where we don't belong and inviting violence against us. Why shouldn't we be proud to be a peace loving nation? Isn't that what all nations should aspire to? We already have it so let's keep it. I don't care who goes in to fight the Taliban in Afghanistan - no one will win. The Americans armed them in the first place so let them clean up their own mess.
  84. steve allan from Canada writes: -----western thought from Calgary, Canada writes: I like the Steve Allan strategy: This is hard, let's run away and really quickly too! -------

    I don't run from anything. It's a matter of principle something you wouldn't understand because you don't live in a democracy.

    The fact is this is an occupation and it will fail. We have no business being there, the Afghans have never attacked us. Only idiots support this mission that's why it's so popular in Alberta.
  85. Robin and Christine from Tory Hill, Canada writes: We should stick to nice safe peace keeping jobs like defending our border against the evil Americans. ``

    I have a better idea, just build a wall along the border then our military can do something useful like working in government, or they could join the US military if they`ve been sufficiently indoctrinated.
  86. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: Okey Dokey. Remind us, once again, of who it was that effectively created and sponsored the Mujahadeen? And who OBL, a member of the Muj, was sponsored, trained and funded by? And who turned a blind eye to Pakistan's ISI's involvement in the conversion of the Muj into the Taliban?

    While you are at it, please explain why the West had no qualms about what the Taliban was doing to and in Afghanistan between 1995 and 2001. Indeed, why was GWB and crew entertaining senior representatives of the Taliban in Washington DC in August 2001?

    Something very smelly here.
    • Posted 04/09/08 at 6:58 PM EST |