Afghanistan

[runningdog]

Welcome to the forum running dog.

Thanks. I've read back through the thread and do much reading on the subject online. Great forum, btw.

[noahbody]

What have we spent so far on this illegal undertaking?

Speaking of spending money. You should go out and buy an atlas. Iraq is not in Afganistan.

Canada is in a war in Afganistan. Last time I checked anyway.

I was referring to your "illegal undertaking" comment. This is a criticism associated with Iraq, not Afganistan.

[weaponeer]

I have seen many opinions expressed on this board, most are quite compelling.

Many people with many opinions, good to see.

Sometimes we tend to over analyze these events and read more into them than necessary.

Our Prime Minister is well handled. lets not forget his roots in the Reform Party.

Clearly he and his handlers are no more than lapdogs to the US / Bush gang.

The whole thing is a lie.

We have to get our troop numbers up to qualify in NATO.

And hey war is good for business.

What have we spent so far on this illegal undertaking?

I hear we are closing in on two billion.

How can an Afgan in Afganistan be an insurgent?

How come the P.M. never comes on national television and tells us the game plan ? any game plan. All successful organizations have weekly or monthly meetings with everyone including the company principles to discuss the state and future plans of the organization.

Why do we as citizens not demand this from our leader?

It's a simple question.

Hello Steve ... whats going on now and in the future for Canada + Canadians?

Remember "ignore your rights. and they will go away".

No sane government goes on national TV and outlines their military operations. That's stupid. Imagine Ike and Monty giving a press conference weeks before D-Day outlining the attack, when it would happen, it's objectives and how long it would take.

Some things are a secret, that's just the way it is. We have to trust the gov't to do the job right Just because we cannot see everything that's going on each night on TV does not mean things are not going well.

I am over here right now, I monitor the news on the web as much as possible, the media gets and gives only about 10-20% of whats going on. The rest falls under OPSEC/COMSEC. You will all just have to wait until after the war (like in WW1 & WW2 etc....) to get all the details..... or join up and come on over....

[jbg]

No sane government goes on national TV and outlines their military operations. That's stupid. Imagine Ike and Monty giving a press conference weeks before D-Day outlining the attack, when it would happen, it's objectives and how long it would take.

They should pre-announce strategy and attacks, but only when Bin-Laden agrees to transparency as well.

[weaponeer]

How come the P.M. never comes on national television and tells us the game plan ? any game plan. All successful organizations have weekly or monthly meetings with everyone including the company principles to discuss the state and future plans of the organization.

Successful militarys do have hourly, daily and monthly meetings, up and down the chain of command. Those meetings are NOT for public consumption, it is as simple as that.... You want in, join the military, get a security clearance....

AQ does disclose their intentions from time to time, we just did not take them seriously until 9-11.....

[weaponeer]

Warrior seeks an armySidelined Afghan heavyweight says he could tame Taliban with the right force

By SCOTT TAYLOR May 11, 2007

Article Link

SHEBIRGHAN, Afghanistan -- The gates of the compound were hurriedly pulled aside and three black Lexus armoured 4X4s raced into the courtyard. Braking hastily, the vehicles disgorged a dozen heavily armed guards who immediately established a protective cordon.

With the dust still settling, a giant of a man strode through the parked convoy in a flowing stripped green robe. Gen. Abdul Rashid Dostum, one of the most notorious former Afghan warlords, arrived for an interview.

As the primary commander of the Northern Alliance, Dostum's troops were instrumental in helping the U.S. to collapse the Taliban in 2001. However, in the post-war cycle of violence, instability and insurgency, the general has only played a marginal role. Despite winning a million votes in the 2004 election process, Dostum was excluded from President Hamid Karzai's cabinet.

Appointed to the symbolic post of army chief of staff, Dostum says he feels the time is right for him to once again enter the fray.

"I'll collect 10,000 fighters and you give us 10,000 fighters from the international community ... and then you'll see what will happen in just six months," said Dostum. "I would use 5,000 fighters as a reserve and 5,000 as an offensive force to push the Taliban. I am sure we would push the Taliban even out of Waziristan (Pakistan), not just Afghanistan."

The creation of a force of veteran Afghan fighters would serve to buy time for the fledgling Afghan National Army and then allow them to better prepare for combat with the Taliban, he said.

"Every day the ANA is engaged in the fighting -- but just 10 Taliban can disrupt an entire battalion of troops," said Dostum. "What will happen if you stage a wrestling match between a 12-year-old and a 6-month-old infant? Obviously the ANA cannot match the experience of those soldiers who have fought before."

Dostum says the tactics employed by the Taliban against the ANA and coalition forces are the same Afghan fighters used to oust the Soviets. "In these days, 100 Taliban fighters attack a district and destroy everything, kill the police chief, kill the governor and then simply vanish. Then the army comes," explained Dostum. "The Taliban withdraw and the only people left to die are civilians."

Dostum's criticism of the ANA's inability and unwillingness to enter into combat also extends to the foreign coalition forces, which he says have a mixed record of battlefield efficiency.

"I have friends who have given me intelligence that the people really fighting the Taliban from the international community are the United States soldiers and the Canadian soldiers," said Dostum. "Other nationals are not fighting. They are just in defensive positions."

In recent months Dostum has held meetings with a number of foreign ambassadors and military commanders from the international community. "If President Karzai gives me the power, I can guarantee him and assure the international community and the people of Afghanistan that we can play a significant role in defeating and breaking the back of the Taliban," Dostum said.

Here's something interesting....

[weaponeer]

http://winnipegsun.com/News/World/2007/05/...170994-sun.html

Forgot the link again, sorry.....

[chezfiero]

I can cleary see here that the first casualty of war is certainly the truth.

[capricorn]

I can cleary see here that the first casualty of war is certainly the truth.

Scott Taylor recently visited afghan detainees in Kandahar to check out their claims of torture. I respect journalists who doesn't take everyone else's word and take steps to eyeball the scene for themselves. I particularly believe Taylor's account that there is no evidence of torture. In 2005 he was taken hostage in Iraq for 5 days and tortured by Al-Qaeda operatives. With that experience, I bet he knew what to look for. In his own words, he acknowledges those prisons are not the Club Feds we are so proud of, but hey, these cost money and the Afghans have none.

http://www.ottawasun.com/News/2007/05/12/4173858-sun.html

This quote from the article is interesting as it presents a different scenario than the one harped on by the opposition that our troops are in increased danger from Taliban attacks for turning over prisoners to Afghan authorities.

"The Canadian (soldiers) have a better attitude than some other NATO troops -- including the Americans -- and people will pass along advance warnings to the NDS if they suspect Canadians are being targeted," Karzai explained. "That is why we are angry that the Canadian media did not observe the reality before publishing their negative stories."

It's not a stretch to presume that some of these advance warnings of attack may come from Taliban-friendly locals who inadvertently land in detention.

Will Taylor's report satisfy the opposition? I don't think so. They still have plenty of mileage to get by inflaming Canadians on the state of affairs in Afghanistan.

So, in response to chezfiero, truth remains elusive.

[jdobbin]

I can cleary see here that the first casualty of war is certainly the truth.

Scott Taylor recently visited afghan detainees in Kandahar to check out their claims of torture. I respect journalists who doesn't take everyone else's word and take steps to eyeball the scene for themselves. I particularly believe Taylor's account that there is no evidence of torture. In 2005 he was taken hostage in Iraq for 5 days and tortured by Al-Qaeda operatives. With that experience, I bet he knew what to look for. In his own words, he acknowledges those prisons are not the Club Feds we are so proud of, but hey, these cost money and the Afghans have none.

http://www.ottawasun.com/News/2007/05/12/4173858-sun.html

This report by Taylor doesn't show he spoke to the witnesses interviewed in the Globe. It doesn't say he interviewed the Afghan Human Rights agency. It doesn't say that he interviewed the people who put out the State Department, Canada's Foreign Affairs report or Human Rights Watch about possible torture.

This report is about the NDS who have a reputation among Afghan people as being brutal. The Canadian media didn't have to make that up. It just is.

http://www.edmontonsun.com/Comment/2007/05...157610-sun.html

[kimmy]

What have we spent so far on this illegal undertaking?

I hear we are closing in on two billion.

The invasion of Afghanistan was fully sanctioned and approved of by the United Nations.

The Taliban "government" of Afghanistan was itself illegal and was never recognized by any international body other than their Saudi benefactors.

Canadian forces remain in Afghanistan at the request of the legitimate elected government of Afghanistan.

What exactly is illegal?

How can an Afgan in Afganistan be an insurgent?

Do you actually know what the word insurgent means?

Do you understand that insurgent and invader do not mean the same thing?

-k

[capricorn]

Hi, jdobbin:

First a comment on the Globe's article that unleashed the firestorm. As I recall, after the Globe printed its original story on April 23rd it was reported elsewhere that not all of the 30 detainees interviewed by the Globe were in fact transfered to Afghan authorities by Canadian soldiers. In reading that original Globe article, the reader was left with the distinct impression they all were. Did the Globe intentionally attempt to cast a wider shadow on the role of the Canadian military in the transfer of detainees? That certainly would make the story more sensational and help sell more papers. Let me be clear. In no way does this minimize human rights violations of any type in Afghanistan. But in reporting on sensitive issues that can throw our government into chaos, I think the media should strive to be as precise as possible in laying out all the facts.

It is even more important when you consider that the Globe's article played a big part in the subsequent accusations of war crimes against Gordon O'Connor and and Rick Hillier. I find it fascinating that Canadians Michael Byers and William Schabas would resort to this action. Here is their submission to the International Criminal Court:

http://thetyee.ca/Views/2007/04/27/WarCrime/

N.B. Anyone linking to this story, if you see a blank page with The Tyee letterhead, just click on it and you'll access the document.

I don't think the fact that Taylor did not interview the original 30 detainees has any relevance to the investigation he set out to undertake. The Afghan authorities face an incredible challenge. Stories of torture at their hands coming out of Canada add to their internal problems. Taylor set out to tour the Kandahar prison. Although he didn't interview detainees, he observed them closely. In personally inspecting the jails and viewing the detainees, I believe he could drawn credible conclusions.

No, the media does not have to invent what is a known fact to rational thinking people. We are not there to eradicate brutality in that country simply because we know it cannot be done. It's been a fact of life in that country for thousands of years and will continue after we're all long gone from this earth.

Sorry I was so long winded.

[jdobbin]

Hi, jdobbin:

First a comment on the Globe's article that unleashed the firestorm. As I recall, after the Globe printed its original story on April 23rd it was reported elsewhere that not all of the 30 detainees interviewed by the Globe were in fact transfered to Afghan authorities by Canadian soldiers. In reading that original Globe article, the reader was left with the distinct impression they all were. Did the Globe intentionally attempt to cast a wider shadow on the role of the Canadian military in the transfer of detainees? That certainly would make the story more sensational and help sell more papers. Let me be clear. In no way does this minimize human rights violations of any type in Afghanistan. But in reporting on sensitive issues that can throw our government into chaos, I think the media should strive to be as precise as possible in laying out all the facts.

I don't think the fact that Taylor did not interview the original 30 detainees has any relevance to the investigation he set out to undertake. The Afghan authorities face an incredible challenge. Stories of torture at their hands coming out of Canada add to their internal problems. Taylor set out to tour the Kandahar prison. Although he didn't interview detainees, he observed them closely. In personally inspecting the jails and viewing the detainees, I believe he could drawn credible conclusions.

No, the media does not have to invent what is a known fact to rational thinking people. We are not there to eradicate brutality in that country simply because we know it cannot be done. It's been a fact of life in that country for thousands of years and will continue after we're all long gone from this earth.

Sorry I was so long winded.

I think the Globe and Mail was quite candid about who they interviewed. Many of those interviewed were indeed first detained by Canadians soldiers.

As for Taylor's foray into an NDS prison. He was not the only one who went. He was accompanied by other Canadian media. Some compared it on radio to when the Red Cross would visit prisoner of war camps in World War 2. Suddenly, the soldiers would get new blankets.

[jbg]

I am fast losing patience with a mentality that seems to require that the West fight with one or two hands tied behind their backs, i.e. under rules that guarantee that they lose. If we fought under anything like Taliban rules, the fights in Iraq and Afghanistan would be long over.

I cannot believe we are humiliating ourselves in the pages of mass media, even flagellating ourselves, over the treatment of people who, in a minute, would indiscriminately slaughter any "infidel" or even Muslim of slightly differing beliefs. These lands are not chaotic, dictatorial and dangerous because of the depradations of George W. Bush, Israel or Stephen Harper.

Self-destruction might be the interest of some on this Board. Not mine.

[jdobbin]

I cannot believe we are humiliating ourselves in the pages of mass media, even flagellating ourselves, over the treatment of people who, in a minute, would indiscriminately slaughter any "infidel" or even Muslim of slightly differing beliefs. These lands are not chaotic, dictatorial and dangerous because of the depradations of George W. Bush, Israel or Stephen Harper.

Self-destruction might be the interest of some on this Board. Not mine.

By taking off the gloves, do you you mean full scale slaughter of all?

[jbg]

I cannot believe we are humiliating ourselves in the pages of mass media, even flagellating ourselves, over the treatment of people who, in a minute, would indiscriminately slaughter any "infidel" or even Muslim of slightly differing beliefs. These lands are not chaotic, dictatorial and dangerous because of the depradations of George W. Bush, Israel or Stephen Harper.

Self-destruction might be the interest of some on this Board. Not mine.

By taking off the gloves, do you you mean full scale slaughter of all?

My words are not tough to understand. How would you feel if a 27 year old brother of your lawyer was in the World Trade Center?

[jdobbin]

My words are not tough to understand. How would you feel if a 27 year old brother of your lawyer was in the World Trade Center?

My neighbor was in the World Trade Center when it went down. It doesn't mean that I advocate what happened in Iraq.

[jbg]

My words are not tough to understand. How would you feel if a 27 year old brother of your lawyer was in the World Trade Center?

My neighbor was in the World Trade Center when it went down. It doesn't mean that I advocate what happened in Iraq.

What I mean is that winning the war is more important than the niceties of the Geneva Convention, which the savages don't obey anyway.

[jdobbin]

What I mean is that winning the war is more important than the niceties of the Geneva Convention, which the savages don't obey anyway.

I think that things like the Constitution and the Geneva Convention are as important when things go bad as when things go right.

[jbg]

What I mean is that winning the war is more important than the niceties of the Geneva Convention, which the savages don't obey anyway.

I think that things like the Constitution and the Geneva Convention are as important when things go bad as when things go right.

The Geneva Convention is not a suicide pact. It applies between signatories. Taliban, and the various shadowy "armies" do not adhere to it, and we have no obligation to tie our hands in dealing with people that don't fight in uniform, and don't seek to confine their belligerant activities to combatants.

[jdobbin]

The Geneva Convention is not a suicide pact. It applies between signatories. Taliban, and the various shadowy "armies" do not adhere to it, and we have no obligation to tie our hands in dealing with people that don't fight in uniform, and don't seek to confine their belligerant activities to combatants.

An unlawful combatant still has rights to the law as Bush has found out when the Supreme Court weighed in.

I don't think that the U.S. or Canada serves it own sense of justice to simply act as executioner with no due process. Nor can it expect to get reliable information from torture.

[jbg]

[i don't think that the U.S. or Canada serves it own sense of justice to simply act as executioner with no due process. Nor can it expect to get reliable information from torture.

And what due process does the Taliban afford?

[jdobbin]

And what due process does the Taliban afford?

None. But neither do criminals in Canada and the U.S.

And yet we treat criminals according to rules that protect the police, the courts and the criminals themselves from abuse.

[geoffrey]

And what due process does the Taliban afford?

And what gives us the moral authority over the Taliban? Not treating people like inhuman peices of trash.

We're on the right side because we play by the rules. I prefer not to sink to their levels, I prefer not to be the extremist terrorists that we are fighting.

[madmax]

[i don't think that the U.S. or Canada serves it own sense of justice to simply act as executioner with no due process. Nor can it expect to get reliable information from torture.

And what due process does the Taliban afford?

It is that backwards logic that allowed for Abu Graib. The loss of support of the Iraqi people started to occur after seeing the disgusting treatment of prisoners, many of whom were in the wrong place at the wrong time. If the US had afforded the slightest amount of dignity towards these "prisoners" and not foolishly allow them to be drawn into actions that Iraqis saw as no different then Saddam Husseins rule, perhaps, just perhaps the US wouldn't have botched up Iraq as badly as they have.

To think that our government has suggested such nonsensical logic towards the Taliban, and adopt acceptance of the Karzai governments practice of torture and release is a policy that is detrimental to the security of our forces and our country. During the invasion of Afghanistan, prisoners that held little value, were executed by the Northern Alliance. Hundreds were known to be shipped in containers and sent to their death. Just hearing this statement should make us think twice about what we are suggesting is acceptable. If we have to ensure the safety of the captured prisoners, then NATO should darn well have it sorted out by now.

Stephen Harper has proven to be totally inept in this matter.

JBG, your comments are no better, your country is losing a war, and you wish to suggest that we turn a blind eye, follow some American policies, and lose this one too.

No thanks.