Esq Posted January 27, 2011 Report Posted January 27, 2011 (edited) I was really suprised to read this line today. Half a year before the mission is set to "go into gear", and after I've heard countless times how this mission is going to happen. But the minister says the military is already negotiating for locations in the Kabul area. So am I to beleive that they have been saying that this mission is going to occur as a training mission and it will be in school buildings etc... yet.. they havn't even secured the locations yet? Does this seem like maybe they have made all this mission stuff up, and have been lying to Canadians about this - mission they'd like to do but havn't actually yet secured permission for from the Afghan government? http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20110127/mackay-gates-meeting-ottawa-110127/ Or am I misreading this? It makes me feel wrong inside. Edited January 27, 2011 by Esq Quote
Esq Posted January 27, 2011 Author Report Posted January 27, 2011 (edited) Oh and the page was switched at CTV... to the f35 story not the Kabul story. In an odd twist. It is still visible in google but it links to the f35 story now. Here is a replacement version on the same topic http://ipolitics.ca/2011/01/27/canadas-afghan-trainers-will-work-around-kabul-away-from-violent-south/ Edited January 27, 2011 by Esq Quote
GWiz Posted January 27, 2011 Report Posted January 27, 2011 I was really suprised to read this line today. Half a year before the mission is set to "go into gear", and after I've heard countless times how this mission is going to happen. So am I to beleive that they have been saying that this mission is going to occur as a training mission and it will be in school buildings etc... yet.. they havn't even secured the locations yet? Does this seem like maybe they have made all this mission stuff up, and have been lying to Canadians about this - mission they'd like to do but havn't actually yet secured permission for from the Afghan government? http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20110127/mackay-gates-meeting-ottawa-110127/ Or am I misreading this? It makes me feel wrong inside. The latest is that Canada will NOT, according to the Harper Gov. and reported on both the CBC and CTV news networks, as was agreed to by our political parties and to a lesser extent Canadians, our training mission will likely be out in "harms way" with Afgan troops rather than "behind the wire" in Kabul... Big, big change that... You're right, just more lies from the Harper Gov.... BTW, did you hear about our Defence Minister's "Palin Moment" where he told the gov/ter-minator about how California borders on BC Like Palin sees Russia from Alaska? ROTFL Quote There are none so blind, deaf and dumb as those that fail to recognize, understand, and promote TRUTH...- GWiz
PIK Posted January 27, 2011 Report Posted January 27, 2011 The latest is that Canada will NOT, according to the Harper Gov. and reported on both the CBC and CTV news networks, as was agreed to by our political parties and to a lesser extent Canadians, our training mission will likely be out in "harms way" with Afgan troops rather than "behind the wire" in Kabul... Big, big change that... You're right, just more lies from the Harper Gov.... BTW, did you hear about our Defence Minister's "Palin Moment" where he told the gov/ter-minator about how California borders on BC Like Palin sees Russia from Alaska? ROTFL It would be stupid to be in kabul, it should be in kandahar and if you actully read what McKay said ,you can see it was not a palin moment, but hey since the libs have nothing to go on they might as well run with this . Quote Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
GWiz Posted January 28, 2011 Report Posted January 28, 2011 It would be stupid to be in kabul, it should be in kandahar and if you actully read what McKay said ,you can see it was not a palin moment, but hey since the libs have nothing to go on they might as well run with this . When Canada's Defense minister tells the former Govenor of California that his state is next to BC, omitting Oregon and Washington state off the US map, calling it a Palin moment was being kind... Luckily 'ol Gov/Ter-minator set dear Petey strait on the matter... FYI, the "Training of Afghanistan troops" is all done in Kabul, currently by countries like Germany that don't want to get into the real fighting, although some German troops have been killed even in Kabul... What has changed, arbitrarily by the Harper Gov. at this point, is that when the "combat mission" in Khandahar province, where most of Canada's military deaths have occured, ends in 2012, a "training mission behind the wire" in Kabul would be Canada's role in Afghanistan post 2012... That's what is now being changed... Canada has been punching, way, way beyond it's weight class for years now and Canadians have paid way too high a price for that in both blood and money... Enough already, bring ALL the troops home... Canada has already done more with less, based on population and military capability, than any other NATO(+) nation in Afghanistan... Quote There are none so blind, deaf and dumb as those that fail to recognize, understand, and promote TRUTH...- GWiz
Topaz Posted January 28, 2011 Report Posted January 28, 2011 NATO is NOT leaving Afghansitan in 2014. A NATO senior civilian rep. in Afghainstan Mark Sedwell, said in a press conference with Finnish Foreign Minister. He said this will not end NATO's operations in Afghanistan but the beginning of a new phrase campaign. NATO will stay as long as they are needed or required. So the question is, were does this affect Canada'a soldiers? Is the PM well aware of this? http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2011-01/26/c_13706930.htm Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 28, 2011 Report Posted January 28, 2011 .... So the question is, were does this affect Canada'a soldiers? Is the PM well aware of this? I guess Canada will just have to leave NATO, even though it is a founding (charter) member. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Army Guy Posted January 28, 2011 Report Posted January 28, 2011 So am I to beleive that they have been saying that this mission is going to occur as a training mission and it will be in school buildings etc... yet.. they havn't even secured the locations yet? And while the exact location may not have been chosen just yet, as most of the already established camps are full to capacity, that does not mean the mission is scrubed , it would not be the first time Canada has been handed a piece of ground and been told to construct it's own camp from the ground up, it was done when we first went into Kabul, then Kanadar. troops slept, and lived in holes, and under small 4 man recce tents. Does this seem like maybe they have made all this mission stuff up, and have been lying to Canadians about this - mission they'd like to do but havn't actually yet secured permission for from the Afghan government? The mission is still a go, in fact the first units to go over are preparing now. The latest is that Canada will NOT, according to the Harper Gov. and reported on both the CBC and CTV news networks, as was agreed to by our political parties and to a lesser extent Canadians, our training mission will likely be out in "harms way" with Afgan troops rather than "behind the wire" in Kabul... Big, big change that... You're right, just more lies from the Harper Gov. The New mission is to teach Basic training to the Afghan army, you don't have to go outside the wire for that, it's the advanced training that is outside the wire....all that being said, it is still Afghan and one still has to re supply which means convoys... which means outside the wire...for some... 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.
Esq Posted January 28, 2011 Author Report Posted January 28, 2011 (edited) I guess Canada will just have to leave NATO, even though it is a founding (charter) member. Or maybe the US can leave NATO and watch the peace ensue. It might actually revert to a defensive organization without US wars to drag it on. Its not like they like the French anyway. Back to a grass routes group of Canada the EU and Turkey. Maybe Israel and the US could form a secondary alliance to keep their objectives aligned. Edited January 28, 2011 by Esq Quote
Esq Posted January 28, 2011 Author Report Posted January 28, 2011 (edited) And while the exact location may not have been chosen just yet, as most of the already established camps are full to capacity, that does not mean the mission is scrubed , it would not be the first time Canada has been handed a piece of ground and been told to construct it's own camp from the ground up, it was done when we first went into Kabul, then Kanadar. troops slept, and lived in holes, and under small 4 man recce tents. Camp? That doesn't sound like school it me. It also doesn't sound like you would pitch tent in the middle of a major Urban centre. The mission is still a go, in fact the first units to go over are preparing now. Yeah aparently the unit 3rd light out of edmonton (trained for light assault in multienvironmental roles and scenarios) those who were suppose to be the vangaurd of the withdrawl will now be the first instructors.. doesn't sound very specialized or organized to me. It sounds like an operation that was just switched up putting the units that were suppose to be the combat units during the withdrawal into instructors. It to me doesn't make much sense to have 1000 soilders yet only maybe 50 to 100 offier trainers in that amount. It sounds like a waste of personnel to me. Sounds more like they are keeping their combat unit there, not putting trainers in place. The New mission is to teach Basic training to the Afghan army, you don't have to go outside the wire for that, it's the advanced training that is outside the wire....all that being said, it is still Afghan and one still has to re supply which means convoys... which means outside the wire...for some... So why don't they have basic training officers deployed there rather than a combat battalion? Has the 3rd ever done basic training operations before.. how many of those 1000 are trained to train? I have this image of somolian theives perimiters in my mind - one of the only good use of the grunts in this. Why do you need 800 combat troops to gaurd a school house? So I guess the Germans must be doing the advanced training huh, cause the PM said that it would be behind the wire if I recall. Edited January 28, 2011 by Esq Quote
M.Dancer Posted January 28, 2011 Report Posted January 28, 2011 Why do you need 800 combat troops to gaurd a school house? Are you serious? In Afghanistan, schools are targets. http://www.irinnews.org/Report.aspx?ReportId=85831 Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
GWiz Posted January 28, 2011 Report Posted January 28, 2011 The New mission is to teach Basic training to the Afghan army, you don't have to go outside the wire for that, it's the advanced training that is outside the wire....all that being said, it is still Afghan and one still has to re supply which means convoys... which means outside the wire...for some... Since this part is in response to my post let me say that, that is where the "change" in mission occurs... It's changing from doing that "basic training" to accompanying Afghan troops on their initial field missions, which after what Canada has already contributed in blood and treasure fighting way above it's weight class in Khandahar Province may be a bit much for us Canadians to take should, as is fairly likely, more Canadian blood be spilled in Afghanistan post the mission change... No one can ever say Canada didn't do it's part for and in Afghanistan no matter what happens in the future... Obama even acknowledged that quite correctly in his Peter Mansbridge interview... Quote There are none so blind, deaf and dumb as those that fail to recognize, understand, and promote TRUTH...- GWiz
Esq Posted January 28, 2011 Author Report Posted January 28, 2011 (edited) Are you serious? In Afghanistan, schools are targets. http://www.irinnews.org/Report.aspx?ReportId=85831 800? Oh so you are saying it would be safer to train in Taliban held territory where attacks don't happen. Actually it may make a little sense come to think of it. Heck they may even want to take part if you ask them nice enough. Instead of calling them training operations you could call them Joint Training Operations. The only flaw in this is that I don't see any attacks in Kabul Province where the training operations were said to take place behind the wire. By behhind the wire I thought this implied within the city, not behind the city wire on the outside of the city hundreds of KM away. Edited January 28, 2011 by Esq Quote
M.Dancer Posted January 28, 2011 Report Posted January 28, 2011 800? Oh so you are saying it would be safer to train in Taliban held territory where attacks don't happen. Actually it may make a little sense come to think of it. Heck they may even want to take part if you ask them nice enough. Instead of calling them training operations you could call them Joint Training Operations. The only flaw in this is that I don't see any attacks in Kabul Province where the training operations were ssaid to take place behind the wire. By behhind the wire I thought this implied within the city, not behind the city wire on the outside of the city hundreds of KM away. Are you intransigent or do you actually want to know what it is you are talking about? Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
Esq Posted January 28, 2011 Author Report Posted January 28, 2011 (edited) http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/01/28/canadas-afghan-training-mission-to-be-%E2%80%9Ckabul-centric%E2%80%9D/ Yeah. North of Kabul... ?Mazar-e Sharif? That doesn't sound like Kabul to me. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazar-i-Sharif what a legacy to be surrounded by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghan_Massacre_-_the_Convoy_of_Death that and Pashtun people being ethnic cleansed by the other groups These are the people Canadians are suppose to train how to fight? Hmmmm reality check anyone? Could Canada be training war criminals? Also anyone catch the typo Heart / Herat in Macleans, it is actually suprising the escalating hacking of news sites, and not just my own posts? Is it the NSA, Israel - who is behind all the hacking... another subject perhaps. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herat Edited January 28, 2011 by Esq Quote
Army Guy Posted January 31, 2011 Report Posted January 31, 2011 Camp? That doesn't sound like school it me. It also doesn't sound like you would pitch tent in the middle of a major Urban centre. The government assigned DND the mission, and DND will carry it out, be it from tents or trenches we've done it before i don't see what the problem is. The government news release said in the Kabul area, that does not mean downtown, it means in and around kabul....Estasblishing a camp takes time and like any other camp we have established it will grow with time to have infra struture more condusive of a training establishment. Yeah aparently the unit 3rd light out of edmonton (trained for light assault in multienvironmental roles and scenarios) those who were suppose to be the vangaurd of the withdrawl will now be the first instructors.. doesn't sound very specialized or organized to me. It sounds like an operation that was just switched up putting the units that were suppose to be the combat units during the withdrawal into instructors. It to me doesn't make much sense to have 1000 soilders yet only maybe 50 to 100 offier trainers in that amount. It sounds like a waste of personnel to me. Sounds more like they are keeping their combat unit there, not putting trainers in place Your getting confused, PPCLI may be light in name but they are well adapted to the heavy role , in fact for this mission there ORBAT will be adjusted again, this time they will be heavy on Mcpl's and Sr Ncos these troops will be do the teaching as it has been done for years....And while it may sound like it has just been switched up it is a totally new unit, formed for this tasking...Along with the instructors there still is a need for support, and for comabt troops for protection....after all it is afghanistan, not toronto.... So why don't they have basic training officers deployed there rather than a combat battalion? Has the 3rd ever done basic training operations before.. how many of those 1000 are trained to train? Like i said before the officers really have a small role to play in training it will be the Mcpl and Above that will be the core instructors, # VP will have it's TOE redone it will not look like it's traditional combat BN...Every Mcpl and above has been instructed how to teach, it is how we train our army....as for how many are going to be teaching i'd say about 1/2 the reat will be support , protection, and Admin... So I guess the Germans must be doing the advanced training huh, cause the PM said that it would be behind the wire if I recall. The school is behind the wire, but ammo, supplies , and equipment don't fall from the sky, and unless the school is built around a major air head, they will still need to travel to get resupplied... 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.
Esq Posted January 31, 2011 Author Report Posted January 31, 2011 (edited) The government assigned DND the mission, and DND will carry it out, be it from tents or trenches we've done it before i don't see what the problem is. The government news release said in the Kabul area, that does not mean downtown, it means in and around kabul....Estasblishing a camp takes time and like any other camp we have established it will grow with time to have infra struture more condusive of a training establishment. Your getting confused, PPCLI may be light in name but they are well adapted to the heavy role , in fact for this mission there ORBAT will be adjusted again, this time they will be heavy on Mcpl's and Sr Ncos these troops will be do the teaching as it has been done for years....And while it may sound like it has just been switched up it is a totally new unit, formed for this tasking...Along with the instructors there still is a need for support, and for comabt troops for protection....after all it is afghanistan, not toronto.... Like i said before the officers really have a small role to play in training it will be the Mcpl and Above that will be the core instructors, # VP will have it's TOE redone it will not look like it's traditional combat BN...Every Mcpl and above has been instructed how to teach, it is how we train our army....as for how many are going to be teaching i'd say about 1/2 the reat will be support , protection, and Admin... The school is behind the wire, but ammo, supplies , and equipment don't fall from the sky, and unless the school is built around a major air head, they will still need to travel to get resupplied... Why not just order in Pizza and get their students to supply their own school supplies, saves the need for toilet paper too? The "issue" here is that politico totally lied and gave a false impression of the mission. It is very difficult to take away "combat" potential from a warzone - unless you have another country doing your security and convoy. It is irresponsible otherwise. Operation Get Bread and Butter still has a combat requirement Operation Gaurd Posterior is still a combat operation. There is little doubt in my mind that if this isn't in a "green zone" Canadian soilders will have the potential for ground based assaults on their positions as well as mortar and other attacks such as sniping. In order to secure an operation facility you need to have a zone of control that requires both patrols and hardened combat locations away from the locus. SO in my mind there either needs to be another country involved doing the combat side of things, or the Prime minister and cronies are lying about the nature of the operation. Edited January 31, 2011 by Esq Quote
Army Guy Posted January 31, 2011 Report Posted January 31, 2011 Since this part is in response to my post let me say that, that is where the "change" in mission occurs... It's changing from doing that "basic training" to accompanying Afghan troops on their initial field missions, Who said that, it is and remains as of today a BASIC TRAINING mission only, Once those afghanis soldiers are trained up to basic training standards they will be passed on to another nations to complete advanced training.....Part of Canada's Current mission is the advance training done outside the wire it will cease once this mission begins. which after what Canada has already contributed in blood and treasure fighting way above it's weight class in Khandahar Province may be a bit much for us Canadians to take should, as is fairly likely, more Canadian blood be spilled in Afghanistan post the mission change... No one can ever say Canada didn't do it's part for and in Afghanistan no matter what happens in the future... Obama even acknowledged that quite correctly in his Peter Mansbridge interview... Canada military forces has been sitting on the sidelines since korea, Our nation has decided to take a different approach to military matters concentrating on peacekeeping because it was cheaper, and provided votes. some how it is more exceptable to have a soldier killed in a peacekeeping mission than it is in combat. even with that said Canada's government place very limited caveats on what we could do or could not do. made very edvident during the balken conflict, where we had a reputation of CANBAT 1 and CAN BAT 2 or as our allieds used to call us CAN DON"T 1 and CAN DON'T 2. Something Canadian soldiers were very egar to change...that came with the combat mission to Afghanistan.....A mission were our government had released all those caveats and restraints and let us do what we were paid to do...close with and destroy the enemy... Canadians soldiers have spent alot time rebuilding our reputation as top grade professional soldiers, of the quality that our nation once seen at Vimy Ridge or the beaches of Normandy........And we don't want to undo that with an early withdrawal from a conflict not yet done. Canadians soon forget that this conflict is not over, and that Canada signed up to be a part of a larger coalition and the mission is not yet done....and in the eyes of alot of Canadian soldiers we are letting our allieds down by switching roles,taking the easier road instead of keeping with our current role and 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.
Army Guy Posted January 31, 2011 Report Posted January 31, 2011 There is little doubt in my mind that if this isn't in a "green zone" Canadian soilders will have the potential for ground based assaults on their positions as well as mortar and other attacks such as sniping. The current size of the Kanadar base is est at over 35,000 combat troops, and it is subjected to all the above, on a regualr bases , i mean it is a war zone.... In order to secure an operation facility you need to have a zone of control that requires both patrols and hardened combat locations away from the locus. The sercurity elements have already been established with 3 VP new TOE.... SO in my mind there either needs to be another country involved doing the combat side of things, or the Prime minister and cronies are lying about the nature of the operation. Lying, or perhaps he thought all of us would already know that being in a combat zone is dangerous and there is no garentees that Canadian soldiers will not find themselfs engaged with the enemy, regardless of what precautions we put in place....want garentees, train them in ontario....perhaps asking Canadians to have some common sense is asking to much.... 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.
Esq Posted January 31, 2011 Author Report Posted January 31, 2011 (edited) Who said that, it is and remains as of today a BASIC TRAINING mission only, Once those afghanis soldiers are trained up to basic training standards they will be passed on to another nations to complete advanced training.....Part of Canada's Current mission is the advance training done outside the wire it will cease once this mission begins. Canada military forces has been sitting on the sidelines since korea, Our nation has decided to take a different approach to military matters concentrating on peacekeeping because it was cheaper, and provided votes. some how it is more exceptable to have a soldier killed in a peacekeeping mission than it is in combat. even with that said Canada's government place very limited caveats on what we could do or could not do. made very edvident during the balken conflict, where we had a reputation of CANBAT 1 and CAN BAT 2 or as our allieds used to call us CAN DON"T 1 and CAN DON'T 2. Something Canadian soldiers were very egar to change...that came with the combat mission to Afghanistan.....A mission were our government had released all those caveats and restraints and let us do what we were paid to do...close with and destroy the enemy... Canadians soldiers have spent alot time rebuilding our reputation as top grade professional soldiers, of the quality that our nation once seen at Vimy Ridge or the beaches of Normandy........And we don't want to undo that with an early withdrawal from a conflict not yet done. Canadians soon forget that this conflict is not over, and that Canada signed up to be a part of a larger coalition and the mission is not yet done....and in the eyes of alot of Canadian soldiers we are letting our allieds down by switching roles,taking the easier road instead of keeping with our current role and mission. A 10 year timespan and not getting it done, isn't a reputation builder no matter how you look at it. It took less than a year to go from Normandy to Berlin. And we are talking about a small country against the biggest militaries in the world. NO sorry, this is not a reputation builder NO MATTER WHAT WAY you look at it. OH hold on from a taliban perspective yes it could be a reputation builder for the afganis resisting the occupation - something they DO mujadeen et al DO have a reputation for. It is difficult to have failure by design and success unless you've gone to yale. http://opac.yale.edu/news/article.aspx?id=2158 Edited January 31, 2011 by Esq Quote
Sir Bandelot Posted January 31, 2011 Report Posted January 31, 2011 Of course it's still a highly dangerous area, there was a major bombing in Kabul just recently, and the Governor of Kandahar was killed by a suicide bomber yesterday. Nothing of substance has been accomplished, vis a vis Taliban. What we're seeing now is the first steps toward a pullout, mission unaccomplished. If the mission was to stabilize and reduce extremism, mission anti-accomplished. We must not blame the military. The rich people's kids who run our country have absolutely goofed it. Yet despite their failings and loss of life, undermining national security they will not be held accountable. Oh Canada Quote
Army Guy Posted January 31, 2011 Report Posted January 31, 2011 A 10 year timespan and not getting it done, isn't a reputation builder no matter how you look at it. The reputation i was talking about was our ability to take the fight to the enemy , one that we had lost during the last 30 years or so.... It took less than a year to go from Normandy to Berlin. How many troops did it take to do that...and where they fighting an insurgency And we are talking about a small country against the biggest militaries in the world. This is what insurgent warfare is all about, it only takes a few to tie up thousands...but then again your an expert... NO sorry, this is not a reputation builder NO MATTER WHAT WAY you look at it. No this is your opinion, one based on what exactly i don't know, perhaps you can explain....As for me i've done 3 tours in Afghan, and seen more than my share of Combat, Canadian soldiers have earned their reputation as some of the best fighting forces in the world, they've earned that through their blood, sweat, and tears....we've over come any and all obsticles put in our way, and for the most part we done it ourselfs.....I'm not asking you to take my word for it, do some research find out what our reputation is like, find out WTF your talking about ....goggle is a wonderful thing.... 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.
GWiz Posted January 31, 2011 Report Posted January 31, 2011 Who said that, it is and remains as of today a BASIC TRAINING mission only, Once those afghanis soldiers are trained up to basic training standards they will be passed on to another nations to complete advanced training.....Part of Canada's Current mission is the advance training done outside the wire it will cease once this mission begins. That's my point, the mission today is NOT a training mission, it's a forward combat mission involving some 2200 Canadian troops... In their area of operation, South Khandahar province, Canada was alone until Obama sent the US military in in substantial numbers and has over 5000 troops in the area where Canada was operating... The move to a training mission, leaving Khandahar in the hands of the Americans, was to take over exactly that "basic training" mission leaving some 800 (originally only 200 troops were to remain) troops trained to train in place in Afghanistan based out of Kabul... That is what is being changed... Harper wants to change that mission into an "Advanced Training" mission whereby Afghan troops would be accompanied by Canadian troops on their initial "forays into hostile territory" and Kabul area security... THAT would be a significant and far more dangerous mission than what a "basic training" mission "behind the wire" would be... Canada military forces has been sitting on the sidelines since korea, Our nation has decided to take a different approach to military matters concentrating on peacekeeping because it was cheaper, and provided votes. some how it is more exceptable to have a soldier killed in a peacekeeping mission than it is in combat. even with that said Canada's government place very limited caveats on what we could do or could not do. made very edvident during the balken conflict, where we had a reputation of CANBAT 1 and CAN BAT 2 or as our allieds used to call us CAN DON"T 1 and CAN DON'T 2. Something Canadian soldiers were very egar to change...that came with the combat mission to Afghanistan.....A mission were our government had released all those caveats and restraints and let us do what we were paid to do...close with and destroy the enemy... Yes, but without the proper equipment & numbers to do the job... You're somewhat wrong in what you say as well, in that initially Canada's role, as was Germany's and Frances, etc., was to be in Kabul doing training, but without any "wire" to be behind... US and GB were to do the forward fighting roles with support from Afghan troops trained by Canada etc.... In 2005 that changed with NATO being the leader in Afghanistan and Great Britain and Canada increasing their troop strength substantially, and Canada taking forward (Combat) control of south Khandahar province based out of Khandahar... As always, Canada's troops, while fighting waaay above their weight class, did an outstanding job but at a very heavy price in blood and treasure... All this came about because of the lies told to NATO member countries about the strength of the enemy in Afghanstan so that the US could free up it's troops to go fight in Iraq... Canadians soldiers have spent alot time rebuilding our reputation as top grade professional soldiers, of the quality that our nation once seen at Vimy Ridge or the beaches of Normandy........And we don't want to undo that with an early withdrawal from a conflict not yet done. Canadians soon forget that this conflict is not over, and that Canada signed up to be a part of a larger coalition and the mission is not yet done....and in the eyes of alot of Canadian soldiers we are letting our allieds down by switching roles,taking the easier road instead of keeping with our current role and mission. Canadian troops have NEVER had to prove anything to anyone and have always been highly respected and valued by other nations with the exception of the United States... The US is a militaristic nation, the ONLY one in NATO, with a consistant and continuos fighting record since Viet Nam... Ergo the milirary and political leadership in the US is quite different than Canada's and of course US troops reflect that... In fact Canada's JTF-2 units went into Afghanistan with the second batch of US Rangers to hunt Bin Ladin in the first forays into Afghanistan (unbeknown to most Canadians) and were also sent to "establish" a "safe zone" for the move into Khandahar province for the following Canadian troops (better known)... I'm sorry, if Canada's troops feel that they're letting their dead buddies down in Afghanistan by taking on a different role/mission, they are completely WRONG... They in fact have done much more man for man than what could have been expected from any troops including those of the United States... Canada is NOT in a competion to be more like the US... So just bring our troops home, they've done their job and a whole lot more... Quote There are none so blind, deaf and dumb as those that fail to recognize, understand, and promote TRUTH...- GWiz
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 31, 2011 Report Posted January 31, 2011 ...All this came about because of the lies told to NATO member countries about the strength of the enemy in Afghanstan so that the US could free up it's troops to go fight in Iraq... Where were the rest of Canada's "troops" if this mission was more important? Doesn't Canada have intelligence collection and analysis capabilities? If not, why not? Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Army Guy Posted January 31, 2011 Report Posted January 31, 2011 That's my point, the mission today is NOT a training mission, it's a forward combat mission involving some 2200 Canadian troops... In their area of operation, South Khandahar province, Canada was alone until Obama sent the US military in in substantial numbers and has over 5000 troops in the area where Canada was operating... Thats a misunderstanding, Khanadar had a very large contingent of troops before we arrived, Dutch, Americans, and other assorted troops far outnumbered Canada's contribution, today those numbers are roughly around 35,000 troops that share the same base....And while Pres Obama did re-inforce the area with addtional troops, there was already more americans than Canadians in Khanadar....Those extra 5000 were split between our area of operations and the British Area in the Hemland district. The move to a training mission, leaving Khandahar in the hands of the Americans, was to take over exactly that "basic training" mission leaving some 800 (originally only 200 troops were to remain) troops trained to train in place in Afghanistan based out of Kabul...That is what is being changed... Harper wants to change that mission into an "Advanced Training" mission whereby Afghan troops would be accompanied by Canadian troops on their initial "forays into hostile territory" and Kabul area security... THAT would be a significant and far more dangerous mission than what a "basic training" mission "behind the wire" would be... That is not what we have been briefed, the mission according to DND sources is still a Basic training Mission...however the exact location has not been chosen, because most of the established bases are full to capacity, no room for a training school and it's support staff, which means re supply will have to be done by road, as any other unit in Afghanistan.... Perhaps the misunderstanding is our current mission includes a combat battle group, a PRT (reconstruction team), and an Omlet which is an advanced training codray taking the Afghanis soldiers into Combat....3 missions roled into one... Yes, but without the proper equipment & numbers to do the job... You're somewhat wrong in what you say as well, in that initially Canada's role, as was Germany's and Frances, etc., was to be in Kabul doing training, but without any "wire" to be behind... No initially our role was a combat role in Khanadar actually with the PPCLI battle group under American control.....it was this mission that wouls set the tone for previous missions. Canadians were assigned a role around Kabul not training but patroling around and trough the city...we replaced the Germans there as they pushed further north due to their caveats in place, in other words it got to warm their for them...and they left, we were the new kids, so we got slotted in .... In 2005 that changed with NATO being the leader in Afghanistan and Great Britain and Canada increasing their troop strength substantially, and Canada taking forward (Combat) control of south Khandahar province based out of Khandahar... As always, Canada's troops, while fighting waaay above their weight class, did an outstanding job but at a very heavy price in blood and treasure. Depending who you talk to your right Canada did stick up it's hand for the south, and we have lost alot of good men, but no more than any other fighting contingent, and a hell of alot less than we expected, All this came about because of the lies told to NATO member countries about the strength of the enemy in Afghanstan so that the US could free up it's troops to go fight in Iraq... I dont beleive that for a minute, Canadian intel is as good or better than most on the ground, DND knew exactly what was going on, and what it faced before getting into anything....It's all spelled out in serveral books, like i said depends which one you read, but they all have something in common it was not a con, they all went in eyes wide open..... I'm sorry, if Canada's troops feel that they're letting their dead buddies down in Afghanistan by taking on a different role/mission, they are completely WRONG... They in fact have done much more man for man than what could have been expected from any troops including those of the United States...Canada is NOT in a competion to be more like the US... So just bring our troops home, they've done their job and a whole lot more... It's never been about competion,it's about respect, when the shit hits the fan, and you here over the radio that the Canadians are rolling up on your postion, that news should be one of relief, not Shit not those guys again .....and we've accomplished that, to the piont were we have been requested... And it's all not about letting our fallen comrads down, finishing what they started, and could not complete, but also our allieds we owe them as well, our government decided to take on this role and now are up and leaving, that may work in governmental etho's but does not sit well with a soldier...then there is the Afghanis civilians, the same ones that we seen grow for the last 10 years, in doing our job it's is sometimes hard not to make promises....those promises will never be kept now.... Trust me we'd love to come home , but the jobs not done yet...and we've never walked out on any mission before...well until now... 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.
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.