CTV News | Afghan war 'deteriorating,' U.S. NATO boss warns

Top Stories -   

Afghan war 'deteriorating,' U.S. NATO boss warns

Viewer

CTV News Video

CTV National News: Paul Workman on pressure for troops
Discussions are under way in Washington that could determine the course of events in Afghanistan for all the NATO allies, including Canada. The top U.S. Commander in the field has told U.S. President Barack Obama that without more troops, the war could be lost.
CTV News Channel: Elliot Tepper, Carleton University
A specialist in Asian studies explains why Obama is taking his time to decide which strategy to follow for the war in Afghanistan.
CTV News Channel: Eleanor Clift, Newsweek Magazine
A contributing magazine editor discusses whether U.S. politicians are surprised by a leaked report about the 'deteriorating' Afghan war.
CTV News Channel: Janis Mackey Frayer in Kabul
A leaked report says the revised strategy in Afghanistan is not working, but Afghan police officials say while more work needs to be done, more international troops may not be the best answer.
CTV News Channel: Retired general Lewis MacKenzie
Retired general Lewis MacKenzie is relived that U.S. Gen. Stanley McChrystal made the comments. Finally, says MacKenzie, a commander speaking out instead of following a politician's points.

Font-size:      Share  Print  Comments(45)

Photos

Slideshow image

View Larger Image

Selected Comment

We need to take a stand on Terrorists/Al Qaeda and people that don't believe in human rights, rights of women, rights of freedom, etc I rather be fighting these guys over there than in our backyard.

Kevin

Afghan war 'deteriorating,' U.S. NATO boss warns

talking about
Afghan war 'deteriorating,' U.S. NATO boss warns

CTV.ca News Staff

Date: Mon. Sep. 21 2009 9:00 AM ET

Weeks after taking command of all NATO troops based in Afghanistan, U.S. Gen. Stanley McChrystal wrote a confidential report to the Pentagon, advising that the war was "deteriorating" and could be lost without sending in additional troops.

In a report dated August 30, McChrystal informed U.S. Defence Secretary Robert Gates that NATO would not be successful in defeating the country's insurgents if it didn't change its strategy and better organize its approach with allied forces.

"Although considerable effort and sacrifice have resulted in some progress, many indicators suggest the overall effort is deteriorating," McChrystal said in his report.

While McChrystal acknowledged in his report that "additional resources are required" to win the war, he wrote that focusing too heavily on "force or resource requirements misses the point entirely."

The Washington Post published the report on its website on Monday, with the exception of some portions that the U.S. government requested be withheld. The newspaper first reported the details of McChrystal's assessment of the war late Sunday.

Geoff Morrell, a spokesperson for the U.S. defence secretary, confirmed the report, but said the Pentagon would not release McChrystal's assessment.

"While we would have much preferred none of this be made public at this time we appreciate the paper's willingness to edit out those passages which would likely have endangered personnel and operations in Afghanistan," Morrell said in an email statement.

Additionally, McChrystal wrote that "there is a crisis of confidence among Afghans -- in both their government and the international community -- that undermines our credibility and emboldens the insurgents. Further, a perception that our resolve is uncertain makes Afghans reluctant to align us against the insurgents."

CTV's South Asia Bureau Chief Janis Mackey Frayer said that Afghan officials don't want to see any more foreign troops inside their borders.

"Afghan officials, and particularly those affiliated with the Afghan security forces, are saying that, really, international troops are the last thing that Afghanistan needs," Frayer told CTV's Canada AM on Monday morning from Kabul.

Instead, the officials would rather have money sent "to try to bolster, train and hire more Afghan forces," Frayer said. "There are currently about 130,000 Afghan police, some 80,000 Afghan soldiers and they (officials) are saying that should be the focus here, not to reinforce to Afghans that there is a foreign occupation of their country."

McChrystal's report is now in the hands of U.S. President Barack Obama, who is reviewing its contents while he decides whether to send more U.S. service members into Afghanistan.

A separate report from McChrystal on the Afghan war will soon be sent to the White House and the Pentagon, which will detail the troop and resource needs of U.S. troops. Weekend media reports suggested the U.S. general had completed the second report, though his senior spokesperson, Rear Adm. Gregory Smith said Sunday that it was not yet finished.

In a series of recent television interviews, Obama explained the questions he is asking the military as he considers what resources to provide them with.

"How does this advance America's national security interests? How does it make sure that al Qaeda and its extremist allies cannot attack the United States homeland, our allies, our troops who are based in Europe?" the president said.

"If supporting the Afghan national government and building capacity for their army and securing certain provinces advances that strategy, then we'll move forward," Obama continued. "But if it doesn't, then I'm not interested in just being in Afghanistan for the sake of being in Afghanistan."

The release of McChrystal's report on the Post's website comes at a time when a partisan debate on the future of the war is raging in Washington: Senate Republicans want to see more troops in the war-torn country, while many Democrats want to put on the brakes.

Since taking office, Obama has sent 21,000 more U.S. troops to Afghanistan, who pushed into Taliban-districts in the weeks leading up to the country's Aug. 19 election.

McChrystal officially took command of the nearly 90,000 U.S. and NATO troops in the Afghanistan on June 15.

With files from The Associated Press

Comments are now closed for this story

Roger T
said
0 0

I think it had already deteriorating the day it started. The US is bankrupted and dragging it's allies with them. The US is really putting the term "Together we stand, divided we fall" to its promise. Its another FAILED war with all the high tech equipments only to lose to outdated machineries on foreign soil.

The only reason the US and its allies is trying to put up a fake and false campaign front because they need to SAVE FACE, even thought the leader (US) is bankrupted.


The Man
said
0 0

Afghanistan truly is Canada's Vietnam. The Americans lost in Vietnam because the media made it look like the Americans were being slaughtered when they weren't. They stirred up such a strong anti-war sentiment that the Americans were forced to withdraw.

Now the media is doing the same thing in Afghanistan. If we lose the war there, it will be because of the media, not the Taliban.


Kevin
said
0 0

We need to take a stand on Terrorists/Al Qaeda and people that don't believe in human rights, rights of women, rights of freedom, etc I rather be fighting these guys over there than in our backyard.


terry in ottawa
said
0 0

This should not be a surprise to anyone who is familiar with the history of this area. You cannot kill an ideology and for everyone of them that is killed you make 10 more to replace them. It is unfortunate that so many young people from the US and Canada have had to die and what I find very upsetting is that when one speaks out about our involvement many seem to take it as a direct insult to those who are over there and those that have lost their lives. To justify our involvement so those that have died are not for nothing is not a good reason to continue. The US should have learned this from their experience in South East Asia. They lost 58,000 and killed something like 2.5 million Vietnamese and for nothing!


Oshawa Duane
said
0 0

We have a lot of different names for the same enemy, all have the same common root, Islam. Taliban, Al Qaeda, Hammas, Al Umma, Mujahideen,Fedayeen, Lashkar-e-Toiba, Abu Hafs Al-Masri Brigades and the list goes on and on


Martin
said
0 0

With the end of the European Missile Defense Shield, expect the new Russian involvement to escalate. We are now using Russian territory and airspace, and nobody in the Canadian media is mentioning it! And, is the Karzai regime really as democratic as Taraki's was, anyway?

Looks like NATO has gone full-circle from the 1980's in realizing exactly which side was building the schools, the roads, and upholding the rights of women in Afghanistan back then.


Wade Ens
said
0 0

As long as school girls brave having acid thrown at them to get to school we should be supporting those brave girls.
The new democracy is not perfect and there is some corruption. Let's not forget we had Gomery show us there was corruption here and a party running on stolen dirty money.
The young people are learning to read and write and 15 million educated women will change Afganistan forever.
We can never be wrong fighting for human rights and we cannot afford more 911.

Dale
said
0 0

Exactly what war has the U.S. ever won, besides the invasion of Grenada?
They take credit for WWII, but they were about 2 years late entering, and thanks to a couple of big bombs.


Adele from Toronto
said
0 0

Vietnam loss of lives was 55,000 and Iraq was 5,000.
and Afganistan 1500.
Iraq is now stable and we see Iran screaming for fair and free elections.
Half the Senate and Congress is up for elections every two yrs for 4 yr terms. So you can expect positions to change from weak people who bend daily with the wind of polls.
The surge Obama has started is the right answer the war has been under resourced from the beginning. The most improvised explosives ied's are hitting the new troops who are just getting organized on the ground.
The big problem was the taking ground and then retreating because of lack of man power. Now the USA can do what Canada did and thats take it and hold it.
The surge needs a little time.


Peter Kavanagh
said
0 0

Where are all the NATO partners ?
They need to step up , we just can't let these guys go back to treating their women like dogs .


DaveEast
said
0 0

This position has nothing to do with "ideology". It has to do with the werakness of Western commitment to fight the war with the proper resources and commitment. As usual, when we get involved, it is with not enough will, soldiers, or commitment to winning. We start whining when, as wars always see occur, casualties happen. It is disgusting to dishonour the dead by turning our backs on this job before it is properly ended.

We are in a total war against Islamic fundamentalists who want nothing short of our destruction. Knowing this, those who want us to flee the scene really don't get it.


Nancy : Concerned Student
said
0 0

The Liberal leader who is the biggest Bush war hawk we have, supported the Iraq invasion too. Bush said in Iraq bring it on. In Canda Ignatieff said mess with me and I will mess with you until I am done.
Ignatieff wrote the Lesser evil saying we must fight evil by trafficiing in evil including pre-emptive war (invasion) corrersive interrogation. He also wrote A Just Pain, Blood and War and Blood and Belonging to mention a few.
I appreciate that mr Ignatieff did not have the money to retire in the USA and could get a quick pension back in Canada after a 3 yr stint in Canadian politics with a guaranteed liberal seat close to Toronto.
But the Ignatieff the self described American gamble too much and his books would be an embarassment to Canada and be used against us. We need the steady sure hand of the conservatives that always push for womens rights and human rights in a persitant way, not wreckless over the top stuff that last until the next polls like the Liberals.



Mark
said
0 0

...and the Taliban/Al-Queda launched their terrorist attacks from the safety of Afghanistan and Pakistani 'tribal lands'.

They continue with their terrorist plans and 'sleeper cells' as we've seen in recent court actions.

So what do we do (Colin Kenney-are you listening?) just pack-up, allow terroristst their safe havens and admit that we dont' have the fortitude to stick it out?

We do need a comprehensive strategy. Shame it's only 8 years late in coming


Jake
said
0 0

I find it interesting that the media try to drum up support for the war by discussing the positive influence it is having on women's rights, democracy, etc. Let's be honest, the mission has never been about women's rights. It's just something that helps us stomach our involvement in a war based on questionable pretexts. If NATO really cared about human suffering, don't you think they could at least protect food shipments into Darfur where people cannot expect to enjoy the right to live, let alone go to school. We should expect more scrutiny of this mission from our leaders. The lives of this countries best citizens are being risked over there on a daily basis. The longer this war continues, the harder it will be to explain its purpose to our children.


Raj
said
0 0

They need more boots on the ground, that's the probem.If Obama holds back it will be the failing of him. We are there becuse of NATO It woudnt matter who is in power we would stll be there until 2011.I fear if Iggy gets in, it could be longer


Tyler Wyatt in Vancouver
said
0 0

Ignatieff sounded like Bush when he was popular. Then he tried his Obama impersonation and hope stuff but as Obama sinks in the polls who will Ignatieff try and impersonate next on this issue.
Canada has the right balance and the USA is starting to figure that out give Obama another 6 months and he will get it right too.


John Global
said
0 0

The US leadership is the problem. Just sending more troops to Afhganistan is a far stretch from a winning hand. When you have the Commander in Chief on a personal popularity quest rather than dealing directly with the Taliban supporters behind the scenes, then there is truly reason for feeling hopeless. For the US to remain the leader of the free world a Ronald Reagen is needed who was such a key figure in toppling the Berlin Wall without "firing a shot". Freedom is not negotiable.


fancythat
said
0 0

Just what our troops need right now...negative feedback from who? We need those American troops over there right now to support our young men and women who are doing their darndest.I speak for our son who is in country right now and would be truly dismayed to read that he is there for no reason...Mom


Martin
said
0 0

Germany, for one, cannot do more in Afghanistan since its constitution is based, in part, on the 1945 terms of surrender. We rarely hear about that part...

The Russians are stepping in, though.


David in Dartmouth
said
0 0

Pack up and quit!?

If that was the attitude in the last war... well.. the swastika would be flying over us instead of the red maple leaf!

Give the surge a chance,

This is just what Mr. Tallie was waiting for... enough angst over enough dead westerners and the country is there for the picking..

It is little wonder the locals are not throwing in with us, they are at least intelligent enough to know that our collective commitment is indeed very questionable, hence my earlier prediction when the decision was taken to go to Khandahar... we will stay until enough "bodies" are brought home.. I never thought it would be so soon.

Thanks a lot media, acadaemics etc., now you will debate for the next 30 years as to why we failed.. and it was not our troops, but those who supposedly supported them..!! SHAME ON YOU!!


Marc O
said
0 0

Hearts and minds.

That used to be a tenet of the US military in Vietnam; to win over the hearts and minds of the Vietnamese people.

Of course, this is not Vietnam. In Vietnam the US military forces defended and propped an unpopular figurehead (Ngo Dinh Diem) in a war against NVA insurgents, led by Ho Chi Minh. In the end, the unpopular figurehead was arrested and assassinated by his own troops and the war went downhill from there.

No, THIS is Afghanistan. Our forces are propping a corrupt and possibly illegitimately-reelected, and highly unpopular figurehead (Hamid Karzai) in a war against Al Qaeda and Taliban insurgents, led by Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar, respectively.

Again, we're dealing with troops vying to win over the hearts and minds of the Afghan people. I also notice there hasn't been much said by General McChrystal about the highly tainted reelection of Hamid Karzai and the cynicism among the Afghani people over the legitimacy of the election, or the stuffed ballots, and the general knowledge that there is rampant corruption in the Karzai administration. No, this is not Vietnam.

Sometimes the cynic in me wonders if the stuffed ballot boxes that reelected Karzai were not planted by Karzai government officials under the guidance of the US government. Something is definitely wrong there, when you find a high-ranking American general being quiet over such a major stumbling block to winning the hearts and minds of the Afghan people. After all, fair, honest and transparent elections are the key to winning hearts and minds, isn't it? And that silence is as telling as an endorsement to me.

This is not Vietnam. Yet. But if the people of Afghanistan turn against their 'duly elected' leader and arrest him, it will be.



G. Helm
said
0 0

Dale: how about these?

The Revolutionary War, the Spanish-American War, the Mexican-American war, the Civil War (if you consider it as a war against rebellious insurgents), World War 1 (late arrivals, but they were undoubtedly on the winning side and had made a useful contribution).


Steve in Ottawa
said
0 0

This is a low scale, dirty war, and will remain so. Nobody wants to fight a war, but some recognize we have to (and some don't) and that creates a dramatic division of opinion.

AlQueda started the current war in Afghanistan with the attack on the World Trde Center. Many Canadians died in the initial attack. Attacks have also taken place around the world on innocent civilians in public areas so it is a sustained effort by the radical Islamists and a sustained defensive effort by the West, which really doesn't want to fight there.

Nobody has ever won a war in Afghanistan. Russia, Britain, Ghengis Khan, Alexander the Great. They have all gone in, won a few battles and then suffered slow expulsion with the philosophy of the local population. But, Afghanistan is a sponge; every radical Islamist in the the world is focused on Afghanistan and Iraq. That is where they can attack. If they did not have this forum, they would be focused on the West. So, it is not a question of good or bad, it is a question of bad, worse and worst. Right now it is the best of a very big mess, one which is getting worse by the day. Staying there does not solve the problem, but neither does leaving.


Acorn
said
0 0

Instead, the officials would rather have money sent "to try to bolster, train and hire more Afghan forces," Frayer said. "There are currently about 130,000 Afghan police, some 80,000 Afghan soldiers and they (officials) are saying that should be the focus here, not to reinforce to Afghans that there is a foreign occupation of their country." Please, I work here and the money we pour into this country never makes it to the places it is suppose to go. The Warlords and politicians in the Loyal Jirga steal it all for themselves. The majority of the security forces are corrupt because they do not get paid enough.Pay them a few hundred $ at a checkpoint and they walk/look away. Not good.


V aka Layton in Moncton
said
0 0

I hate to say it, but the Russians will tell you, you cannot win in Afghanistan. The more troops you send the worse it will get. In fact I have recently read articles to that effect WRITTEN by Russians. This will be a war without end. You cannot win a 'War on Terror' as terror is not an enemy but a way of waging the war. Just like the 'War on Drugs' is a failure so too will this be. If we truly honour our soldiers who sacrificed their lives, then we'll leave this place. So no more of our men and women will join them.


The Truth Hurts!.
said
0 0

Is this surprising news?. Not really!. The whole world know that NATO is losing this war even though our media is telling us the complete opposite!. At least 50% of the Afghanis think that the NATO are bloody merciless invaders and why would not they think this way!. Not a single week passes without NATO killing tens of Afghani civilians in attacks on weddings, workers' gatherings, etc. Karazai pleaded with us several time to show some care for Afghani lives but our typical arrogance would not let us listen. We should let Afghanis settle their conflicts and only help them in sitting together and share power for a long term peace!. Out of Afghanistan now!.


Red X
said
0 0

It would be unpatriotic to criticize the mission so says the Media. We are essentially proping up Karzai to run Afghanistan to the stone age.

Can you support the troops with out supporting the mission?!


J-L
said
0 0

You can't have it both ways.

Our troops are over there in order to preserve our freedoms here. Liberals constantly support suspected extremists, like Harkat, Charkaoui, and associates, and then also argue to withdraw our soldiers from Afghanistan.

I would argue that there are consequences domestically to a strategic withdrawal of our troops over there, and that would be, at the very least, a tightening on restrictions to our own rights and freedoms. They will eventually strike us, of that, there is no doubt. What is stopping them now is that our troops are keeping them busy.

If we bring our men home, lets tighten the laws on religious extremism and broaden police powers to fight it. Otherwise, it's foolishness, akin to giving your enemy a reprieve, while at the same time, letting your guard down.


WarmongersDon'tHeartheTruth
said
0 0

Who in there right mind makes these comments on this board to continue the war? Do you have shares in millitary contractors? Do you have more experience than McChrystal on this invasion?

The war was lost before it even started.. how many billions and trillions of dollars and lives need to be lost for you to listen to the voice of reason?

I would conclude there is no voice of reason for the Warmonger posts as they only have Blood on their minds...

What a shame... wake up and bring the troops home!


Alan in Kitchener
said
0 0

The biggest problem is that we're currently not even putting a dent in their numbers. We're not just fighting Taliban in Afghanistan, we're fighting massive amounts of foreign nationals, from Pakistan and elsewhere who believe they're in a holy war. The combined coalition force could achieve at 10 to 1 ratio and still lose, due to the insurgents nearly bottomless manpower pool. Our countries do not have those numbers in uniform and eventually even the greatest troops in the world will be whittled down by deaths, stress and injuries.

This is not about supporting the troops, I do 110%, this is just basic math.


They cry for more till they've got excuse to lose.
said
0 0

Toward the end of his report, McChrystal revisits his central theme: "Failure to provide adequate resources also risks a longer conflict, greater casualties, higher overall costs, and ultimately, a critical loss of political support. Any of these risks, in turn, are likely to result in mission failure."

Eventually no more troops are sent and the army blames the politicians or media for losing the war.


The Whiteman
said
0 0

Most people see little value in continuing this mission due to their ignorance. The government has failed to temper people's expectation as to what success means in Afghanistan. The flawed election also makes one question our involvement...BUT...do most people realize that Afghanistan is not Canada. They are not suited to a hand over between one elected official and another. Anyone who loses their position is likely to create more chaos by encouraging their supporters or officials they have emplaced to wreak havoc. Fixing the election was probably the best thing for that country at this time. They don't have the organically grown administrative government or skills to manage...and you want to have them change over??


Phil in London
said
0 0

Sadly I agree that the war is deteriorating. So much so we don't in our everyday life even consider our country at war.

I still feel it was the right thing to do but I doubt anyone really believed this would still be going on nearly 8 years later.

I believe this is a clear sign that NATO is not the answer nor the UN.

If the USA wanted this fight they should have done so under only one pretext, that they were declaring war for a stated purpose and let the chips fall where they may. Without trying to gain approval from these two bodies. Allies could come voluntarily, remain netural or support the Taliban if they chose to.

All I am saying is that without NATO/UN the US would have had a different set of calculations to make before it went to war.

The Canada of values being so staunch a member of NATO had no choice but to line up it's young men and women for a combat role when everyone else ducked and ran.

I'm not sure Canada wouldn't have made the same choice without NATO but it woudl have been under a diferent pretense than going to set a great example and then wondering why the Euro-coward countries weren't right there with them.


It's not the media and academics calling war lost
said
0 0

It's the general in charge.

Of course he's trying to put the blame on anyone else instead of admitting he and the rest of the Pentagoons can't fight worth crap.




let afghanistan fall
said
0 0

pull out. save soldiers' lives. take away international funding from afghanistan. go home and deal with terrorism through more effective means. it's that simple.


Dave
said
0 0

To Jake.

It is the UN in Darfur not NATO. do your homework. And by the way, the UN has not been a crediable organization since Somilia.


Bill Steedman
said
0 0

The US Commander is a very capable man. I suspect the remarks that he is making privately would lean towards the policy side of the coin. Karzai has not reigned in the corruption and may in fact be part of it. He needs to go, and considerably more political pressure needs to be brought to bear on Afghani leadership to deal harshly with corrupt officials and war lords. Read Canadian Colonel Ian Hope's book regarding the conflict to understand the early errors made by US leadership. Their new commander is on-side with the Canadian approach which will ultimately prevail. The reluctance to properly arm and train the ANA is inexplicable.


Rick in NB, Ste Marie
said
0 0

This is a double edged sword. The more soldiers we lose the harder it is to admit we made a big mistake.


General McCrazy is going to start crying.
said
0 0

See the pic of that guy? He is old. They need a new mechanic on the job.


Sgt Chris
said
0 0

"The Truth Hurts", Where do you get your info from? Have you spoken to 100% of Afghanis, so you know how 50% of them feel? And if all the media is reporting one thing, how the heck could the whole world know they are ALL WRONG?

Quote- "Karazai pleaded with us several time to show some care for Afghani lives but our typical arrogance would not let us listen."

---- Yes some innocent people die, thats a shame, but THAT IS WAR! You have NO IDEA the lengths NATO goes to to protect innocent lives! And for every civilian killed, there are probably 100 Taliban killed, and quite possible a thousand Canadian or American lives saved because those B*STARDS are dead!

My opinions on being over there, are another discussion, but I do know what I am talking about in this area- I have served over there.

GHW
said
0 0

This war is not winnable. The best we can hope for is to hold back the enemy and police indefinitely with no real change for many-many years. Are we prepared to do this? I don’t think so.
I realize that for too many on the conservative far right this seems the only way to deal with the crazies in the world but your methods will be impossible to conclude anything unless you are prepared to wipe them all out laying waste everything in the way similar to the conclusion of WWII. This is simply not an option.
I’d like to also remind everyone that war in general is disgusting and reprehensible and should only be conducted as a last ditch attempt to protect ourselves from total loss. 9/11 was tragic and deplorable but the response was incorrect and played right into the hands of these wacko’s.
Mark my words; If humanity continues down this path it can only lead to one place. Satan weaves his webs in all corners of all societies and too many of us are getting caught.

WWJD


Allan Eizinas
said
0 0

Al Qaeda - not the Taliban is the enemy. The Taliban are the same USA and Canadian backed and supplied Afghanistan nationalists who fought for their country against the Russians to throw them out.

The Taliban won that war.

Al Qaeda is in Pakistan. Separate Al Qaeda from the Taliban as the enemy, negotiate with the Taliban to keep Al Qaeda out of Afghanistan, declare victory and go home.

That is what Obama is going to do.



Rose
said
0 0

Others have been saying this for some time. The British were talking about the deterioration a long time ago. Canadians have been left in the dark for far too long.
Afghans are not confident especially after the Radiation was found in their children and many adults.
UMRC’s Field Team found Afghan civilians with acute symptoms of radiation poisoning, along with chronic symptoms of internal uranium contamination.


Julie in Montreal
said
0 0

How the war's progressing depends on our objective. Every time we take casualties the naysayers rant about how we're 'losing', or how things are 'deteriorating.' We're not there to try and force a setpiece battle WW2-style, nor are we there as peacekeepers or nation-builders. We're there to punish the Taliban for harboring those who propogate violent hatred towards us, and for doing so themselves. As long as we're giving the jihadists a good beating then things are proceeding just fine. It's either that or we can let them attack us and our allies, just like they were having a grand time doing before we took the fight to them.


M
said
0 0

I agree completely with Arjay in this matter. The fact that so many people can justify this slaughter is disturbing to me, and the fact that they can support more soldiers is confusing to me. Thanks Arjay, you articulated that better than I could!


Share with your social Network:

 

Advertisement

Contest

CTV News

Canada in Afghanistan

Canada in Afghanistan

The latest news, photos and interactives from Canada's mission in Afghanistan.

Janis Mackey Frayer

Janis Mackey Frayer

A long way to the exit: Training the Afghan police force

Exit Strategy

Exit Strategy

What's the real plan for Canada's 2011 exit strategy?

Canada's new ambassador to Afghanistan, Bill Crosbie, visits Sayad Pacha School near Kandahar Airfield in this Sept. 8, 2009 photo. (THE CANADIAN PRESS/Bill Graveland)

CTV.ca Exclusive

Janis Mackey Frayer sits down with Canada's new ambassador in Afghanistan.

Petawawa

Petawawa

Two-part series on Canadian actor, director and playwright Christopher Morris.

Bios and Pictures

Casualties

Canadian Casualties

We remember those who lost their lives in Afghanistan since the mission began in 2002.

In Pictures

Hockey night in Kandahar

Hockey night in Kandahar

Hockey night in Kandahar? Soldiers let off steam playing desert ball hockey.

Helping conflict victims in Kabul

Helping victims in Kabul

A Red Cross orthopedic centre gives new hope to disabled Afghans in Kabul.

Corrections Canada

Corrections Canada

Corrections Canada and Canadian Forces reconstruct and train at an infamous Afghan prison.

After the surge

After the surge

A look at life in Afghanistan after the U.S. troop surge.

User Tools

About the tools

Need to get in touch with CTV? You can email the CTV web team using the 'Feedback' button.

Share it with your network of friends

Share this CTV article or feature with your friends. Click on the icon for your favourite social networking or messaging system, and follow the prompts.

Share this article with Facebook

Share this article with Digg

Share this article with Newsvine

Share this article with delicious

Share this article.
Send Email

Share this article with Twitter

Share this article with StumbleUpon

Share this article with Reddit

Share this article with Yahoo! Buzz