51% of Afghans Feeling Good About Country's

[Michael Hardner]

MD:

You you can't 'rid' Islam. It's not possible.

The best we can do is stop letting them to our countries for our own safety.

Or alternately, the best and brightest who want to leave can come here and the source country will wither, don't you think ?

[myata]

I wonder how much one can read into these results. The whole presumption of question (now vs Taleban times) is loaded. Because now, Karzai only has control in Kabul, foreign troops are required anywhere else in the country. While Taleban, in their times, ran the whole country.

So the question is, basically, is it Karzai with x,000 of foreign troops providing security and y,000,000,000 of foreign donations vs Taleban with nothing.

The real question I'd ask would be, who would you support if the foreign troops were to leave tomorrow?

[shavluk]

Are suggesting oild prices went DOWN since the Iraq conflict?? Do you drive??

Mike I am being sarcastic ,oil was $26 dollars before the war ,yesterday it hit a new high of $90 dollars a barrel !!!

Edited October 19, 2007 by shavluk

[myata]

Are suggesting oild prices went DOWN since the Iraq conflict?? Do you drive??

The right question would be, "what do you drive?".

(I don't think the CEO drivers of oil companies are greatly dissatisfied with these developments - regardless, whether they actually drive or not).

[M.Dancer]

Apparently there is some urban myth being circulated that the Taliban managed to control all of Afghanistan and did it in record time.

Fact is they never controlled the whole country because the North never submitted to them. The coalition that fought the Taliban during the civil war were called the Northern Alliance.

While the rest of the country did submit to the Taliban because of the ruthless tactics they employed. I'm not sure if they myth peddlars want NATO to adopt the same tactics of the Taliban.....

[CLRV]

While the rest of the country did submit to the Taliban because of the ruthless tactics they employed. I'm not sure if they myth peddlars want NATO to adopt the same tactics of the Taliban.....

Why would we need to, when all we have to do is "ally" ourselves with a few of the local warlords and let *them* do the slaughtering for us. You know, like last time?

That way our hands remain squeaky clean...

[dpwozney]

Afghans have much less debt than Canadians, yet Canadians are being asked to pay the cost of providing security for Afghans.

Are Canadians going to receive any financial benefits such as debt forgiveness, or are Canadians going to be continued to be burdened with large unpayable debts incurred partially by providing for the security of non-Canadians?

Who is providing for the financial security of Canadians?

Edited October 19, 2007 by dpwozney

[guyser]

Who is providing for the financial security of Canadians?

David Dodge .

[Higgly]

Don Newman, in his CBC political affairs program, interviewed the Environics guy who ran the poll in Afghanistan (missed his name, but he was clearly Middle Eastern in origin).

He said that, in spite of all the dying our troops have been doing in Kandahar, the people of Kandahar give all the credit for fighting the Taliban to the Americans. Reminiscent of a John Wayne movie about WWII (Wayne never fought in WWII but was real good at looking like a hero). This puts me in mind of a Vietnam War era song by a group called Country Joe and the Fish, which went soemthing like this: "And it's one, two three, whatta we fightin' for? Don't ask me I don't give a damn. Next stop is..." ... Afghanistan. Funny how it even rhymes with Vietnam.

The majority of Afghanis want the foreign troops to stay "as long as it takes".

Only 1% of Afghanis give any credit to the US for reconstruction in Afghanistan

The majority of Afghanis think that Karzai should open up negotiations with the Taliban.

Edited October 19, 2007 by Higgly

[Wilber]

Afghans have much less debt than Canadians, yet Canadians are being asked to pay the cost of providing security for Afghans.

Are Canadians going to receive any financial benefits such as debt forgiveness, or are Canadians going to be continued to be burdened with large unpayable debts incurred partially by providing for the security of non-Canadians?

Who is providing for the financial security of Canadians?

You'll provide for your own financial security if you have any brains.

[dpwozney]

You'll provide for your own financial security if you have any brains.

Does Elizabeth II provide for the security of Afghans but not for the security of Canadians?

“What Canadians don't know about basic financial concepts could fill a book and it is harming their financial security, says a report by Canadian Policy Research Networksâ€, according to Julian Beltrame, The Canadian Press.

“Canadians are deeper in debt than ever before, according to a new study by the Certified General Accountants Association of Canadaâ€, according to CTV.ca News Staff.

Edited October 20, 2007 by dpwozney

[capricorn]

The CBC is "surprised" by the poll results, in spit of journalists regularly visit Afghanistan. I suppose they were not asking the right questions during those frequent visits.

"What's most surprising about a new CBC/Environics poll that shows that the Afghan people overwhelmingly want foreign troops to stay in their country is just how surprised the CBC is.

The CBC has had a steady stream of reporters almost constantly in Afghanistan since regular Canadian forces were stationed there in January 2002.

So why haven't CBC reporters reported on the thoughts of ordinary Afghan citizens before now?

On Thursday night The National's host Peter Mansbridge mentioned that viewers might be "surprised" by the poll results. No kidding.:

http://ottawasun.com/Comment/2007/10/20/4590707-sun.html

I'm not surprised that the CBC was surprised.

[Wilber]

Does Elizabeth II provide for the security of Afghans but not for the security of Canadians?

“What Canadians don't know about basic financial concepts could fill a book and it is harming their financial security, says a report by Canadian Policy Research Networksâ€, according to Julian Beltrame, The Canadian Press.

“Canadians are deeper in debt than ever before, according to a new study by the Certified General Accountants Association of Canadaâ€, according to CTV.ca News Staff.

Then stop buying stuff you can't afford.

[ScottSA]

MD:

Or alternately, the best and brightest who want to leave can come here and the source country will wither, don't you think ?

That is so utterly lame I can't believe anyone would actually post it.

[dpwozney]

Then stop buying stuff you can't afford.

Do you believe that Canadians should stop buying into the idea that Canadians can afford to continue to lose the lives of Canadians in Afghanistan?

According to Wikipedia, “Canada's role in the invasion of Afghanistan, as an active combatant in operations against the Taliban and other insurgents, has produced the largest number of fatal casualties for any single military mission since the 25th Canadian Brigade served in the Korean War. A reported total of 71 members of the Canadian Forces have died in Afghanistan between February 2002 and September 29, 2007.[1]â€.

[old_bold&cold]

Do you believe that Canadians should stop buying into the idea that Canadians can afford to continue to lose the lives of Canadians in Afghanistan?

According to Wikipedia, “Canada's role in the invasion of Afghanistan, as an active combatant in operations against the Taliban and other insurgents, has produced the largest number of fatal casualties for any single military mission since the 25th Canadian Brigade served in the Korean War. A reported total of 71 members of the Canadian Forces have died in Afghanistan between February 2002 and September 29, 2007.[1]â€.

Ok, I assume you are now narrowing your post to things about the casualties in Afghanistan? Do people not understand that in a combat mission there are casualties and yes even death, and for a country to be in this kind of thing and only have 70 deaths or so, is really something of an accomplishment, not some statistic to be used for antiwar movement. Face it, there really is not any large scale anti-war movement here in Canada, and they will not sway many people one way or the other. At one time the people were more on the fence about Canada's role in Afghanistan, but it has become clearer to many that without our combat role, there is no rebuilding role that can be done there, until the areas become secure. It is like trying to build a house in a hurricane. If it was finished and done right it could provide shelter from that same hurricane, but you must first wait for the hurricane to stop before building it.

On you post about more Canadians in more debt then before goes, .... well if you can not do simple math to know you can not afford things, then you should not complain when you go bankrupt. If there were things that you could not have seen happening, then yes there might be a small amount of sympathy. But not for what is your own fault. You control your own debt load.

[Moxie]

Does Elizabeth II provide for the security of Afghans but not for the security of Canadians?

“What Canadians don't know about basic financial concepts could fill a book and it is harming their financial security, says a report by Canadian Policy Research Networksâ€, according to Julian Beltrame, The Canadian Press.

“Canadians are deeper in debt than ever before, according to a new study by the Certified General Accountants Association of Canadaâ€, according to CTV.ca News Staff.

So is your assertion that Canadians being in deeper debt is a direct cause of the Afghanistan conflict? Do you believe we should use the money being spent on Afghanistan to bail out greedy consumers who can't manage their finances? Wow shades of Marxism their dude. What's the queen got to do with Afghanistan? What direct threat are you ranting about visa vie our security?

LOL that's the strangest post I've ever decoded.

[kuzadd]

Regardless, the people do not want us there and feel there is not an overwhellming sence of optamism as there was in Iraq.

They pretty much want us ot leave.

I would have put the number at 80% but these people really ARE animals I guess. Scum of the earth.

Lets just leave. They certainly aren't worth it.

Nato can build their pipeline. Let's get out now.

I would have put the number at 80% but these people really ARE animals I guess. Scum of the earth.

really, they are scum of the earth? they are ANIMALS?!

exactly who invaded an entire nation on the flimsiest of premises (getting OBL, removing the Taliban LOL) and has killed thousands of civilians??

[kuzadd]

To develop the country so that the Taleban have no resonance. What brought the Taleban to the forefront was the anachy and chaos that was Afghanistan post Soviet era. The nation was awash in private warlords/crime lords......to that end Canada is helping bring security to really what is one of the last hold outs of insurection.

One of the naivest assessements I've ever read.

what brought the Taleban to the forefront was the USA and oilpipeline deals.

Via the war in Afghanistan, USA vs Soviet Union , in which the US trained tens of thousands of mujahadeens, to INITIATE the invasion of the Soviet Union, looking for a response from the Soviet Union, which did eventually come.

Question: The former director of the CIA, Robert Gates, stated in his memoirs ["From the Shadows"], that American intelligence services began to aid the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan 6 months before the Soviet intervention. In this period you were the national security adviser to President Carter. You therefore played a role in this affair. Is that correct?

Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979.

But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.

Q: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action. But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into war and looked to provoke it?

B:

It isn't quite that. We didn't push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.

Q: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United States in Afghanistan, people didn't believe them. However, there was a basis of truth. You don't regret anything today?

B:

Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter. We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a

conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.

Q: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic fundamentalism, having given arms and advice to future terrorists?

B: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?

Please let's at least get the facts straight.

from an interview: The CIA's Intervention in Afghanistan

Interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski,

President Jimmy Carter's National Security Adviser

Le Nouvel Observateur, Paris, 15-21 January 1998

Edited October 20, 2007 by kuzadd

[Army Guy]

One of the naivest assessements I've ever read.

what brought the Taleban to the forefront was the USA and oilpipeline deals

And we are talking about "Naive" my ,my...perhaps you could provide a source that states clearly your above statement...

Via the war in Afghanistan, USA vs Soviet Union , in which the US trained tens of thousands of mujahadeens, to INITIATE the invasion of the Soviet Union, looking for a response from the Soviet Union, which did eventually come

This is so wrong, it's actually kind of funney. Yes the US did train thousands of mujahadeen fighters over the entire course of the war.. not tens of thousands but just thousands period...Your giving the US to much credit and not placing the blame where it truely needs to lie...you fail to take in account mother Russias true ambitions in regards to Afgan, and you also fail to take into account the Mujahadeen's ambitions and thier reasons for fighting... instead your placing the blame at the US government 's feet, over your lame excuse of oil pipeline deals and other fictional excuses...

so yes, lets Please at least get the facts straight.

Afgan history

CIA involvement

Edited October 22, 2007 by Army Guy

[jbg]

Sorry guys, I love our military but it's time to go. These people aren't appreciating what we are going through and our deaths for their country. They can go to hell. Bring the troops home.

I don't agree.

Those troops are there for our benefit, to assist in more or less re-establishing 1940's era control over an area that should never have been given total absence of Western presence license to wreck the West.