World -   

1
U.S. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, right, salutes during his assumption of a command ceremony as the head of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan in Kabul, Monday, June 15, 2009. (AP / Ricardo Mazalan) U.S. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, right, salutes during his assumption of a command ceremony as the head of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan in Kabul, Monday, June 15, 2009. (AP / Ricardo Mazalan) U.S. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, right, salutes during his assumption of a command ceremony as the head of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan in Kabul, Monday, June 15, 2009. (AP / Ricardo Mazalan)

Canada's exit will hurt Afghan mission: expert

Viewer

CTV News Video

CTV News Channel: Walter Dorn, Canadian Forces College
The House of Commons motion states that Canada will end its military role in Afghanistan by 2011, but that still leaves open several other possibilities of involvement.
CTV News Channel: Mercedes Stephenson, defense and security analyst
Analysts say the pressure to keep Canadian troops in Afghanistan could eventually lead to a public plea. Americans may replace missing Canadian troops but they cannot duplicate the 'Canadian experience'.
CTV News Channel: Retired Col. Michel Drapeau
It's not surprising that there are more calls to extend Canada's mission in Afghanistan beyond 2011, but the troops have already given more than any other nation.
Canada AM: Retired. Col. Brian MacDonald
A senior defence analyst discusses when the U.S. will start applying pressure to Canada after the new secretary-general of NATO says he would 'regret' seeing Ottawa end its Afghan mission in two years time..
Canada AM: Mercedes Stephenson, analyst
The new NATO secretary-general is urging Ottawa to keep combat troops in Afghanistan beyond 2011, and more international pressure is expected to be exerted by the international community.
CTV National News: Roger Smith on Rasmussen's request
With the deaths of four U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan on Thursday, the mission looks to be getting increasingly deadly. This did not deter NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen from urging Canada to extend its commitment past 2011.
CTV News Channel: Denis Coderre, Liberal defence critic on the mission in Afghanistan
NATO's new secretary-general Anders Fogh Rasmussen's urging of Canada to extend its 2011 commitment to the mission in Afghanistan is an unprecedented level of pressure placed on Canada's contribution.
CTV News Channel: The Globe and Mail's Omar El Akkad with reaction in Kandahar
A reporter based in Kandahar has reaction to NATO's new secretary-general calling on Canada to maintain its military presence in Afghanistan beyond 2011.

A A |  Email ThisEmail  | PrintComments (106) Facebook   

U.S. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, right, salutes during his assumption of a command ceremony as the head of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan in Kabul, Monday, June 15, 2009. (AP / Ricardo Mazalan) U.S. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, right, salutes during his assumption of a command ceremony as the head of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan in Kabul, Monday, June 15, 2009. (AP / Ricardo Mazalan) U.S. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, right, salutes during his assumption of a command ceremony as the head of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan in Kabul, Monday, June 15, 2009. (AP / Ricardo Mazalan)

Photos

U.S. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, right, salutes during his assumption of a command ceremony as the head of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan in Kabul, Monday, June 15, 2009. (AP / Ricardo Mazalan)

View Larger Image

Date: Wed. Aug. 12 2009 3:43 PM ET

OTTAWA — Canada will significantly weaken NATO's war against the Taliban when its troops leave Afghanistan in 2011, an influential American counter-insurgency expert has said.

Anthony Cordesman, who has advised NATO's current ground commander, U.S. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, said losing the experience and credibility of Canadian troops around the Kandahar region will undermine military efforts in a crucial battleground.

"It isn't simply a matter of troop levels," Cordesman said in an interview with The Canadian Press. "It's a matter of experience continuity; having shaped the security presence in one of the most critical provinces in the country."

"Would a Canadian departure seriously hurt NATO? The answer at least this point seems to be: Yes."

Cordesman said reluctant NATO countries need encouragement to "eliminate as many national caveats and restrictions on troops as possible" and that the U.S. government should dispatch additional troops to stem increasing violence in the war-torn country.

McChrystal sought out Cordesman's advice as part of a 60-day review of the military strategy NATO forces have adopted in Afghanistan. He is expected to appear before Congress in September.

While the U.S. has more than enough trained troops to replace Canada's 2,850, Cordesman said, diplomatic efforts towards Ottawa are intensifying because of the difficulty of replacing Canadian expertise.

"The experience Canada has gained and the effectiveness of its civil-military operations have been particularly critical," said Cordesman, an expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. He added that the NATO forces who replace Canadian soldiers in Kandahar "are not going to have the capabilities that Canada has developed over years of having been in the province."

"The fact is, just because you do not have the largest contingent in Afghanistan doesn't make the country's role unimportant."

Last week, NATO's new secretary-general pleaded with Canadian officials to agree to remain longer in the Central Asian country. Members of the Obama administration have also been hinting they would like Canadian troops to maintain their presence well in to the next decade.

But the Conservative government has shown few indications that it intends to extend the date for withdrawing Canadian combat troops beyond July 2011. Ottawa quickly replied to the secretary general's recent request by reaffirming the decision to pull out as scheduled.

On Tuesday, Defence Minister Peter MacKay said NATO's leadership can ask many other countries to contribute to the mission before additional participation is requested from Canada.

Michel Drapeau, an Ottawa lawyer and retired colonel, told CTV News Channel that Cordesman's comments will encourage defence lobbyists in Canada to step up pressure on Ottawa to extend its Afghan presence.

"This will only add fuel to the fire," he said. "The fact of the matter is, our troops have given an extraordinary commitment and sacrifices over the past. By the time we return it will be almost 10 years we will have been in Afghanistan."

"There's nothing in our constitution that says we have to be there forever," he said. Canadian troops "are tired, their families are exhausted, the equipment requires to be replaced."

"We have done our share."

With files from The Canadian Press

Comments are now closed for this story

David
said
0 0

Read another 'expert's' book "Descent into Chaos". There will be interest in Afghanistan only as long as the US feels it serves their interests. Once their interest wanes or isdiverted elsewhere, Afghanistan will once again be abandoned. Canada should forget about involving itself in this quagmire. The sooner we are out of there, the better.


GTK
said
0 0

It is good to see that the American brass realizes that without the balanced approach that Canada represents, their Command and Conquer approach is not sustainable.
Had they stuck to Afghanistan and not gone looting and pillaging in Iraq, this might have been over by now.


Al-BC
said
0 0

To "Bring our troops home", and others who want to pull out. Have you bleeding hearts forgotten what happened on September 11, 2001? What if it was Toronto not New York that was attacked? Would any of your opinions change? Our men and women are there to help ensure such a horrible act never happens again. They are doing all of Canada proud in a very difficult situation. Thank you again to the brave men and women our our Canadian Forces.


Peter in Edmonton
said
0 0

Independent thinker wrote: "There will never be a military solution to the problems in Afghanistan as long as the Taliban enjoy popular support among the people."

Yeah but, they don't. Not in Afghanistan and no longer in Pakistan. If you've been keeping up to date with the way things have been going in that region you'd know that the Taliban recently went from hero to Zero in Pakistan just like they did a while back in Afghanistan.



stephanie
said
0 0

the army, and the military should of got back home in december 2002. Having the Canadian military in Afghanistan was a mistake in a couple areas, and they should of been back home in december 2002. But the military mission in Afghanistan was a success in most areas, but the government should thought more about the dangers of the mission.

the government is useless


Citizen
said
0 0

I think he is right, it will definitely hurt the mission. I support our efforts in Afghanistan and I would advocate staying BUT only if our European allies agreed to start picking up some of the commitment in the South and rotated our troops to the safer Northern Regions for a while.

Canada has been pulling more than its weight in Afghanistan so of course our leaving will hurt the mission. Time for Europe to do their share. We helped them in the Cold War and both world wars. Its their turn to help us.


Travis
said
0 0

At this point it doesn't matter if Canada's decision to pull out is the right on or the wrong one. Canada made the decision to be out by 2011 and we need to stick to that decision. If we don't keep to the decisions that we've made, what message are we sending to the world?


Mike
said
0 0

I dont no anything about NATO or orther agencies but i do no that are soldiers are fighting and dying for us at home and for the innocient over there and are willing to give up there lives to do so, so tired yes very tired and physically and mentally,it falls back on the government the people elected,the troops need more support from home and the country and more wages and benafits and shorter tours if ya cant get the boys to stay in then you need to change the program stop paying and treating them like shit and an object while you sit at home i say levae it to the troops if they want out then they get out if no they stay and do waht there trained to do which half of us canadians are to scared to do is to fight for freedom and the weak. NO MATTER WHAT THE CAUSE MAYBE.


Mike vdB - Chatham, ON
said
0 0

I support our troops and all the hard work they have done in the country. They have accomplished many things with blood, sweat, and tears. NATO knows full well if Canada pulls out, they do not have a backup plan to encourage other allies (other then our US friends) to pick up the slack.

Please Mr. Harper, do not give in to the pressure and bring our combat mission to an end. We can still provide expertise and support, but not in a combat role.


Kiruna
said
0 0

Why prolong this mess. Other foreign countries have tried and failed. Leave them to their own way of life, as sordid as that may be compared to ours. Let's save our men and women who have no business being over there. Get out now. We used to be the peacekeeping force that was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize; now we're the combatants. Enough is enough, get out.


George Poole
said
0 0

I respect other's opinions that we should 'return to peace-keeping, which we are good at' - sadly, a serviceman's job is to do what he has been told, not to pick and choose which missions he goes on - it was Mr. Pearson's idea to send Canadian soldiers to war armed with nothing but radios, notepads, and binoculars, and silly blue hats. - if we do, maybe we should contract out peacekeeping out to Securitas and be done with the whole charade of having a credible armed forces. Best regards all.


Dollar Bill
said
0 0

Jim Mac from Edmonton thinks that the hearts and minds of the soldier are won with combat troops and nothing else. He forgets (or has no clue) there are a lot of folks working on his behalf in Ottawa, in Edmonton and especially in Kandahar that allow him to have hot water, showers, fresh food including salads, electricity, access to TV, newspapers, computer access etc etc. We've come a long way from places like Cambodia, Rwanda and Somalia where hard (boil in bag) rations were the norm and we washed in buckets. Those of us who support you and some of us who have been there are dismayed by Jim Mac's unwarranted criticism. Last time I checked it took 10 personnel (military and civilians) to support each troop sent overseas. But then again if your first and even 2nd tour is Afghanistan, you know very little of what occurred before that.


Tono
said
0 0

Instead of spending our money and boys' lives on a war that is mostly for U.S. interests, why don't we spend the time and money building a coastal defense force in our Arctic, which is in Canadian interests?

I'll answer my own question: BECAUSE WE ARE STILL PART OF NATO.

Ron (first comment) nails it: NATO is finished like the Cold War.


Prof. Pye Chartt
said
0 0

@ Independent thinker

Firstly, before sauntering off on the usual left-wing diatribe whilst pretending to be "independently minded" when, in fact, you're trigger finger always itches for a shot at your ideological opposite, try actually reading someone's post before quoting any aspect of it. (I didn't assert that the mission itself was "pretty simple.")

Lastly, as it is evident that you really don't stand for anything (you refuse to acknowledge any benefit generated by Canada's military presence in Afghanistan), then stand aside and leave this particular debate to principled others. Thanks. Our military men and women, who regularly and continually state that we're making a real, tangible difference over there, have all the credibility...and you have none.

P.S. Send Chretien/Martin an angry letter next time. Your Liberal pals landed us in Afghanistan (outrageously poorly equipped, to boot).

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

@ Rick

Because you're ill-informed about what's actually happening in Afghanistan (outside of I.E.D.s going off), your analogy about fish/fishing is rather foolish. Furthermore, you're inability to manage your political and ideological compulsion to insert the name "Bush" into virtually every post renders your argument rather hollow and painfully biased.

While I respect and understand those harboring an opinion different than my rational view, any legitimate debate is worthless when someone opposes something "just because."

P.S. As a self-admitted card-carrying Liberal, send Chretien/Martin an angry letter. Your political heroes landed us in Afghanistan (outrageously poorly equipped, to boot).


Stan Baumgertner
said
0 0

The nations not having a combat role in Afghanistan are democracies. Most, like Germany have no mandate from the Bundestag to have a combat role.

It's kind of nice that the German leaders are actually forced by law to follow the will of the elected representatives of the people. I thought Canadians might actually like the concept. I listen to German radio and the German government would fall in a nano-second if it adoped a combat role.

There is an irony when folks want German leaders to violate the laws of its democracy to help impose democracy in Afghanistan.


Rob NS
said
0 0

We have pulled beyond our weight there for ten years, even more so since 2005. The US does a great job helping around the globe, Britian as well.
If NATO wishes to remain a strong force, it has to come up with some rules that forces member countries to do their share. Romania is another not so well known country that has had combat troops in Kandahar, doing QRF duties.


P. Dieter RCHA (ret.)
said
0 0

I spent 23 years in the military and get a laugh out of these 'experts' the media salivates over for a sound bite. Talking heads interviewing talking heads.

hint: The old USSR is gone. Nato unfortunately, is a bloated bureaucracy looking for a reason to justify its existence. It's been an impediment to strengthening USA-Russia-China military co-operation that would be the real source of promoting a stable and secure world peasce. The USA is not going to get meaningful co-operation from Russia on Iran or from China on North Korea as long as there is the antiquarian mind set of us, 'The West' against them.


Golf Company Grunt
said
0 0

<< RETURN then to PEACEKEEPING- where we are experts at.>>>

First off, you don't sound like any vet I know.

We have had over 100 Canadian service personnel killed while on peacekeeping duty. Are their deaths more pallitable because they were wearing the blue beret?

'Pro Patria'


meerkat
said
0 0

many have tried to "subdue" this Afghanistan over the centuries. the british and the russians (recently) to mention a couple. all have failed. why does NATO seem to think they can accomplish what all others have failed to accomplish? on the backs of our Canadian service men & women yet...

N - nonsensical
A - antiquated
T - tired
O - old

this alliance needs to be revamped.


Jason from Calgary
said
0 0

So, the new tactic is to GUILT us into staying in Afghanistan?

I mean, I'm all for us sticking around and fighting to create and preserve peace. But don't give us the whole "Oh, NATO will fall apart without Canada." Plenty of other nations in NATO who could shore up some troops and give us a rest for a while.


Oh Sure
said
0 0

Nice little trick that Harper & Company are playing here!

They've got an expert telling us what the conservatives what us to hear so it can give them cause to keep Canada in the fight.

Politics is so sleazy!


Isabella
said
0 0

As a military spouse, it's difficult saying goodbye to the person you love the most in this world... especially if they are headed overseas. Before my spouse left for his first tour, I cursed this war (not fully understanding why he was going) now, that he is back, I understand why. I always understood the politics regarding this mission... but, through my spouse, who was injured during combat I see things differently.

Canada has made a commitment to NATO and the people of Afghanistan. We must see this through.

Pro Patria




dulak
said
0 0

@ reese:

ummm...the Conservative government was forced to set a withdraw date of combat troops as a result of political pressure from the Liberals, NDP, and Bloc.


Matthew
said
0 0

Well we all know that the Conservative Party of Canada will say anything to get themselves re-elected. "Our economic fundamentals are sound, a Conservative government will NEVER run a deficit", HA! Harper and MacKay can say whatever they think will get them re-elected (because we will have an election before 2011) and then they will bend to U.S. pressure and agree to extend the mission anyways. They have two years to figure out how they will justify lying to the Canadian public AGAIN.


Mark
said
0 0

I just knew that the "We're peacekeepers not soliders" voices would squeak from the leftist camp within the context of this discussion. To those on the un-informed political 'left', peacekeeping is a practice performed where two parties want peace but their participation needs to be monitored. The Taliban and extremists do not want peace-unless it is in line with their demands. Canada and its allies are in Afghanistan (at the stroke of a LIBERAL pen I might add-the same colour of ink that gutted our military capability over a decade of neglect. Nonetheless we are there as PEACE MAKERS and Protection for the reconstruction teams-their excellent work referred to by Gen. McCrystal.

It is long past due that Canada receive the commendations our troops deserve. It is also about time that Stephen Harper receive the commendations HE deserves for sticking it out and ensuring that our troops get what they need. Let us not forget General Hillier as well.

It is time that Canada passed the batton to oh....Germany, Italy, Spain, Denmark for example and our expertise can be put to use advising those to follow on 'lessons learned'.

Our forces and equipment need a rest and recovery. Come home safely lads and lasses from a job well done.

...and the mushy middle and 'left', you're welcome for your freedom. Just remember that your freedom to criticize was paid for by somebody else's blood.

Mark


Raymond
said
0 0

@Reece

Just as I predicted.

The lefties who, not one year ago, were demanding that the Conservatives pull out of Afghanistan immediately.

Now that a firm date has been determined for a discontinuation of combat operations, those same people are accusing the tories of 'cutting and running', and calling them cowards.

There's no pleasing some people.




Linda in Vancouver
said
0 0

For all those who hate PM Harper so much,be grateful that you don't have to make these decisions.Most of you would probably fold.On one hand the decision to fulfil our NATO responsibilities means ending our brave troops into a stuation that will certainly cause some of them to lose their lives.On the other had,leaving with the mission still in limbo will have unintended consequences.Other nations will question whether or not Canada is really willing to stand up for human rights,or just sit here,fat,dumb,and happy while we whine and criticize other nations.

While the loss of lives in Afghanistan as created far to many sad days around here,while we are very much in the dark about the real conditions in Afghanistan,and while domestic politics is really driving the debate in Canada,and while I truley believe Canada has given more than it's share of our finest citizens,I also believe this is a good and just cause.

I think we have to leave.Not because the mission has been accomplished,and not because I have changed my mind about the value of the mission.But because we have to few troops to carry on much longer.The bravery and skill of these people cannot make up for the fact that to many of them are doing to many rotations in a very dangerous combat zone.No one can live like that in perpetuity.

For thoe who want to blame Harper,I guess if it makes you feel good,go for it.But if you are a Liberal,or an NDPer,at least you could look in the mirror and accept the role youR parties played in downsizing our military over the last 40 years or so.For not getting them the equipment and the support they need for a mission like this,or for protecting our sovereignty.
GOD BLESS OUR TROOPS


Chuck P
said
0 0

Shawn
said "harper" should have rejected "Bush's" request for troops in the :first place"
Shawn I don't know your political affiliation but I must point out the Liberal's were in power when we were sent to Afghanistan. We went with rusted out Iltis jeeps & worn out equipment and then the Liberal government ordered us out of Kabul in the relatively stable North to the fighting in the Kandahar region, with yes the same worn out, rusted equipment. It took many months or even years to get replacement anything, remember the uniform scandal? Please check the open source news articles and yes it was still the Liberal's in power. I am not an apolgist for the Conservatives but I do want posts to reflect honesty not barely concealed political agenda.


Shawn, Ottawa
said
0 0

How about countries like France step up and do their part?


Grunt
said
0 0

I am a combat solider and I did fight in Kandahar during 2006 and 2007... the heaviest head to head combat year. I have three tours completed and getting ready for a forth. Ive lost multiple good friends over there.
From my perspective the mission is worth while and honorable. However it really irks me and my comrades that there are only a small handfull of nations (British, American, Canadian, Dutch) doing the fighting. I had one tour up North in Kabul and lets face it... its safe there, a relative shelter. Get in the weeds and the dirt with the rest of us and fight. If we had the full participation of all NATO members without caveats, we would be much more willing to stay. The mission would most likely have progressed positively along much more than it has, had we the full support of other NATO members.

This is why I dont feel bad about leaving in 2011... This may be what it takes to finally get participation from our Allies.


GB, Poco, BC
said
0 0

The war we are fighting against Afghanistan’s Taliban is a justifiable war. They are a ruthless extremists group who has no respect to other religion, freedom for women or for democracy. They also groomed up terrorist that carried out heinous crime outside of their country generating fear and obstacle to peace.

But I think Canada and all other countries so far has failed win the war because their main aim was to defeat Taliban militarily. In my opinion this is only one strategy. Providing people way of life, generate income on their own, provide good education facilities, more freedom for women would have won the heart of the population. Until we win this side of the war no one will be ever able to win the war against Taliban. We should know this very well. Russians tried this for 10 years and they failed. Canada and other countries did work on this other side of this development. But I think it was too late and too little. We should spend the same or more of our resources in this front to win this war.

Our valiant forces sacrificed more than 100 soldiers for a just war and we should never let it go without a cause. After 2011 I think we should definitely play a role there as peace keepers and non military development work

As always we should fight the extremist and get the moderate to the main stream and to our side. Hope the West do the same with other moderate Muslim countries like Egypt, Turkey, Bosnia and Indonesia. If we all allow the extremist to bloom in the largest Muslim country Indonesia we are doomed my friend that will be our next world war



Jim in Ottawa
said
0 0

I sort of agree with this expert from the perspective of the importance of "experience continuity" helping to shape the security presence in the region.

However, I thnk what is really hurting NATO is not Canada's notice of withdrawl in 2011, but rather the unwillingness of other NATO members to step things up and offer some relief. Where are the Germans? The Italians? The Spanish? We've given plenty of notice our our intentions to NATO; why are these NATO members not pulling their weight? Why must Canada be expected to do all of the heavy lifting?

Part of having a NATO alliance is that we members are supposed to protect our mutual interests, but some members such as those mentioned above are not contributing their fair share. This in my opinion is the greatest harm to NATO's efforts in Afghanistan. ALL NATO members need to start taking Afghanistan more seriously.


MAL of TO
said
0 0

Get out of Iraq. Get out of Germany. Get out of Japan. Get out of Cyprus. Get out of Cuba. Get out of all the other countries that host NATO and US bases that are not of their own troops and whom we are NOT at war with, then send 10% of these troops to Afghanistan and finish the job once and for all.

I though we went to Afghanistan to chase down Al-Queda and Cave-Boy, time to stop saving the world especially when it doesn't want saving.


Tankserwife
said
0 0

"Bring our Troops Home", please don't belittle our 'children' troops by saying that they are fighting for something they don't 'know what it is'.

As the proud wife of a Canadian soldier who has served 3 tours of duty in Afghanistan, I can tell you that the vast majority of the men and women soldiers there are painfully aware of the reasons for fighting and do so for no reason other than a sense of duty and belief in the cause.

Recruitment in the forces has surged as a result of the Afghan war, and many soldiers have joined out of a desire to serve there. Soldiers know the risks, they leave families, wives, children, to serve their country in conditions and hardships most of us canot imagine. They have seen first hand the people they are fighting to help, and the evil they are trying to destroy. These are remarkable men and women who I consider is a privledge to know.

Every soldier is someone's child, but regardless of your personal political ideology, please don't treat them as children. They are intellegent adults making a tremedous sacrifice, and deserve more respect than that.


MRC in Ontario
said
0 0

"STAND UP FOR CANADA". Our government certainly is!


PBW
said
0 0

reece: "The neo-cons are great at cutting and running. Cowards. They sure like to spend all that money on new military equipment - all dressed up and nowhere to go."

Please check your facts. The decision to pull out was by a majority vote of parliament, NOT a "neo-con" decision. As for cutting and running, isn't that the position of left-wing Liberals and NDP'ers?


The new equipment is just replacing time expired equipment that the Liberals sent our troops into battle with. You have probably forgotten that our troops originally went to Afghanistan - a desert country - wearing forest-pattern BDU's, all because the Liberals didn't think. They went with small jeeps that didn't protect against heavy rain, let alone IED's.

But then, you are probably a Liberal or Dipper, and facts are irrelevant to your stance.



Daniel
said
0 0

How long can we babysit other countries?


opinion
said
0 0

Too bad.
Bring our guys home.


CMT
said
0 0

Begging for Canada to stay and continue to help in what I am sure we all believe to be a useless mission. Peace is no closer to the people of Afghanistan today that it was when this mission started. Canada has lost far too many young people in this valiant effort to bring democracy to a country that is not ready for it..nor do they want it.

Its time to leave.

For those of you who believe that we must remain as a presence there..I ask do any of you have a loved one there?


Dan in Quebec
said
0 0

Only 14 of the 28 NATO countries are participating in Afghanistan as of today. Lets get this right, we would be letting NATO down if we do not extend our commitment in Afghanistan?

Mean while, we have Russian subs roaming around our coastal lines and testing our response in the north, seems to me that we have other military issues to deal with here at home.


Willow B
said
0 0

Send our troops home NOW !!


Soldier from Edmonton
said
0 0

It's time for all the news agencies of this country to start looking to truly tell what we’re doing over in Afghanistan. There are more than soldiers dying and bombs going off. I have been there twice and in areas that we have been able to put the work into there has been real change. I wish every Canadian could see the change there that I have seen, if the people of Canada could see the girls and boys going to school and the women by themselves in town shopping at the markets, none of which was happing in 2006. If they could see the good that we have done everyone would want use to stay. In my personal opinion we have done more good here in Afghanistan then any Peace Keeping operation before.


Rick
said
0 0

Yo Prof Pie Chartt: When exactly will the Afghanistan mission be complete? What tangible event has to occur before Canada can withdraw with "our national pride intact"?
I could have sworn that Bush stated the war was won a few years ago! Canada doesn't need another Cypres or Bosnia where we slowly but surely evolve into a mainstay of the economy! Equally disturbing is that some troops are now returning to Afghanistan for their 3rd and 4th tour!
We have to start to establish a withdrawal plan leaving advisors, mentors and instructors. (Corrections Canada, RCMP and CIDA) People overlook that Afghanistan has the same population as Canada, maybe it's time to teach the fisherman "how to fish" rather then giving Afghanistan "fish". It's time to stand up and step up to the plate Afghanistan.


Doug in BC
said
0 0

Notwithstanding the lack of comittment by some NATO nations in this endeavour,I find it hard to use someone else's lack of effort as an excuse to do less yourself.Just because one person decides it's OK to jump off a skyscraper is that a good reason to follow?This UN sanctioned mission,being carried out by NATO is a good cause that has been executed poorly.But,ALL Canadians have good reason to be extremely proud of the way our people have carried out their mission.They have done it in an extremely professional manner,no whining and complaining,and all at a time when they see their comrades paying the ultimate price.
Yes.We have been let down by many NATO nations.That MUST be addressed.No,we were not successful in getting ALL NATO nations to step up to the plate in Afghanistan.And yes,our people have done far more than their fair share.
It's time to stop the partisan bickering.BOTH major parties MUST find ways to move forward on this.The finger pointing is beyond assinine.The Liberals know they can beat Harper in an election if he he decied our troops should stay.That is exactly what they hoped for the last time.And,they refuse to share the blame for how this is unfolding.Liberals sent the troops there,and Liberals downsized our forces to the point that staying is almost an impossibility.We cannot keep sending the same people on tour,afer tour,after tour.And still,Canada needs to stand with it's allies.There will come a day when our children,or our grandchildren may need our allies to stand by them.
We MUST resolve this WITHOUT political partisanship.But there is no good option on the table right now.Both choices paint Canada in a bad light.
Me,I blame all those who,for decades,neglected our military and dismissed our need for security,and our responsibility to assist NATO and the UN.


D edwards
said
0 0

It is hard to imagine a positive, lasting outcome for this war given the corruption of the local government and security forces, and the safe haven in Pakistan that is the lifeblood of the insurgency. Locals often dont want the taliban presence but it is often the only alternative to counter a corrupt or non-existant government. Unfortunately we dont have the troop numbers, or the stomach for casualties to maintain a consistant security presence in village areas, thus allowing insurgents take over as soon as we leave, this is the critical failure in this mission.
There are too many countries that are simply in the way and not pulling their weight. However a end to a combat role does not mean our withdrawel, there are many assets which could remain such as the PRT which would require a security presence.


Vic
said
0 0

To: Ron, you are absolutely right, as Canadian cannot pay extremely high cost and continuing lost our hero in Bush's cold war under NATO.


kevin in vancouver
said
0 0

JL makes the best point here on the blog. Canada's army is too small to be able to sustain this operation even now let alone past 2011. We could release the current batch of soldiers who have served unbelievable well in 2011 and start training a new batch of recruits to take over in 2011 but that would be completely wrong. These men and woman have seved with honor and distinction they deserve to carry on with their careers.
Remarkable mentions that their are European soldiers who could serve well and want to serve in the combat role but are prevented doing this by their governments this is very true. Let us not forget however that many european nations like Germany and France have huge Muslim populations and face a serious terrorist threat if they were to engage in combat in Afghanistan, they already have problems with that segment of their populations.
There is a viable solution to this dilemma and it is quite simple. Nato members need to fund a nato force. Soldiers from all member states can voluntarily join this force, it can train and work from bases accross Europe and North America and then can be deployed by the Secretary General when needed like in Afghanistan. A Nato vote is all that will be required to deploy the force and the Army then is Nato's and not Canada's or France's or Germany's.
Governments then are not responsible for sending sons and daughters to war they volunteered for a dangerous job end of storey. It takes the politics out of it. Member nations could then reduce their armed forces by appropriate numbers to offset the cost of funding this new military organization.



Jane
said
0 0

We've done our fair share. It's time for someone else in NATO to take their turn.

BRING OUR TROOPS HOME!


SunCoaster
said
0 0

I think this is about to go from a supportive working with the people on the ground war, into a shock and awe war. I don't think this is the kind of conflict we should be involved with.


David Probst
said
0 0

David P from PG. Sometimes one just has to admit a screw-up. Afganistan is, and will be, a complete quagmire. We should quit trying to impose our way of life on the Afghan people. Its NOT GOING to work. All the "experts" in the world are not going to put Humpty Dumpty back together. Pull out now.


Dean
said
0 0

@ Rick in SK

Heavy lifting eh,thats real sacrifice.Give your head a shake pal.Commiting soldiers who are fighting the enemy and are in the HOT zones,thats heavy lifting.Ultimate sacrifice is losing 1's young men for the cause.In this case a lost cause.


Trent a Vet from Edmonton
said
0 0

JP- a vet at what??? I i'm a vet aswell I have served right in the middle of it all...It pisses me off when people like you think that we are only good at peace keeping,I have done that to and do not like being shoot at without the right to engage unless you use self defense...I'm a solider the tax payers pay me to do a job thats what I do... I'm well aware of the risk to life so are my family...It is obvous you have been retired for awell and do not understand what the Army is about anymore....


Rick in AB
said
0 0

I totally agree that Canada has been pulling more than our fair share of the weight in Afgahnistan and that the other NATO members, with the exceptions noted, be made to participate with the heavy lifting ie dangerous fighting.
If they don't want to, then kick in the funding to replace our equipment, although it still won't give our brave men and women a break.

Then again, who are we kidding!!
Yes we can try to bring stability to the region, but it will be twice or three times as long as we have been there so far. Don't forget that these regions have been warring for centuries and due to the religious and cultural mix involved, they won't just quit very soon.

Canada has done her part and we can contribute in other ways as other NATO nations are rotated to the front lines.


Independent thinker
said
0 0

There will never be a military solution to the problems in Afghanistan as long as the Taliban enjoy popular support among the people. If Canada stays, we are commiting ourselves to an endless war with no solution.

Those of you who think that this is "pretty simple" just don't get it. As the Russians found out, the Afghan people are incredibly hardy and are willing to die to defend their territory. As many as we kill through air strikes, more young boys are being trained to carry on the fight. After 7 years, we are no closer to a "victory", are we?

Does anyone remember the original purpose of our going there? We were meant to be peacekeepers who held the fort while the Americans foolishly invaded Iraq (something they had planned to do for years- that was always the primary mission for them, planned in '74 ).

The Americans in Afghanistan, meanwhile, were supposed to find Osama bin Laden and bring him to justice - remember, it wasn't the Taliban who attacked the States, it was al Quida.

But who even talks about bin Laden now? Because the original rationale for the invasions of both Iraq and Afghanistan have fallen through, new ones have been invented for the sole purpose of extending the wars.

We never went to Afghanistan to fight for "women's rights"- that was a sop to appease the left. We never went there to spread democracy- that appeased the right.

Now the mission is so vaguely defined that it is impossible to fulfill. When exactly are we done?

Instead, we might want to consider whether there's a real mission here, one that neither the public nor our leaders wish to acknowledge: the continued occupation of Middle Eastern countries to secure oil for Western economies. That's why the UK and America remain.

And our excuse is...?


Bill Steedman
said
0 0

I believe that the withdrawal of troops will go forward as planned, as it should.
It would however not be unreasonable to provide some key officers and Senior NCOs on exchange service with the U.S. forces as advisors.
We've always done this, both with the Americans and the Brits, and this would address the experience issue without maintaining a large military presence in Afghanistan.


Gary
said
0 0

I think until the US & Nato gets serious about Afghanistan in terms of not just taking & holding ground but rather crushing the enemy decisively be they in Afgan or Pakistan territory, then all we are doing is holding the status-quo which is the same as putting just enough water on the fire to contain the flames but still allowing the fire to smolder.


dulak
said
0 0

Let's remember that it is only the Combat mission that will end. Canada will remain there training Afghan troops, police officers, etc.

No need for NATO to worry. Canadian expertise will remain, only in a different roll.


reece
said
0 0

The neo-cons are great at cutting and running. Cowards. They sure like to spend all that money on new military equipment - all dressed up and nowhere to go.


Jim Mac
said
0 0

Enough

For all you people who think that the fight in Afghanistan is just in the Southern provinces think again Look along the Pakistani boarder in Khowst look at the commitment there from the NATO partners CTV is not broadcasting or reporting on actions there because there are no Canadian missions being conducted there. And to all these so called Soldiers who have been there we would have not reached a high standard if it was not for Allied help, maybe you mouth pieces should leave the KAF and go on a patrol instead of bad mouthing from what you hear at the local Kaf timhortons or pizza hut, I bet when you do leave camp its to go to the bazaar to buy a hero carpet and talk about your tough deployment in your air-condition internet access sea can.


MikeAwesome00
said
0 0

I'm less concerned about NATOs well being than I am about Canada's and Canadians well being... Minister MacKay is correct in suggesting there is lots of help available elsewhere.


Doug On
said
0 0

This really irritates me. NATO, with it's headquarters in Europe. and a European smooth-talking secretary-general, would like for Canada to continue to be cannon fodder. How about the larger European countries, with their big armies and showcase military equiptment stepping up to the plate.
Mr Secretary-General, having those ramp ceremonies continue will "really-hurt" Canadians.


There won't be any peace to keep
said
0 0

until the USA stops its murdering and looting.


GLENN C
said
0 0

We have more than done our share, sorry, we are done in 2011!
where are the Italians and other Nato countries? for that matter why can't the Afghan troops take over?


Canada out of NATO
said
0 0

NATO is a flunkey organization for the US empire.




Inga
said
0 0

I once again see calls for Denmark to send troops and FIGHT. Denmark is already fighting in Afghanistan with approx 700 troops, all stationed in the Helmand province. So far they have suffered 26 deaths and 43 casualties. Proportionally you could say they're actually doing more fighting than Canada with a population of just 5 mill compared to Canada's 33 mill. Perhaps they're not recognized for that effort, mainly because people over here seem to forever mix up Denmark and Holland/Netherlands. Yes, I am born in Denmark and whenever people ask me where I'm from and I tell them Denmark, 9 out of 10 times they'll exclaim: Oh, you speak Dutch. No, I speak Danish. I don't know why that is so hard for people to wrap their heads around. Anyway, there's strong support for the war in Denmark. A recent poll showed 62% of the population in favour of staying on. I think very few countries can show higher support than that.


MJ
said
0 0

So why doesn't NATO send some other troops into where the Canadians are so the local people can get use to them and then they wouldn't have the continuity problem. There are solutions if they just looked at them!


David H in Ottawa
said
0 0

It's just an observation, but it if funny how everyone is commenting on the how European countries (such as France, Germany, Italy) need to step up to bat for N.A.T.O., How strange that all of these countries have less ties to the United States, actually, most of them have been very blunt about there political stance regarding the Iraq/Afghanistan war. Let's face it, this all started around the same time the Bush Mob decided it was time to drop a bomb on a very poor defenceless country, that Posed no threat to anyone, but the cost of Fuel for Americans. Canada has had there head pushed far to high into the Americans back sides, and it's time we stepped back and started to be peacekeepers again.


Lorne
said
0 0

This country is in a dilema - do we or do we not pull out our troops as agreed to in parliament?
Our troops have done a commendable job - but lack the proper military equipment to do the job.
In addition, our troop levels are small and these troops are continue to go back over and over again - without any rest period whatsoever. This is not a good situation as the fatalities and injuries will continue to increase, when troops are tired.
Will our continued presence solve the insurgency problem?
The media continues to report on such issues as Michael Jackson's death and problems he created for himself over the years.
Yet, there are very few reports on our troops who have put their lives on the line, just so that somebody in some other country can have a taste of the freedom we experience in Canada.
It's about time that we have daily reports on the progress of our troops and continued acknowledgement of their efforts.
The current priorities appear to be wrong - an entertainer, for example, who made and spent millions versus a soldier who fights for freedom and makes a miniscule salary for his/her efforts and puts their life on the line.



LMAO
said
0 0

If Canadians believe that when we leave Afghanistan in 2011 it means the end of the CF being in a hostile war zone they are sadly mistaken. When we pull out of Afghanistan we will undoubtably be sent to another hot spot somewhere else in the world. And if you look at the geo-political landscape of the conflicts out there it is all the same. When we leave Afghanistan we will move on to another country that will see our soldiers become the very same western targets they are in Afghanistan. Peace keeping is dead, there are no lines, just bands of thugs that want to see nothing more than instability and the destruction of the western way of life. And they will travel all over the globe to execute their terror. Those that kill us in Kandahar will simply buy a ticket to somewhere else, hopefully not here.


GG
said
0 0

Will someone stuff a old sock into these NATO goofballs. Here is what Canada is saying.....We have done our part in Afghanistan....more than almost all others, in the worst part of the country, Kandahar...and we have CLEARLY spoken...we are out of the combat mission. I am sure we would redeploy a smaller number of troops elsewhere in Afghanistan and we will work with other NATO allies in training of the Afghan secuirty forcesand we will assist in development and diplomacy....but WE are done in 2011.

It would be political suicide for our government to change positions. I am asking all Canadians to send NATO all their worn out socks..maybe they will get the message. And for the Canadian troops who were or are in Afghanistan...You rock !! We are proud of all of you...and its time we get you home.


Remarkable
said
0 0

To Chicken, these are you words written below.
"Canadian soldiers are worn out???? Get real.
I wish I could say that at my job after 5 years and take off a few years to sit around.
No more surrender talk. It's better to fight over there, than to let these guys bring it here."

Chicken, I don't think you can quite grasp the fact, that in the military our job is not a 9am-5pm, 5 day a week thing.

When you are in combat, your job is 24/7 and that goes on for months at a time. I suggest before you make anymore uneducated comments like this, that you go to your nearest recruiting office and if you are eligible, please sign up, Infantry and find out for yourself.

And for the rest of you who have never served in the military, please stop pretending that you know what it is that we go through and please quit pretending that you actually know what is going on there, because just reading your opinions....you don't!


Politricks
said
0 0

If you read the international press you may have noticed that Britain's Army Chief stated this week that the Afghan mission could take 40 years.

I think we need to be clear what an extension to this mission means. More importantly what voice Canada has in forming the broader NATO strategy.

No surprise, Harper of course will not mention a mission extension while the federal election has been looming. But I guarentee it's in the wood work, especially after our order for some new helicopters.


Scott/Hfx
said
0 0

President Obama wants us to stay! What is the Liberal answer to this request, I'd like to know? Are the Liberals now saying Obama is wrong? Personally I side with Obama on this, and would even increase our committment. I don't buy into the argument our troops are tired etc. etc., some may in fact be, but some have asked to return again and again. This is what military does, replace those that are tired with a round of fresh people.


Dave
said
0 0

I think Canada, The Netherlands, UK and USA have done enough of the fighting. It is time for countries like Germany and France to do their fair share and let our soldiers have their most deserved rest.


Shoe
said
0 0

NATO?

How many other NATO nations are there alongside us??
Once ALL other NATO countries have soldiers there can they start talking about us. Until then, shut up!


Kar
said
0 0

It was a "Lost war" before it even started. And... how many of you can named five of our casualties killed over there?


DCR-Toronto
said
0 0

Shawn "If Harper had a spine in the first place he would have denied Bush's request for troops at the beginning of the war."

Obviously some people haven't a clue of what is going on. Harper took office in 2006. Our troops were sent there YEARS before that..by the LIBERALS. Martin then proceeded to OFFER to send our troops to the south where most of the fighting is. I still remember a couple very high ranking Liberal Ministers telling Canadians that we will be taking heavy casualties.

Another Liberal trying to rewrite history, eh Shawn.


Rick in SK
said
0 0

Dean said: "Now it's time for all the so called "important" nations (Fance Germany Italy Netherlands Denmark Spain...etc) to send troops and FIGHT."

Actually the Netherlands is doing a lot of the heavy lifting in Afghanistan. Check your facts before you post.


Pip
said
0 0

"And so would a Canadian departure seriously hurt NATO? The answer at least this point seems to be: Yes."

Cordesman omits the most important fact: that NATO has already been seriously hurt by some of its major members refusing their treaty obligations by placing caveats on what their troops could do. Why those nations chose to do as they did is beyond me. That they need to carry their share of the combat burden, however, is glaringly obvious.

As has been pointed out, Canada has more than carried out its treaty obligations, and has achieved much in the most difficult of conditions. We should, as required by parliamentary decision, withdraw from combat operations according to schedule. We should, however, continue our aid to Afghanistan, continuing the rebuilding of the fabric of that nation, especially working in the field of social development and education. it is only through the latter than an eventual peace will be won, as educated children learn that there are other ways to live than under the medieval tribal system that separates instead of uniting Afghanis. The Taliban and its unyielding fundamentalism that rejects change relies on the tribal divisions; remove them and the Taliban loses its power.

It is also time that Canada,the United States and Britain review their ties to NATO and produce a few caveats of our own. We went to their aid twice. When asked for their aid, the aid offered was so hedged with caveats and cavilling as to be worthless.


Jim Mac
said
0 0

Maybe Nato has other goals to tend to in Afghanistan The southern Afghan province of Helmand is the main producer of Afghan opium, which accounts for more than 90% of the global supply. The UK has said the Afghanistan mission may take them until 2030, Our Focus in Afghanistan was to rid the terror net works that were resposible for 9/11. Canada has to stay in Afghanistan to maintain its good workings with Nato Allies. Don't forget about other Allies who have commited to other conflicts and Canada has stood by and not deployed troops either, we have approx 2500 troops maybe 500 are combat arms who leave the camp and conduct missions, other countrys like France were in Afghanistan since 2001 I recall running into a French special forces team in 2005 conducting missions find out the facts first before bashing other forces




Canadian Soldier
said
0 0

JP:

The days of peacekeeping as you know it are over. It is proven to be completely ineffective. The only thing a peacekeeping mission serves to accomplish is to send soldiers overseas. Force them to watch a genocide happen before their very eyes, and not be permitted to intervene and save the day. And then we come home and live with that the rest of our lives while Canadian citizens pat themselves on the back for a job well done.

I should know, i've been there. Lets please not push our politics back to a failed policy like that ever again.

As for Afghanistan. In my humble opinion, we definitly need a short break. But that doesnt have to mean we are out for good. We can always go back once we're rested up and have had a chance to properly train our new members.


Chicken
said
0 0

Canadian soldiers are worn out????

Get real.

I wish I could say that at my job after 5 years and take off a few years to sit around.

No more surrender talk. It's better to fight over there, than to let these guys bring it here.




Shawn
said
0 0

Too bad!

If Harper had a spine in the first place he would have denied Bush's request for troops at the beginning of the war.

It's the United States' mess. Let them clean it up. That's what you get when you put an arrogant self centered Texan in office.


DaveEast
said
0 0

We should stay and finish the job, no matter how long it takes. Democracy is a hard thing to grow, and the opponents of democracy will continue to test the defenders.

We must stand with our Allies, and especially stand with the Afghan people against this brutal and inhuman fundamentalist terrorist infection.


ADM Saskatchewan
said
0 0

We have done our share and it is time for other NATO members to step up. Please Mr. Harper remain firm and don't let yourself be pressured into extending the 2011 exit from Afghanistan.


Roger T
said
0 0

NATO has others members which they can ask for assistance from. The Canadian death toll has risen to a all time high. Contributing to a lost cause which burdens the fmailies of the dead is overwhelming. Also the cost of TAX PAYERS money gone down the drain which can be better used to update infrastuctures in every cities or help the poor and homeless CANADIAN citizens on CANADIAN SOIL!




George
said
0 0

When the deadline comes in 2011 you can bet Canada will remain there. Canada will remain there as long as the United States wants them there. In 2011 we will have had our new elections and if Peter MacKay is still in for another 4 years he will extend the deadline for another 4 years just wait and see.


GHW
said
0 0

First of all there is no winning to be had here. The best we can hope for by staying in Afghanistan is a reduction in international terrorism and providing some freedom to women and children living there. This is only achievable by committing to a long term policing role with a regular loss of life by our troops. If our troops and their families are willing to make this sacrifice then it might be worth it in the long run. Maybe we should let all the troops and military families vote on whether to continue?


David in Dartmouth
said
0 0

There is no doubt for a moment that "The Canadian Experience " would be missed, when our combat role ends.

There are other ways we could still contribute.

1) Security teams will still be required for the Provincial re-construction teams, and training units for the Afghan Army;

2) The Wainwright War school in Alberta, could provide in valuable training for other NATO countries contemplating sending troops there;

3) Most importantly, this business of allowing Nato members to use caveats to avoid the heavy lifting must cease forthwith.

We need a breather, to re-group, replce our worn equipment and worn troops.

We have done more than our fair share, NATO -STEP UP TO THE PLATE! (U.S., U.K. and Dutch exempted of course)

Pro Patra


Dean
said
0 0

" TOUGH "

We have done our job there.Now it's time for all the so called "important" nations (Fance Germany Italy Netherlands Denmark Spain...etc) to send troops and FIGHT.They now can feel the pain of losing young lads in a useless quagmire of a war.
There is only 1 goal in war,and that is to win.Not to play peace keeper and rebuild said country when you are fighting.After you have destroyed and cleaned up what is left of your enemy,then you can start rebuilding and repairing the damage.We have done none of this,and that is why we and the Brits and Americans are struggling.The Taliban could care less how many of there soldiers die,ther not afraid of death.So unless we decide (nato) to become exrtemely ruthless,we can never win this war.


simon
said
0 0

Stephane Dion used to continually ask Harper in the House to go tell NATO "We're Out!". Harper refused to listen.
Now Harper is under pressure from both Obama and NATO to stay.
Know what? He just might !


carole davis
said
0 0

Why not ask the ground troops? You know, the ones that are on their third or fourth tour of duty there. Why not as the reservists who volunteer to go? Apparently they think tis is important.


Glen
said
0 0

Our brave Canadian soldiers have more than fulfilled their obligation in Afghanistan. It's time for other countries to step up to the plate and we need to bring our men and women home.


D. Winkler Moose Jaw
said
0 0

For things to change, that country needs a change in culture. Fighting this war won't change that. Secondly, it's very hard to fight Men and I use that term loosely, who hide in women's clothing blowing up public buildings like they did the other day.


Jon in London ON
said
0 0

Canadian soldiers are clearly setting the example for the world, and the Conservatives are the only party to recognize.

The true issue is that Obama has no influence over or respect from other NATO countries. They simply smile politely and ignore the NATO requests for more troops.

It is interesting to note another story today about a "disillusioned" US war resister being supported and allowed to stay in Canada for another six months.

In 2008, all parties except for the Conservatives adopted a non-binding motion urging that American military resisters be allowed to stay in Canada.

Michelle Robidoux, spokeswoman for the War Resisters Support Campaign, you need to support your Canadian troops. What has this group done to support Canadian soldiers?


Dean
said
0 0

NATO is just a washed up old boys club. Look who is doing all of the fighting and dying for the club. I don't hear of the French, Germans Italians, Belgians etc doing any of the bloody work. They are all safe in the non dangerous zones of the region. How about those countries step up and do something. After all, it's closer to their backyard than ours.


Bring our troops home
said
0 0

I would tell them to pull out NOW! Enough is enough, our children are out there fighting a cause that probably don't even know what it is. And then we try to teach the Afghans democracy and civilization, they come here and try to culture US and kill their own. I say ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.


JDF
said
0 0

JP:

In order for us to be effective Peacekeepers, we need to be effective Soldiers first. How can you keep peace that doesn't exist yet? Ya gotta make it before you can keep it.

Good for the Conservatives for not budging...


Remarkable
said
0 0

Canada's continuing presence in the south has made a lot of headway, creating better and safer living conditions for many of the civilians in that region. I know that a lot of naysayers on here will disagree with me, but I don't listen to those people, becaue for one, they have never served in uniform and two, they have never been in these area's. I guess it's easy to be an arm chair general and these days, it appears that many people here all of a sudden become military experts in their own minds.

Canada's departure from the South would most definately hurt the NATO mission there. However, many of our allies within NATO (especially the Germans and Italians) should start lifting these restrictions they have on their military who are serving in Afghanistan.

Canada has been doing more than it's fair share, which has always been the case in major military expeditions, but it is now time that these governments in Europe start pulling their own weight.

I know of German Soldiers who would love to move into the Southern Regions and do their share, however their governments are holding them back and that is not fair to neither Canada, the US, The Dutch or the Brits who have been doing most of the fighting there.


Prof. Pye Chartt
said
0 0

IT'S ALL PRETTY SIMPLE...

Our departure from Afghanistan can, and will only, be justified if/when we can credibly and legitimately say that, at that point, we've fully achieved our ORIGINAL objective. Otherwise, it's not "mission accomplished" but, rather, "mission incomplete and unaccomplished."

Indeed, 10 years is a long time...and the mission, clearly, SHOULD be completed by now. However, we all know that NATO still has unfinished business there.

Setting a pull-out date, long in advance of appearing to complete a mission, makes a sad statement that it's not really about "winning" as much as it is putting in your time and being able to say that you helped out. That's a wimpy, politically-driven, unmilitary posture.

My hope is that our federal government doesn't shame and demean the valiant efforts and brave sacrifices of our men and women in uniform; and especially those who gave their lives for the cause...by "quitting" at an "early" juncture.

Regardless, politicians in Ottawa will never, and should never, diminish our national pride.


John
said
0 0

I am not against Canada doing its part in helping in Afghanistan, however its time other countries stepped up to the plate! There are other NATO countries that won't do their share. CANADA. GET OUT AT THE TIME YOU SAID YOU WOULD. It's also not up to Americans to fight and die for the remaining countries that refuse to send in soldiers to fight.


A Voice From Ottawa
said
0 0

What's in it for us? Why should we continue to send our young people over there to risk death and injury beyond the agreed upon deadline? Where are the other NATO countries and why is their blood richer than ours?

Canada has been a world leader in providing assistance to the Afghan people, let those who have watched from the sidelines in NATO step up and do their part.


JP- a Vet in BC
said
0 0

its nice for Nato to keep saying if Canada leaves it will be this and that.

For the Political party in power- if they extend- it will be political suicide for them.

Remember the people who put us into this Nato duty- Martin and Hillier- have both gotten so far away from this- and are collectoing nice pensions. You do not hearthen speak out anymore.

BRING OUR TROOPS HOME.

RETURN then to PEACEKEEPING- where we are experts at.


JL
said
0 0

It's not that Canada's troops feel unimportant, it's that they are mentally and physically worn out. We have so few soldiers already, and by staying in this mission we continue to lose more troops. Not just through death, but through injuries and mental trauma(PTSD)which deem the soldiers incapable of returning to tour. Many troops have related this mission to that of the Vietnam war. Have we not learned from the past?


Steve
said
0 0

Someone tell NATO to take it's turn in the south and not hide in the north.


Ron
said
0 0

NATO is done like the cold war.


Share with your social Network:

Facebook DIGG Newsvine Delicious Twitter StumbeUpon Reddit Yahoo! Buzz

 

Advertisement

Contest

Today's World Stories

Faysal Khabbaz Hamoui, Ambassador of the Permanent Representative Mission of the Syrian Arab Republic to Geneva, delivers his statement during a special session of the Human Rights Council at the European headquarters of the United Nations in Geneva, Switzerland, Friday, June 1, 2012.  (Keystone / Salvatore Di Nolfi)

UN rights chief warns of full civil war in Syria

More