[Newsbot]

Title: Longer Afghan mission doesn't need vote: Harper
Category: Political
Posted By: Curtman
Date: 2010-11-12 10:18:17
Canadian

[Curtman]

$1:

Harper noted that the Liberals have been in favour of extending the Afghan mission in a non-combat capacity that would see Canadian troops helping to train Afghan forces.

The Liberals were proposing this years ago. Harper said something about it being offensive that he should dictate to military commanders on the ground.

[bootlegga]

I agree, something like this doesn't need debate in the House of Commons.

[EyeBrock]

I think it should be debated.

[Mowich]

There is absolutely no need for debate on this matter. As usual, Layton is conveniently leaving out the fact that the troops will be in non-fighting capacity, teaching roles as you will.
Canada is right to stay in Afghanistan and do their best to help the people of that country.

[andyt]

Mowich Mowich:

There is absolutely no need for debate on this matter. As usual, Layton is conveniently leaving out the fact that the troops will be in non-fighting capacity, teaching roles as you will.
Canada is right to stay in Afghanistan and do their best to help the people of that country.

The push is on from NATO to have the troops outside the wire, ie be involved in missions with the Astani troops. Sounds like a fighting capacity to me if that is how this shapes up.

[Curtman]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

I think it should be debated.

Can you tell me about your opinion? Again, I don't want a fight. I can talk to people in my circle of friends, and I can talk to people in passing during the day, but I never get a chance to talk to people who are informed about the issue.

[martin14]

andyt andyt:

Mowich Mowich:

There is absolutely no need for debate on this matter. As usual, Layton is conveniently leaving out the fact that the troops will be in non-fighting capacity, teaching roles as you will.
Canada is right to stay in Afghanistan and do their best to help the people of that country.

The push is on from NATO to have the troops outside the wire, ie be involved in missions with the Astani troops. Sounds like a fighting capacity to me if that is how this shapes up.

The article specifically mentions a non combat role, what NATO and principally
the US want is another matter, but I don't think it will be heard in Canada.

The UN bit has sealed that deal.


I would also like EBs opinion.

[andyt]

martin14 martin14:

andyt andyt:

Mowich Mowich:

There is absolutely no need for debate on this matter. As usual, Layton is conveniently leaving out the fact that the troops will be in non-fighting capacity, teaching roles as you will.
Canada is right to stay in Afghanistan and do their best to help the people of that country.

The push is on from NATO to have the troops outside the wire, ie be involved in missions with the Astani troops. Sounds like a fighting capacity to me if that is how this shapes up.

The article specifically mentions a non combat role, what NATO and principally
the US want is another matter, but I don't think it will be heard in Canada.

The UN bit will seal that deal.


I would also like EBs opinion.

Things have a way of changing. But I have no problem sending our military to help the Afghanis if they're not getting killed for it. I don't think the deaths are worth the likelihood of success. Let's just make sure we have some planes available when the time comes to evacuate them, and let's make sure we get them out of there before the Taliban have the strength to take the fight inside the wire.

[EyeBrock]

Curtman Curtman:

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

I think it should be debated.

Can you tell me about your opinion? Again, I don't want a fight. I can talk to people in my circle of friends, and I can talk to people in passing during the day, but I never get a chance to talk to people who are informed about the issue.

Ok, and I think we have both moved on from our pointless fighting phase Curt.

Harper is right, the government doesn't need to have a debate on this but the whole Afghanistan mission is much more than a debating point to a great many Canadians.

We have lost a lot of guys out there and it's an emotive topic to many.

I think Parliament should have an open and public debate since Harper has changed tack. I'm sure the Libs and Tories can push it through anyway, but to not have a debate on an issue of such national significance is a mistake.

Let's hear what Layton, Harper, Iggy and Duceppe have to say on this if we are to go on with any kind of mission after our pull-out date.

Whether our guys are behind the wire or not, they can still get killed. What's wrong with a national discussion on this before the CF takes on this new 'mission' after it's combat role ends?

[Curtman]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

Ok, and I think we have both moved on from our pointless fighting phase Curt.

I hope so.

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

Harper is right, the government doesn't need to have a debate on this but the whole Afghanistan mission is much more than a debating point to a great many Canadians.

We have lost a lot of guys out there and it's an emotive topic to many.

I think Parliament should have an open and public debate since Harper has changed tack. I'm sure the Libs and Tories can push it through anyway, but to not have a debate on an issue of such national significance is a mistake.

Let's hear what Layton, Harper, Iggy and Duceppe have to say on this if we are to go on with any kind of mission after our pull-out date.

Whether our guys are behind the wire or not, they can still get killed. What's wrong with a national discussion on this before the CF takes on this new 'mission' after it's combat role ends?

I'm not really interested in whether they need to vote or not. I'm curious if you (or anyone else here) thinks they're being asked to stand by and watch a tragedy. am I reading too much into what a non-combat role means?

I know it says Liberal up there beside my picture, but I don't necessarily agree with asking anybody to do that. Even if my "default" party does.

[EyeBrock]

My view Curt is, Afghanistan is a country in the middle of a war.

Whatever role we play there in the future, if we are in the country our guys are at risk. People will die, our people. Parliament should have a say. Mission 'creep' in this theatre is something our guys won't be able to avoid.

The NATO nations who have their guys hiding in their barracks, getting pissed and shagging whores like the Germans, have lost guys to suicide bombers and IED's.

[djakeydd]

Afghanistan is a lost cause, Gorbachev just made that clear in a statment, but lets just keep on that lost cause with our little nazi leading the cheering section. By the way, I dont see him or his cabinet pals volunteering their sons and daughter for that hell hole. Let me make this abundantly clear, Afghanistan will NEVER be won.

[djakeydd]

Now maybe, just maybe our very own nazi could hire these capable chaps to bring some of this equipment to rout out that nasty ole terrorist of terrorists, Osama bin lately, and blow his network of millions of caves to kingdome come. Then we could just send a nice cheque over to putin and co and be done with the mess.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sq-TRC_z7TQ

[djakeydd]

And if that isnt enough, here is some more footage of inferior russian technology..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzPBAHwF ... re=related