59% of Canadians believe Afghanistan is a lost cause

[gerryhatrick]

Most Canadians believe Afghan mission a lost cause: survey

Canadian Press

OTTAWA — A clear majority of Canadians consider the mission in Afghanistan a lost cause, according to an extensive survey that hints at deep public skepticism about the war on terror.

Decima Research polled more than 2,000 Canadians last month just as Prime Minister Stephen Harper stepped up his efforts to promote the mission.

Fifty-nine per cent of respondents agreed Canadian soldiers “are dying for a cause we cannot win,” while just 34 per cent disagreed with that statement.

snip

Almost three-quarters said the Bush administration had made the world more dangerous, 76 per cent said American policy had contributed to a rise in terrorism, and 68 per cent predicted the U.S. will eventually abandon Iraq without success.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...y/National/home

I agree with the pollsters analysis that this shows more of a spillover attitude about the Bush administration and it's war in Iraq and terror than it does with Canadian policy.

Canadians have figured out that Bush and his people have nothing left but empty rhetoric and that Iraq is getting worse. They're hearing SOME of the same rhetoric from Stephen Harper and Gordon O'Conner et al and it's creating the same negative attitude over Afghanistan.

[Borg]

Polls - seems the media always pushes the when they fit the media agenda.

What was the exact question?

What were the possible answers?

Where was it asked?

Borg

[watching&waiting]

Wow Decima must have really screwed that poll up. I do not know about where you live, but here in and around Ottawa support for the troops and the mission is such that I would have to say that the vast majority(at least 70%) are in favour of both the troops and mission. You can hear them talking in cafes and the lunch room tables etc.. If you look at the ribbons worn to show their support, you start to wonder if this was a manadtory thing. But as you say that was last month, so it was before Parliament was sitting for this session. Since that time the people have been informed about the mission and why we are there and they have heard from the Elected PM of Afghanistan, ho greatful there are for all we are doing and hope we continuue to help them, until they can train and help themselves. Maybe that is why you poll is so out of step with what I see today.

[gerryhatrick]

Wow Decima must have really screwed that poll up. I do not know about where you live, but here in and around Ottawa support for the troops and the mission is such that I would have to say that the vast majority(at least 70%) are in favour of both the troops and mission. You can hear them talking in cafes and the lunch room tables etc.. If you look at the ribbons worn to show their support, you start to wonder if this was a manadtory thing.

You are treating support for the troops and the mission as the same thing.

This poll was concerning the mission in Afghanistan and specifically if people believed it could be won. That has nothing to do with the troops, who I like to think enjoy near 100% support.

[gerryhatrick]

Polls - seems the media always pushes the when they fit the media agenda.

What "media agenda"?

Are you suggesting this poll would not have been published if the numbers were the other way? Ridiculous.

[myata]

Living in the same city I just don't see that massive and obvious show of support you're talking about. Especially in the cafes, restorants and ribbons worn on the streat. That being said, personally I don't believe that Afganistan is a lost cause just yet, but it's close (and getting closer). A solution must be found, and quickly, to these two main problems: 1) Canada (and NATO in general) should be seen by the population as only assistants to the government of Afganistan in its reconstruction efforts, not a troup of foreigners on their own mission; that would involve more than just words; and 2) Population assuming lot more positive attitude toward the government (through the latter's genuine concern and visible help to its own citizens).

[Wilber]

The ONLY possible translation of Harpers comment in the House back in May regarding the troops is that if the House does not vote for his mission extension to 2009 then the troops might not have support.

They keep telling us they believe in what they are doing over there. You don't. How is that support?

[killjoy]

The story the media tells us about the mission changed 180 degrees immediately after our government changed. That's the double truth, Ruth. That's all there is to it. Bottom line. No argument. No "kinda-sorta" about it.

The media story under the Liberal government:

"Our gallant beloved Canadian soldiers ran the evil Taliban out and are providing peace and security for Afghans while handing out candy and making the world a better place."

24 hours after Harper won the election the media story changed to this:

"We are risking our gallant young soldiers on a doomed mission put forth by the Evil Bush Empire to conquer the worlds oil supplies. We can never provide security for Afghanistan. Harper is a Bush puppet and has led us into another Vietnam. Historically Afghanistan has never been occupied (self-evident mistruth since they were being occupied insidiously by Pakistan elements). We are only bringing death and destruction onto a poor defenseless people for the cause of profit."

There is no argument here. No debate. That's the way it went and frankly anyone who can't see that is either: lying, wasn’t ever paying attention to begin with, or incredibly stupid.

As I pointed out: we all like to think of ourselves as free thinkers and intelligent people but the media tells you what your opinion is and because it takes too much time and effort to truly get all the information on the subject people just lap it up. Those were the two 180 degree different stories being told and they coincide with the 180-degree change in popular opinion about the mission.

In other words there is no other conclusion to come to besides the one that accurately points out that the media controls your opinion. Oh – that and they lie for a living – MUCH more than any politician does.

It doesn't really matter what Canadians "think" (although I'd like to see proof of this "thinking"), most of them apparently can't tell the difference between Afghanistan and Iraq, or worse simply think there is none.

The bottom line is regardless of what Canadians think, feel, wish or day-dream if we leave now we'll be going back within ten years to do it all over again and many many more will die then than now.

.

[jdobbin]

The bottom line is regardless of what Canadians think, feel, wish or day-dream if we leave now we'll be going back within ten years to do it all over again and many many more will die then than now.

That military have not been happy with the Conservatives not getting out there and explaining the mission this summer.

Also, the reconstruction teams have not left the barracks in months. This is something that people support but if security continues to be a problem so that *no one* can be safe in the area and no progress is made, faith is lost in the ability to achieve lasting peace.

If evacuating the region is what ordinary Afghans start doing, who is it that we are fighting for?

It is a tough situation and our Generals keep telling us that it will only get tougher. People start asking themselves: "Is this something that will ever end or is it an endless cycle?

Moreover, if Canada is there to protect our own shores from terrorism and attacks are planned, funded and executed in the land of our ally Pakistan, what are we to make of that?

[rover1]

So far as I know, Decima is a respectable polling organisation, at least it's quoted a lot.

My impression is that a large number of Canadians are at least sceptical about the prospects in Afghanistan.

Considering the past history of the area, and international press reports as to the success or failure of the operations there, there is good reason for the scepticism, in my opinion.

[killjoy]

That military have not been happy with the Conservatives not getting out there and explaining the mission this summer.

Um, in what context? The only thing the military wants is more troops out there.

Also, the reconstruction teams have not left the barracks in months. This is something that people support but if security continues to be a problem so that *no one* can be safe in the area and no progress is made, faith is lost in the ability to achieve lasting peace.

This is because you need to view reconstruction as the fight it is and not la-la land day-dreaming and handing out candy (that's not directed at you). What I mean is you can't just go somewhere out in the middle of nowhere and build a school and expect that to be it. You need to also:

A: be financially prepared to build another if it gets burned down.

B: provide at least a modicum of security for it...i.e. more troops.

It is a tough situation and our Generals keep telling us that it will only get tougher. People start asking themselves: "Is this something that will ever end or is it an endless cycle?

Cypress was an endless cycle. Yugoslavia was an endless cycle. They both ended. Endless cycles only exist because no one commits to ending them. There is a difference with expecting things to be done in a time period that regular workin’ folk can relate to and a reasonable amount of time actually required for this kind of risk. The "endless cycle" is it's own perpetuated myth.

Moreover, if Canada is there to protect our own shores from terrorism and attacks are planned, funded and executed in the land of our ally Pakistan, what are we to make of that?

Quite possibly war with Pakistan. Opps, I'm sorry, did my generation think they were going to escape the wars of previous ones? Did they think it was as easy as just "gettin' along"? Did they think those wars happened because people were simply stupider than they are now? (LOL!!)

Please put your seats back in the upright position, extinguish all cigarettes and hang on.

.

[jdobbin]

Um, in what context? The only thing the military wants is more troops out there.

This is because you need to view reconstruction as the fight it is and not la-la land day-dreaming and handing out candy (that's not directed at you). What I mean is you can't just go somewhere out in the middle of nowhere and build a school and expect that to be it. You need to also:

A: be financially prepared to build another if it gets burned down.

B: provide at least a modicum of security for it...i.e. more troops.

Cypress was an endless cycle. Yugoslavia was an endless cycle. They both ended. Endless cycles only exist because no one commits to ending them. There is a difference with expecting things to be done in a time period that regular workin’ folk can relate to and a reasonable amount of time actually required for this kind of risk.

Quite possibly war with Pakistan. Opps, I'm sorry, did my generation think they were going to escape the wars of previous ones? Did they think it was as easy as just "gettin' along"? Did they think those wars happened because people were simply stupider than they are now? (LOL!!)

Please put your seats back in the upright position, extinguish all cigarettes and hang on.

This was just out today:

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/01102006/2/nati...ion-summer.html

The problem is our reconstruction team has not done anything lately. There is *no* building going on.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/30092006/2/nati...m-kandahar.html

Cyprus and Bosnia continue today. We've just cut our committment to it but we still have soldiers in both places.

As far as Pakistan goes, we are tapped out. NATO might have the guns but they aren't backing us up now. The U.S. is tapped out. What forces could we use?

[killjoy]

This was just out today:

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/01102006/2/nati...ion-summer.html

The problem is our reconstruction team has not done anything lately. There is *no* building going on.

You know dobbin my respect for your nature dictates that I do read your links and I saw this one elsewhere. However the one you're presenting now is a bad link. I know there's no reconstruction going on now, as i said there's little point and since every new school is a target to Taliban with every potential of having children burned down with them --- oh, did the media not tell you that one? About how it's one of their favorite things to lock the doors and burn them down with the kids in them? Sorry you had to hear it from me. I guess the story sounds sweeter when it's just "we don't do it any more" rather than why. Or maybe the editors were worried they might give Canadians reason to believe it's worth it.

Cyprus and Bosnia continue today. We've just cut our commitment to it but we still have soldiers in both places.

Still going on? I think I know what you mean, but when was the last time a "long ditch" was dug in Yugoslavia? To that extent it's a looong way from "still going on". For all realistic purposes it's over.

Or more to the point if Afghanistan made it to that level of 'success' then we'd already be defying the critic's predictions by miles wouldn't we?

As far as Pakistan goes, we are tapped out. NATO might have the guns but they aren't backing us up now. The U.S. is tapped out. What forces could we use?

Naturally we can't do it without allies but we're getting more troops not less. Again the media screams about not enough troops then give one single paragraph blurb about Poland sending 2000 more. Mark my words, or propose a wager: Regardless of what Canadians want or think we're going to be there longer, we're going to get more troops and if it comes to war with Pakistan we will have more allies than we’ll need.

.

[jdobbin]

You know dobbin my respect for your nature dictates that I do read your links and I saw this one elsewhere. However the one you're presenting now is a bad link. I know there's no reconstruction going on now, as i said there's little point and since every new school is a target to Taliban with every potential of having children burned down with them --- oh, did the media not tell you that one? About how it's one of their favorite things to lock the doors and burn them down with the kids in them? Sorry you had to hear it from me. I guess the story sounds sweeter when it's just "we don't do it any more" rather than why. Or maybe the editors were worried they might give Canadians reason to believe it's worth it.

Still going on? I think I know what you mean, but when was the last time a "long ditch" was dug in Yugoslavia? To that extent it's a looong way from "still going on". For all realistic purposes it's over.

Or more to the point if Afghanistan made it to that level of 'success' then we'd already be defying the critic's predictions by miles wouldn't we?

Naturally we can't do it without allies but we're getting more troops not less. Again the media screams about not enough troops then give one single paragraph blurb about Poland sending 2000 more. Mark my words, or propose a wager: Regardless of what Canadians want or think we're going to be there longer, we're going to get more troops and if it comes to war with Pakistan we will have more allies than we’ll need.

Don't know why that link won't work. It seems to work in another post in this forum.

The gist of the article is that if the reconstruction teams can't get active soon that Afghans might start evacuating. Not exactly what NATO wants in the area.

As far as Cyprus goes, my meaning is that they still have to be separated to prevent a fight. Forces in the former Yugoslavia do the same thing even now.

I heard about Poland's troops but not where they will be placed.

Pakistan is likely to be a sensitive area. It boils down to whether anyone trusts Pakistan's leader.

[Riverwind]

Don't know why that link won't work. It seems to work in another post in this forum.

This message board will replace a good link with '...' in the middle

http : //ca.news.yahoo.com/s/01102006/2/nati...ion-summer.html

This means you cannot cut and paste links from the text. You have to grab them from the address bar in your browser or do reply to.

[mr-trudo]

Seriously, you'd have to be an anarchist or a terrorist to say you don't support the troops. Yet, this simple slogan repetition wrapped up in patroitism scares me as it seems to have a mind numbing effect. The real debates ends, passion takes over reason and a self-censored debate begins. The debate becomes support our troops, our troops always agree and follow the government, you don't agree with our government, you are against our troops and you become the enemy of our beloved troops and our nation. And in comes Anne Coulter with death threats and FOX News proclaiming the government should silence you. This was a tactic adopted by the US Conservatives in "War on Terror" and Canadian Conservatives are now adopting it with Lowell Green replacing Anne Coulter and so on.

A side note, notice many support the troops stickers became more passionate, replacing "the" with "our" and are now adopting US flags and Blue, the colour of the Conservative party. As a previous poster mentioned strong "support our troops" people in Ottawa, which is easily the most Conservative major city in Canada after Calgary. It just further backs my point. The Canadian Conservatives are merely followers of the American Conservatives who believe in one big global American Conservative empire, as drawn out in the Project for a New American Century.

It angers me to see the Conservatives hijack people's patroitism and respect for public servants who regularly risk their lives for the public good for their own agenda. When you get people so passionate thinking only in simple slogans and mindless patroitism, they follow the government blindly and when that has happened, it is because people wouldn't follow the government otherwise.

My reaction to the latest poll is one of relief that so many people are still thinking and seeing a couple bumperstickers and red shirt fridays is nothing but a psychological trick and Tory propaganda stunt that everyone is following their government and their policies. Or are they? the actual party polls don't reflect it.

But sooner or later, the new Liberal minority government will end the combat as they respond to public opinion as everyone can agree, the Liberals are either centrist, opportunistic, or both.

[mr-trudo]

Unless Iggy becomes PM

[BubberMiley]

You can support the troops and still be aware that they're fighting a lost cause. You don't have to lose touch with reality to wish them well.

[gerryhatrick]

Seriously, you'd have to be an anarchist or a terrorist to say you don't support the troops. Yet, this simple slogan repetition wrapped up in patroitism scares me as it seems to have a mind numbing effect. The real debates ends, passion takes over reason and a self-censored debate begins. The debate becomes support our troops, our troops always agree and follow the government, you don't agree with our government, you are against our troops and you become the enemy of our beloved troops and our nation.

An incredibly astute and well put distillation of the situation. Bravo.

[killjoy]

Seriously, you'd have to be an anarchist or a terrorist to say you don't support the troops.

No you don't. You can simply be a member of a generation that idolizes and envies the myths of the '60s

.

[gerryhatrick]

The ONLY possible translation of Harpers comment in the House back in May regarding the troops is that if the House does not vote for his mission extension to 2009 then the troops might not have support.

They keep telling us they believe in what they are doing over there. You don't. How is that support?

Who keeps telling you that? And how do you know what I believe?

My cricism of Harper for leveraging the troops to ensure support or the mission has NOTHING to do with what I believe. It shows I'm against the cynical use of our troops, and that IS support.

[Army Guy]

mr-trudo:

Seriously, you'd have to be an anarchist or a terrorist to say you don't support the troops. Yet, this simple slogan repetition wrapped up in patroitism scares me as it seems to have a mind numbing effect. The real debates ends, passion takes over reason and a self-censored debate begins. The debate becomes support our troops, our troops always agree and follow the government, you don't agree with our government, you are against our troops and you become the enemy of our beloved troops and our nation. And in comes Anne Coulter with death threats and FOX News proclaiming the government should silence you. This was a tactic adopted by the US Conservatives in "War on Terror" and Canadian Conservatives are now adopting it with Lowell Green replacing Anne Coulter and so on.

What your really saying that Canadians are scared to be labeled anarcharists or terrorists, and would much rather smile and grin and go with the flow. Rather than speak out on what they truely believe.

This show of patroitism scares you because it's an american thing, waving the flag, putting a bumper sticker on your car. and as Canadians have to hate or be very wary of everything american.

There is nothing wrong with Canadians showing how patroitic they are in fact it is kind of refreshing. Far from being mind numbing and i think your reading to much into it. Are we talking about Lowell green from the ottawa area.

A side note, notice many support the troops stickers became more passionate, replacing "the" with "our" and are now adopting US flags and Blue, the colour of the Conservative party. As a previous poster mentioned strong "support our troops" people in Ottawa, which is easily the most Conservative major city in Canada after Calgary. It just further backs my point. The Canadian Conservatives are merely followers of the American Conservatives who believe in one big global American Conservative empire, as drawn out in the Project for a New American Century.

The demand for these stickers is high perhaps Canadians are using the US version, instead, hardly backs your theory. Your post drips with anti american punch lines and references, but would it not make since that two countries not all that different may have some of the same policies, or goals. But then again it has been the fashion lately to bash everything american, regardless of the real reason we are involved in Afgan. but because the Americans were thier first .it has to be bad.

It angers me to see the Conservatives hijack people's patroitism and respect for public servants who regularly risk their lives for the public good for their own agenda. When you get people so passionate thinking only in simple slogans and mindless patroitism, they follow the government blindly and when that has happened, it is because people wouldn't follow the government otherwise.

Something we have not seen by the Liberals or NDP...give me a break, if thier is a vote to be grab out there all the parties are in there like dirty shirts, only that is the current governments job is it not, to drum up support for the Military and it's current mission.

And you don't give the avg Canadian much credit for being able to sit down and figure this out..

and if this mindless patriotism as you called it was working then why are the polls showing something totally different.

My reaction to the latest poll is one of relief that so many people are still thinking and seeing a couple bumperstickers and red shirt fridays is nothing but a psychological trick and Tory propaganda stunt that everyone is following their government and their policies. Or are they? the actual party polls don't reflect it

The bumper stickers, were orginated by the military family resource centers across the country to allow family members and the troops to show support for thier comrads, the idea took off , with the legion, getting involved... the other stickers are folks taking advantage of supply and demand and making a buck...

The Red shirt fridays and ottawa event was planned and organised by serveral wifes from Petawawa,ont ... not by the Tories, not by DND, but a few wifes to show thier support for thier spouses now serving overseas...The PM was asked to address the people as were the CDS....because that who they wanted to hear from...So much for your propaganda stunt theory... But rather military families showing thier support showing thier spouses that are serving in Afgan that they are not forgotten, and are always on thier minds..

[Remiel]

I am not much for the Conservatives version of the story for supporting the troops. That being said, when Don Cherry was plugging for the Support Our Troops hats, I went out and ordered two of them. Why? Well, because they were being sold at Canex, and to the best of my knowledge, all profits from Canex go to actually supporting the troops, not just talking about it.

[geoffrey]

If 59% of Canadians believing that Afghanistan is a lost cause makes that statement true... then global warming must not happen in Alberta because a poll in today's Calgary Herald, only Alberta has a majority of citizens that think global warming isn't happening. It does happen everywhere else though, as a majority in other provinces believe in the theory.

What the majority of people think is irrelevant.

[Remiel]

Who was it that said that " Truth is not a majority vote. "