Obama, Harper, and Afghanistan

[Keepitsimple]

Canadians have fallen in love with Obama and the Democrats. Critics on this blog have shown glee in calling Harper a Bush clone and that he's fighting Bush's war in Afghanistan. Obama has already said that he will quickly draw down troops from Iraq and send at least 15,000 troops to Afghanistan. He believes that the fight in Afghanistan is the right one and if he follows through, it will become Obama's war. Media have already speculated that that European countries will be more open to sending more troops and lifting caveats when Bush is gone. Obama will likely ask Canada to stay beyond 2011. If Obama does send troops and other countries step up to the plate - should Canada re-think its position?

[jdobbin]

So far it has been hard to see anyone really take Afghanistan seriously. Canada has been at the pointy end of the stick for some time and will continue to be.

I expect we might see a surge but the overall problems of Afghanistan as a nation are likely to go on.

If Canada is fighting the same fight in 2011 and we are now, I expect that even Obama will reconsider how long to stay in that country.

Edited November 5, 2008 by Charles Anthony
deleted re-copied previous post

[Oleg Bach]

Have you noticed that the Bushies at the tail end are bombing the hell out of the terrorist safe zone that is between Afghanistan and Pakistan? They are not very good shots and are killing a lot of civilians in their last ditch attempt to redeem themselves before they fall out of power. At this point in time I just hope that the military industrial complex has taken as much profit as it needs to be satisfied - and will stop sucking blood for a while. What I see is that the Republicans are like dogs that are fully fed...just hope that the dems will not come to the war trough...I hope they are creative wealth builders - nothing more pitiful than inept jerks in power who use the classic "war stimulates the economy" stratagem.

Edited November 5, 2008 by Charles Anthony
deleted re-copied previous post

[White Doors]

I think Afghanistan will be ok, long term espeically if the Messiah sends more troops there in an Iraq-like surge.

Whatever the case, I do think it's time the CF had a break.

[Alta4ever]

I think Afghanistan will be ok, long term espeically if the Messiah sends more troops there in an Iraq-like surge.

Whatever the case, I do think it's time the CF had a break.

I agree come 2011 its time we were rotated out of a front line combat role.

[White Doors]

Yeah, like a 2 year break. Let them get some rest, be closer to home and re-equip then they could go out after that dependign on what is going on in the world. Churn is also a worry in the CF's right now so that would help that issue too probably.

[Sir Bandelot]

We are there for another 3 years, if US and others send more troops that would be enough time ot show some kind of progress. Even if we are asked to stay, our troops have done more than the fair share on this mission and someone else can take the lead.

Ultimately this will only come to an end if the Afghani government and the Taliban reasch some form of agreement and reconciliation. Obama says he wants to go after al-Qaeda.

[Army Guy]

Normally i'd be the first one jumping up and down at the thought of getting a break, spending some time with the family, doing some other training, rebuilding the army with new toys etc etc...but i have my doubts that it will happen...for a number of reasons, one is if we are going to get a break , rest and recoup, and rebuild then we should at least try and accomplish something in that time frame...rebuilding a undermaned and under equiped force would be a worthy goal....but an unlikely one with the condition of the budgets and future monies...no funding then no rebuilding...

Military

And while we have been in the spot light for sometime, we've been dancing around on the fringes ...i'd like to remind everyone so have the Americans and British, Dutch, Australian,and others, and all will be there until this mission dies out...there is no end date for these countries, and they've been at our side since the start. and while we are contributing to the mission we are not doing so according to our postion as a G-8 nation...and if they are not going to rebuild us then they should just keep us here, which atleast will force them to equip and modernize the force here....

Edited November 5, 2008 by Army Guy

[White Doors]

I think as long as Harper or Ignatieff (if he wins the leadership and then an election) are in - the Military will continue to see budget increases fighting the rust-out Army-guy. Moreso if it is Harper running the ship.

I know what you mean about Afghan, but I think by 2011 we will have done our part for now and are due for a break. That's what I think, but you would know best.

[Argus]

I think as long as Harper or Ignatieff (if he wins the leadership and then an election) are in - the Military will continue to see budget increases fighting the rust-out Army-guy. Moreso if it is Harper running the ship.

I know what you mean about Afghan, but I think by 2011 we will have done our part for now and are due for a break. That's what I think, but you would know best.

I would have liked to have seen them add at least another 5,000 infantry, but Harper clearly wasn't conservative enough for that, and prioritized tax cuts and money for arts funding in Quebec. Unfortunately, that's still better than the Liberals, who had planned to cut the military's budget if they got elected.

[jdobbin]

And while we have been in the spot light for sometime, we've been dancing around on the fringes ...i'd like to remind everyone so have the Americans and British, Dutch, Australian,and others, and all will be there until this mission dies out...there is no end date for these countries, and they've been at our side since the start. and while we are contributing to the mission we are not doing so according to our postion as a G-8 nation...and if they are not going to rebuild us then they should just keep us here, which atleast will force them to equip and modernize the force here....

That could be a very, very long time for deployment. If Canada is still fighting as they are now in 2011, there will be very little confidence that Afghanistan will be ever be secure. And our allies will probably agree.

The answer might be to withdraw and keep the hammer at the ready for any threats. Give Afghanistan what they need to try and secure their future but to be part of a battle that goes back to tribal custom seems a lot to ask.

[White Doors]

I would have liked to have seen them add at least another 5,000 infantry, but Harper clearly wasn't conservative enough for that, and prioritized tax cuts and money for arts funding in Quebec. Unfortunately, that's still better than the Liberals, who had planned to cut the military's budget if they got elected.

Last I heard the recruiting was on target to make their goals. I think alot of the issues have been in the turn around time from application to basic training. Sound like Infrastructure problems to me. Hopefully they are recruiting trainers too.

[Argus]

Last I heard the recruiting was on target to make their goals. I think alot of the issues have been in the turn around time from application to basic training. Sound like Infrastructure problems to me. Hopefully they are recruiting trainers too.

I'm not talking about 5,000 people overall, but 5,000 infantry, fill out the current regiments and add another.

Actually, I'd like to see more like another 3 regiments, but clearly that's not going to happen any time soon.

[White Doors]

I'm not talking about 5,000 people overall, but 5,000 infantry, fill out the current regiments and add another.

Actually, I'd like to see more like another 3 regiments, but clearly that's not going to happen any time soon.

Agreed on both fronts.

[M.Dancer]

I'm not talking about 5,000 people overall, but 5,000 infantry, fill out the current regiments and add another.

Actually, I'd like to see more like another 3 regiments, but clearly that's not going to happen any time soon.

Wouldn't that mean about 25,000 or more in total?

[Smallc]

Last I heard the recruiting was on target to make their goals.

Last I heard (earlier this year on either CBC or CTV), the army has actually shrunk since 2005 by 30 people. Maybe things are improving, I don't know.

Edited November 6, 2008 by Smallc

[bluegreen]

Back on topic,

What if Obama asks us to stay?

Simple answer is Afghans need to settle their civil war. There is little hope that an occupying force can bring lasting peace, or NATO objectives. There are a lot of tribes and factions that love a good scrap, and if the local warlord, Taliban, or whatever label you want to apply is willing to pay $50 a week, then to paraphrase 'hey, my Kalishnikov is at your service, at least until the harvest needs to come in.' As long as foreigners are there, then there will be people shooting at them.

At this moment, the Afghan gvt. has under $800mm in Revenues. They claim to need 200,000 military and security forces to effectively police their own nation, and Operating costs alone for a force this size will run into the billions, let alone equipping these forces. It is not conceivable that Afghanistan will have the resources to fund these kind of forces for many decades to come.

The war there simply cannot practically be prosecuted to achieve the stated objectives of NATO, if prosecuted by NATO. I find it distasteful, and cynical that the arguments for waging a war in somebody else's country should be that it's a good excuse to retool our army, or that we need to kiss another countries ass. Either we have sound reasons to be there, and a reasonable probability of achieving our objectives, or we should get out.

[eyeball]

What if Obama asks us to stay?

Tell him to get lost.

[craiger]

Harper was all for invading Iraq.

I so wish he was PM at the time we could have encountered the same revolution as the USA. a time for change.

Edited November 6, 2008 by craiger

[kimmy]

As far as I've been able to tell, a big part of Obama's plan for Afghanistan involves "asking our NATO allies for a stronger commitment" to the effort in Afghanistan. It's not a question of if he asks, but when, and how Canadians will feel when the question comes from the Nice Guy President instead of Dubya.

-k

[Alta4ever]

Harper was all for invading Iraq.

I so wish he was PM at the time we could have encountered the same revolution as the USA. a time for change.

No he was infavour of supporting the Americans. He said nothing about troop commitments. I'm glad we haven't gone through the same revolution that America has, we don't need a rock star who can memorize a speech, we need people who can formulate real policy. The last thing we need is another Trudeau.

[Alta4ever]

As far as I've been able to tell, a big part of Obama's plan for Afghanistan involves "asking our NATO allies for a stronger commitment" to the effort in Afghanistan. It's not a question of if he asks, but when, and how Canadians will feel when the question comes from the Nice Guy President instead of Dubya.

-k

No more troops, the other members can step up, or they can send the troops that they are withdrawing from Iraq. While we need to be there due to current Canadian military levels we have as many troops over there as is possible for our country at this time.

[craiger]

No he was infavour of supporting the Americans. He said nothing about troop commitments. I'm glad we haven't gone through the same revolution that America has, we don't need a rock star who can memorize a speech, we need people who can formulate real policy. The last thing we need is another Trudeau.

No . we need to enspire younger generations to vote not these pot head 60's radicules. our younger generations are allot more educated than the bed shitter.

Edited November 6, 2008 by craiger

[Alta4ever]

No . we need to enspire younger generations to vote not these pot head 60's radicules. our younger generations are allot more educated than the bed shitter.

That is not the kind of inspiration the world needs. Those younger generations need ot use their education to form an opinion instead of jumping on trends and bandwagon tactics. All that education means nothing if they can't even form one of their own opinons.

The problem is not the process its the type of education.

[craiger]

That is not the kind of inspiration the world needs. Those younger generations need ot use their education to form an opinion instead of jumping on trends and bandwagon tactics. All that education means nothing if they can't even form one of their own opinons.

The problem is not the process its the type of education.

So true .

and my generation does have a opinion it is the Environment and future technology's but we also know it will take something drastic! these old baby boomers still hold the vote for Canada it will take Harper to run a deficit showing the tories do not hold a platform, this economic crisis and lies will be what will give us the opertunity for change. mark my word Canadians will look at harper the same as bush and changes will be made to parliment.

we have already shown a very strong green movement, in time I have faith we will put the dinasours to rest they refuse to listen or care about us we have seen the cuttbacks, the increased to tuition no incetive for our generation. This economic greed has shown the greed in our elders and how they do not care for us, they even want to privtize our health. mark my word next election will be about change

Edited November 6, 2008 by craiger