The deaths of six soldiers and a translator in yet another roadside bombing has raised questions about Canada's role in Afghanistan, and NATO's strategy for the mission.

A prominent retired general and some military analysts say it's time for NATO to re-think the mission.

"If you believe in the mission, you have to accept casualties," retired Maj.-Gen. Lewis MacKenzie said Wednesday in an interview with CTV Newsnet.

"If you don't believe in the mission, and you really don't believe we're achieving anything ... then actually, we should be leaving," said MacKenzie, who supports the mission.

That help has come at the cost of Canadian lives -- 66 military personnel and one diplomat have been killed since 2002.

Canada took over the provincial reconstruction mission in Kandahar province in February 2006 and is scheduled to remain until February 2009.

MacKenzie had harsh words for NATO, the organization responsible for the overall mission.

He said NATO needs to "get off its butt" and member nations of NATO have to increase the number of troops in southern Afghanistan. Other countries have their troops stationed in relatively calm northern Afghanistan and have balked at having them in combat roles in the volatile south.

 "I'm really getting upset with an alliance that's supposed to be one for all and all for one," MacKenzie said. "It sure doesn't look that way."

Canadian and British forces are doing the bulk of the work in Kandahar and Helmand, respectively, the two most dangerous provinces in Afghanistan.

In Kandahar province, Canada has 2,500 troops to patrol an area that is 54,000 square kilometres in size (about the size of Nova Scotia). The province also shares a 400-kilometre border with Pakistan, where Taliban insurgents can generally find a safe haven when things get hot in Afghanistan.

MacKenzie said NATO needs to provide at least four times the number of troops on the ground in Kandahar that it does now. There are 35,000 NATO soldiers in Afghanistan. Sunil Ram, a military analyst, would like to see anywhere from 100,000 to 200,000 NATO troops stationed in the South Asian country.

Rob Huebert, a fellow at the University of Calgary's Centre for Military and Strategic Studies, told CTV.ca that "you'll never have enough 'boots on the ground' if you're thinking tactically."

One must think instead of about how to stabilize the government there and have "enough public victories so political will does not dissipate," Huebert said.

Losing troops

Multiple deaths always bring the mission into question.

Wednesday's deadly incident occurred on a road that was considered relatively safe -- and in an area, the Panjwaii district, that Canadian soldiers had supposedly pacified.

There are no truly safe roads in Kandahar or Helmand provinces, MacKenzie said. There aren't enough troops on the ground to secure earlier victories.

"If you abandon that particular piece of ground, the insurgents, small in numbers as they might be, are able to move back in there," MacKenzie explained. "So you're never going to be able to provide security."

Canadian troops do change up their routes, have human sources in the local Afghan community to advise them of dangers and have ways of detecting roadside bombs, he said.

However, even if they detect 19 out of 20 such devices, that still leaves one remaining bomb to kill Canadian troops.

Wednesday's deadly blast struck an RG-31 Nyala armoured vehicle, which are designed to withstand such attacks.

Ram told Newsnet that techniques developed in Iraq by Islamist insurgents are making their way to Afghanistan. Other analysts support that claim.

One device the Iraqi insurgents use -- and that has reportedly shown up in Afghanistan -- is called an explosively formed projectile (EFP), something developed in Iran. A pipe filled with explosives is capped with a copper disc that turns to molten metal upon detonation and can blast through armour. This is a poor man's version of U.S. anti-tank missiles.

CTV's Paul Workman said Saturday the military believes the deadly blast was caused by four powerful anti-tank mines bundled together. He said the military is wondering when the device was planted and how it was detonated.

IEDs are believed to account for 26 of 66 Canadian military deaths so far. Nineteen of those deaths have come so far in 2007, according to a Globe and Mail analysis. In comparison, one soldier has died in traditional combat.

NATO soldiers look at a map at the town of Gereshk in Helmand province, Afghanistan on Monday, April 30, 2007. (AP / Fisnik Abrashi)

NATO's losing battle

While losing troops hurts support at home, NATO efforts to fight the Taliban have hurt relations with the local population, Ram said.

Afghanistan's President Hamid Karzai has strongly criticized the number of civilian casualties stemming from either NATO or U.S. battles with insurgents.

Afghan authorities say up to 45 civilians died in air strikes in Helmand province on June 29, along with up to 62 insurgents.

When such an incident happens, Ram said local opposition to the Taliban softens and they filter back into an area.

Huebert said the Taliban are also deliberately picking fights in towns and villages in the hopes that NATO troops will kill civilians too.

Many analysts have said one reason why U.S. and NATO troops must rely on artillery and air power -- which in turn leads to more civilian casualties -- comes back to not enough troops on the ground.

Ram called for a "complete strategic rethink" of the mission.

"We were ostensibly there as a stabilization force. And ultimately, we're war-fighting in an asymmetric battlefield," he told CTV.ca.

While the Canadian forces have done their best to adapt, it's still the Taliban's territory, he said.

With drug money, relatively low costs and their safe havens in Pakistan, the Taliban can keep picking away at Canadian troops indefinitely, he said.

Huebert said this war is now about outlasting the enemy.

He used Cambodia as an example. Vietnam drove the murderous Khmer Rouge from power in late 1979. A peace deal was signed in 1991. Some Khmer Rouge leaders are facing trial this year.

"They were able to force a political settlement because they were able to exhaust the Khmer Rouge. This is ultimately what we have to do with the Taliban," he said.