carepov Posted March 19, 2014 Report Posted March 19, 2014 How did we punch above our weight ? Not compared to the US of course. But compared to other NATO allies we did, certainly in terms of taking on dangerous missions in Kandahar. "In Afghanistan, Canada has been lauded by the United States for punching above its weight, and Gates offered the same praise Friday for its contribution to the Libya mission." http://www.ctvnews.ca/mackay-backs-gates-criticism-of-nato-1.655444 Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 19, 2014 Report Posted March 19, 2014 If Canada "punched above its weight" with fewer allocated resources, it it unclear to me how Canada's mission can be characterized as a "failure", regardless of what the US/UK did in Afghanistan or Iraq (or South Korea, Japan, Germany, Italy, etc.) Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Scotty Posted March 19, 2014 Report Posted March 19, 2014 (edited) Anti-terrorism (Al Qaeda training camps, safe habour), counter insurgency for a fledgling government, PRT security, infrastructure build out, staging base for Pakistan interventions, Usama Bin 'Hidin, humanitarian aid, etc., etc. I would say those are a loosely stated collection of 'good things' but they don't mean anything in terms of a 'goal'. If there was a goal it was to put in place a stable governmental structure which would, above all else, ensure Afghanistan did not return to a state of religious fanaticism which would allow it to be used as an open base for terrorists intent on attacking the west and its allies. That was a worthy and sensible goal and it failed utterly. Everyone knows the current government will be in Dubai with their stolen money within a few months of western soldiers leaving, and Afghanistan will be returned to the control of the Taliban. And this wasn't a a failure of military force. It was a failure of government building. The US, in its blundering way, just as it did in Iraq, insisted on trying to plant democracy in a land which was not prepared for it, rather like conquering Alaska and insisting on planting palm trees everywhere. That is the failure in Afghanistan. And that is why everything will return to the way it was shortly after you guys leave. Edited March 19, 2014 by Scotty Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
PIK Posted March 19, 2014 Report Posted March 19, 2014 If Canada "punched above its weight" with fewer allocated resources, it it unclear to me how Canada's mission can be characterized as a "failure", regardless of what the US/UK did in Afghanistan or Iraq (or South Korea, Japan, Germany, Italy, etc.) It was not a failure, that is the canadian left that says that. Quote Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
carepov Posted March 19, 2014 Report Posted March 19, 2014 (edited) If Canada "punched above its weight" with fewer allocated resources, it it unclear to me how Canada's mission can be characterized as a "failure", regardless of what the US/UK did in Afghanistan or Iraq (or South Korea, Japan, Germany, Italy, etc.) What was "Canada's mission"? What good is it if the new house is properly wired but the foundations and framing is NFG? Edited March 19, 2014 by carepov Quote
PIK Posted March 19, 2014 Report Posted March 19, 2014 Afghani women would say it has helped alot and hopefully they can hold on to what they have now. Quote Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
carepov Posted March 19, 2014 Report Posted March 19, 2014 Afghani women would say it has helped alot and hopefully they can hold on to what they have now. I would hope that the death of over 3,300 coalition troops (mostly American), so many wounded, and over $900 billion spent would get us more than "hope". Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 19, 2014 Report Posted March 19, 2014 What was "Canada's mission"? What good is it if the new house is properly wired but the foundations and framing is NFG? Canada's mission is defined by Canadians, not me. By many measures, there were successes for what turned out to be mission and scope creep. The "new house", general contractor, and subcontractor analogy just doesn't work for this circumstance. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
eyeball Posted March 20, 2014 Report Posted March 20, 2014 It was not a failure, that is the canadian left that says that. Notice we also told you that would be the case before it even got started. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Topaz Posted March 20, 2014 Report Posted March 20, 2014 Only time will tell if going over there was worth all those people that died. If the mission was to drive the Taliban out, they left, but now with the Afghan's can hopefully keep the security in their country. The downside of this conflict/war, are the soldiers who are mentally ill and the people of Afghanistan, who have their own scars to heal. No one wins in wars. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted March 21, 2014 Report Posted March 21, 2014 Just look at the news today. 10 blown up in my old stomping grounds of JAF. Bunch more killed in Kabul. And of course we all know what a wreck Iraq continues to be. And if you think AFG has been swept of Taliban, maybe you'd like to buy some lovely property I have for sale. Quote
Michael Hardner Posted March 21, 2014 Report Posted March 21, 2014 Just look at the news today. 10 blown up in my old stomping grounds of JAF. Bunch more killed in Kabul. As Topaz said, time will tell. The events of a single day don't add up to much in the long view. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
Argus Posted March 21, 2014 Report Posted March 21, 2014 Afghani women would say it has helped alot and hopefully they can hold on to what they have now. Not going to happen. Notice that just last month Afghanistan's parliament voted to forbid any family members from testifying or giving evidence against any other family members. That neatly makes it impossible to punish any man for anything he does against his wife or children. And that's NOW. Wait until the Taliban take over! This is a country where honor killings are still rife, and child marriages still common. And it certainly isn't going to get any better when the West leaves. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 21, 2014 Report Posted March 21, 2014 Canada also has spousal privilege laws. To wit: 4 (3) No husband is compellable to disclose any communication made to him by his wife during their marriage, and no wife is compellable to disclose any communication made to her by her husband during their marriage. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Argus Posted March 21, 2014 Report Posted March 21, 2014 Canada also has spousal privilege laws. To wit: 4 (3) No husband is compellable to disclose any communication made to him by his wife during their marriage, and no wife is compellable to disclose any communication made to her by her husband during their marriage. Not at all the same thing. The Afghan law forbids family members from giving evidence whether they want to or not. Further, in Canada police will intercede and arrest a man for spousal violence regardless of whether his spouse wants it done or not. The Afghan law would prohibit police from doing anything, no matter what the wife said. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 21, 2014 Report Posted March 21, 2014 Not at all the same thing. The Afghan law forbids family members from giving evidence whether they want to or not. Further, in Canada police will intercede and arrest a man for spousal violence regardless of whether his spouse wants it done or not. The Afghan law would prohibit police from doing anything, no matter what the wife said. Nevertheless, and the practical point you choose to ignore, is that many a domestic violence case has been derailed because the spouse chooses to not testify at trial. This option is legislated in Canadian law. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Argus Posted March 21, 2014 Report Posted March 21, 2014 Nevertheless, and the practical point you choose to ignore, is that many a domestic violence case has been derailed because the spouse chooses to not testify at trial. This option is legislated in Canadian law. Nevertheless, and the practical point you are choosing to ignore is that there is a VAST difference between permitting a spouse to not testify and forbidding a spouse from testifying. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 21, 2014 Report Posted March 21, 2014 Nevertheless, and the practical point you are choosing to ignore is that there is a VAST difference between permitting a spouse to not testify and forbidding a spouse from testifying. Not so vast...the Afghans can pass laws just like Canada does to control speech, publication, testimony, etc. One doesn't have to agree, but such laws in an Islamic state are to be expected. Afghans probably forbid abortions too..the same way Canada or the U.S. did at one time. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
guyser Posted March 21, 2014 Report Posted March 21, 2014 Not so vast... ...and the Grand Canyon is a minor depression. Quote
Argus Posted March 21, 2014 Report Posted March 21, 2014 (edited) Not so vast.. You are permitted to not vote. You are not allowed to vote. I consider the difference between two such laws to be vast. .the Afghans can pass laws just like Canada does to control speech, publication, testimony, etc. One doesn't have to agree, but such laws in an Islamic state are to be expected. Yes. That was my point. Such laws are to be expected from backward, violent, misogynistic cultures with no cultural connection to democratic values. And as I said, if you see that now, wait until westerners leave. Edited March 21, 2014 by Argus Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
On Guard for Thee Posted March 21, 2014 Report Posted March 21, 2014 Canada also has spousal privilege laws. To wit: 4 (3) No husband is compellable to disclose any communication made to him by his wife during their marriage, and no wife is compellable to disclose any communication made to her by her husband during their marriage. Quite the mix of apples and oranges there! Communicationg with your spouse and killing them are viewed quite differently by the courts in Canada. I know that in some states in the US you can shoot your wife if you find her in bed with the neighbour and get away with it. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 22, 2014 Report Posted March 22, 2014 Yes. That was my point. Such laws are to be expected from backward, violent, misogynistic cultures with no cultural connection to democratic values. And as I said, if you see that now, wait until westerners leave. They are even expected from "backward" western nations with hate speech laws, native reserve systems, and government funded/controlled broadcaster(s). Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 22, 2014 Report Posted March 22, 2014 Quite the mix of apples and oranges there! Communicationg with your spouse and killing them are viewed quite differently by the courts in Canada. I know that in some states in the US you can shoot your wife if you find her in bed with the neighbour and get away with it. Not so much...in Canada you can legally kill your unborn children up to the point of birth. That's illegal in Afghanistan ! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
On Guard for Thee Posted March 22, 2014 Report Posted March 22, 2014 Not so much...in Canada you can legally kill your unborn children up to the point of birth. That's illegal in Afghanistan ! You know what is legal in Afghanistan? You can kill your children after they have been born if it is decided they have broought some sort of "shame" on the family. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 22, 2014 Report Posted March 22, 2014 You know what is legal in Afghanistan? You can kill your children after they have been born if it is decided they have broought some sort of "shame" on the family. Right...so what's the problem ?! Different strokes for different folks...err...cultures. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
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.