carepov Posted March 17, 2014 Report Posted March 17, 2014 And yet, here you are already calling the mission a failure. Even if the objectives were acheived the mission was a failure due to excessive costs. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 17, 2014 Report Posted March 17, 2014 Even if the objectives were acheived the mission was a failure due to excessive costs. OK...some people know the cost of everything and the value of nothing. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 17, 2014 Report Posted March 17, 2014 Pity, a lot of NATO forces were in Iraq. U.S. forces are not NATO forces unless assigned to a NATO command. Canada was not in Iraq save for some exchange personnel and frigate missions previously deployed (Op Apollo). The American military is not some 'big brother' that one can conjure up to mass only on things of presumed priority. Afghanistan had ceased to be a primary threat by March 2003. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
carepov Posted March 17, 2014 Report Posted March 17, 2014 U.S. forces are not NATO forces unless assigned to a NATO command. Canada was not in Iraq save for some exchange personnel and frigate missions previously deployed (Op Apollo). The American military is not some 'big brother' that one can conjure up to mass only on things of presumed priority. Afghanistan had ceased to be a primary threat by March 2003. I was refering mainly to the British. Quote
Michael Hardner Posted March 17, 2014 Report Posted March 17, 2014 If you send them to war without the proper equipment, wouldn't that be the case? Is the government not the representatives of the Canadian people? It seems to me that the issue might be more with the government, although it's ultimately the people. This is the problem with "the" public. It's actually not a public but a mass of people whose opinions don't add up, eg. give us more programs and cut taxes, go to war but don't suffer casualties. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
Michael Hardner Posted March 17, 2014 Report Posted March 17, 2014 with out the support of the people funding dries up for everything....nobody gave a crap... On that basis, the people were probably never behind it. For that matter, are we even behind being in NATO ? Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
carepov Posted March 17, 2014 Report Posted March 17, 2014 OK...some people know the cost of everything and the value of nothing. And some people are doomed to repeat mistakes of the past, how many apply to the WOT? Robert McNamara's 11 lessons from Vietnam[edit]From Robert McNamara's 1995 book "In Retrospect: The Tragedy and Lessons of Vietnam".[9] We misjudged then — and we have since — the geopolitical intentions of our adversaries … and we exaggerated the dangers to the United States of their actions. We viewed the people and leaders of South Vietnam in terms of our own experience … We totally misjudged the political forces within the country. We underestimated the power of nationalism to motivate a people to fight and die for their beliefs and values. Our misjudgments of friend and foe, alike, reflected our profound ignorance of the history, culture, and politics of the people in the area, and the personalities and habits of their leaders. We failed then — and have since — to recognize the limitations of modern, high-technology military equipment, forces, and doctrine. We failed, as well, to adapt our military tactics to the task of winning the hearts and minds of people from a totally different culture. We failed to draw Congress and the American people into a full and frank discussion and debate of the pros and cons of a large-scale military involvement … before we initiated the action. After the action got under way, and unanticipated events forced us off our planned course … we did not fully explain what was happening, and why we were doing what we did. We did not recognize that neither our people nor our leaders are omniscient. Our judgment of what is in another people's or country's best interest should be put to the test of open discussion in international forums. We do not have the God-given right to shape every nation in our image or as we choose. We did not hold to the principle that U.S. military action … should be carried out only in conjunction with multinational forces supported fully (and not merely cosmetically) by the international community. We failed to recognize that in international affairs, as in other aspects of life, there may be problems for which there are no immediate solutions … At times, we may have to live with an imperfect, untidy world. Underlying many of these errors lay our failure to organize the top echelons of the executive branch to deal effectively with the extraordinarily complex range of political and military issues. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 17, 2014 Report Posted March 17, 2014 (edited) And some people are doomed to repeat mistakes of the past, how many apply to the WOT? Like I said....yours is a different agenda entirely. Canada was not directly involved with Vietnam or Iraq, yet you insist on making U.S. actions a primary driver in Canada's consideration for success or failure in Afghanistan, including the costs. Do you have any Canadian content to offer ? How about General Hillier ? Edited March 17, 2014 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
carepov Posted March 17, 2014 Report Posted March 17, 2014 There is no "Canadian Content" without considering the US . "But the bottom line, as drawn out clearly in this case, is strong US leadership: Canada should say “yes” to operations preponderantly led by the United States. The Pentagon’s 2012 strategic guidance calls for high technology and small footprint approaches to maintaining global leadership. Canada must ensure from the outset that any future NATO non-Article V operation it participates in, enjoys core US support and direction. When America leads it will still need dependable and capable allies to contribute a robust combat capability. Canada and others must decide how to respond to this opportunity." http://www.cdfai.org/PDF/Canada%20and%20NATO%20-%20A%20Military%20Assessment.pdf Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 17, 2014 Report Posted March 17, 2014 There is no "Canadian Content" without considering the US . OK, and as previously stated, how can anyone determine CANADIAN success or failure in Afghanistan if it will always be determined by what another nation does or doesn't do ? Sounds like a 'bandwagon' mentality to me. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
GostHacked Posted March 17, 2014 Report Posted March 17, 2014 They have no presence in Afghanistan, they are based in Pakistan , and have influence in Afghan. there is a big difference. I do blame them for their share, but it is the Canadian people that make change in this country, It is the Canadian people who have the responsability to have our backs...... The people who were against the war in the first place would rather not have had to send you to another country to fight a war to begin with. The responsibility lies on our leaders that put you in harms way in the first place. We as the public can do nothing really to prevent you from being sent abroad simply because of foreign policy and international agreements that force us to participate. That should never be the case. So the majority of our equipment problems are yours...every Canadian citizen....a good example of that would be the F-35 program, we'd already have that Aircraft if it were not for public opinion....you can't have it both ways..... The public opinions have nothing to do with the ongoing technical failures and budget problems of the F-35. I am sure you would rather have a working plane instead of one that might cut off your oxygen supply. And even the earliest date we could acquire any of them are still years off. The Afghanistan mission was to end way before that original date anyways. How do you blame a public if the military cannot equip you properly? We don't set the budgets of the military, and we don't have a say in how that money is spent. Do we want to waste more money on ex UK diesel subs? You can try to eradicate an idea....i don't know how many military books mention this...you can not kill it with out wipeing out everyone with knowledge of it....that would have went over well in the media.... You are either with us, or with the terrorists. That is a myth that wea are fighting the same terrorist as the US created for Russia....do some more research.... Afghanistan has for the most part always been SHIA law, but they took it to the extreme, hence the problem... Well welcome to democracy, were the majority rule....each Canadian does not get to chose where our tax dollars get spent.....Just like i don't get to chose what war DND is going to engage with.....Back to reality.... It's not that i want to pin it on them, I do pin it on them just so we are clear.... Does not sound like democracy if I have no say in where my tax dollars are spent. Canada got all hot and horny about beating the shit out of a bunch of goat herders, so off we went....they loss interest shortly afterwards and forgot we even had troops over there....except when one of us came home in a bag....or you wanted answers about some aligation.....with no interest, just how easy would you think it would be to get equipment.....Canadian soldiers have an unwritten code that we will defend this nation, without concern over our own lifes so you and your family does not have to....., but it is the Canadian citizen who ensures we have what is needed for us to do that job.....and like us you don't have a say in which war you want to do that...it is everyday.... You were not defending Canada. You were following the US lead in the war on terror. There was no threat to Canada. We had to die before we got any equipment.....now put yourself in my boots, who are you going to blame..... The government listens to the public....if they're is no uproar then there is no action..... I would rather have your boots never left Canada in the first place. Had this been a no fail mission the Canadian public would have been their to fully support our cause....But it was not, hence why i say this was a Canadian military mission only....we did all the work, we did all the bleeding , we did all the greiving.....the Canadian public has not right to call it a failure...you lost that honor when you abandoned us on the battle field. There was no honour sending you to fight a war that was a bunch of bull to begin with? Quote
Michael Hardner Posted March 17, 2014 Report Posted March 17, 2014 There was no honour sending you to fight a war that was a bunch of bull to begin with? I doubt that the majority of the Canadian public doubts Afghanistan's role in 9/11. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
carepov Posted March 17, 2014 Report Posted March 17, 2014 OK, and as previously stated, how can anyone determine CANADIAN success or failure in Afghanistan if it will always be determined by what another nation does or doesn't do ? Sounds like a 'bandwagon' mentality to me. Not bandwagon, it's a team mentality: Lieutenant General Stuart Beare: “NATO is an us not a them,” Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 17, 2014 Report Posted March 17, 2014 Not bandwagon, it's a team mentality: So are you shifting the narrative to a "NATO failure in Afghanistan", regardless of Canadian Forces contributions to the effort ? U.S. and U.K forces in Iraq did not chop to NATO. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
On Guard for Thee Posted March 18, 2014 Report Posted March 18, 2014 OK, and as previously stated, how can anyone determine CANADIAN success or failure in Afghanistan if it will always be determined by what another nation does or doesn't do ? Sounds like a 'bandwagon' mentality to me. Bull***t. Why did we go there if it wasn't to affect what a nation does or doesn't do? Or was it just to get rid of some extra bulletts! Quote
PIK Posted March 18, 2014 Report Posted March 18, 2014 So the last soldeirs came home today and they came home on a globemaster. Do you think we would owns these planes right now if the liberals were still in power?? Our troops would still be stuck in afghanistan waiting for the rented russian planes to show up and with what is going on in ukraine..................... Quote Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
carepov Posted March 18, 2014 Report Posted March 18, 2014 So are you shifting the narrative to a "NATO failure in Afghanistan", regardless of Canadian Forces contributions to the effort ? U.S. and U.K forces in Iraq did not chop to NATO. No shift, IMO the International Community failed in Afghanistan. There were many mistakes made by all involved, but by far the largest mistake that cost us the war was the invasion of Iraq in 2003. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 18, 2014 Report Posted March 18, 2014 No shift, IMO the International Community failed in Afghanistan. There were many mistakes made by all involved, but by far the largest mistake that cost us the war was the invasion of Iraq in 2003. This is just more rationalization....either Canada failed or it didn't. The Invasion of Iraq actually helped to mobilize more, not less expeditionary forces that were subsequently deployed to Afghanistan. Iraq was a far more important policy goal for the US/UK than was Afghanistan. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
carepov Posted March 18, 2014 Report Posted March 18, 2014 This is just more rationalization....either Canada failed or it didn't. Not necessarily, there is a whole spectrum ranging from complete failure to astounding sucess. Iraq was a far more important policy goal for the US/UK than was Afghanistan. Exactly. That's the blunder that cost us the war. http://costsofwar.org/ Quote
Scotty Posted March 18, 2014 Report Posted March 18, 2014 This is just more rationalization....either Canada failed or it didn't. The Invasion of Iraq actually helped to mobilize more, not less expeditionary forces that were subsequently deployed to Afghanistan. Iraq was a far more important policy goal for the US/UK than was Afghanistan. Foolishly so. 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
Scotty Posted March 18, 2014 Report Posted March 18, 2014 No shift, IMO the International Community failed in Afghanistan. There were many mistakes made by all involved, but by far the largest mistake that cost us the war was the invasion of Iraq in 2003. In order to state the international community failed in Afghanistan you'd need to state what the goals were. 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
Army Guy Posted March 18, 2014 Report Posted March 18, 2014 The people who were against the war in the first place would rather not have had to send you to another country to fight a war to begin with. The responsibility lies on our leaders that put you in harms way in the first place. We as the public can do nothing really to prevent you from being sent abroad simply because of foreign policy and international agreements that force us to participate. That should never be the case. The public opinions have nothing to do with the ongoing technical failures and budget problems of the F-35. I am sure you would rather have a working plane instead of one that might cut off your oxygen supply. And even the earliest date we could acquire any of them are still years off. The Afghanistan mission was to end way before that original date anyways. How do you blame a public if the military cannot equip you properly? We don't set the budgets of the military, and we don't have a say in how that money is spent. Do we want to waste more money on ex UK diesel subs? You are either with us, or with the terrorists. Does not sound like democracy if I have no say in where my tax dollars are spent. You were not defending Canada. You were following the US lead in the war on terror. There was no threat to Canada. I would rather have your boots never left Canada in the first place. There was no honour sending you to fight a war that was a bunch of bull to begin with? You seem to forget we live in a democracy and majority rules, we either live with that decision or we can try and change it. So in the begining a majority of Canadians were all for this mission. So in we went.... We were humping the mountains searching for bad guys under US forces using US assets...everything was golden...except for the fact we had green combats.... All that being said the mission changes, we deploy into Kabul, we start using open air jeeps, shit goes south...I agree with you the chain of command shares some of the burden with how we are equiped..... But you say how can Canadian citizens change this they have no power, well one universty prof in Ottawa said the same thing about our POW policies and aledged abuses....remember that, one man got the government not only to look into it, but also launched an investagation into the whole problem....that was one man...there are other examples as well, of ordinary Canadians making changes...It is the system we live with.... Public opinion holds alot of weight in this country, i used the F-35 program as a good example of this, Can you say with 100 % certainity that public opinion is not what is holding our military from getting this plane....Airforce have a hard on for this plane so does the current government and they would take it as is right now...yet they have been presured to relook at the whole program ..where did that presure come from ? And perhaps you misunderstood me we did not need the F-35 in Afghan, i was using it as an example of the peoples voice and how powerful it is... Thats is the power of the people, that is their voice....and it is being heard by government in fact they don't do very much with out it....they check it for everything they do, as they know it is your vote that keeps them in office... The people of this country have been using their power since the first government formed in this country nothing has changed....Budgets are made up in government i get that but if the people wanted to grow or shrienk our military their voices would be heard, if not 4 years later there would be a change of government.....if it was the wish of the people to spend more on our military, it would happen... Look my biggest piont here is the Canadian people have been given the right to make changes in anything they want...saying anything less is not true.....i get it sometimes we all feel like our voice is not being heard.....we feel lost in the crowd....but there are examples of people doing it....and it is working...the key word is "want" to do it.... My second piont is it is the Canadian citizens responsability to have all our soldiers,policmen, fire fighters backs....they have signed on to unlimited liabilty, meaning they have to risk their lives on our behalf....we can't sit by and say they knew what they signed on for, tough shit here is a bucket of water, save my house, i pay taxes.......because in the end we need these people to do those things they do....and if the Citizen say screw you we are paying you...well i can make more money as a garbage truck driver...i do what i do because i like it, and love this country...but if there is no support many will change their minds about doing those jobs, seeing it as a one way street, sacrafice on their part, nothing on the tax payers side except a few dollars... 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.
Scotty Posted March 18, 2014 Report Posted March 18, 2014 Yes...the objective in Vietnam was clearly not achieved. Different situation and objective in Afghanistan. What was the objective in Afghanistan? 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
GostHacked Posted March 18, 2014 Report Posted March 18, 2014 I doubt that the majority of the Canadian public doubts Afghanistan's role in 9/11. It was not Afghanistan that attacked the USA, it was Al-Queda. And most of the hijackers were Saudis. Afghanistan as a country had little if anything to do with 9/11. The hijackers trained to be pilots in the USA. Quote
Scotty Posted March 18, 2014 Report Posted March 18, 2014 And yet...lots was accomplished...not the least of which was an opportunity for Afghans to unify and form a functioning government. Which they have yet to do. 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
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.