Army Guy

I think were are missing the main piont here. Helo's and 1000 troops is not the magical answer that will determine success in Afgan Yes it will certainly change things in the Canadian district , but it is one of many districts.... And for that to happen Canada needs to by part of that to put in it's addtional 1000 troops. To set the example, for others to follow....it would provide our own troops and the Afgan people addtional safety, allowing us to hold more ground and to deny the enemy the use of that ground and resources... Getting all the NATO Countries more involved in the mission is the main piont... and to accomplish that there needs to be more than 25,000 additional troops.... This would allow NATO troops to do more than just put out fires as they appear, or reacting to what ever the Taliban throw at us , Thats what Guerrilla warfare is all about, keeping your opponet off balance and unprepared.... but to actually put boots on the ground to secure the entire country. Once that is done then and only then can we have take advantage of our numbers and destroy these scumbags once and for all. putting us in a better postion to close the Pakistan border, to assist the Pakistan government in destroying thier problem areas. allowing us to Put an early close this mission or atleast scale it back...

don't be sucked into that myth when you describe peacekeeping, which does include offensive type operations....and if anything this Afgan operation would fit into peacemaking .... Right now just under 2 cents of every dollar you pay into taxes is spent on Afgan in total...that includes our military and aid assistance....Costly no...And Yes lets not forget those brave souls "less we forget" but also remember they have voluteered, and continue to do so over and over again...The average Canadian should be asking themselves why ? Why do they continue to put thier lives on hold, risking everything for this cause... I don't know where the general public gets this notion that join the military and poof your in combat....NO one is forced to volunteer, there are no carear implications for refusing to go any where....those that do volunteer can opt out thru dozens of ways at any time..... Every member that will go outside the wire goes thru high intensive training for atleast 6 months prior to any mission, regardless of how many tours you've completed...the training is very realistic, and very real...nobody that recieves this training would be under the assupmtion thats its going to be a cake walk or like some movie where nobody runs out of ammo and nobody gets hurt.... Our nations military is not a meat grinder where we have to trick people into joining, every young kid is very aware of what they will be asked to do....And if you go to the recruiter expecting to travel the worlds vacation spots your bubble will be burst by the recruiter...if not by him then by some old and cranky NCO like me... You join the military and sign on to that unlimited liability , that is fully explained to everyone....YOU may be called upon to give your life for your country period.... how anyone after all that would think life is going to be gravy after that is beyond me....we don't need our PM telling us anything....

I don't think it was as much as keeping the SSF history a secret but the facts about the JTF. other than that i would be guessing... True enough, but do we relly have to shot ourselfs in the foot, in order to make our piont , or do we give the rest of NATO the finger and send our boys reinforcements that could save lives....because that is the bottom line is'nt it....

The problem is getting the models we requested the CH47F, but the US has plenty of older models CH47's, including the manufacturer, that can be leased or even purchased....we don't even have to stick with the chinnok, the are plenty of older Hvy lift helo's out there... Perhaps a purchase of a limited qty that could be updated at a later date to the Ch-47f standard... I think i seen a few articles in CSAR about just this....

I don't think it would be our request that would do the damage , as the damage is already been done with other nations not living up to thier end of the alliance...our request would certainly highlight that.... And perhaps it would be time to relook at the NATO alliance and how it does business....all the countries involved have been told countless times that this mission in Afgan would make or break NATO...And they have decided not to support it via by it's unpopularity at home , or Anti US feelings or what ever reason. That and the fact that the European union is pushing thier own agenda, and pushing thier own alliance so yes maybe it is time to relook at our partners.... That being said do i think it would be in Canada's interest to support current defense arrangments with the US and NATO until it's collaspe or it's redesign.

Topaz No, it's not even on the radar, mandatory service is a bad idea, it produces poor soldiers, of poor quality....and would undo everything that the volunteer army has worked so hard for.... While we are short of personal, that is what Canadians want and have voted for. The problem is being addressed slowly, but will take many years to repair that decision to reduce our numbers in the 80's and 90's...and i agree with you that it would be polictical sucide if the brought this measure in.

Thats what the media reported, but not true, The Canadian Airbourne regt was given that link between them and the SSF, and bore the SSF battle honors... CAR history. Connors SSF SAS The JTF have no linage in our past to link to, even Canada's SAS (special air service company) has had it's links to given to the CAR. The new unit in Canada is call CSOR (Canadian special operations regt) it is comprised of troops given special training, ( more in line with the old Airbourne regt in it's hay day) thier mandate is wide but do have a standing task to assist JTF-2 in larger operations... No, it may not motivate anyone your right, but it would'nt weaken our postion either, plus it would mean we would have more boots on the ground...thats the key to safety, of our troops, and accomplishing more in our district.

No, the problem is not enough troops period...and the existing Canadian troops currently over there are covering more ground than they should, putting extra risk to our own troops....and while we are looking for answers from other nations to help us....we should be doing everything in our power to ensure our troops safety.... And it would put additional pressure on the other NATO nations, if a military the size of ours can pony up another 1000 to 1500...then we could get tough and start demanding more nations do more....Lets not forget that other reports done in the past have recommneded 25,000 extra troops were required....

news restrictions. I guess i was beaten to the punch by Dancer.... No what we need is for those in those postions of power to lay down thier petty differences and find solutions to this situation...lets remind them that everyday our soldiers are operating outside the wire and there lifes are in danger...( something that was not imprinted on thier tiny brains during thier vists) And what the people of Canada need to do is drop this "it's a liberal war, or it's a cons war....thats bullshit it's a Canadian war, which involves or should involve all Canadians....time for us to put the remote down, and demand our government lliberal, Cons, NDP, who ever to find a solution to this nightmare....make it a Canadian solution, but find a solution fast before more of our boys and my comrads come in in an flagged drapped aluminum box.

Care canada The above story was written by a Policy and advocacy adviser of Care Canada, down playing, and at times spitting on Military efforts to provide Afgan civilians medical care....It's sad that during my 2 tours in Afgan i never seen one CARE Canada employee, veh, piece of equipment nothing...And in thier absence the military is filling a void...one that should be filled by CARE Canada....and when the big bad army guys decide to risk everything including thier own lifes to bring medical care to "Yes" a dangerous place, that was truely in need of this care, there efforts are pissed upon by the very people that should be giving the care in the first place.... Below is the orginal story ...that day some 325 people were treated....but lets not mention that to the Care people they want to concentrate on the 75 that did not get seen.... Orginal story.

I don't know why i used the map below, as it won't support any of my arguments....but it will give you an idea on some of the trouble spots within the whole country...it also gives you something to compare again'st year by year... But i don't want you to forget that these are reported activities, mostly by NATO, or Afgan gov't troops and police....and while it looks like it is getting worse, it's only because before they were not reported by the locals and the good guys have moved into the area and they report everything... The Map shows there is a big difference in the northern provinces...very few incidents reported, some only 5 or less a year....thats pretty quite... Our problem when i was there is we take a chunk of land then leave, the taliban would come back and we'd do it over and over....that is changing now....more FOB are being built by everyone...putting boots on the ground everywhere...they are also placing troops at Afgan police and army OP's, this gives the Afgans quick and direct access to NATO assets such as helo or fast air...but also large armoured QRF ( quick reaction forces) , they are also making sure of the little things that matter, like ensuring the Afgans get paid, get the equipment and monies they need to build proper forts for a lack of a better word... Overall things are getting better, alot better( hard to tell by the map i know) but when we pushed into Op mudusa we were engaged very shortly after we crossed the start line well within our lines or so we thought........by massive amounts of taliban...now we are not see those numbers...we are not seeing those tactics like we once did...instead lots of hit and run stuff IED's which don't take a large number of troops just a few guys and a shovel... The best guy to comment on upto date info would be weoponeer as he just got back, and he could comment on what he saw. map

jdobbin: Nice presentation, excellent topic, well done. Although the report was a breath of fresh air, did it really open up new doors, has it really uncovered anything that has not already been brought up. So really all that has happen is a highly respected Liberal has put all our cards on the table at once....in one nice neat package. should have been done a long time ago... I hope, not only as a soldier but as a Canadian, that our government actually uses it recomendations and acts on them, and i hope that it invokes a massive debate that unites Canada's stand on this problem, not only within the Cons and all or most of the parties...But the Canadian people as well. Here is what some of the experts are saying: experts. And my favorite military supporter Christie Blatchford: christie Manleys main recommendation seems to hinge on the prospect of NATO coming up with 1000 more troops.... Why just NATO, why not Canada, both the US and Britian are expanding thier roles, why could we not as well...upgrade our current Battlegroup to a small Brigade group...Set the example, for others to follow... The quicker we pacify the area the quicker we can scale back and concentrate on what every Canadain really wants...reconstruction...and what the soldiers want to finish the job we started and go home. I'm hopeful that this report does spur a productive debate across the nations at all levels that produces something I'm hoping that Canadians enter these debates with open minds and have not already made up thier minds about Afgan..

Perhaps you should rephase your question....Would we be willing to take a pay cut in order to keep our jobs... but that is only a small part of the problem is it, there is many things that drive industry away...Unions, safety requirments, enviromental requirements, taxes, pension plans, medical plans....and many others all combine to make China a pretty attractive deal.... Not all of your 18 % is collecting EI or welfare because the can't find a job, but rather won't find a job....and we working class stiff pay because our gov't can't police that problem... And once again that is just a small part of the problem, Canadians don't want to work, when EI or welfare pays so well.....it should be work or starve baby....can't make ends meet then apply for assistance to make up the difference...Today we don't take jobs that don't pay as well as assistance.... They may in your world cost less, but when i the consumer go out shopping for goods and services i buy the best product for the best price...want to compete in that free market then you need quality as well as the lowest price... and if i have to go to the states to make my money go further....the thats what me and most Canadians will do... And to use that guilt trip on the rest of us, to put cash back into these companies is just not right...Can AM wants to sell bikes then we should all be treated the same across the board...not one price for Canadians and one for the US....GM is finding that out with it's price adjustments....and if some guy losses his job because the avg auto worker is making over 60- 70 k a year then so be it....Can you say fries up...your hired...

eyeball: .Actually it was brought up by you, as you made ref to it in the quote below.... ...oh all see one...

US prices have gone up upto 1.5 % already for 2008, and this mark up is already reflected in us prices.... US prices GM vehs have already been reduced by up to 14,000 in some cases....for 2008 models and prices already reflect those changes.... 14,000 in price reductions 2008 Tahoe 4x4 45,450.00 Cdn dollars 2008 Tahoe 4x4 39,205.00 Cdn dollars for a diffenence of still 6245.00 cdn dollars... My question is just how much of that 14,000.00 in price reduction was involved with the Tahoe ? and for a company to offer that much of a reduction for vehs there must have been a whooping of a difference....And we are wondering why Canadian customers are buying in the US.... Can prices. Please note that the above prices already have the below Canadian discounted subtracted off the price....discount is for 1150.00 File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML Offers valid in Canada only from December 1, 2007 to January 31, 2008. ... See your participating BRP Can-Am dealer for all details and to receive a copy of ... www.can-am.brp.com/NR/rdonlyres/67043D26-385D-4132-AFDD-291BFCC6DF71/0/CAN139_WinterPstr_CA3_LRz.pdf - Similar pages When compared to the US prices the difference isx about 5600.00 so i was a little off... us prices,

Once again the transportation cost we are cutting our own throats....with an avg of 30 plus cents of tax on gas alone...compared to the US of only 12 cents...once again we are producing this product exporting it to the US and still it is cheaper to buy in the US....a full 22 cents a liter in Calis maine, compare to NB prices.... As for the unfavourable climatic conditions, well we have to suck that up, it is what makes us Canadian.... 4. Gasoline Tax Components by Province/Territory The table below provides a breakdown of tax components of gasoline for different cities across Canada. The cities of Montréal, Vancouver and Victoria are shown in italics because of the regional surtaxes that are levied. Table – Tax Components of Gasoline (in cents) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Province Retail Price Excluding Taxes* Provincial Excise Tax (flat rate) Federal Excise Tax (flat rate) Total GST Provincial Sales Tax Total Tax Component -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- St John’s (NFLB) 69.0 16.5 10 5.7 7.6 39.9 Charlottetown (PEI) 67.4 20.9 10 5.9 N.A. 36.8 Halifax (NS) 66.7 15.5 10 5.5 7.4 38.4 Fredericton (NB) 67.4 14.5 10 5.5 7.4 37.4 Quebec (QC) 66.7 15.2 10 5.5 7.3 38.0 Montreal (QC) 63.4 16.7 10 5.4 7.2 39.3 Toronto (ONT) 65.6 14.7 10 5.4 N.A. 30.1 Winnipeg (MB) 68.1 11.5 10 5.4 N.A. 26.9 Regina (SK) 69.4 15.0 10 5.7 N.A. 30.7 Calgary (AB) 68.2 9.0 10 5.2 N.A. 24.2 Kelowna (BC) 73.4 14.5 10 5.9 N.A. 30.4 Vancouver (BC) 66.4 20.5 10 5.8 N.A. 36.3 Victoria (BC) 72.8 17.0 10 6.0 N.A. 33.0 Whitehorse (YK) 87.2 6.2 10 6.2 N.A. 22.4 Yellowknife (NWT) 81.0 10.7 10 6.1 N.A. 26.8 Canada Avg. 66.0 14.5 10 5.4 2.0 31.9 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Gas taxes.

Thats how the taliban control the population thru violence or the threat of it...if the troops go, the taliban will return in some form, and the violence will continue....thier history is well recorded.... The only scrafice that the Avg Canadian has to make is 2 cents out of ever tax dollar they provide our gov't, that pays not only for the military side of the mission but all the aid we have provided to date....so really it's not that expensive, what price would you be willing to pay for your current rights and freedoms.... The demanding, difficult, and lives, all of that is being paid by our military, RCMP and the few diplomats serving over there..... Those that are being asked to make those sacrifices think it can and will succeed, provided that the AVG canadian gives us that opurtunity... This is where the Military separates from the civilian population...we don't look at a problem and say historically it can't be down, anything can be down if you throw enough resources at it....Vimy ridge, D Day landings, all examples of our nations soldiers taking a problem grabing it by the balls and getting ity down. But to do that we first and foremost need our nations support, without it it will be a needless sacrafice by all...

Kithchener: To really explain this would take a few pages....UN missions, number of peacekeepers, equipment peacekeepers could use , operational mandate, was decided by the nations in conflict....so they would decide how many soldiers were allowed in , and what kind of equipment they could use....Mostly just small arms and lt vehs....so if things went bad again, the UN could not effectly put out any fires , or get in the way.... NATO missions, most things are decided by NATO, the nations in conflict have little to say on how the operation is carried out, how many soldiers, what type of equipment is used. ETC....So you will see the right equipment to get the job done, keeping the peace is down by having a bigger stick, one that NATO is willing to use... UN has traditional been observe and report missions....Not taking any action to stop war crimes etc...just observe and report...very frustrating for UN soldiers as both sides know this and will often commit these acts in front of UN soldiers trying to get a reaction... NATO missions give the soldiers the means to stop anything that may effect the peace....the RO&E are very different giving the soldier more abilities to stop these acts, thru use of force. For a long time all we did was UN missions, it's soldiering with both arms tied behind your back....watch and report, it is what the media does,...not soldiers...hard to watch a bus load of Yugo muslims exicuted by a large wooden hammer to the head, and bodies pushed into the river....while your brain is screaming for you to do something....we did we reported it, then retrived the bodies down stream.... NATO missions on the other hand gives the soldiers the power the right to protect the people from the above acts...a soldier can take what ever use of force that is nesicary to protect those same people....that could be from pionting a wpn at them to calling in air strikes....no longer are we forced to watch war crimes happen but we can stop them....NATO often has the biggest stick and waring factions don't want any part of it...so the peace is kept for the most part.... Only difference in Afgan is that the taliban are willing to take on NATO....and are paying a heavy price... Summing up, giving our soldiers the ability to soldier , less restrictive RO&E's we are able to take action on the spot, before things escalute, saving inocent people...Forcing the bad guys into peace....not waiting around until it's to late for peace.. What Canadians forget is most of Afgan was ruled by the Taliban numbering hundrds of thousands, loyal and fantical people.....this group numbers have been dwindled, so much that they have been forced into Guerrilla warfare....Our soldiers have been apart of doing that.... All while not having the numbers to get the job right and quicker....If Canada was truely concerned about ending this thing then we as a nation should be screaming for the others to do more, by setting the example and increasing not decreasing our numbers....by having more soldiers on the ground we could effectivily provide the security the Afgan people need and want winning over more hearts and minds plus allowing for more reconstructive project to be carried out....We've been told build a skyscraper, heres your ten guys good luck.... and then wondering 5 years later why they are still working on the basement. Yugo was the forgotten mission, nobody even cared about yugo, nor do they truly know the history of Yugo, and what our troops did in thier nations name....NATO had enough troops in place, hey it was in the europeans back yard....Afgan is the opposite everything is covered in the media, and NATO does not have the troops to effectly do the job....the Mission is very clear to those involved....Yes our government has done a shitty job discribing it's mission to the Avg joe...but this is not the cause of this mission being so unpopular....It's because nobody cares period, nobody cares enough to get up of thier asses and do something....put another 25 30 thousand troops in there and the progress would astound everyone....and boom we now have a popular mission....on with a much clearer end date. Both sides of the coin should be reported equally, the deaths and the price this mission is costing this nation, but also show where this money is being spent and what effect it is having on the Afgan people....and the effect our soldiers are having in solving this problem area....It all has an effect on our decssion making process, be it to support or not....and Canadians need both sides of the story....

Is it just me or is buying anything in Canada, more expensive...let alone a Made in CANADA product.... Canadian manufacturers and large retail agencies are more concerned on ripping you off, and pulling ever dollar they can out of our pockets....there are many examples out there.... GM for instance Cars and trucks produced here in Canada have a approx difference in price of 10 to 12 thousand dollars....MADE in Canada product , and it's just recently that the price is coming down because the Canadian market is complaining....It is still however cheaper to buy in the US.... Bombardier ATV's and skidoos, made in Quebec, the same bike with the same specs sells for approx 6 to 8 thousand dollars more here in Canada, They've even made it policy that US dealers can not sell there bikes or skidoos to Canadians, if they don't compile they we'll remove they dealership lic....Check the internet....and compare prices.... These are a few examples there are many more, So while it makes sense for Canadians to buy Canadian goods....They ( Canadian retailers and Manufactures) don't really make that a viable practice...Instead of buying Canadian goods we should be boycotting them until prices are somewhat comparable....

As you should, but then again you find it difficult when it comes to what is published by our media in regards to Afgan. I find it kind of funney that you would use the above quote when it clearly goes again'st your stated believes. Those men and women fought and died for a cause that was outside of Canada. Clearly Canada did take part in offensive operations to beat back a nation bent on controling it's weaker neighbours....is it that your OK with WWI and WWII and Canada's role....or is it that you've changed your objector status once again...what is it that you call it again...

Nice list but i did say resolved in less than 2 years, handing over to someone else to finish the job is not what i called resolved....but rather handing over the problem.... Handed over to the indian BN to complete. nice try, but there are 3 missions in kosvo...the last one operation Quadrant ended in Sept 2002 So resolution took 4 years... This was a 30 day commitment, to do a a small job....OK i'll give you this one....I guess my diffinition of resolved is different than yours so i'll explain " resolution means the problem has been resolved and peace is broken out and peace keepers are not really required...., "some place you would think about bringing the family for vacation... The piont i was trying to make is 90 % of the UN or NATO missions we take on are long term over 10 to 25 years long....making a 2 year mission a short one.... Then why is the liberals making so much fuss over the bils being spent on military contracts.... Actually quoting MR Dion, recently he said that Canada could take on other missions such as Dafur or haiti.... Is that what this is about, getting in as many missions as possiable....or is it getting the job right the first time... if that was the case why not take this circus on the road....we could do dozens of nations in no time.... Cyprus....how many Canadians even knew we were there, or where is it on the map, or the fact we actually did carry out our last combat airbourne jump there.....

Name one, UN or Canadian military mission that has been resolved in less than 2 years.... Those sound like bench marks to me, every 2 years forces the government to have a look at the mission from top to bottom. You have a piont, we are not able to help anyone else....Do to our current size...a chioce made by previous governments , a choice a might add that most Canadians where fine with...so which one is it to big or to small... As for domestic ops, with only one battle group deployed at a time and one in training in Canada that still leaves you with 2 full brigades plus countless navy and airforce pers to deal with anything that comes our way.... DND's response to the ICE storm was not effected by our deployment to Afgan....and Bosina at the time.... As for training new people Yes i'll agree with you we are having problems, because of commitments...but don't think for a second that Mr dion is going to solve that by pulling us out of afgan....his plans include sending us back into the fire to some shit hole like Dafur....so how is our withdrawal going to help that problem.... Does it really, kind of like getting pulled from the ice and sent to the dressing room...while listening to the game on the radio...while someone else finishes the game...We put our hands up and volunteered for this mission....we should honor that commitment regardless if no one else is willing to take over for us...or put more troops in the line....And when this whole thing comes to an end...then we should take a look at NATO's existing membership and revamp it... NATO consists right now of the US, Briton, Dutch and us when it comes down to the south and doing the lifting....even then our deployment is marginal, besides who cares what the rest of NATO is doing ,we should be worried about our commitmnet and our reputation....

Taxing weed is a good idea...but we'd have to double the taxes on munchies as well if we are really going to clean up..... legalizing it would of course put most of BC back in work....working for the man growing dope...this is getting better and better....

So do the chinese believe in home defense...with 2.5 million men under arms, and climbing....so is there military spending (one of the leading nations in the world.....)along with a very long list of toys they own....Bad choice using china as an example....

Does'nt sound long term to me....a quote out of MR chrietien's book, and MR martins reply... I'm saying or impling that we did say we would go on the Afgan mission, however MR Martin did not make it clear to NATO it was short term, Yes there was an end date attached to our mission, along with every other nations mission statement, but you can't just quit in the middle of the mission and say i gave you 4 years time is up...we have not done this on any other mission, that was not completed...Nor is it living up to our NATO commitments... Mr Dion Show me in the NATO agreements that they are open or closed ended....you won't find any dates in there. Mission dates are assigned so that nations are forced to reacess the mission....to update there requirements as the mission requires... Would you say that this mission requires Canada or other nations to withdrawal....or is more troops required...