NDP calls for immediate withdrawal from Afghanistan

[TCBF]

" While some say it is unrealistic or undesirable to negotiate with the enemy, nearly all lasting resolutions to modern-day wars have come through negotiated peace settlements."

- Well, it is true both Germany and Japan negotiated peace settlements after they surrendered.  Is that what she means?

"What we can and should do is actively encourage a political peace process among the key players in the conflict - including Pakistan where the porous border has made the containment of extremist forces
impossible."

- So, would she advocate that we re-deploy to and secure the Pak border?  If not us, who?  If not now, when?

Tom

 

[foerestedwarrior]

Canada initially entered Afghanistan as part of the UN-sanctioned
International Stabilization Force (ISAF), which was created in 2001 to
provide security to Afghanistan's capital region of Kabul. Canada's
original role consisted of providing stability and security for the new
government, assisting with reconstruction, and supporting humanitarian
aid efforts.

Our mission has since changed dramatically - with virtually no public
debate or consultation. Canadian soldiers now operate under NATO
command, as part of a counterinsurgency campaign in the Kandahar region.
For every ten dollars Canada spends on the Afghan mission, nine dollars
go to military operations, and one dollar goes to aid.

Ok so maby its just the crazy in me talking, but I geuse I was brainwashed by George W. into beleiving that we actually went in, in 2002. INTO Kandahar, not Kabul initially. Oh, and all that debating on moving, and debating AND voting that went on with the mission extension(which apparently the NDP were in BC sittin on their keisters for) was all a dream......

Also, where does this 9-1 ratio come from? Can someone who represents a national political party just make up facts, or is there some ground to this. I am not judging how the money is allocated for assets in country, just wondering if this is a acurate representaion of spending.

Unless I was lied to, my understanding of the mission currently, is everything that he described we where doing in Kabul, yet because we are engaged in "counter-insurgency" we are not providing stability and security for the new
government, assisting with reconstruction, or supporting humanitarian aid efforts?

 

[McG]

Canada initially entered Afghanistan as part of the UN-sanctioned
International Stabilization Force (ISAF), which was created in 2001 to
provide security to Afghanistan's capital region of Kabul. Canada's
original role consisted of providing stability and security for the new
government, assisting with reconstruction, and supporting humanitarian
aid efforts.

Our mission has since changed dramatically - with virtually no public
debate or consultation. Canadian soldiers now operate under NATO
command, as part of a counterinsurgency campaign in the Kandahar region.
For every ten dollars Canada spends on the Afghan mission, nine dollars
go to military operations, and one dollar goes to aid.

What an idiot!  Not only was this three times a topic in the House of Commons, but ISAF is the NATO commanded operation.  

 

[TCBF]

The guys who should be going door to door winninng the hearts and minds are the ANA themselves.  If the people won't support them, then they won't trust us.  Ever.  We should do the hi-tech direct action, they should win the moral war and secure the hopes of the people.

NDP has it backwards.  Go figure.

"For every ten dollars Canada spends on the Afghan mission, nine dollars go to military operations, and one dollar goes to aid."

- I suppose we could start cost accounting LAV 3s carrying blankets to villages as an aide project.  I handed out pencils to kids from beside my Coyote once.  We were escorting 3 VP Recce as they brought aide to a village in '02.  I guess we could cost-account that whole mission to aide.

- Maybe we could rent B52s to drop Aid related leaflets to the locals, and pad the cost onto some Aid IO.

Am I helping?

Tom

 

[medicineman]

The clowns live in their own little world.  I was on the TAT into Kabul in 03 - strange how none of us were under any illusion about what we were going there for, and really, the rest of the litterate people of the country who read a paper or McLean's knew damn well what we were there for too.  The government was pretty clear about that and the risks that we'd be facing.  But, as with all other apethetics, they have conveniently forgotten that Security and Force part of International Security Assistance Force.  I'm taking the evening to formulate my reply - I think I'll be more blunt this time about how they either can't get the rose coloured glasses off or how they should in fact be checked for alzheimer's.

 

[HDE]

I thought the NDP plan was to "bring the troops home" just long enough to load them onto flights to south Lebanon and/or Darfur.  The issue appears less about bringing them home and more about sending them to the "right" really dangerous place.

 

[Kirkhill]

- Take the necessary measures to ensure the safe and immediate
withdrawal of Canadian troops from Afghanistan;

Given these
conditions, I think we can best support our troops by removing them from
this combat-oriented operation in Afghanistan's southern region.

So how exactly does the resolution calling for the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan square with rebalancing the mission by withdrawing them from the south?

Simple.  Idiot Jack stepped on his short and skinny. 

Edited for excessive intemperance (Thanks Tom).

 

[zipperhead_cop]

Increasingly credible sources are stating publicly that we cannot defeat
terrorism through military means alone. For example, Captain Leo
Docherty, a former aide-de-camp to the commander of British forces in
Helmand Province, recently said the NATO-led mission had been
"grotesquely clumsy" and has "sucked [NATO] into a problem unsolvable by
military means." Even Gordon O'Connor, the Minister of National Defence,
has admitted that: "we cannot eliminate the Taliban, not militarily
anyway."

There exists somewhere an augulet that is lost in a dark place, and if recovered will never be servicable again. 
Nice that a dime-a-dozen Captain who is for some reason disgruntled is considered a "reliable source".  Not even from Canada, no less. 

In his recent meeting with the U.S. Council on Foreign Relations, Afghan
President Karzai has said," Bombings in Afghanistan are no solution to
the Taliban. You do not destroy terrorism by bombing villages." 

I have tried like crazy to find a transcript of that meeting, or some sort of record to see what the context of the comments were.  If anyone has located it, I would appreciate the link. 

 

[warspite]

I join the NDP in calling for the rebalancing and refocusing of the
Canadian operation in Afghanistan, because the mission as it currently
stands is misguided and cannot lead to sustainable peace. It lacks clear
measures of success, and it contains no exit strategy. Given these
conditions, I think we can best support our troops by removing them from
this combat-oriented operation in Afghanistan's southern region.

What war has had an exit strategy? I was under the impression that you went to a war to win. Not to visit.

."  Malalai Joya, a member of Afghanistan's Parliament, has urged Canada to adopt an
alternative role in Afghanistan, one that is independent of US
operations.

I was under the impression that this was a U.N. sanctioned mission, not an American war. What is the problem then if they are there.

For every ten dollars Canada spends on the Afghan mission, nine dollars
go to military operations, and one dollar goes to aid.

WOW... who would have thought fighting a war would cost a bit of money. ???

As CARE Canada's president has asserted

Who the heck are these guys cause I've never heard of them.

While some say it is unrealistic or undesirable to negotiate
with the enemy, nearly all lasting resolutions to modern-day wars have
come through negotiated peace settlements.

Seeing as the NDP is still living in its little dream world I'll give them a heads up. It is unrealistic and undesirable to negotiate
with the enemy unless they are defeated.

By working toward these goals, Canada
would be pursuing an independent foreign policy

Well who control our foreign policy now? Mother Brittian?

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the New Democratic Party of Canada supports
unequivocally the individual women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces

I call B.S.

Well we have another addition to the yuppie high leadership:
Congratulations Denise Savoie you are now a Hippie high ambassador.

Lets check the ranks so far:
Chief superleader of the Hippies:Vacant (Taliban Jack nominated)
Chief Plenipotentiary of the Hippies: Taliban Jack
Chief Ambassador of the Hippies: The NDP
High Ambassador of the Hippies: John Dugard, Denise Savoie  (further high ambassador nominations pending)
Ambassador of the Hippies: A-channel "girl on the street" (further ambassador nominations pending)
*list is a work in progress

Edit: have changed the word YUPPIE to HIPPIE.... Still have my own definition of yuppie in my head but don't want to insult any past or present yuppies(actual definition not my own) on this site. Happy now zipperhead_cop  ;D

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

There exists somewhere an augulet that is lost in a dark place, and if recovered will never be servicable again.
Nice that a dime-a-dozen Captain who is for some reason disgruntled is considered a "reliable source".  Not even from Canada, no less.

This bag-carrier is described in countless articles as a "top soldier"... :  Similar to the failed-Reservist turned "war resister" that briefly made the press a few weeks ago, the NDP and their fellow travellers are desperate to have a soldier support their morally bankrupt and profoundly misleading position.  A "retired" A de C is the best they can do...

I'm not normally overly partisan, but I'm beginning to loathe Taliban Jack and his worthless party.

 

[zipperhead_cop]

Chief superleader of the yuppies:Vacant (Taliban Jack nominated)
Chief Plenipotentiary of the yuppies: Taliban Jack
Chief Ambassador of the Yuppies: The NDP
High Ambassador of the Yuppies: John Dugard, Denise Savoie  (further high ambassador nominations pending)
Ambassador of the Yuppies: A-channel "girl on the street" (further ambassador nominations pending)
*list is a work in progress

I thought we sorted out the "yuppie" issue?  ???  "Hippies" and "Yuppies" are two ends of a spectrum.  Hell, if I was younger I think I might be a "yuppie".  (although I will never and have never owned a BMW)

 

[Journeyman]

What war has had an exit strategy?

It's usually expressed as "Bring the boys home by Christmas" - - it's seldom worked.

This bag-carrier is described in countless articles as a "top soldier"... :  Similar to the failed-Reservist turned "war resister" that briefly made the press

....or a former Cpl who's an "Expert Defence Analyst" 

 

[vonGarvin]

It's usually expressed as "Bring the boys home by Christmas" - - it's seldom worked.

Sure it works.  Just that they get home on the NEXT Christmas, or the one after that, or the one after that....

....or a former Cpl who's an "Expert Defence Analyst"   

...Or a former Cpl who's a Minister of National Defence, or Fuehrer.......

 

[Journeyman]

....or a former Cpl who's an "Expert Defence Analyst" 

Or a former Cpl who's a Minister of National Defence, or Fuehrer.......

Oh great.....who knows how far he can go 

 

[MarkOttawa]

One wishes this Conservative MP had been right

Skelton admits error in column slamming NDP
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/saskatchewan/story/2006/10/03/skelton-error.html

Conservative MP Carol Skelton admits her recent newspaper column contains an "incorrect line" concerning the NDP's support of the Afghanistan mission.

Skelton, Saskatchewan's sole representative in Prime Minister Stephen Harper's cabinet, wrote in her most recent newsletter, published Sept. 25 in the Rosetown Eagle, that last spring the NDP voted in favour [my emphasis - MC] of extending Canada's military mission in Afghanistan to 2009.

In fact, the New Democrats voted unanimously against the two-year extension...

Mark
Ottawa

 

[riot]

Similar to the failed-Reservist turned "war resister" that briefly made the press a few weeks ago

Some more info, but also a site worth writing to.

http://theproles.blogspot.com/2006/09/canadas-first-afghanistan-war-resister.html

 

[medicineman]

I expected a few laughs, but not a whole shite storm over my long winded MP's letter.  When I read it through (eventually - it got a little tiring), I just laughed and shook my head.  I'm going to write back and point out some convenient factual errors and discrepancies, then ask for the name and address of the party crack dealer - seems they sell some pretty good stuff.

She's the MP for Victoria for those who care - incidentally the first one I can remember being NDP in an awful long time.

Cheers for now folks.

MM

 

[Brad Sallows]

>Her reply's so full of holes that it's pathetic...

>Quote
Captain Leo Docherty, a former aide-de-camp to the commander of British forces in Helmand Province, recently said the NATO-led mission had been "grotesquely clumsy" and has "sucked [NATO] into a problem unsolvable by military means."

>Is that the best they can do?

Everytime I see that guy's name in print I have to suppress a fit of giggles.  Does the NDP realize that repeatedly and solemnly quoting the opinion of one gentleman who managed to rise to the dizzying rank of Captain isn't exactly helping them build a credible case or burnishing their reputation among informed observers?

 

[medicineman]

All they need to impress are the people that really couldn't be bother to read a news paper or have lapsed into apathy.  Unfortunately, alot of those clowns are out there.  I really wouldn't mind some of the stuff they're saying, but it's all taken out of context to let them hear what they wan to hear or is history rewritten in their own image - like how we went from apparent UN control in Kabul to NATO control in K'har.  I read McLean's and the papers and watched the news from the time we were told this was going to happen, through my time there and after, and I feel that people were fairly well warned to expect that we weren't there to look like pretty targets for peace in blue hats and that combat might in fact have been a distinct possibility.  How soon we forget though.

MM

 

[Kirkhill]

Remember that up until now their chief anti-Iraq spokesmen were a couple of wandering privates from the US Army.

They know how to work with what's available.