Maybe it's time to bring "The Troops Home"? Artic
YarLeon @ Tue Oct 10, 2006 1:25 pm
canadiansailor canadiansailor:
Lets put this in perspective, those of us in uniform have no desire to be shot at or to shoot anyone, yet we all feel we need to be in Afghanistan as do many who are currently joining to serve there.
Well, Canadiansailor, you have commented on the most basic reason the majority of Canadians (IMHO) are struggling with this issue. Tell us, what is the purpose of Canada's Military. You state no desire to be shot at or shoot anyone. Last time I checked the CF is not a police force. Our soldiers, for whom I have the greatest respect by the way, are trained to kill...this is not a hard concept to understand. That is their first role, and I pray will remain so in the event our nation needs to call on them. Also Canada's CF is strictally voluntary, another reason I am proud and respect you and your fellow members.
If any civilians bothered to follow the Somalia inquiry and other hearings held these past few years they would have witnessed, as I did, the utter foolishnes of our governments' treatment of the CF and it's members. I believe it bordered on the Criminal that the Prime Minister, and any Prime Minister of Canada has the same power, was able to effectively shut down these inquiries when they get close to making our Government and top Military officials accountable to the other members of the CF and the citizens of this country. Why is it so difficult for Canadians to recognize and accept that military forces are trained to kill as they struggle not to be killed themselves? I would welcome with an open mind discussion across this country about our Cf's role in Afghanistan and elsewhere, however I am having trouble with the argument that Canada is in that country to help aid thier people set up their own government, while the other hand is actively seeking mortal combat with the Taliban or any other insurgent groups. In my mind, the combat has to take place before any stability can be brought to Afghanistan, and I sorely wish my Government and the CF would explain this to our citizens.
Scrappy @ Tue Oct 10, 2006 2:31 pm
Maggiemygosh Maggiemygosh:
Scrappy YOUR NOSE is up Osama Bin Laytons ass looking for intelligence.
Stephen Harpers is the best PM we have had in decades. G W Bush is a very good President of the USA and he is working under unbelievable stress which makes the idiot leftys on here criticize him when they haven't a clue as to what they are saying.
Anyone who is anti-USA or anti-President of the USA is an unintellgent jerk.
So Scrappy you have been in grade 1 for 26 years? Can't graduate to grade 2 can you? HUH You say Grade 2 what is that?
Stephen Harpers is the best PM we have had in decades. G W Bush is a very good President of the USA and he is working under unbelievable stress which makes the idiot leftys on here criticize him when they haven't a clue as to what they are saying.
Anyone who is anti-USA or anti-President of the USA is an unintellgent jerk.
So Scrappy you have been in grade 1 for 26 years? Can't graduate to grade 2 can you? HUH You say Grade 2 what is that?
Meggie let me warn you just this once, attack me "Personally" again and I'll bitch slap you and the "Fake" persona you are currently poseing as. What is it on this forum a 65 plus senior who has worked for the CBC, Police Agencies blah blah. You won't be much of a challenge sunshine.
Steven Harper hasn't been in Power long enough to call him "Anything' other than a "Luke Warm" leader at this conjuncture. I don't define people visa vie their Political Preferences, I like Liberals, Cons, and even some NDP members. Unlike you Maggie I don't foam at the mouth and become incoherant when someone does't agree with me. Regarding my Education I have a Degree in Criminology, a trade license, and a Diploma in Business from the Oldest Business School in Canada and I run my own Successful Business. Thankyou for asking about me thou, your care and concern was touching.
Maggie you are doing yourself and your natural ability to write a disservice by ranting and insulting just because you can. You look and sound childish and very unintelligent.
USCAdad @ Tue Oct 10, 2006 2:49 pm
Scrappy: You go girrrrl! 
Tricks @ Tue Oct 10, 2006 2:56 pm
Scrappy Scrappy:
I have a Degree in Criminology
Sorry to go off-topic, but where did you go? I am looking at going to Uni for that.
SprCForr @ Tue Oct 10, 2006 9:18 pm
Read Lew's take on this stuff (from today's Globe and Mail):
$1:
Remember the Taliban, and stay the course
'Do you support Canadian troops serving in Afghanistan?" asks a typical Canadian poll. The response comes in with 50-plus per cent responding "No!" and those of us who support the soldiers and the mission get even more frustrated. If none of the professional polling firms are prepared to ask the less misleading and more relevant questions, then let me give it a try.
"Do you support letting the Taliban return to power in Afghanistan?" If your answer is Yes, please go on to the next questions.
"Do you support beheading teachers in front of their class if they permit even one girl to attend?" "Do you support denying all Afghan women the right to visit a doctor, as there are no female doctors permitted by the Taliban and male doctors are not allowed to inspect female patients?" "Do you support the government's right to execute women by blowing out their brains in front of thousands of cheering onlookers in a football stadium because the victims were seen in the company of men other than their husbands?" "Do you support the actions of a suicide bomber who, just before he blows himself up beside elderly Muslims waiting to obtain papers for a once-in-a-lifetime pilgrimage to Mecca, picks up a child and presses her against his explosive vest before detonating himself?"
I assume most Canadians would answer No to these questions -- which means they probably don't remember the history of the Taliban regime before the United Nations-authorized intervention that followed 9/11. Or they are prepared to remove Canadian troops from the conflict and let others do the dirty work and, yes, to "cut and run."
All too many countries have decided not to show up, while some who have dared to send contingents have added caveats regarding the employment of their troops by the NATO commander. Restrictions such as "no night operations" and "no combat" make a joke of the NATO article that states that an attack against one member is an attack against all. The after-action report once the Afghan mission is over will not be kind to the alliance in general and many of its members in particular. Canada will not be included in the criticism.
Has anyone noticed that the category of Canadians expected to be critical of the mission and call for our troops to come home is by far the most supportive? The most compelling and convincing support for the Afghan mission has come from the families of the killed and seriously injured soldiers.
Consider how much more dangerous the world would be if we had done nothing after 9/11 and joined the pathetic chorus that said it was all our fault. Al-Qaeda would be freely operating in Afghanistan, Sudan, Somalia, Indonesia and God knows how many other countries. Transnational terrorism would be much better financed, and sleeper cells would be under little scrutiny even in Canada.
With a free rein to proceed, ingenious attacks on us, the infidels, would make 9/11 seem like a pinprick.
Hyperbole? I wish -- it's reality.
Retired Major-General Lewis MacKenzie was the first commander of United Nations peacekeeping forces in Sarajevo.
'Do you support Canadian troops serving in Afghanistan?" asks a typical Canadian poll. The response comes in with 50-plus per cent responding "No!" and those of us who support the soldiers and the mission get even more frustrated. If none of the professional polling firms are prepared to ask the less misleading and more relevant questions, then let me give it a try.
"Do you support letting the Taliban return to power in Afghanistan?" If your answer is Yes, please go on to the next questions.
"Do you support beheading teachers in front of their class if they permit even one girl to attend?" "Do you support denying all Afghan women the right to visit a doctor, as there are no female doctors permitted by the Taliban and male doctors are not allowed to inspect female patients?" "Do you support the government's right to execute women by blowing out their brains in front of thousands of cheering onlookers in a football stadium because the victims were seen in the company of men other than their husbands?" "Do you support the actions of a suicide bomber who, just before he blows himself up beside elderly Muslims waiting to obtain papers for a once-in-a-lifetime pilgrimage to Mecca, picks up a child and presses her against his explosive vest before detonating himself?"
I assume most Canadians would answer No to these questions -- which means they probably don't remember the history of the Taliban regime before the United Nations-authorized intervention that followed 9/11. Or they are prepared to remove Canadian troops from the conflict and let others do the dirty work and, yes, to "cut and run."
All too many countries have decided not to show up, while some who have dared to send contingents have added caveats regarding the employment of their troops by the NATO commander. Restrictions such as "no night operations" and "no combat" make a joke of the NATO article that states that an attack against one member is an attack against all. The after-action report once the Afghan mission is over will not be kind to the alliance in general and many of its members in particular. Canada will not be included in the criticism.
Has anyone noticed that the category of Canadians expected to be critical of the mission and call for our troops to come home is by far the most supportive? The most compelling and convincing support for the Afghan mission has come from the families of the killed and seriously injured soldiers.
Consider how much more dangerous the world would be if we had done nothing after 9/11 and joined the pathetic chorus that said it was all our fault. Al-Qaeda would be freely operating in Afghanistan, Sudan, Somalia, Indonesia and God knows how many other countries. Transnational terrorism would be much better financed, and sleeper cells would be under little scrutiny even in Canada.
With a free rein to proceed, ingenious attacks on us, the infidels, would make 9/11 seem like a pinprick.
Hyperbole? I wish -- it's reality.
Retired Major-General Lewis MacKenzie was the first commander of United Nations peacekeeping forces in Sarajevo.