If it couldn't get any worse!

[canadian_conservative]

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/20...tan-050808.html

Above cited is my information for this topic.

Alright here's the story. I totaly agree with this war, peacekeeping and rebuilding in Afganistan but I have recently read on cbc.ca that one of our top brass has just said that we will possibly be staying in Afganistan for 20 years a generation he says. Also we are planning on sending more troops in to this devestated country. Like I said I totaly support this mission in Kandahar but is it worth it now? is it worth it to the soldiers to be a way from wives, parants, sons, families?

[kimmy]

Canadian peacekeeping efforts in Cyprus went on for a generation, didn't they?

-k

[crazymf]

Or is it a situation where the end justifies the means?

Before 911, I didn't see much reason for a military other than to help citizens flooded out in Winnipeg or as a national labor pool.

It would be a great world indeed if military power was merely needed for ornamental duty. I think the world took a giant step backward the last couple of years. Thank your extremist muslim buddies for that. Or could be some Republican/CIA conspiracy to keep the US economy spurred or something like that.

Who knows?

[Shady]

is it worth it to the soldiers to be a way from wives, parants, sons, families?

Yes it is worth it, in my opinion. However, if you don't wish to spend a year or two in Afghanistan peacekeeping then don't join the military. If you're currently in the military and don't want to be in Afghanistan peacekeeping, then don't re-enlist.

[SirSpanky]

To take a nation such as this, and put people in it of the caliber that we are sending? Could be one of the great deeds a middle power such as us can accomplish. I see no better use for our troops. I just hope the media is in there consistantly to let us know how its all going.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear all,

This vapid comment from our General makes me cringe at the sheer idiocy. The following is a quote from CBC.ca today...

General warns of 20-year mission in Afghanistan

Last Updated Mon, 08 Aug 2005 11:53:10 EDT

CBC News

One of Canada's top generals says Canadian troops could end up serving for a generation in Afghanistan, a prediction that comes as more soldiers prepare to head to the region.

'There are things worth dying for.' – Maj.-Gen. Andrew Leslie

INDEPTH: Afghanistan

Maj.-Gen. Andrew Leslie says the lengthy stay may be necessary to help that country break out of "a cycle of warlords and tribalism."

Leslie made the remarks on Sunday at the Couchiching Summer Conference in Orillia, Ont., north of Toronto.

"Afghanistan is a 20-year venture," he said.

But, he said, the commitment is a necessary one.

"There are things worth fighting for. There are things worth dying for. There are things worth killing for," Leslie said, in remarks reported in Monday's Toronto Star newspaper.

Meanwhile, Canada's efforts in Afghanistan gets another boost Monday with the departure of more soldiers from Fredericton.

Another 43 soldiers from the 2nd Battalion, Royal Canadian Regiment are heading to join military efforts in the region.

As many as 1,250 Canadian soldiers will be serving in Afghanistan by February 2006.

FROM AUG. 7, 2005: Canadians survey Kandahar for new mission

But, as the soldiers leave, Leslie warns Canadians should be prepared for a long mission, that could cost lives.

"Every time you kill an angry young man overseas, you're creating 15 more who will come after you," he said.

If the Canadians kill 1, and then 15 more are expected to join the fight, then they will have to kill the 15, and have 225 come after them. Then, when they kill the 225,.......they might as well admit that their thinking leaves no other option but genocide to solve the problem from the outset. At least they'd be honest for a change.

[SirSpanky]

As soon as the general shows me his PHD in Afghanistani sociology, I'll start to listen.

[Army Guy]

Flea bag:

Just curious as to what part of those comments are vipid, or make you cringe.

If the Canadians kill 1, and then 15 more are expected to join the fight, then they will have to kill the 15, and have 225 come after them. Then, when they kill the 225,.......they might as well admit that their thinking leaves no other option but genocide to solve the problem from the outset. At least they'd be honest for a change.

Do you honestly think that is what is happening over there now ?

Perhaps when you read the entire text it takes on a new meaning i know it does for me...

"More of that activity is about to take place," he said, warning of "predators ... who wish to kill those whom we are charged to protect."

Still, no one should expect answers to come pouring out of the barrel of a gun, Leslie cautioned.

"Every time you kill an angry young man overseas, you're creating 15 more who will come after you," he said.

"You have to be prepared for the consequences."

My Webpage

SirSpanky:

Are you saying you've changed your views. a complete 180 actually...because the Gen says it might be a long term operation. Why the change in heart...

[Argus]

As soon as the general shows me his PHD in Afghanistani sociology, I'll start to listen.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Andrew Lewlie Bioigraphy

[canadian_conservative]

Yes it is worth it, in my opinion. However, if you don't wish to spend a year or two in Afghanistan peacekeeping then don't join the military. If you're currently in the military and don't want to be in Afghanistan peacekeeping, then don't re-enlist.

Your absul;utly right about that, I didn't really mean to say it isn't worth leaving your familiy to go to war but at the same time I meant it. I guess it just kind of made me think of how I would feel if I were the one being sent to Afganistan for 20 years, I wouldnt fret if it were 2 or 3 but 20 just seems like a lot. But than again thats the reality we face when terror is the new Hitler.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear Army Guy,

I read the page, Leslie is indeed a well-lettered simpleton. He delivers polished verbiage but without original thought. Its as though the 'intelligence' on the US military has oozed into his (and others) mind. Unless Leslie is trying to sell them a 'New, Improved Islam', nothing that has been tried before will work. The Afghanis, the Muj and the foreign fighters that defeated vastly superior Russian forces did not do so because they wanted democracy. Or freedom (individual, western style), for that matter. They wanted an Islamic land with Islamic law, free of occupying forces, especially those of 'infidels'.

Now Canada proposes that they can use military might to change their minds and is willing to spend 20 years doing it? (Nevermind the fact that Canada can't support it's military, if they actually became involved in something serious, for 20 weeks!) If Leslie aims to create a 'secular' Afghanistan, he (and Canada) will basically be fighting Islam. When he calls such 'soldiers of God' simple predators, "who want to kill those we would protect", he is either lying or stupid.

But then again, he is not trying to sell it to the Afghani Mujihadeen. He is trying to sell it to you.

[SirSpanky]

Army guy:

No change in heart. I don't think we should be there simply because the general said so. His expertise is blowing things up, hunting down baddies etc. All I was saying is that I'll take his opinion on social matters as though he is a biased observer, with interests there. Its hard to be objective when your buddies are getting shot at around you.

[canadian_conservative]

Army guy:

No change in heart. I don't think we should be there simply because the general said so. His expertise is blowing things up, hunting down baddies etc. All I was saying is that I'll take his opinion on social matters as though he is a biased observer, with interests there. Its hard to be objective when your buddies are getting shot at around you.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

How is the general biased this will be the first I have hear sombody call him biassed. What interests does he have their in fact not by your oppinion but please prove to me by a link what is his interests their? War is war and like my buddy said up above if you don;t want to be shot at or see a freind fall in combat than don't enlist, don;t join the army plain and simple.

[SirSpanky]

His interest is seeing his troops not die. I didn't mean anything more grand than that. If you have military men on the ground making decisions with political ramifications, you're in bad shape. If the generals had their way in Korea, the US would have used nukes.

[Shady]

I wouldnt fret if it were 2 or 3 but 20 just seems like a lot

Not one soldier is going to be in Afghanistan for a 20 year tour. That's not how the military works. A Canadian military presence may last for that long, but an individual's tour of duty isn't anything close to 20 years.

[Argus]

His interest is seeing his troops not die. I didn't mean anything more grand than that. If you have military men on the ground making decisions with political ramifications, you're in bad shape. If the generals had their way in Korea, the US would have used nukes.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Who's to say that wouldn't have been the better choice in the long run?

[SirSpanky]

Nobody I guess. I just think it would've been a dangerous precedant to set. The fact that if a general yells loud enough he gets to do whatever he wants. Whats the difference between a person like that, and Kim Jong? Also, the from the hip attitude of using the most dangerous weapons we've yet created (at the time).

[Army Guy]

theloniusfleabag:

Unless Leslie is trying to sell them a 'New, Improved Islam', nothing that has been tried before will work.

I think that is exactly what is being done over there now, Yes they have had elections with another to be held shortly, is that western democracy to a piont, however Islamic law and customs still play a major role in thier new goverment.

The Afganis i talked to thier number one concern was peace, they want the fighting to end, they are tired of death,and destruction. most not all did not like the Taliban, and thier extremist Islamic ways.

The Afghanis, the Muj and the foreign fighters that defeated vastly superior Russian forces did not do so because they wanted democracy. Or freedom (individual, western style), for that matter. They wanted an Islamic land with Islamic law, free of occupying forces, especially those of 'infidels'.

I agree, but democracy is not being pushed at them at the same level as Russia forced communism at them or the Extremist islamic veiws that the taliban forced on them. They have set up thier own goverment in traditional islamic ways...

NATO is fine with that.

Now Canada proposes that they can use military might to change their minds and is willing to spend 20 years doing it? (Nevermind the fact that Canada can't support it's military, if they actually became involved in something serious, for 20 weeks!)

Canada is not using military power to change anyones minds, with the exception of the taliban who is bent on revenge not only on Nato but it's own people as well Nato is trying to provide a secure enviroment, so aid agencies can come in, so major reconstruction can take place etc etc. Peace is a long prcess, we were in Bosina for all most 10 years, but it did not suffer the damage that Afganistan did. Most of Canada's other peace keeping missions have been canceled or severly curtailed so they could concentrate on the Afganistan mission.

If Leslie aims to create a 'secular' Afghanistan, he (and Canada) will basically be fighting Islam. When he calls such 'soldiers of God' simple predators, "who want to kill those we would protect", he is either lying or stupid

Again that is not the goal, but to give Afganis the goverment of thier choice that follows the islamic ways. To unit the different Warlords under one goverment( this is the difficult one). and those "soldiers of god" you ref to are the taliban and they are not just attacking Nato targets but like i said thier own people as well...what would you call them freedom fighters, who's freedom are they fighting for...

But then again, he is not trying to sell it to the Afghani Mujihadeen. He is trying to sell it to you.

Yes to me, to you , to the nation. I guess it comes down to the question of can Canada really help these people and in which ways. I've seen what it was like during the first Roto Canada sent, and i've talked to some of the guys coming back off Roto 3 just a year and a bit later and there is prgress being made ,the Afgan peoples lives are improving. Do we stay or do we go....

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear Army Guy,

most not all did not like the Taliban, and thier extremist Islamic ways.

Indeed, I have heard that said before. The Taliban, as they stood before 9/11, were not well liked, even amongst the Muslims in Afghanistan.

I agree, but democracy is not being pushed at them at the same level as Russia forced communism at them or the Extremist islamic veiws that the taliban forced on them. They have set up thier own goverment in traditional islamic ways...

NATO is fine with that.

This is great news, if it is true. Many are still resentful of the fact that Karzai is a 'wesertn puppet', though. How is that going to be reconciled when the US (and other western countries) still wish to impose a 'western puppet' favourable to the energy interests in the US, and therefore not favourable to the Muslims in Afghanistan?

I guess it comes down to the question of can Canada really help these people and in which ways.

A very valid question. I have my ideas, but another valid question might be "Why is Afghanistan so important to Canada that we would concentrate all of our efforts there?"

[Army Guy]

theloniusfleabag:

This is great news, if it is true. Many are still resentful of the fact that Karzai is a 'wesertn puppet', though. How is that going to be reconciled when the US (and other western countries) still wish to impose a 'western puppet' favourable to the energy interests in the US, and therefore not favourable to the Muslims in Afghanistan?

There is no real way to prove that unless your in the Afgani or US goverment , We as soldiers were only thier to provide sercurity during the elections. so my comments are only my opinion or what i precieved to have happened.

As for Karzai being a puppet, i'm sure that would be said of any person who took the office, Karzai does have his own agenda, like any country does, and he does tow the line on certain subjects to be able to continue getting US funding, but not all......The US war machine is interested in Iraq a this piont ,...Nato is starting to rebuild the countries infra structure which can only improve conditions over there. Thats got to be good for everyone....Thats why i think this mission is a good one as we can only make things better, because things are pretty bad over there in regards to quality of life, conditions etc, etc....

A very valid question. I have my ideas, but another valid question might be "Why is Afghanistan so important to Canada that we would concentrate all of our efforts there?"

Canada was winding down our efforts in Bosina. our goverment had already put troops in Afgan, at the time it was the only game in town so to speak. it is cheaper to have one large mission than two small ones half a continent apart....

Why is it so important to Canada, in my opinion i see it as Canada helping out a nation that has known nothing but conflict for generations, it littorally has nothing and Canada has so much to offer. Why not ? Canadian soldiers are well liked by the people, but most important we are respected, for our fairness,neutrality, and for keeping our word and promises....

[Argus]

Nobody I guess. I just think it would've been a dangerous precedant to set. The fact that if a general yells loud enough he gets to do whatever he wants. Whats the difference between a person like that, and Kim Jong? Also, the from the hip attitude of using the most dangerous weapons we've yet created (at the time).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Are you suggesting that the only thing which differentiates Kim Jong from other world military and civilian leaders is that he yells a lot?

To answer your question, the difference is that no matter how much the general yells, he isn't a mass murderer and a tyrant of Hitlerian proportions.

In fact, when North Korea is eventually freed I believe the stories which come out of there will give us a new end point to the scale of murder and slaughter. I believe the tragedy and murder of North Korea has now surpassed what the Nazis did.

[SirSpanky]

You'll get no argument that Kim Jong is a dink from me. Perhaps the biggest dink.

A dictator in my mind, is someone in charge, with the capacity and desire to enforce his will on the population (be it noble or not). Kim Jong was just the first one that popped into my little head. I don't trust a general to dole out justice and good administrative decisions though.

[canadian_conservative]

Now that we are off topic discussing Kim Jong I think ill cut in to! Kim Jong hasnt murdered anyone he is admired by a lot of people for his courage to stand up to the americans. When the great country of America who by the way has nukes coming out their ying yang is telling him to get rid of all his nukes Jong tells the Americans where to go. I belive he is one of the few leaders who does this.

[SirSpanky]

Definately give him points for going against the grain. You really think hes the one benevolant dictator in history though? Perhaps check out wikepedia before you sing his praises too much.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea

[kimmy]

Kim Jong hasnt murdered anyone

Are you sure?

Amnesty International mentions makes mention of the torture, execution, and "re-education" of political prisoners. And of mass starvation, as the government spends 25% of the GDP on the military.

http://web.amnesty.org/report2005/prk-summary-eng

-k