Army Guy

No it's a Canadian commitment, not belonging to one party or another, but to all of us as a nation. we signed onto that once we agreed to help. Thats part of the problem Canadians don't want to take ownership and solve this thing....they just want to piont fingers. Does anyone out there really think that if Afgan turns out to be succesful that they would change thier vote, or thier minds about the mission or harper.... And if Harper agreed to pull out today, and move to Darfur, who's war would that be...

Keepitsimple: Polls are suggesting that Canadians are in favour of pulling out of Afgan and starting a new mission in Darfur. And like Afgan it would be an honorable mission that could save thousands of lives. But before Canadian citizens start jumping up and down raising thier hands in support of this new idea, much like they did for Afgan they should atleast do thier research, and ask all those questions and have all those debates before we enter into any deployments. I think that the below article addresses some of the problems in doing that. Darfur. Some of the problems that were not fully addressed in the article. With all that is going on in the world right now, and only 3000 UN peacekeepers on the ground now even with a huge Canadian commitment those numbers might be able to double, where are they going to get the additional troops from , most reliable militaries are already stretched as thin as we are. so that leaves us outnumbered in a huge area of operations without the additional support we enjoy in Afgan like Fighter aircraft, Hvy arty support, recon assets like air, and land, Attack helos etc etc ...not a very tenable postion. Un missions have a completly different setup, it's HQ is based in New York, not on the ground as NATO has in Afgan, It's chief players ( civilians) are only available during working hours, (8am to 4pm ) after that time you get a junior civilian who can not take action without contacting someone else first...How does that translate into a bad set up, imagine your self under fire talking on the radio, asking permission to return fire, or stop a serious crime ie murder from taking place, you finally get thru only to find out it's past 4 pm new york time and the rockie on the phone say's you have to wait until he can get ahold of someone more senior....even then nobody wants to make a decision in fear of making a bad one or slighting another country... Rules of engagement differ greatly, are far to restrictive, to the piont they put soldiers lives indanger. some will say this is good, but they forget the bad guys know the rules as well and by the time you get permission to stop a rape or murder the crimes done and they have moved onto something else. And those UN soldiers are force to watch it all unfold before them helpless... Not to mention the building of a new camp, purchasing new types of equipment more suited to jungle and desert warfare. Change of training and tactics. it will all cost large... Starting all over again on a new mission , just so we can escape Afgan is not a smart thing to do. Canadians have already proven they do not have the patients for a long term mission, so one would have to ask what we could accomplish in a short time, from scratch, in an eviroment similar to Afgan, out manned and out gunned. Darfur would cost Canada alot more than it's paying out in Afgan in equipment, soldiers, and aid.

Perhaps Canadian should do some research before we commit to another mission. Darfur

Why is it time to move on, and to what are we moving towards, And if it is so important to tadays people why is there not a drive to remove any and all traces of our connection to royality. Perhaps because todays Canadians really don't care, and if that is true why would anyone stand or block this drive to restore some of our old history. That is the piont that these depts are steep in history and tradition, and draw from that to inspire todays people that are serving more pride, moral, and the fact that when it is thier turn, thier sacrifice and service will not be forgotten. I'll give you an example how many Canadians remember Vimy and what it means to our nation. And in saying that the past must never be changed or rewritten but remmebered as it is and how it happened. This example of going back to oplace Royal in front of our elements has not grown outdated or has nothing to be replaced by. I think the fact that our military has taken pride in everything it has done proves that that is not true. as for meaniless monicker not to those depts whom most of thier history is written with. Who would you blame, it was the public that demanded it be changed...And it does set the tone of thier mind set towards the military at the time. The oath i took was over 25 years ago, i'm not sure of the exact wording of the oath today but it is still to the Queen. Hence why the GG is the commander and chief. It's been that why since the start of our history, something that a canadians don't care about, or to lazy to change it. which one is it..so why is it now objectionable

Perhaps i made a piss poor choice of words, in trying to explain myself. And should have been more explicted when using the word inspire...It would inspire more pride, in thier unit and the Royal family, and that translates into a better unit, better soldiers. And No they would not want to divest thier Royal titles earned by past serving members on the battle field.

Actually there is not a great argument to be made, one would have to understand that history and tradition plays a big role in the RCMP and military. To a member with unlimited liabilty ( may be asked to give thier life in the course of thier jobs) that member would like to know that thier sacrafice would not be forgotten. As for the Royal title it is a major part of that history, one that most of Canada's history is written under, and it would be another way for it's members to preserve history and the memory of fallen comrads, and past serving members alive. As for inspiring people to fight for the Queen, your right, but then again ask any soldier whom he is fighting for and he'll piont to his comrads, not queen or country. One might be intially drawn into the recruiting center to serve his country, or the adventure, or on some idea that combat is romantic, and cool. But when thier on the battle field, he's fighting to stay alive, for him and his comrads first, then the cause , then for his country or Queen. Like i said before, it's not about inspiring anyone, just keeping our history and tradition alive, it's a solution that will not cost anything but a few gals of paint. As for surveys and scientific evidence i don't think there is none, other than the fact that the Queen still effects Canadian lives, they still flock to see her when she comes, we still swear allegence to her, our money etc etc. although we consider ourselfs a seperate country with little ties to mother England, we have not cut all our ties, either because where lazy, or we are not ready to just yet.

Stretched beyond belief.

Most of those depts that are effected, RCMP, and the military, are steep in history, dating back when Royal meant alot to all Canadians. History and tradition as M Dancer explains does mean alot to those units, it is what conects us with our past, another way to ensure "we never forget" as the poem goes. It's another way for us to share in the sacrifices of those that went before us. Do Canadians really care what we call our ships, or aircraft or elements. Not really so why all the fuss. After unification we changed it to Canadian armed forces, which lasted for some time until believe it or not the word ARMED was considered to offensive by the public, and it was changed to simply Canadian forces... RCMP and the Military do swear an oath to the Queen, nobody else, no other country or institution. Although it is very highly unlikely that the Queen calls upon our services, or they come to conflict that piont is still there. Perhaps it has never changed all these years is there is some philoophical substance there.

Who told you that, perhaps you can provide a source....your pretty quick on telling everyone they are spinning the topic at hand. when you have done nothing to prove them wrong nor have you provided any ref or sources....Your the Queen of spin....in fact i get dizzy just reading all your posts... neg Anyone that thinks that anything is going to be different in Darfur has not done any research into the Dafur problem. And like Afgan will be screaming thier bloody heads off "bring our troops home" but not of course until we have lost 40 or 50 good soldiers....And once again the soldiers will by screaming give us the time to complete our jobs .....and once again we will be reminded who we work for, and who's tax dollars we are spending and it's an unwinniable mission.... And why so armchair critics can feel good about atleast we tried... I say get off your armchair and sign your ass up, want to make a difference then put on some boots and join me on the tarmac when we carry our comrads to the herc in a metal coffin...if you can't do that then stop opening your gobs about something you ethier refuse to do any research on, or know anything about... As it is already been mentioned on this forum most canadians could not find Darfur on a map drawn on thier arse ....they agree on darfur because they want anything but Afgan...

Yes you've caught me, I'm a military propagandist hidden deep inside the confines of NDHQ, locked in a vault so i can spread evil military propaganda. my goals are to lengthen the mission in Afgan, endanger the lives of my comrads, spend as much as the tax payers dollars as i can, and keep soldiers away from thier families and loved ones....My piont is that you and many Canadians don't have a clue why soldiers are putting so much into this mission, nor do you care, either why they think that way or do you care anything about the Afgan people. Actually, i did want to hear what they had to say, my comments are correcting some info that they have provided , as it may give them some more incite other than what is printed in the media. Perhaps you can provide some proof that the Afgans want us out. but then again you've already made up your mind, that the Afgan people don't deserve what our nation has to offer. AFgan

I wish... but we are only get 100 vehs total, that includes the 20 leased from germany which will be replaced out of the netherlands stock.

This is how insurgent warfare is played, thier own cas are not a factor, thier aim is to produce NATO cas at any cost, look at how Canada reacted to the deaths in OP Mudusa, they know that they are going to get miliage out of our deaths , meaning they will sway public opinion in the west which is the sole goal of insurgent warfare...sway public opinion enough and a country leaves packing up it's troops, leaving them with a victory regardless of what happens on the battle field. So to them it is not insane and piontless, it is a means of winning. Don't let anyone tell you they are poorly trained or poorly led, these people are warriors in the true sense they've been doing this since they were small kids. top off all this and then add religion and brain washing and your correct some are willing to die for thier cause, i say some because the will to live is strong in everyone and when faced with a split second decission to live or die most will pick surrender. All i can really say on this , is nothing moves with out NATO seeing it. They have there reasons for not making it public, as you can well imagine why. The recruits are easy, money talks and will buy anything including a life, why would they sign up, to feed thier families is a big one, loyality to thier clan is another, loyal to thier religion...NATO is slowly catching on paying Afgan army pers more giving them more benifits but it really has a long way to go. The surprise was the actual numbers of taliban in OP Mudusa, but then again we did give them days in which to prepare, we gave them advanced warning of the date of the attack, by dropping leaflets to the civilians warning them to leave... As for them having to be driven out or dieing in place thats true, but the speed in which we attacked, bringing to bear maxium fire power that we had available did not give them much of a chioce. by this time we had already suffer cas, and were not in the mood to talk each of them them out, but rather more interested in finishing this so we could be with our dead and wounded. It's hard to explain those days of combat during Op mudusa, but to say we met an enemy that out number us , were dug in, in prepared postions and killed them by the hundards has got to say serveral things. This battle was as intense as any describe in history, that Canadian soldiers are second to no one, and that the Taliban can be defeated on the battle field. As for the need of tanks, every seen 10 ft grass fields, so thick and dense that a 25,000 lb 8x8 veh could not penatrate, thats alot of dope. And those trees, harder than anything we have in Canada, we tried to clear them with combat dozers, with little effect, tried cutting them with chainsaws, some what more effective but still did not clear them, we tried using explosives most required serveral attempts....now put a 45 ton tank on the ground thier is not a tree in afgan you could not mow down, or a mud wall you could not drive thru...and the new tamks are closer to 70 tonnes a big multiplyer on the battle field..Yes they can be defeated with what we have over there now, we've proven that...but having tanks means saving lives, our lives... This is not new news, the fact that we can not support any other missions is proof of that, as for having 36 months at home i wish...most are lucky to be home for a year, with the 1 st brig and 2 and brig doing most of the missions , our 5 th brig french comrads will have to explain why they are just starting to go on missions in any numbers... But then again we have always been over committed. there is no funding for expansion, that is required...

There is some misunderstanding here, the orginal 650 mil contract was for the lease of 20 LeoIIA6 tanks plus the purchase of 80 LeoIIA4 tanks (which includes 20 assorted versions such as taurus recover vehs, Bager engineer vehs, and beaver brigde layers). The contract also includes training and logistics for only 5 years. It did not include price to upgrade the other 60 LeoIIA4 tanks to A6 standards, plus the contract for logistics and training is for an addtional 15 years.. Tanks are very expensive to operate, and Afgan eats vehs for breakfast. CSAR The Additional sticker shock is hard to swallow, and normal Canadians don't see this when they purchase a veh, if you got the bill for 20 years of parts and labour added to the price tag i think most of us would be purchaseing bikes or walking to work..

Thank you for your detailed reply, it has brought a few things to light that i have forgotten or had to do research on , a learning experiance for me anyway. For as long as i can remember military force is not the only players on the team, there is a diplomatic mission, plus many civilian agencies involved, including RCMP, elections Canada, Dept of corrections, ETC, on top of the PRT teams which does duplicate some of the above efforts. so it is a combined effort, and at this time it is the only solution to the insurgent warfare problem. And a better solution needs to be found or we will soon have to bend to the faithfull wishes and demands. And all this effort does take time, unfortunatly longer than Canadians have patients for. Lets not forget about operation Apollo which was happening around the same time oct 2001 until Nov 2003. our support and deployments were considerable larger than a det of JTF guys. OP Appollo Todate they Afgan army stands at about 35,000 pers, and grads about 1200 soldiers every 2 weeks NATO wants those numbers at 70,000 by 2009 a very tall order. but those timmings and figures are for a basic soldier and do not take into account the need to train a strong NCO corp and officer corp the men that are required to lead them into battle. That takes years of training, and experiance, unfortunitly they are learning the hard way, by doing it in combat conditions. In the west it takes years of training in a training enviroment (no one is actually shoting back at you, and mistakes don't cost lives) to produce leaders " hence why the is western soldiers actually attached to afgan units. I just want to piont out that from day one our mission in afgan has been a combat one, I've completed 2 tours in afgan one in Kabul, and one in Kanadar, and did spend many days outside the wire in Kabul doing patrols, ambushes, or hunting down bad guys , but i would not compare the 2 , with Kanadar operations being larger, and longer, and far more intense. As for the attitude you talk of i can relate to as i've had it as well, eager to test all those years of training and experiance, now that i have, it's not something i'm eager to test again, war has a way of changing all that. And as for glory there is none, just mad minutes as some author once said, filled with adreniline and fear and occasional prayer, but no glory, and when it's all done and the adreniline is subsided and the rush is gone, all that is left is reflection, guilt, and sadness for comrads that did not make it thru... and after all that , and you've made up your mind that this is insane.... until your patrol enters another Afgan village and you see, smell, and taste what the taliban are capable of, and to whom they are carrying it out on. And you vow to do what you can do to stop it all, to help those that can not defend themselfs and the cyle starts all over again. Something that thousands of Canadian soldiers have done every day since we have arrived in afgan, and yet they volunteer to come back, not because we want combat, not because we like killing, not because we want glory,medals,parades. because it is the right thing to do, because it's the Canadian thing to do, and that is what those that have served before us would have done. It's hard to articulate why i or others like me are compelled to go back. This is wrong, and is a result of the media finding it easier to slot them into two groups. NATO has a slot for everyone and every group. I'm sorry i've run out time and will get back to this tommorow.

Please provide proof that Afghanistan said they would protect al Qaeda. Today's elected government says too many civilians are being killed by NATO and they want it stopped. And tonight, the United States of America makes the following demands on the Taliban: Deliver to United States authorities all the leaders of al Qaeda who hide in your land. (Applause.) Release all foreign nationals, including American citizens, you have unjustly imprisoned. Protect foreign journalists, diplomats and aid workers in your country. Close immediately and permanently every terrorist training camp in Afghanistan, and hand over every terrorist, and every person in their support structure, to appropriate authorities. (Applause.) Give the United States full access to terrorist training camps, so we can make sure they are no longer operating. Pres speach The Al-Jazeera correspondent asked, "Now, let's return to the issue of Osama bin Laden. Do you think it is just that a people be attacked and that a country be destroyed on account of one person? You are protecting one person, and you are destroying your country on account of one person. How do you defend this position of yours?" Haqani responded, "There is no difference between Osama and his community ... and those in Kashmir, Chechnya, Uzbekistan. ..." Haqani spoke of the willingness of those in this community to defend each other, "like they would fight for their own children, for their own land, for their own selves," and he emphasized that they would fight as one in opposition to "the infidels." interview. Pres speech? He said Canada's role was indispensable in the battle against Taliban militants and emphasized the importance of non-military support -- such as reconstruction and protecting human rights. "Canada has made a tremendous difference in the lives of millions of Afghans already. Your country is helping us on a daily basis,'' he said. My Webpage Agan foreign minster. I think before one ask the questions they should know what the answers are. So what are our interests, and what is the interests of Afganistan. Explain what you really mean here. What oil interests, and yes the opuim interests, does it make good business sense to you or anyone else here to spend more 10 of bils in defending a couple of bil dollar industry... So your one of the 54 % of Canadians that have made up thier minds based on facts you make up or here say. Get off your ass and get on a plane see for yourself ask the afganis yourself, stop taking the media reports as gospel...I'm telling you they rarely leave the camp, file thier reports daily, where are they getting half the crap they print....only a very few have actually gone out with us and interviewed the people and those have been chastised for thier efforts "reporting the truth".... But hey i'm just a dumb grunt who's opinion does not count, why because i work for the government...i'm one of those guys that lived outside the wire for months at a time and had daily contact with "those Afganis" whom you've said wanted us out now....Although i will not sit here and tell you they all loved us and wanted us there. i will say that most where grateful and wanted us to stay, they may of not been happy with everything we did , they still prefered us over the taliban.

I'd be lying if i said yes, but then again once they declared they had taken Al Quida under thier wing and would protect them by force in nessicary. They did draw the line in the sand. Todays elected Afgan government does want us there. It is a big question....That would depend on what exactly do we as a nation declare to be our National interests? And do we always have to be motivated by our national interests.... Is helping other nations in need not in our best interest now or down the road. It is obvious that Afgan has nothing to offer our country, now or in the near future. God knows there are plenty of countries out there in more need and of more help, but the fact remains we did agree to help destroy this nations infra structure and remove it's government. And we should assist it in re building it. Are we global babysitters ? It is something that most Canadians take pride in , is our role as as you say babysitting. As for the cost, our soldiers freely commit thier blood in the case of Afgan anyways, and as for treasure come on, a quick look at what programs and studies our government pays out for, and we can't find a few dollars to assist one nation.

This sure sounds like the horse calling the kettle black...who would have guessed Catchme a dominionist... I got one question does that title come with a special uniform...

Catchme: We've already been through all this, infact serveral posters here tried to explain it to you, you either refused to read the material or pronounced it false. but i'm not getting into that debate with you again. You mean the same Jack that wanted to redeploy us to Dafur, a country that does not want us in there. A country with similar problems as Afgan...Jack wants us there because it gets him votes, nothing more....and when something newer or sexier comes along he'll be screaming to leave Dafar as well. Negotiations of some sort or another have been taken place well before "Jack" said so... Your right it is the Afganis that we should be listening to, So let me ask you how many have you or the average Canadian talked to. For every media site that claims the Average Afganis wants us out I'll provide you a source that wants us to stay. But then again does the average Canadian even care about what the Afganis want ?

I'm assuming the "rules" we are talking about are the Genva convention. one could argue that the convention is a handicap to a certain piont, when the other side is not expected to follow the same guide lines...It all boils down to what we as the people are willing to do or accept to win the conflict. We as a nation have thrown down the gloves sort to speak in the past, some good examples do exist in WWII. That being said it would take a major event for our nation to cross that line again. As for Afgan this will not happen, we are much closer to quiting than we are to throwing out the convention. But for what little advantage breaking the conventions would give us in afgan i don't think it would be a winning statagy. and in my opinion would actually do more harm than good. As the russians found out.

I can say with all honesty that this is the best board that i've come across on the net. And what makes it so good is you guys, i guess it would be easier to make a list of those that i don't like, but even those are pretty colorful so i tip my hat to you all. Yes all of you, the left, center and right, the tree huggers, and tree cutters, french, and english, the separatists and federalists, and the list goes on...because without you things would be pretty boring. Thank you.

capricorn: A majority do want peace, but they also want work, to feed thier families, to raise thier families without the extreme violence they face every day. And all of that is shatter, by a minority or Taliban hardliners, warlords, and foreign fighters that pray on them everyday. The insurgents come from many different sources, altough true alot of them do come from Pakistan, and other foreign muslim countries, alot are Afganis themselfs fighting for money, or following family tradition of being Taliban, or forced into fighting thru fear. And yes there is a steady flow of fighters coming into Afgan ,but nothing like the Taliban would like us to believe...a good example of this was Taliban leaders bragged of a summer offensive of more than 10,000 fighters this year, and over 1000 bombers, they would be lucky to put out a tenth of those numbers...So they are being contained, NATO troops are making huge dents in thier numbers that they can not replace easily.. They know they can not defeat us on the battle field, any battle field...What they do know is time is on thier side, all they have to do is cause a few cas and the west will scream...they also know that they are winning the hearts and minds of the people in the west, and sooner or later it is the people that will demand thier troops go home. Once that happens they will declare total victory, and run thier affairs anyway they want...and as history has already shown us, they will continue this strategy as it works well when used again'st the west. only next time maybe the prize won't be Afgan freedom but perhaps some of our own... Here is the kicker, Canadian soldiers are volunteering to do this mission over and over again, Why is that ? the average soldier in Afgan today already has serveral missions under his belt, from the Yugo, Haiti, and this one although more dangerous it has the potential of doing the most good, giving a nation the ability to take it's first steps... So while Canadian citizens may think we are wasting our lives, and some of our tax dollars our soldiers don't think so. Soldiers are a very vocal lot of people and if they did not believe in something they would let you know...not the case here. There is no question that Canadians can hold thier heads high for all of our acomplishments that have been done todate. What is hard for soldiers to accept is that we have spilled thier blood with these people, we've been thier since thier conception, and it will be extremily difficult to pack up and leave without seeing it come to a conclusion of some sort. To look them in the eyes and say sorry, but our countrymen have said we have done enough, and it's time to go home... I know there will be some that will say tough shit, your a soldier and you'll do as your told and go where your told...all true, but don't think that will not come at a price, and those that disagree will find another ocupation, will find another way to help, soldiers don't grow on trees they are trained and forged to be who they are and quiting is not one of the things we do easily....and those that remain will have learned not to give so much of themselfs as the Canadian tax payer changes thier tune on the fly... Don't get me wrong, i'm proud of what i do, where i come from and thank god everyday for allowing me to live and raise my family in Canada. I just wish that the rest of Canada could give as much to this mission as we do...

Catchme: Still trying to rewrite history and the facts hey Catchme. I think we've already discused all of this in previous threads, and if i remember correctly you failed to make or prove your case then. As for your piont that peacekeeping operations out numbered actual NATO operations is true, keeping in mind that just because we send out one or two soldiers on most of these peacekeeping ops does not imply that we put more effort or time into peacekeeping.

Runningdog: Judging by your response, i've burst your bubble and your perception of our nations military and her soldiers. Perhaps you can piont out the shame in living up to our NATO commitments, and putting more emphases on them than actual peacekeeping operations. It was not my intention to take away any of our accomplishments done under peacekeeping operations, but rather inform you that more time and money is spent towards our nations defense and living up to it's defense pacts. I'd also like to remind you that there is more to peacekeeping than providing clean water,building schools, handing out teddy bears etc, although that is part of it ,it is only a small part most peacekeeping missions have seen our soldiers involved in combat operations of one sort or another. As for your opinion of soldiers only joining for a job, clearly shows me that you really do not know what a soldiers life is like, and i could think of thousands of easier ways to earn a living. Ones that do not involve strapping on 40 lbs of protective equipment, 40 lbs of ammo and going to the office, NO it's not just a job it's a way of life, one that i do because i want to, not because i have to. Yes, i'm a soldier that takes orders, much like you do in your job, unless your self employed. As for being told what to think, there's a leap on your behalf, free thinking soldiers is exactly what our military promotes, much like any job really. Military life is more restrictive than normal every day jobs, but then again it has to be as others lives depend on it. I'm free to think and express myself as i see fit, just like any other Canadian citizen. I don't know where you got those facts, but they are false. As for spouting the government line in regards to Afganistan your wrong, every soldier over there now or in the past has volunteered , thats right put there hands up to go, not because we are rebots with no opinon, but because we believe in what we are doing over there, that this mission is an honourable one, worth all the risks and effort we put into that. Most soldiers infact have volunteered more than once, and have completed atleast 2 tours of duty, that has got to speak about how they feel about this mission. Again it is not my intention to piss any one off , but rather debate the issue, or offer some facts from a soldiers piont of view.

I don't place much faith in polls, as they don't mean much and change day to day. And the numbers have pretty much been consistant for a while now.... My objective here was to have some of those 54 % explain to me and the thousands of other soldiers why we should pull out of Afgan NOW ? and how they come by thier opinions. Not to get into a pissing contest but rather a debate, only this time with them defending there opinions rather than me doing it all of the time...and who knows maybe even an old army guy can learn something. I've heard this said a thousand times, i've read the governments explaination, i've read DND's explaination, and find it very clear, but maybe it's just me, and my miltary background. What do you think needs clearing up... DND's explaination. We've had many opened ended commitments before, Cyprus, Bosina, Germany, why is this one different...or is it really about Cas suffered.. What is your interputation of peacekeeping ? Canada as a nation has always had more troops and equipment on NATO run missions than it has ever had on Peacekeeping duties, Canada as strickly peacekeeping nation is a myth set out by previous governments. And how do you do that, the reason i ask is that is the whole reason i started posting in this forum to start with, but it's been my experance that most do not want to know, or refuse to see it any other way...which as you piont out is being backed up thru the media.

As most here in this forum know i recently returned from a tour of duty in Afgan. And have for a long while been trying to defend our nations decission to be there, and have been answering a long list of questions as to our involvement and giving a soldiers piont of veiw.. Perhaps i'm looking at this from the wrong direction, instead of me defending the mission perhaps someone out there can tell me why we need to pull out NOW... Below is a poll that suggests that over 54 % of our nation does not agree with our involment in Afgan. Perhaps one of those 54 % can explain to me WHY ? and how you decided on this course of action. As a soldier that has completed 2 tours in Afgan, i like so many thousands of soldiers would like to know why ? and what do you know that we do not ? CTV poll