wyly Posted September 21, 2009 Report Share Posted September 21, 2009 (edited) Don't forget, the Soviets murdered the Afghan leader and they replaced him with another. And also, the Afghan Government forces were losing before the Soviets invaded. why would I forget something you imagined??? the soviets did not kill President Kahn....he was killed in the coup by the PDPA after it's leader was assinated and a number of it's members were thrown in prison by Kahn... but hey don't let historical accuracy get in the way of your posts... the soviets left because they were taking you losses to united afghan milita forces from all over afghanistan not the just the Pashtun based Taliban that NATO is fighting..these fighters were well armed and finaced by the CIA...US Supplied stinger missles was probably the most efffective deterent to the Soviet forces...I wonder what NATO troops and Candians in general would think of continuing this mission if their helicopters and planes were facing portable ground to air missiles? I think our resolve to continue this war would erode very quickly once Chinooks with full compliments of troops began falling from the skies... Edited September 21, 2009 by wyly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted September 21, 2009 Report Share Posted September 21, 2009 why would I forget something you imagined??? the soviets did not kill President Kahn....he was killed in the coup by the PDPA after it's leader was assinated and a number of it's members were thrown in prison by Kahn...but hey don't let historical accuracy get in the way of your posts... Well that's certainly the Soviet press release.... on the otherhand, On December 27, 1979, 700 Soviet troops dressed in Afghan uniforms, including KGB and GRU special force officers from the Alpha Group and Zenith Group, occupied major governmental, military and media buildings in Kabul, including their primary target - the Tajbeg Presidential Palace.lThat operation began at 19:00 hr., when the Soviet Zenith Group destroyed Kabul's communications hub, paralyzing Afghan military command. At 19:15, the assault on Tajbeg Palace began; as planned, president Hafizullah Amin was killed. How's that explanation of why regmental loyaty is outdated coming? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted September 21, 2009 Report Share Posted September 21, 2009 .....I think our resolve to continue this war would erode very quickly once Chinooks with full compliments of troops began falling from the skies... Sorry we don't always load per your dire scenario, but many have "fallen" from the sky: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Coali...ummary_per_type Canada didn't even have any Chinooks to fall at all in the beginning because....well....oh never mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted September 21, 2009 Report Share Posted September 21, 2009 This is ludicrous considering that the "insurgency" is quite capable against US and NATO forces today...they certainly had more than "little chance". The Soviets suffered much larger losses, with and without American intervention. NATO isn't fighting general revolt in the entire country as the Soviets faced... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted September 21, 2009 Report Share Posted September 21, 2009 (edited) Canada didn't even have any Chinooks to fall at all in the beginning because....well....oh never mind. Canadians don't fly by Chinook in afghanistan....well...oh never mind lol... chinooks canada A CH-47D Chinook helicopter, assigned to A Company, 7th Battalion, 101st Airborne Division, prepares to land and pick up members of a coalition force in the Tora Bora region of Afghanistan in support of Operation Torii on 4 May 2002. Operation Torii is an intelligence gathering operation consisting of over 400 members from the United States, Canada, and Afghan infantry units. Edited September 21, 2009 by wyly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted September 21, 2009 Report Share Posted September 21, 2009 Well that's certainly the Soviet press release....on the otherhand, How's that explanation of why regmental loyaty is outdated coming? do you get tired of being wrong??? Dancer Actually it was the secular government that was overthrown by the Soviets, who place a new leader in charge of a new secular government. The insurgency against that soviet installed secular government was in full swing even before the US got involved.no Kahn replaced his cousin the King in a coup creating a secular government...Kahn himself was killed in the following Saur coup, it was communist PDPA that was toppled by Soviets not Kahn....by that time the Soviets had already been invited into Afghanistan by the PDPA... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted September 21, 2009 Report Share Posted September 21, 2009 do you get tired of being wrong???Dancerno Kahn replaced his cousin the King in a coup creating a secular government...Kahn himself was killed in the following Saur coup, it was communist PDPA that was toppled by Soviets not Kahn....by that time the Soviets had already been invited into Afghanistan by the PDPA... I can't say if you are wrong or confused. Yes Khan was not kiled by the Soviets. He was killed beofre the Soviets entered. That isn't who I am talking about. I am refering to Amin who was murdered by the Soviets Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted September 21, 2009 Report Share Posted September 21, 2009 Canadians don't fly by Chinook in afghanistan....well...oh never mind lol... Yes...nevermind because it took a long time and a new PM to finally substitute used Chinooks (from the Americans) for those Iltis Uber Jeeps. The subject of buying used Chinooks for the Canadian Forces needs little further discussion (no shit!). The CH-47D model is the current US Army service variant. This Foreign Military Sales notice covers six stock-standard US Army 'D models (and seems to be unrelated to the CHAPS program). The proposed package also covers a degree of in- service support and limited spares (including two AlliedSignal T55 turbine engines). http://www.casr.ca/doc-fms-ch47d-chinook.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wulf42 Posted September 21, 2009 Report Share Posted September 21, 2009 The focus should have always been on Afghanistan ...Iraq was a huge mistake and a complete waste of resources and money, the Iraqi's never did have weapons of mass destruction or as far as i know any involvement in Al Qaeda, actually Bin Laden didn t like Saddam Hussein either! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted September 21, 2009 Report Share Posted September 21, 2009 The focus should have always been on Afghanistan ...Iraq was a huge mistakeand a complete waste of resources and money, the Iraqi's never did have weapons of mass destruction or as far as i know any involvement in Al Qaeda, actually Bin Laden didn t like Saddam Hussein either! Too bad.....Saddam was in America's sights before Al Qaeda.....just ask Bush Sr. or Bill Clinton. Canada was ill equipped for either Iraq or Afghanistan at the start of those conflicts, but it's America's fault for losing a focus that Canada never had and couldn't execute to begin with. Right...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted September 21, 2009 Report Share Posted September 21, 2009 Too bad.....Saddam was in America's sights before Al Qaeda.....just ask Bush Sr. or Bill Clinton.Canada was ill equipped for either Iraq or Afghanistan at the start of those conflicts, but it's America's fault for losing a focus that Canada never had and couldn't execute to begin with. Right...... True enough...and it is presumptuous, really, to assume there is no rhyme or reason to Iraq's invasion. As I mentioned...whose azz is surrounded now? See here for answer... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wulf42 Posted September 21, 2009 Report Share Posted September 21, 2009 Too bad.....Saddam was in America's sights before Al Qaeda.....just ask Bush Sr. or Bill Clinton.Canada was ill equipped for either Iraq or Afghanistan at the start of those conflicts, but it's America's fault for losing a focus that Canada never had and couldn't execute to begin with. Right...... Don t get me wrong i fully support US Forces but it might have been better to get the Taliban fully under control before engaging in Iraq, a war on two fronts is never good..and yes Canada has been lacking if anything Afghanistan has showed the weakness....unfortunately the Liberals reduced our armed forces down to a peace keeping only force because of military cut backs!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted September 21, 2009 Report Share Posted September 21, 2009 Don t get me wrong i fully support US Forces but it might have been betterto get the Taliban fully under control before engaging in Iraq, a war on two fronts is never good If Canada has a beef over Afghanistan, it's with other NATO allies besides the US, UK, and maybe Denmark. The war in Iraq was the same "front" from Washington's global perspective; Iraq was unfinished business. ..and yes Canada has been lacking if anything Afghanistan has showedthe weakness....unfortunately the Liberals reduced our armed forces down to a peace keeping only force because of military cut backs!! Good news....PM Harper is fixing that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wulf42 Posted September 21, 2009 Report Share Posted September 21, 2009 If Canada has a beef over Afghanistan, it's with other NATO allies besides the US, UK, and maybe Denmark. The war in Iraq was the same "front" from Washington's global perspective; Iraq was unfinished business.Good news....PM Harper is fixing that. Yes our ships our going for a refit now...and i believe we are getting more updated Tanks as well...we certainly need better armoured personel carriers the IED problem is showing us that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted September 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 So I'll ask again.If "pulling out too early" created a "deadly mess," how is Canada's basically "pulling out" in regards to fighting, and returning to peacekeeping, going to make things better? Believe me , you won't miss us! The US wants to rule the world.... go for it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 Believe me , you won't miss us! The US wants to rule the world.... go for it! ...and if Canada wants to Keep The Peace......good luck! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 Good news....PM Harper is fixing that. Hopefully, we have a history of going to war unprepared and to be realistic if dispassionate, this one is probably the best thing that has happened to our military in over 30 years. Too bad it has taken 120 dead Canadians so far to make the point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 we certainly need better armoured personel carriers the IED problem is showing us that. In other words, you don't know what we have. Since going to Afghanistan, we have upgraded more than once. A big enough bomb will go through anything, whether it be an iltis, a G Wagen, a LAV, or a RG - 31....or a tank. There's no better armour than we're using on the ground right now. Our troops on the ground there have the best now, even if they didn't when we arrived...and even then, they have the LAV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazykai Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 Somebody has to say, I am sick of all this "support the troops" and "red fridays" propaganda, because that is what it is, military and grassroots conservative propaganda that wants endless sums of money to fight an endless list of wars. Much of our tax dollars even pays for it. These slogans also distract the public from the real issues. As we can see with the US Healthcare debate, if you don't have a good position, screaming simple slogans that may or may not makes sense is always an effective strategy. I think it works as people with neutral or somewhat anti-war views are quickly silenced by questions of "patroitism", being targed by pro-war hardliners or avoid the issue because of social awkwardness. It sickens me. Not to mention the attitude of the military that they always know what to do and our opinion does matter. Well, frankly it does because it is my tax dollars. The other myth I want to debunk is Canada's military is underfunded. That is because we always compare ourselves to the US. Other middle global powers like Japan, Ireland and Austria have roughly half the share of GDP in military expenditure that we do. Many economists say this was a factor in the Japanese and Irish economic miracles and why Austria remains one of the wealthier countries in mainland Europe. All of these countries are seen as safe, soverign, and internationally respected. Interestingly enough, all three of these countries have a 20th century history of war that I think majority of the public want to keep in the past. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 QUOTE=American Woman: So I'll ask again.If "pulling out too early" created a "deadly mess," how is Canada's basically "pulling out" in regards to fighting, and returning to peacekeeping, going to make things better? Believe me , you won't miss us! The US wants to rule the world.... go for it! Not sure how that answers the question. In fact I'm pretty sure it doesn't, since the question was about Canada, not the United States. Furthermore, I'm pretty sure if we wanted to "rule" Afghanistan, we wouldn't have "pulled out too early." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 (edited) Hopefully, we have a history of going to war unprepared and to be realistic if dispassionate, this one is probably the best thing that has happened to our military in over 30 years. Too bad it has taken 120 dead Canadians so far to make the point. Historically it has always taken the price of soldiers lives to get the government and people of Canada to release the purse strings...what scares me is it may take hundrds more to get our military into shape...what we should be asking is why ? Edited September 22, 2009 by Army Guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted September 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 Historically it has always taken the price of soldiers lives to get the government and people of Canada to release the purse strings...what scares me is it may take hundrds more to get our military into shape...what we should be asking is why ? Well, since history is repeating its self again with our deficit, I imagine that everything is going to be on hold until that debt is paid. I think we still have some equipment on order for the military, but the best thing is not to create more debt and not to put Canadians soldiers lives at stake until they can be fully equipped. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 In other words, you don't know what we have. Since going to Afghanistan, we have upgraded more than once. A big enough bomb will go through anything, whether it be an iltis, a G Wagen, a LAV, or a RG - 31....or a tank. There's no better armour than we're using on the ground right now. Our troops on the ground there have the best now, even if they didn't when we arrived...and even then, they have the LAV. One would have to admit we are always "behind" the 8 ball when it comes to sending the right equipment over for the right job...One of those reasons is there is simply not enough of it...and while there is alot of semi modern equipment in Afghan there is only a couple of examples of this equipment in Canada for the troops to train on.... And while you are correct the enemy will always adapt his IED's to the equipment we are using, we should atleast give our troops a fighting chance, or allow for a open casket any ways ...As for better armour, our LAVs are generation III or third gen....GM is now producing Gen V plus an upgraded version of gen 5 known as LAV -H....much more armour, better wpns, more speed....they are also replacing the T-Lav's ( modified M-113) with perhaps CV-90's but only a handeful will be purchased.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 Somebody has to say, I am sick of all this "support the troops" and "red fridays" propaganda, because that is what it is, military and grassroots conservative propaganda that wants endless sums of money to fight an endless list of wars. Much of our tax dollars even pays for it. These slogans also distract the public from the real issues. As we can see with the US Healthcare debate, if you don't have a good position, screaming simple slogans that may or may not makes sense is always an effective strategy. I think it works as people with neutral or somewhat anti-war views are quickly silenced by questions of "patroitism", being targed by pro-war hardliners or avoid the issue because of social awkwardness. It sickens me. Not to mention the attitude of the military that they always know what to do and our opinion does matter. Well, frankly it does because it is my tax dollars. Not to mention Nov 11, and all them great battles dates such as D-DAY, Dieppe, to name but a few all taken up TV time, or messing with traffic for thier parades and shit.........and don't get me started on all the discounts that them Vets get on airfare, car purchases, free medical care, shit they even got thier own hospital .... and you know it's a conservative propaganda plot again'st all Canadians because the liberals don't use the military....shit they don't even like them....I'm with you man, hey pass me some of that weed....Sooooooooo what great debates is the Canadian public being distracted from again....US health care right......your right lets get out our pickets mannnnn...i'm with ya..... I want to ask you just how much of your tax dollars you think you pay into Afghan mission or for that matter the military.....Considering that last year the bill for Afghan was under 2 Bil.....I think it works out to each Canadian puts in under 20 dollars out of thier total tax bill into this mission.....send me your address and i'll send you your 20 bucks if it bothers you that much..... The other myth I want to debunk is Canada's military is underfunded. That is because we always compare ourselves to the US. Other middle global powers like Japan, Ireland and Austria have roughly half the share of GDP in military expenditure that we do. Many economists say this was a factor in the Japanese and Irish economic miracles and why Austria remains one of the wealthier countries in mainland Europe. All of these countries are seen as safe, soverign, and internationally respected. Interestingly enough, all three of these countries have a 20th century history of war that I think majority of the public want to keep in the past Japans miltary budget last year was twice as high as ours is. Calling Ireland and Austria a middle global power is somewhat a reach don't you think.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 Japans miltary budget last year was twice as high as ours is. Calling Ireland and Austria a middle global power is somewhat a reach don't you think.... Ireland's navy docks at Portsmith and flys the Union Jack....But seriously, they do have an armed cutter.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.