Army Guy Posted May 19, 2009 Report Posted May 19, 2009 Looks like our commitment may be getting bigger instead of smaller in 2011.... Globe Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
waldo Posted May 19, 2009 Report Posted May 19, 2009 Looks like our commitment may be getting bigger instead of smaller in 2011....Ottawa mulls role in Afghanistan past 2011 (Address not found - corrected the posted url)mulls... just mulling it over... subject to Parliament ("the will of the people", as MacKay says) HOC vote particulars from a previous post: There seems to be this misconception that Canada will be leaving Afghan in 2011, it's wrong, Canadian military forces will be re roled, but there is no mention of leaving afghan or for that matter leaving Kanadar AO or what that new role may be... that misconception is fuelled by the repeated comments from Conservatives (Harper, MacKay, Cannon, etc.), that “the combat mission” will end in 2011. Little to nothing is/was ever stated/emphasized about Canada continuing a UNAMA support role targeted towards UN reconstruction and relief efforts. that misconception is fuelled by the 2008 election campaign statements made by Harper as he attempted to garner Quebec votes… where Harper emphatically stated Canada would be leaving Afghanistan in 2011. In that regard Harper didn’t bother to “nuance” the combat versus reconstruction/relief support role distinction. that misconception is fuelled by the recent Harper comments doubting the Afghan “insurgency” can be defeated. of course, the dynamics at play suggest change is always possible… at some point today’s absent tactical plans will be disseminated; however, we should probably be reminded that the March 13, 2008 vote in Parliament that authorized the extension to 2011, somewhat narrowly defined that “new post-2011 Afghanistan role” to align with reconstruction and development contributions defined within that vote: HOC vote - the Afghanistan extension - from Feb 2009 to July 2011 c- the government of Canada notify NATO that Canada will end its presence in Kandahar as of July 2011, and, as of that date, the redeployment of Canadian Forces troops out of Kandahar and their replacement by Afghan forces start as soon as possible, so that it will have been completed by December 2011; that the government of Canada, together with our allies and the government of Afghanistan, must set firm targets and timelines for the training, equipping and paying of the Afghan National Army, the Afghan National Police, the members of the judicial system and the members of the correctional system; that Canada’s contribution to the reconstruction and development of Afghanistan should: a- be revamped and increased to strike a better balance between our military efforts and our development efforts in Afghanistan; b- focus on our traditional strengths as a nation, particularly through the development of sound judicial and correctional systems and strong political institutions on the ground in Afghanistan and the pursuit of a greater role for Canada in addressing the chronic fresh water shortages in the country; c- address the crippling issue of the narco-economy that consistently undermines progress in Afghanistan, through the pursuit of solutions that do not further alienate the goodwill of the local population; by the by... per Conservative MacKay's mulling... is delivering aid a role for the military or, say... a NGO. Just saying. Quote
Army Guy Posted May 19, 2009 Author Report Posted May 19, 2009 I did say it "may" be getting bigger, and while not written in stone, i'd say the jello mold has already been poured....how do you explain the expansion in construction....Why build more if there is already a firm date for extraction set.... mulls... just mulling it over... subject to Parliament ("the will of the people", as MacKay says) Public documents tendered this month on a government website indicates Defence Construction Canada wants to buy 400 more beds at the Kandahar Air Field by next year, at a cost of $5-million, with an option to build 400 more. The documents don't state who the beds are for. Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
waldo Posted May 19, 2009 Report Posted May 19, 2009 I did say it "may" be getting bigger, and while not written in stone, i'd say the jello mold has already been poured....how do you explain the expansion in construction....Why build more if there is already a firm date for extraction set....Public documents tendered this month on a government website indicates Defence Construction Canada wants to buy 400 more beds at the Kandahar Air Field by next year, at a cost of $5-million, with an option to build 400 more. The documents don't state who the beds are for. well... that's more beds than needed to house the Guantanamo detainees... so... we're either opening up a rather large B&B... or... the Harper Conservatives are beyond mulling and are not, as stated, allowing the "will of the people" to determine "the mission". Should we be surprised - really? Quote
Army Guy Posted May 19, 2009 Author Report Posted May 19, 2009 Well it is on the terrorist list of places to vist....that and every Canadian diplomat....But really when has the will of the poeple ever been taken into effect in regards to this mission.... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Shakeyhands Posted May 19, 2009 Report Posted May 19, 2009 speaking of.. (I love to shoe horn) I am the proud owner of a spanking new 2LT as of Thursday last week... I expect she'll get to visit Afghanistan now. Quote "They muddy the water, to make it seem deep." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Army Guy Posted May 19, 2009 Author Report Posted May 19, 2009 speaking of.. (I love to shoe horn) I am the proud owner of a spanking new 2LT as of Thursday last week... I expect she'll get to visit Afghanistan now. congrats....I'm sure dad's as proud as a peacock....It's a hard and honest living....But it's been good to me so far....hey what she sign up as... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Keepitsimple Posted May 19, 2009 Report Posted May 19, 2009 I never expected - nor did I ever hear - that all our personnel would be coming home in 2011 and our committment to Afghanistan would end. What I clearly understood is that our military role - taking the fight to the Taliban- would be completely finished by 2011. I fully expect that we will be engaged in some form of institutional development, construction, police training, etc.......and it makes sense that there may be a localized military presence of some sort to protect our people on the ground. Quote Back to Basics
Shakeyhands Posted May 19, 2009 Report Posted May 19, 2009 congrats....I'm sure dad's as proud as a peacock....It's a hard and honest living....But it's been good to me so far....hey what she sign up as... Armored... being posted to Edmonton and the Lord Strathcona's Horse after a year in Gagetown... or so we think. Quote "They muddy the water, to make it seem deep." - Friedrich Nietzsche
xul Posted May 20, 2009 Report Posted May 20, 2009 (edited) I did say it "may" be getting bigger, and while not written in stone, i'd say the jello mold has already been poured....how do you explain the expansion in construction....Why build more if there is already a firm date for extraction set.... Maybe it is just for training Afghanistan troops there, or there will be some Afghanistan soldiers mixed into Canadian troops.(I have a impression that these is the way American uses in Iraq. In some checkposts Iraqi soldiers mixed with American soldiers and under the command of American soldiers. When an unidentified hooded figure approaches, the American soldiers send their Iraqi fellows going on for first check. If the guy is a suicide bomber, the Iraqi soldiers will be sacrificed and Americans will be saved.) Maybe NATO wants to give Taliban a massive strike before its main force withdraws from Afghanistan, so there will be a temporary troops increase there. Or some American troops based in other area will be temporarily deployed there for summer actions or some other reason and as the host Canadian troops is responsible for some of their logistic affairs such as offerring accommodation. Or these beds are just for Karzai kinds to be refugee in this military fortress becasue when most Canadian troops go back home the Kandahar downtown will not be safe. I inclined to that these accommodations are a part of a new NATO strategy in Afghanistan. Since the sum of the troops is not enough to win the victory by a normal deployment, they may want to outnumber the beds of each fortresses than the troops actually based there, so they can quickly deploy airborne reenforcements everywhere if they are needed. Edited May 20, 2009 by xul Quote
Jerry J. Fortin Posted May 20, 2009 Report Posted May 20, 2009 Canada will cease offensive military operations by the end of 2011, that is mandated by law. Quote
eyeball Posted May 20, 2009 Report Posted May 20, 2009 “First and foremost, Canada is not engaged in air strikes,” said Mr. MacKay. We're 'with' countries that are though, MacKay's point is moot. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.