Afghanistan

[daddyhominum]

It's a war. I think most of us have figured that out already.

And now statistically the casualties are higher than during the Iraq war. Security has worsed rather than gotten better. And O'Connor said the Taliban cannot be defeated so long as they hide in Pakistan.

What is the source for the casualties claim?

And the claim that security is worse is unsupportable because the Southern provinces of Afghanistan have been completely at the mercy of the Taliban until recently. Nato has increased forces in those provinces specifically to help restore the rule of the national government in the area so that development could proceed.

The fact that the Taliban have been removed from Kandahar and hundreds of towns and villages in the South is a vast increase in the level of security in the area.

[M.Dancer]

What is the source for the casualties claim?

Royal Statistical Society, dontcha know darling. Rather posh posh, all sloan rangers counting their beans and has beens.....

[jdobbin]

ummmm......maybe so but statistically, it's an apples and cement blocks comparison.

Firstly, this pertains to British Casualties. The Brits were not acting the tip of the spear during the war, but were concentrated around Basrah where, while not pacified, was not the roasd to baghdad. In afghanistan, the brits are on the front line fighting everyday.

Give that Canada has fewer troops and had a death rate equal to or more than the Brits, I suspect our rate surpasses theirs.

People will say apples and oranges and that's fine. All people will know is that casualties are mounting and security is impeding reconstruction.

[jdobbin]

What is the source for the casualties claim?

And the claim that security is worse is unsupportable because the Southern provinces of Afghanistan have been completely at the mercy of the Taliban until recently. Nato has increased forces in those provinces specifically to help restore the rule of the national government in the area so that development could proceed.

The fact that the Taliban have been removed from Kandahar and hundreds of towns and villages in the South is a vast increase in the level of security in the area.

I think the stats question is well addressed by others. You can read all about it if you want.

The U.S. was head of security in the south. They won some measure of peace by letting opium grow until it got to the point where it is being used to fund the attacks.

[Durgan]

O'Connor and Hillier have indicated that it is impossible to defeat the Taliban militarily. At the worst Canadian troops are being used for target practice, at the best they are attempting to achieve some stability in the Khandhar area.

Re-building the country and assisting a poor and desolate people is on hold. Sufficent aid is not getting down to the mostly rural and remote villages. The rural people grow 90% of the worlds drugs as a cash crop, to supply the insatiable illegal demand of the Western Countries.

To achieve some semblance of stability my suggestion is:

Maintain the NATO presence, which I might add is not properly supported by most of the 37 member countries participating.

Purchase the opium crop yearly from the Afghan peasants. This would cost about $600 million for about 4200 tons of raw opium. The purchaser would have complete control of most of the world supply of the illegal drug. A portion of this supply could be put into the legal channels,of which there is a shortage, and the remainder could be destroyed. The peasant would get some immediate relief and would have monies for everyday life. This could be a five year plan, with the aim of getting the peasants to grow more acceptable crops. I suggest this is a far better method and is practicable in the short term. The people are more likely to accept the carrot than the stick.

Durgan.

[jdobbin]

NATO soldier killed as Canadian's continue advance.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/09092006/2/worl...fghanistan.html

Insurgency moves to Kabul.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14743124/

[Ricki Bobbi]

We'll have to see what Harper says when he addresses the nation.

Afghanistan is a difficult nation to fight in.

A commitment to combatting terrorists is needed. Stability in the region will help reduce the potential for breeding future terrorists.

[jdobbin]

Violence spreads to the others areas of Afghanistan.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14760455/

Meanwhile, trail for Osama bin Laden is stone cold.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14724112/

[jbg]

Meanwhile, trail for Osama bin Laden is stone cold.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14724112/

And he's out of business as well. So really, getting him isn't so important. He's dead man walking.

[jdobbin]

And he's out of business as well. So really, getting him isn't so important. He's dead man walking.

I don't even think the Pentagon makes that argument.

[jbg]

And he's out of business as well. So really, getting him isn't so important. He's dead man walking.

I don't even think the Pentagon makes that argument.

Politically it would be suicide to make that argument. I think it reflects reality, though.

[jdobbin]

Politically it would be suicide to make that argument. I think it reflects reality, though.

He is pretty much free to do organize in Pakistan with the protection of the authorities there. I think until he is in custody that he can incite, fund and organize another attack, don't you?

[jbg]

Politically it would be suicide to make that argument. I think it reflects reality, though.

He is pretty much free to do organize in Pakistan with the protection of the authorities there. I think until he is in custody that he can incite, fund and organize another attack, don't you?

Pakistan may not be allowing the US to kill him, but they're keeping him pretty inert as well.

[jdobbin]

Pakistan may not be allowing the US to kill him, but they're keeping him pretty inert as well.

Are they? Seems to me that training goes right along as per usual in Pakistan. And who is to say just how much bin Laden is involved there.

[Riverwind]

Pakistan may not be allowing the US to kill him, but they're keeping him pretty inert as well.

I think the Pentagon and the Whitehouse are not that interested in catching him. As long as he is running free he can be used as a political boogyman that helps keep the 'war on terror' going.

[Charles Anthony]

I think the Pentagon and the Whitehouse are not that interested in catching him. As long as he is running free he can be used as a political boogyman that helps keep the 'war on terror' going.

I agree.

I wonder what will happen when Bin Laden truly dies. He is only 50 years old now and he could potentially live an other 50 years give or take decades.

I have a frightful thought: imagine if the people harboring him never announce his death.

[Argus]

Pakistan may not be allowing the US to kill him, but they're keeping him pretty inert as well.

I think the Pentagon and the Whitehouse are not that interested in catching him. As long as he is running free he can be used as a political boogyman that helps keep the 'war on terror' going.

That's wildly unrealistic. Catching or killing Bin Laden now would be a huge bonus for the Republicans in the upcoming elections - though perhaps they'd rather do it next year.

In any event, nothing would do them better at the polls than for the 'war on terror" to stop, for the enemy to collapse and for the US to be able to declare victory.

[Durgan]

Periodically some-one brings up the oil bit, regarding motives in Afghanistan. I suggest a perusal of this following chart will dispell any illusions.

URL to Proven Oil Reserves Chart:

World Oil Reserve Chart

URL to a informative Rational review of the Afghanistan operation and Terrorism.

Rational Review

>A change of course is needed. We need to understand that we will succeed in this struggle not by killing all Islamic extremists, but by discrediting the cause they champion among those from whom they draw recruits. Victory lies not in capturing foreign capitals, but in capturing the support of others against our common enemy. In blunt terms that may sound frivolous but are not, we need to approach the struggle against Islamic extremism less like a war and more like an international popularity contest.

That description will no doubt infuriate some, but if our true goal is victory and security, rather than satisfying a thirst for revenge, it is a useful way to think about things.

Our smartest, most experienced military professionals acknowledge and in fact stress that this struggle cannot be won through military means. They understand better than anyone the limitations of even unlimited military power.

Richard Dearlove, until recently the head of British intelligence, said recently that the Western world, more particularly the United States, was doomed unless it reclaimed the moral high ground and once again began to live by the values it preached. Dearlove used to run spies during the Cold War, and he recalled that recruiting agents was made easier in that struggle by the clear moral superiority of the West, an advantage we must never squander. <

It is time to take the emotion out of the equation and apply workable solutions. Judging by some of the posts, rational thought and cognitive logical thinking is sadly lacking. Bar room solutions are not particularly informative, and contribute little to the discussion.

Durgan.

[uOttawaMan]

I know bold font convinces me.

[jbg]

I think the Pentagon and the Whitehouse are not that interested in catching him. As long as he is running free he can be used as a political boogyman that helps keep the 'war on terror' going.

I agree.

I wonder what will happen when Bin Laden truly dies. He is only 50 years old now and he could potentially live an other 50 years give or take decades.

I have a frightful thought: imagine if the people harboring him never announce his death.

I hope they have a good supply, not only of fresh videos, but of whatever recording technology is the rage at some future date.

I am also not that interested in catching him. He knows he's dead man walking, and I believe is actually not doing very much.

[jdobbin]

U.S. soldier killed as base in Eastern Afghanistan attacked.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060916/ap_on_...d_afghanistan_3

[jdobbin]

Four Canadians killed in Afghanistan.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...?hub=TopStories

Five more years in Afghanistan says U.S. report.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/17092006/2/nati...t-european.html

Canada takes disproportionate losses according to study. Losses only slightly lower than what Russians sustained.

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/story.h...6b-df0aeba844d2

[M.Dancer]

Local police said a patrol of Canadian soldiers were outside a school on foot, handing out pens and other items to children when a suicide bomber on a bicycle rode into the crowd.

The explosives were in a crate on the back of his bike, an official said.

One bystander described a horrific scene after the explosion.

"Kids were running towards the Canadian convoy because they were giving out pens and notebooks to the children," Mohammed Karim told the AFP news agency.

"A man riding on a bicycle approached the crowd and detonated in the crowd.

"With the explosion, all the shouting of kids was ended and you could hear cries and people running to all sides. Some of the wounded were also running."

[Durgan]

Four Canadians killed in Afghanistan.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...?hub=TopStories

Five more years in Afghanistan says U.S. report.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/17092006/2/nati...t-european.html

Canada takes disproportionate losses according to study. Losses only slightly lower than what Russians sustained.

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/story.h...6b-df0aeba844d2

Last week the forums were describing the casualities such that' This was the bloodiest War in Canadian History". I grieve about the casualities but at least the rhetoric has been toned down. Mark Twain: There are lies, dammed lies and statistics. The casuality, death, figures serve no purpose of which I am aware. Death is death and one death is one too many.

Durgan.

[cybercoma]

Local police said a patrol of Canadian soldiers were outside a school on foot, handing out pens and other items to children when a suicide bomber on a bicycle rode into the crowd.

The explosives were in a crate on the back of his bike, an official said.

One bystander described a horrific scene after the explosion.

"Kids were running towards the Canadian convoy because they were giving out pens and notebooks to the children," Mohammed Karim told the AFP news agency.

"A man riding on a bicycle approached the crowd and detonated in the crowd.

"With the explosion, all the shouting of kids was ended and you could hear cries and people running to all sides. Some of the wounded were also running."

If this doesn't tell people that we're not fighting a "war" in the traditional sense of the word, I don't know what will. What kind of piece of s*** does it take to blow up a group of children?

If I hear one more poster saying these a**h***s are fighting for their freedom against an oppressive western military machine, I think i just might actually throw up on my keyboard. If I ever see another poster claim the US, UK or Israel targets innocents civilians the same way these sick f***s do, I'm gonna puke.