Afghanistan

[Catchme]

Cdn general urges troops to use restraint following civilian shootings

By MURRAY BREWSTER

Brig.-Gen Tim Grant said Tuesday that he has spoken to his battle group commander about the rash of civilian shootings since fresh Canadian troops arrived in the region earlier this month.

"Every time that we injure a civilian, it is devastating to us, it's devastating to the families and it's something we have to stop," he told reporters following a change of command ceremony, where the 2nd Battalion Royal Canadian Regiment officially took over operations in Kandahar.

"It's a clear priority of mine that we reduce the number of rounds fired and that we protect the people as we go through the city, particularly," he said.

Late Sunday, Canadian troops mistakenly shot and killed a homeless beggar on the street outside of the governor's palace as well as an Afghan National Police officer. The day before that, Canadian troops gunned down an apparently deranged man in the village of Senjray, outside Kandahar.

Early last week, soldiers guarding a convoy opened fire on an Afghan army truck, wounding an officer.

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/War_Terror/200...3648256-cp.html

"I've already spoken to other senior officers in the task force to make sure that the leadership is playing a significant role in making sure that we use force only when absolutely necessary."

The military has acknowledged that shooting Afghan civilians, police officers and soldiers makes it a lot harder for Canadian troops to build good relations with the local population.

In the most recent shooting, the military says both the officer and the civilian were shot after they ignored warnings to stay away from Canadian troops. However, some Afghan police officers have contradicted that.

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2007/02/20/afghan-weapons.html

[Army Guy]

Catchme:

I must admit Catchme, your conversation with your Airbourne friend sounds real, and believable, a first in a long time. That does not mean we are going to hold hands or take long strolls down the beach, just that of all the anti military stuff you've posted this post sounds real.

What everyone forgets is that all thru training there is a couple of theme's taught humanitary work,and the largest one is combat and survival in a combat zone...training is done over and over until it's instinctive, no thought required, By telling our troops there is going to be cas and some will not being going home it is meant to sober these troops up.

In training nobody died from a paper target, In afgan everyone is a possiable target, our enemy does not wear a uniform, hides amoungst the public, and strikes with out regards for anyone...By sobering them up, it as we say "puts thier head in the game"... After most of these speachs the Chain of command also talks about, "remember your training", the importance of team work, etc etc grounding them again, but now they are aware that if the screw up it could mean someones life...That this is the big leagues and people play for keeps....

Yes it makes them more cautious but that is a good thing...

Id also like to add thier is no new recruits, but soldiers that have some time under thier belts. And everyone is being evaluated from day one, and as more soldiers become combat vets the evaluation becomes harder and harder...so they are all screened over and over again...but thier is no telling what a person does in combat until they've been there....

It's not until they have been on ground for awhile that they become effective, hence why there is an increase of problems at the beginning and end of each tour.

Those who are trying to excuse the shootings are sounding more and more like the US soldiers who were in Iraq trying to explain away their fear jerk response and killing civilians needlessly

Again you are judging these soldiers, without being there and knowing exactly what happened, why it happened etc etc... and you are as guilty for making knee jerk responses...Nobody is making excuses here all shootings are investagted...and if they are proven to be outside our ROE then they are charged, sent home for trial..Keep in mind the military does not handle Federal offenses, murder is federal...

Nobody here is qualified to judge any of these soldiers, including myself on why they made a decission to fire and take someones life, because we will never know all the facts, Our country has given us clear ROE's approved by Canadian law, and they trust thier soldiers to stay within them...if they do not they also make it very clear what actions occur when they don't...We are not American soldiers, although it may seem so as we are caught in the same circumstances, there is no majical light that comes on saying shoot or don't shoot. Just one indiv with a split second to decide kill or be killed...and i hope you never have to make that decission because it does stick with you the rest of your life...

Perhaps you should be having this conversation with your AB friend, i'm sure you trust his opinon but would be very surprised it differed from mine.

[jdobbin]

NDP says government plans Afghanistan extension.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...19?hub=Politics

In question period, Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor said: "I have answered this question a number of times. The member is confusing the military internal plan which is based upon the Afghanistan compact and government direction. If she reads the plan in detail, she will notice that the military acknowledge that they are committed to the end of February 2009, however, they plan beyond those dates because the Afghan compact goes until 2011."

The compact is a deal between the Afghan government and the international community reached in February 2006. The compact sets out goals and responsibilities for the Afghan government and its international partners.

"The government has said that we are committed to the end of February 2009. No further decision has been made. The government, when it finds it appropriate, will make the decision on what happens if and when the events occur after 2009," O'Connor added.

The document indicates that Canada's three largest regiments -- the Edmonton-based Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry (PPCLI), the Petawawa, Ont.-based Royal Canadian Regiment and the Val Cartier, Que.-based Royal 22nd Regiment (Van Doos) -- will rotate through Afghanistan two more times by 2011.

There is growing pressure on Canada to commit beyond 2009 but I can't see why we'd agree to it when many of our allies are not very committed.

[madmax]

There is growing pressure on Canada to commit beyond 2009 but I can't see why we'd agree to it when many of our allies are not very committed.

It is difficult to understand committing long term to a government that is of a type that most here could never understand. Fundamentalist with religious police and Women covered head to toe in the burka, No music, dancing women, but its ok to have child brides. They can have their government and even fight for it. I see no reason for our military to run around with limited resources trying to be everything to everybody in Afghanistan. We appear to be the proxies for the Afghan government, yet when the war first started the Afghans were the proxies of the American Invasion.

That said, the British are going to pull out of Iraq. Maybe they will divert some troops to Afghanistan.

[Catchme]

There is growing pressure on Canada to commit beyond 2009 but I can't see why we'd agree to it when many of our allies are not very committed.

It is difficult to understand committing long term to a government that is of a type that most here could never understand. Fundamentalist with religious police and Women covered head to toe in the burka, No music, dancing women, but its ok to have child brides. They can have their government and even fight for it. I see no reason for our military to run around with limited resources trying to be everything to everybody in Afghanistan. We appear to be the proxies for the Afghan government, yet when the war first started the Afghans were the proxies of the American Invasion.

That said, the British are going to pull out of Iraq. Maybe they will divert some troops to Afghanistan.

There is some noise that Austraila may commit more troops to Afghanistan, but Howard is facing stiff opposition to this and to increasing presence in Iraq by only 80 or so persons.

There was a documentary about Malalai Joya on Newsworld last Sunday that showed how oppressive life is for women in Afghanistan. And it also showed that the men doing the oppressing were of course not the Taliban. They were the warlords and the other men that are running the government and society and these are the people that our military personal are fighting to preserve their power, of course in the name of freedom for Afghan women.

It is not our military personal's fault they are supporting the oppressors of women, and they should not be condemned for this propping of the Karzi government. In this situation, our enlisted military are also the victims. We cannot turn them into scapegoats for unscrupulous perhaps even criminal current government foreign policy. To do is shortsighted and ill informed at best.

Their actions regarding ROE's can be questioned, to see if adherence is sufficient, but they are only complying to deployment orders given, and to the ROE's given as well. If the ROE's are not following national policy, and/or the legal parameters of the engagement, nor Canadian and International law, it is the government and commanding officers who are at fault, not the front line personal.

Perhaps, I have not been clear enough, when I have been making criticisms of what the Canadian military is doing. In no way, can we blame the enlisted personal, nor can they be held accountable for anything, unless some are not following their ROE's in regards to Afghan civilians. And that is only limited to the some and not the all. Moreover, I do apologize if my failure to be clear, on exactly whom I was holding accountable, and in what circumstamce, has harmed the moral of our enlisted personal. This was not my intent.

Truly, there is a considerable difference between supporting the mission and supporting the welfare of the military personal. IMV, in this case, real support for the military personal means pressuring the government to abort the wrong mission and bring them home. We have no business being there and any progress that is needed in Afghanistan is a cultural one, and that is NOT our military's mandate or responsibility to change the culture. Nor is it canadians as a whole.

Also, I will go on record as saying, in regards to our military personal killing/injuring civilians, it is a very complex issue especially when there is very little distinction between combatants and non-combatants. There is no actual other identifiable military they are fighting. From this perspective each and every incident must evaluated based upon its own merits. Furthermore, it is unreasonable to expect them not to take whatever precautions that he or she may feel required to do to protect their own life in accordance with their ROE's.

Having said that, investigations of each incident must be done to ensure the correct action was taken, and there are some reported cases, that as of yet appear where this was NOT the case. Nor were investigations being done. However, under pressure now the military brass is looking into these cases, and hopefully we will get full disclosure.

That investigations were not happening until recently is my second largest complaint. The largest is that the Canadian government and top military officals may not be following the dictates of law and national policy.

Truthfully, the actual blame lies with the people who make the decisions to place our military personal in harm's way, to begin with. Afghanistan is not our battle, it is not our cause and deployment should've ended IMV in 2003 when the USA stopped looking for Osama. Our NATO commitment ended then.

Karzai and his people are on the take from the drug mafia and war lords. Dispite the war on opium, that is suposedly going there, opium production is 80+% and it is the Karzi government that is controlling it. (yes I can provide proof)

There is no doubt that there are Canadians on the take too, and that Canadian businesses and banks are profiting from the war and from the drug business as there is lots of money to be made and really, according the powers that be, what are a few thousand or more Afghan lives and the lives of Canadian military personal, if there is profits to be made. And thus it seems it has always been the same, war for the profit of a few. That is why I believe real support for the military personal means pressuring the government to abort the mission and bring them home.

[Canadian Blue]

I believe whenever a civilian is shot, their will automatically be an investigation done by the MP's to see if the shooting was justified.

[Catchme]

I believe whenever a civilian is shot, their will automatically be an investigation done by the MP's to see if the shooting was justified.

Is it not the National Investigation Service that does it now? As I believe that is who the Ottawa law professor, is having issues with, for not conducting them. Please do reread the commentary of his on this aspect.

The National Investigation Service is supposed to run independantly from the DND operational chain of command. If MP's are conducting them again, it would seem that the investigative rules are not being followed, as designed and outlined in Bill C-25 that ammended the National Defense Act in I believe, 1998 or 1999, in this regard.

[Canadian Blue]

I believe CFNIS is independant of the Chain of Command despite being made up of MP's.

http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/newsroom/view_news_e.asp?id=718

[Catchme]

I believe CFNIS is independant of the Chain of Command despite being made up of MP's.

Yes, the NIS is formed from the MP ranks but are highly specialized and trained, as well as working in accompaniment of others. I had thought you meant regular MP's.

[Catchme]

Well, we now know why O'Connor would not let the Armed Forces Committee off of the base to have a look around, when they were there a couple of weeks back. And interestingly the CPC government is keeping mum on the Senlis Report's findings, I guess they must be trying to figure out how to spin it..and after all Hillier said it was a mission NOT a war! But apparently he was wrong again, or just being diengenuous.

The war in Afghanistan is being unnecessarily prolonged, and even conceded, by the international community's decision not to use obvious strategic instruments such as the provision of effective assistance to injured and displaced civilian casualties to build trust and win the hearts and minds of the Afghan people. The international community's military actions, particularly its bombing campaigns, are causing injury and death to innocent Afghan civilians. These attacks are making the situation worse for local Afghans, not better, provoking anger and frustration, and providing the perfect conditions for insurgents to gain support.

However, the hospitals in Kandahar and Helmand are dilapidated, barren and filthy. The current situation of medical care in southern Afghanistan symbolises to Afghan the international community's wilful neglect to support and partner the Afghan people in the meeting of vital health needs.

Afghans were the ones who needed to be listened to.

As well as the majority of rational Canadians.

The majority of Canadians knew, what was up and who did not support the government's changing the "mission" orders to this pre-emptive and wrongfully punishing military action in Afghanistan.

It was the wrong MISSION at the WRONG time. Tanks were not needed, 150k shells were not needed and hateful language towards Afghans, by Hillier, was not needed and was totally unprofessional and inexcusable. Way to go Canadians, it would appear we are not the pathetic ones after all. Pretty in touch I must say.

Canada can't win this way; Think-tank: NATO policy called misguided (Richard Foot)Vancouver Sun, Thursday, February 15, 2007

Canada and its allies in Afghanistan are waging a losing war against the Taliban that's killed thousands of innocent civilians, harmed the reputation of coalition forces

A team of researchers led by the council's president - Canadian Norine MacDonald, who lives in Afghanistan - interviewed more than 500 ordinary citizens in the war-torn south over the past two months.

It seems, the Canadian Government and Military Officials were perhaps failing to heed the constructs of the signed agreement with Afghans and national and NATO policies. It also seems they were trying to keep the legal parameters secret from Canadians for a reason.

The Senlis Council report says this as well:

In particular, it says coalition governments have failed to heed the fundamental rule that a counter-insurgency can't be won at the point of a gun, but rather with policies to win the trust and confidence of local people.

Instead, the council says failed coalition policies, such as the bombing of villages, the poppy eradication program and the lack of school or hospital construction are directly responsible for the rise of the insurgency.

It is too bad the Canadian government shrugged off, Layton's proposals last fall, for many of these very things that the Senlis Council has noted, and recommended from direct polling of Afghans.

Seems again, Layton is the only one in Ottawa who actually knows/understands what's going on and who actually cares about Canadians and our military personal, as opposed to greed and corruption as being the motivators for supporting needless warfare.

And we just spent billions on no bid military contracts, arranged by former arms broker, reborn as our Minister in Charge of the Military, Gord O'Connor. Arms that apparently our military should not be using upon Afghan civilians, on a mission we should not be in. Starting to smell alot like Cheney and Halliburton around Canada it seems. Harper et al sound like Bush et al for a reason.

Seems Harper's visiion for Canada is not so clear, eh?! Decisive means nothing when one is making the wrong decisions.

More on this in this thread:

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index....16entry188216

[Canadian Blue]

Afghans were the ones who needed to be listened to.

According to many world opinion polls they want us to stay.

As well as the majority of rational Canadians.

Apparently a minority according to recent polls.

The majority of Canadians knew, what was up and who did not support the government's changing the "mission" orders to this pre-emptive and wrongfully punishing military action in Afghanistan.

Pre-emptive, what are you talking about. The Taliban set up IED's and ambushes, kill school teachers and civilian's. Yet we are suppose to do nothing about it, and I don't think military members believe they are being punished.

It was the wrong MISSION at the WRONG time. Tanks were not needed, 150k shells were not needed and hateful language towards Afghans, by Hillier, was not needed and was totally unprofessional and inexcusable. Way to go Canadians, it would appear we are not the pathetic ones after all. Pretty in touch I must say.

I'm assuming the shell's you're talking about are the ones which are able to hit targets with accurate precision. That reduces civilian casualties. As for the tanks, why not, heavy armour, plus another arsenal to fight the people who shoot at us. Hateful language towards the Afghan's, are you talking about the Taliban. Why shouldn't we dislike the Taliban. Apparently according to recent poll's Canadian's support the mission, so I guess we are pathetic. Apparently the only ones in touch, are the people who don't know what the situation is like in Afghanistan, and refuse to listen to people who are on the ground there.

Seems again, Layton is the only one in Ottawa who actually knows/understands what's going on and who actually cares about Canadians and our military personal, as opposed to greed and corruption as being the motivators for supporting needless warfare.

Please, Layton is just trying to buy as many of the left leaning votes as possible. That's what politician's do, and the NDP was against the mission from the start.

And we just spent billions on no bid military contracts, arranged by former arms broker, reborn as our Minister in Charge of the Military, Gord O'Connor. Arms that apparently our military should not be using upon Afghan civilians, on a mission we should not be in. Starting to smell alot like Cheney and Halliburton around Canada it seems. Harper et al sound like Bush et al for a reason.

It's already been discussed, and the aircraft was the only one that fit the military requirement's. Why should we buy a mediocre aircraft simply because some people are to partisan to realize members of the military decided which aircraft was the best for the job.

Seems Harper's visiion for Canada is not so clear, eh?! Decisive means nothing when one is making the wrong decisions.

Finally, and end to the madness.

[Catchme]

Got your talking points did ya? Apparently, you read nothing the Senlis Counil reported on. In fact, you avoided mentioning it at all. Here you go again:

Canada and its allies in Afghanistan are waging a losing war against the Taliban that's killed thousands of innocent civilians, harmed the reputation of coalition forces

A team of researchers led by the council's president - Canadian Norine MacDonald, who lives in Afghanistan - interviewed more than 500 ordinary citizens in the war-torn south over the past two months.

It does not matter how many polls in the world there are, Afghans want things different. And it is Afghans who should be listened to, no one else matters, it is their ground they are on.

here you go again perhaps a read of these 2 points would help?

The war in Afghanistan is being unnecessarily prolonged... by the international community's decision not to use .. strategic instruments..The international community's military actions, particularly its bombing campaigns, are causing injury and death to innocent Afghan civilians. These attacks are making the situation worse for local Afghans, not better, provoking anger and frustration, and providing the perfect conditions for insurgents to gain support.

I would take the CPC's tax paid 76k poll derived from Focus Groups which said 35% of Canadians are in support of the mission, as to a poll of the same time frame,l by Angus Reid, that you are speaking of. The results would be way more accurate with Focus Groups than random sampling with slanted questions.

Never said the military were being punished, are you having problems reading or with comprehension? You are continually putting words where there are none. I said Afghans were being punished needlessly.

Coalition actions have driven Afghan civilians to the Taliban. Hillier's words were wrong.

The aircraft were not the only NO BID contract.

Again, recent polls done by the CPC say that the majority of Canadians DO NOT support the mission. See the Taxpayers paying for their own brain washing thread.

No, sadly and apparently, the madness, that is exhibited by Harper and his supporters is not over.

Apparently you care nothing for Afghans.

[Canadian Blue]

Again, recent polls done by the CPC say that the majority of Canadians DO NOT support the mission. See the Taxpayers paying for their own brain washing thread.

So the CPC is paying for poll's, which are meant for brainwashing. Yet the polls show that only 35% of Canadian's support the mission. If you wanted to brainwash people wouldn't you say that +65% of the people support the mission.

It does not matter how many polls in the world there are, Afghans want things different. And it is Afghans who should be listened to, no one else matters, it is their ground they are on.

Then why do I read so many news reports which say differently.

Never said the military were being punished, are you having problems reading or with comprehension? You are continually putting words where there are none. I said Afghans were being punished needlessly.

I think the Afghan's got much worse punishment at the hands of the Taliban.

Coalition actions have driven Afghan civilians to the Taliban. Hillier's words were wrong.

Which were?

No, sadly and apparently, the madness, that is exhibited by Harper and his supporters is not over.

The madness known as rationality, and listening to what people on the ground in Afghanistan are saying, since they have the experience of being, you know, in Afghanistan and seeing it first hand.

Apparently you care nothing for Afghans.

Yes I do, their has been alot of progress made, schools have been built, and a fledgeling democracy has been started [with some growing pains]. However I don't really want to see the Taliban back anytime soon, from what I hear Amnesty International has said they were a brutal group of thugs. As well I think that we are helping to maintain a democracy. If we can get more support in the south, then hopefully thing's will get better. But if they don't in the next few years, the only option may be to pull out.

Actually reading the report, I agree with many of the reccomendation's. However I don't see how an immediate pullout will help the situation, and it certainly won't better Afghan's. The report call's for more troop's in fighting the insurgency.

http://www.senliscouncil.org/documents/Ins...Recommendations

[Army Guy]

Catchme:

I must admit catchme your below post knocked me off my chair, what i really want to know is why the sudden change of heart. I know it was not me, or anything i posted, i'm curious was it a conversation with your A/B friend.

My Webpage

It is not our military personal's fault they are supporting the oppressors of women, and they should not be condemned for this propping of the Karzi government. In this situation, our enlisted military are also the victims. We cannot turn them into scapegoats for unscrupulous perhaps even criminal current government foreign policy. To do is shortsighted and ill informed at best.

So i'm guessing the personal attacks on indiv military personal are going to stop ?

Their actions regarding ROE's can be questioned, to see if adherence is sufficient, but they are only complying to deployment orders given, and to the ROE's given as well. If the ROE's are not following national policy, and/or the legal parameters of the engagement, nor Canadian and International law, it is the government and commanding officers who are at fault, not the front line personal.

I want to clarify the above statement, ROE's are orders, and like all orders anyone within the military can question them or ask for clarification if they think or know that they are outside the Canadian civil and military law, or against the genva convention.

I also want to make it clear that ROE's are approved by our government, not the military, it is approve at many levels within our government and all are very carefully checked to ensure they comply with Canadian civil and military laws, and the genva convention, and are also compared with other nations serving on the same mission.

It is the CDS that issues those ROE's once our government has approved of them, that being said commanding officers in threater can suggest changes to ROE's ...those changes are examined by the CDS who then asks our government to have them changed this starts the whole process over again...

SO inregards to having faulty ROE's the blame squarely rests on the governments shoulders. But thier is alot of checks and balances put in place and having questionable ROE's is very very rare. The government has learned the hard way after the somolia affair.

Perhaps, I have not been clear enough, when I have been making criticisms of what the Canadian military is doing. In no way, can we blame the enlisted personal, nor can they be held accountable for anything, unless some are not following their ROE's in regards to Afghan civilians. And that is only limited to the some and not the all. Moreover, I do apologize if my failure to be clear, on exactly whom I was holding accountable, and in what circumstamce, has harmed the moral of our enlisted personal. This was not my intent.

Alot of your posts are pionted towards the indiv soldier, I'd like to clarify this para as well. Every soldier is accountable for his or her actions on and off the battle field, they must ensure they're actions are within Canadian civil and military laws,plus the genva convention, plus any rules and regs set out by NATO...Not only when handling Agan civilians but anyone involved on the battle field, including the taliban.

Also, I will go on record as saying, in regards to our military personal killing/injuring civilians, it is a very complex issue especially when there is very little distinction between combatants and non-combatants. There is no actual other identifiable military they are fighting. From this perspective each and every incident must evaluated based upon its own merits. Furthermore, it is unreasonable to expect them not to take whatever precautions that he or she may feel required to do to protect their own life in accordance with their ROE's.

Having said that, investigations of each incident must be done to ensure the correct action was taken, and there are some reported cases, that as of yet appear where this was NOT the case. Nor were investigations being done. However, under pressure now the military brass is looking into these cases, and hopefully we will get full disclosure.

I also like to mention, that it is standard practice that when a soldier discharges his wpn it gets reported, exception being on operation as Madusa, obviously not are all reported the same way, for example,

Any shooting that is determined to be an aimed shot at any hostile regardless of it resulting in a miss,wounding , or kill is investaged by the MP's which file thier own reports, it is also reported in the patrol report, plus a clear record of all radio transmissions is also kept and filed. exception being again open combat such as op Madusa,etc.

warning shots are also recorded and filed in patrol reports , radio transmission logs, etc etc...

So basically every time a soldier fires his wpn there is a record, the only time it's investagated is when a soldier takes an aimed shot with the intention of using deadly force...

I've filed out dozens of all these reports all have been reviewed by the chain of command, and they are on file for further review. i would be extremily surprise that complete records were not kept or investagated.

Whom they are available to i do not know i'm sure one would have to have a reason to know to have access, but the military is not trying to hide anything to my knowledge.

[Catchme]

Again, recent polls done by the CPC say that the majority of Canadians DO NOT support the mission. See the Taxpayers paying for their own brain washing thread.

So the CPC is paying for poll's, which are meant for brainwashing. Yet the polls show that only 35% of Canadian's support the mission. If you wanted to brainwash people wouldn't you say that +65% of the people support the mission.

The report call's for more troop's in fighting the insurgency.

Oh, please you simply are as obtuse as that, spin it how you want, the fact remians 35% only of Canadians were found to be in support of Afghanistan.

Yes, I held that info back as I wanted to see if you actually read the links, or responded without, and you did. funny how you blew past everything else the Senlis Council said and landed on the increased deployment and tried to spin it differently than what was implied through out the whole report conclusions.

They do not want more troops to just fight the insurrgency, that is being disengenuous.

They said MORE troops would stop the indiscriment bombing being carried out that kills innocent Afghans. And that more on the ground could provide the required counter insurrgency measures that are needed to to a stop to the growing insurrgency, because most of the Talibin ranks are now comprised of regular Afghan peoples who have been hurt by coalition forces and have legitimate grievences and went to the Taliban.

In no way, does the Senlis report support the conclusion you made.

[Canadian Blue]

Were in the report does it call for an immediate pullout Catchme, I read the reccomendation's.

Oh, please you simply are as obtuse as that, spin it how you want, the fact remians 35% only of Canadians were found to be in support of Afghanistan.

Hold on, so all those other poll's are seriously flawed, or are they meant for brainwashing as well.

They do not want more troops to just fight the insurrgency, that is being disengenuous.

and...

They said MORE troops would stop the indiscriment bombing being carried out that kills innocent Afghans. And that more on the ground could provide the required counter insurrgency measures that are needed to to a stop to the growing insurrgency, because most of the Talibin ranks are now comprised of regular Afghan peoples who have been hurt by coalition forces and have legitimate grievences and went to the Taliban.

So they want more troop's.

In no way, does the Senlis report support the conclusion you made.

Yes it does, you just proved my conclusion by agreeing with the statement that they want more troop's to fight the insurgency with more precision instead of using bombing.

[jdobbin]

Two NATO soldiers killed today. One had been confirmed as being Spanish. The other is not known at this time.

This comes on top of the American helicopter crash that killed several a few day ago. That crash is still under investigation but there has been fear that Iran has been supplying arms to shoot down aircraft in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Today, an eighth helicopter was shot down in Iraq.

NATO commander have been saying this week that troop levels have not improved in a very meaningful way.

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2007/02/21/nato-soldier.html

As the snow melts in the passes between Pakistan and Afghanistan, it could get increasingly dangerous both militarily and politically for Canadians.

[madmax]

Please, Layton is just trying to buy as many of the left leaning votes as possible. That's what politician's do, and the NDP was against the mission from the start.

Trying to increase benefits for Military personel doesn't gain Layton any "Left Wing" votes. It doesn't get him any military ones either. From what I am able to assess, and don't quote me because I am speculating, but it would appear that alot of the ideas are coming from Peter Stoffer. I have heard this guy on TV, and I like him. That said, the NDP were clearly against this mission and it's extension. I don't know their reasoning, but I do know my own.

The NDP couldn't buy a vote if you gave them the money for the bribe. Most of those NDP seats held, are held by hard working MPs and not MPs that have come in during a "wave" or get elected because the riding has been a Liberal or Conservative riding since confederation.

But certainly grandstanding, is something new that Jack Layton has brought to the NDP. And he is pretty successful at that since most people talk about him and the NDP and that hasn't happened since the days of Ed Broadbent. (Different styles)

It was when Layton used O'Conners own words as Defence Critic for an exit strategy, that got him the nickname "Taliban Jack". Never did hear "Taliban O Conner" when the Liberals were in power and the Conservatives were questioning sending the military unprepared for the mission in an unstable country with no exit strategy.

[Jean_Poutine]

Two NATO soldiers killed today. One had been confirmed as being Spanish. The other is not known at this time.

This comes on top of the American helicopter crash that killed several a few day ago. That crash is still under investigation but there has been fear that Iran has been supplying arms to shoot down aircraft in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Today, an eighth helicopter was shot down in Iraq.

NATO commander have been saying this week that troop levels have not improved in a very meaningful way.

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2007/02/21/nato-soldier.html

As the snow melts in the passes between Pakistan and Afghanistan, it could get increasingly dangerous both militarily and politically for Canadians.

There's little that the US can do to pressure Iran economically or diplomatically, but if they have evidence of weapons from Iran being used, they should present it at the UN to put pressure on countries that can do something about it economically or diplomatically. If true, it'd be pretty audacious of Iran at a time when Iran should be trying to avoid attracting more attention.

The US kicked up the number of troops they have in Afghanistan from about 18,000 to about 26,000 - the largest number of US troops since the operation began. So while some countries might not be doing more, I wouldn't say that there's little change in troop levels.

As for Pakistan, the threat there won't go away if Canada pulls out of Afghanistan. The real threat from Pakistan is not simply people crossing the border, but nuclear proliferation. Abdul Qadeer Khan basically created a nuclear black market, yet he's still not in jail, and Pakistan refuses to give the US access to him so that they can get more information on how he was spreading nuclear technology. Moreover, Pakistan's nuclear weapons are only as secure as the man in charge, and the people that tried to assassinate Musharraf had links to Al Quaida, which, as I'm sure most know, has a lot of support in Pakistan. There should be zero tolerance for this, and international pressure to fix it. There's a good documentary on it called Nuclear Jihad.

[Alexandra]

Catchme:

I must admit catchme your below post knocked me off my chair, what i really want to know is why the sudden change of heart. I know it was not me, or anything i posted, i'm curious was it a conversation with your A/B friend.

It is not our military personal's fault they are supporting the oppressors of women, and they should not be condemned for this propping of the Karzi government. In this situation, our enlisted military are also the victims. We cannot turn them into scapegoats for unscrupulous perhaps even criminal current government foreign policy. To do is shortsighted and ill informed at best.

Actually Army Guy the poster, catchme, merely paraphrased a paragraph written by J. West a member of Babble, as follows:

Quote:

Jerry West .....

Our troops are also victims. Turning them into scapegoats for bad (even criminal) foreign policy is shortsighted at best, if not totally ignorant or intentionally malicious.

There is a considerable difference between supporting the mission and supporting the welfare of the troops. In this case real support for the troops means pressuring the government to abort the mission and bring them home.

Possibly catchme is unaware that people do read that NDP forum just to stay abreast of what the Layton ladies and laddies are spewing forth this week?

;>}

[jdobbin]

There's little that the US can do to pressure Iran economically or diplomatically, but if they have evidence of weapons from Iran being used, they should present it at the UN to put pressure on countries that can do something about it economically or diplomatically. If true, it'd be pretty audacious of Iran at a time when Iran should be trying to avoid attracting more attention.

The US kicked up the number of troops they have in Afghanistan from about 18,000 to about 26,000 - the largest number of US troops since the operation began. So while some countries might not be doing more, I wouldn't say that there's little change in troop levels.

As for Pakistan, the threat there won't go away if Canada pulls out of Afghanistan. The real threat from Pakistan is not simply people crossing the border, but nuclear proliferation. Abdul Qadeer Khan basically created a nuclear black market, yet he's still not in jail, and Pakistan refuses to give the US access to him so that they can get more information on how he was spreading nuclear technology. Moreover, Pakistan's nuclear weapons are only as secure as the man in charge, and the people that tried to assassinate Musharraf had links to Al Quaida, which, as I'm sure most know, has a lot of support in Pakistan. There should be zero tolerance for this, and international pressure to fix it. There's a good documentary on it called Nuclear Jihad.

I don't know. It seems like Bush might be contemplating more than just confronting Iran in the U.N. BBC reports they have planned an attack.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20070221...n/20070305klare

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/02/20/...in2493120.shtml

As far as Pakistan goes, even the U.S. is saying this could be a brutal year. The only country to deal with Pakistan has to be the U.S.

The problems on the Iran/Afghanistan border also represent problems.

Increased amounts of U.S. troops still leaves numbers well below the number some have said would be needed to secure Afghanistan.

One thing is certain, Canadian casualties will hurt the government.

[Canadian Blue]

Well, Catchme is abit overly paranoid about anyone that isn't extreme left.

[Catchme]

This is interesting, as I was just pointing out yesterday, that the Canadian government and the Military were breaking Canadian and International Laws.

2 groups ask court to stop transfer of Afghan prisoners

Two human rights groups said Wednesday they are taking legal action to stop Canadian soldiers from handing over their prisoners in Kandahar to Afghan security forces.

The practice exposes the prisoners to possible abuse and torture and is a violation of international law, Amnesty International and the B.C. Civil Liberties Association said in Ottawa.

It also contravenes the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, they said.

"Canadian soldiers must never be part of a process that could lead to torture," said Alex Neve, secretary general of Amnesty International Canada.

"The detainee agreement should mirror our domestic values and match our international commitments and not be a conduit to possible future human rights violations."

It also notes that "the incidence of torture on detained or imprisoned persons was still occurring throughout the past year,..

The Canadian Forces have refused to allow detainees access to legal counsel before being transferred to Afghan authorities, Neve said. This practice is contrary to the Charter of Rights, he said.

Britain and the Netherlands have negotiated through their agreements with Afghanistan the right to check on the condition of their detainees, according to Neve. Amnesty has urged Canada to do the same, Neve said.

One solution to the problem, he said, is for Canada to set up its own detention system that it could share with Afghan authorities. Such a system would also enable the Canadian Forces to train Afghan security forces in the humane treatment of prisoners.

And with a sensible solution given yet. Too bad our NEW government is more concerned with playing games than actually governing.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/02/21/...sty-action.html

[madmax]

As for Pakistan, the threat there won't go away if Canada pulls out of Afghanistan. The real threat from Pakistan is not simply people crossing the border, but nuclear proliferation. Abdul Qadeer Khan basically created a nuclear black market, yet he's still not in jail, and Pakistan refuses to give the US access to him so that they can get more information on how he was spreading nuclear technology. Moreover, Pakistan's nuclear weapons are only as secure as the man in charge, and the people that tried to assassinate Musharraf had links to Al Quaida, which, as I'm sure most know, has a lot of support in Pakistan. There should be zero tolerance for this, and international pressure to fix it. There's a good documentary on it called Nuclear Jihad.

Thanks for the Link. I Concur with your assessment of Nuclear Proliferation and Pakistan.

[Catchme]

As for Pakistan, the threat there won't go away if Canada pulls out of Afghanistan. The real threat from Pakistan is not simply people crossing the border, but nuclear proliferation. Abdul Qadeer Khan basically created a nuclear black market, yet he's still not in jail, and Pakistan refuses to give the US access to him so that they can get more information on how he was spreading nuclear technology. Moreover, Pakistan's nuclear weapons are only as secure as the man in charge, and the people that tried to assassinate Musharraf had links to Al Quaida, which, as I'm sure most know, has a lot of support in Pakistan. There should be zero tolerance for this, and international pressure to fix it. There's a good documentary on it called Nuclear Jihad.

Thanks for the Link. I Concur with your assessment of Nuclear Proliferation and Pakistan.

Oh, so you are sayiing we should have our military stay in Afghanistan because of Pakistans nukes?