Canadians query Afghan mission

What kind of a country are we if we can't even honour our committment?

Big shock that Quebeckers are against this. A quick check of history will see that the only time Quebec took up arms willingly is when the US Army was at the gates of Quebec cities during the war of 1812.

With the new Federal ridings to reflect population growth in Ontario, Alberta and BC , Quebec will lose it's sway over Parliament.
About time too.

Pandering to a province of reluctant members of the Federation over the rest of the country has gone far enough.

That article is just typical Toronto Star spin.

The Star has always been uncomfortable with all things military. But they initially supported this mission because it was enacted by the Liberals and the Star usually supports Liberal initiatives.

But now it's a Conservative problem and the Star Editorial board is ready to start carving.

So when word of a controversy breaks, they commission a poll showing what has been quite apparent for several years. English Canadians are about split on the mission, while a majority of French Canadians oppose it. Nothing new there. That kind of split amongst the population in time of war dates back to about 1900.

Then, they spin the results of the poll by finding some critical quotes from David Staples who represents the left leaning, anti-military Rideau Institute. They spice those up with some comments from Michel Drapeau, a has been ex-military guy whose been out of uniform since the early 80's and has an axe to grind. His only credentials are that he can be always be counted on to say something critical about the military leadership. He did so during the Tarnak Farm bombing, Somalia, Srebenicia, etc.

Expect CBC to jump on board by mid-week with a follow up story on the National. You'll mostly likely see a piece catologuing the various controversy's that have involved the Canadian army over the decades. They'll be a bit about Somalia, maybe the controversy involving the Van Doos in Yugo, perhaps they'll even dust off some old footage about the Princess Pat's in Korea who raped a Korean girl and killed a couple of villagers.

Then you'll start seeing columnists demanding to know why there was a "cover-up", why the military didn't do a press release earlier, blah, blah, blah.

It's all designed to give the story legs and keep it going as long as possible, at the expense of the boys and girls in tan.

It'll go on an on, and those of us who know exactly what they're doing will be annoyed by it. But the average Toronto Star reader will lap it up and wring his hands about the whole thing.

Hopefully when all is said and done, the soldier will be acquitted and all of them will have to eat crow.

But don't count on them doing it even if that happens.

They'll just move on to their next victim.

Quebec is just upset that all that money going to Afghanistan isn't going to them.

Aint that the truth. If we weren't in Afghanistan they could pay less in EI, and pension plan payments and maybe have their free childcare so they can sit on their asses and procreate and not worry about who is going to look after the children. I think it's clear the values of Quebec and Canada have branched off. It's time we look at a separation.

As usual, ideology reigns supreme by the usual suspects. Here are some questions for you...

What is the mission in Afghanistan? What are the milestones on the way to that mission? How do we measure whether we are being successful?

Because apart from this being a good live ammo exercise for our armed forces, and scoring a little bit of clout with the NATO, there doesn't seem to be a whole lot happening in Afghanistan five years later.

I'm all for seeing our commitment out, but after that, we should pull out unless there is some new mission concept. We went in there to knock off the Taliban, not to occupy the place for the next fifty years.

Sorry to bring up reality. It ruins everything, doesn't it?

I think those are great questions, and I'd like to see some clear and concise answers from the government - and if it meant staying beyonde 2011 - so be it, if not, then we're done.

What was the milestone in Bosnia? Or other parts of the former Yugoslavia?

What was the milestone in the Golan Heights or Cyprus?

When should we have left these missions?

(big, intolerant statement alarm! )
The people of Quebec are possibly the most selfish in all of Canada. They could hardly rally their sorry asses to help out the French in WWI or WWII and to this day think of themselves before their country.

Zip: Maybe you're MP could have asked Chretien that when he proposed this in a parliamentary debate? Too bad it took 6 more years for Harper to have that debate and then it was only about us leaving.

Probably about as long as it's gonna take for you to figure you you're not as smart as you think you are.

Probably about as long as it's gonna take for you to figure you you're not as smart as you think you are.
I think you are being way to positive now... We are out of Afghanistan WAY before she will acknowledge that...

People dont seem to realize that we have been in the balkans for the better part of 15 years now performing everything from peacekeeping to airstrikes. All in an attempt to stop small rival groups killing each other and helping them set up a government.

However, they look at A-stan and expect us to be done by now. Doesn't make any sense.

I think the stability in the balkans now compared to what it used to be is a testament to the fact that success is possible in helping to build the nation of Afghanistan. And that means staying for however long is necessary, whether that is 2011 or later.

Probably about as long as it's gonna take for you to figure you you're not as smart as you think you are.
I think you are being way to positive now... We are out of Afghanistan WAY before she will acknowledge that...





Me thinks that is a true story, girl.

World War 2 wasn't an "American War." But Quebecers were against it nonetheless. Pierre Trudeau spent the 1940's riding around on a motorcycle wearing a nazi helmet. Thousands of Quebecers rampaged through the streets of Montreal during the Conscription Crisis.




When exactly were we "Peacekeepers?"

In the 1980's, when the peacekeeping concept was at it's zenith as a way of diffusing simmering bush fire wars that had the potential to set the superpowers off against one another, we did have about 2000 troops stationed abroad on Peacekeeping.

But at that same time, we had almost 10 000 troops stationed in West Germany ready to move at a moment's notice against the Soviet Bloc.



I think it's pretty clear. Canadian soldiers are actively fighting a war against the Taliban while also assigning troops to mentor and advise the Afghan National Army. Pretty simple stuff really, where's the confusion Tegan?