Layton: General right on Afghanistan
Tue, 2008-10-07 15:36
#1
Layton: General right on Afghanistan
Tue, 2008-10-07 15:36
#2
quote:
So what other missions are there in Afghanistan after Canadian troops are withdrawn from counterinsurgency?
There are several possible missions, I think Dawn Black recommend gaurding NGOs (not that I agree with this mission).
quote:
Sssslip'n slidin' their away around the truth
Fidel, I do not think you could understand the truth, given some of your responses to several questions asked to you.
PS: You complete me. [img]wink.gif" border="0[/img]
Tue, 2008-10-07 16:21
#3
quote:
Originally posted by Webgear:
[b]There are several possible missions, I think Dawn Black recommend gaurding NGOs (not that I agree with this mission).[/b]
Well that's not counterinsurgency, is iit? It's not the kind of "mission" our Liberal government was so secretive about in Parliament in 2005. The Liberals continued to lie to opposition parties in Ottawa and Canadians with the very U.S.-friendly Manley Report.
quote:
[b]Fidel, I do not think you could understand the truth, given some of your responses to several questions asked to you. [/b]
[Col. Jessop on]
Truth? You want the truth? [b]You can't haaaaandle the truth![/b]
Tue, 2008-10-07 16:24
#4
Cueball
quote:
Originally posted by Webgear:
[b]There are several possible missions, I think Dawn Black recommend gaurding NGOs (not that I agree with this mission). [/b]
So is there a mission that is worth doing here?
Tue, 2008-10-07 16:31
#5
Of course, there is rarely any reference to the truth in these threads except from NDP and few other sources.
Tue, 2008-10-07 16:32
#6
Cueball
Did you turn in your membership then?
Tue, 2008-10-07 17:11
#7
The difference between the NDP and everyone else in Ottawa seems to be the original sticking point for even being there, which is [url=http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/11598509/national_affairs_pre... George's phony war on terror[/url]
Popularity for this lame duck friend of the Liberal and Conservative Parties of Canada is now on the wane in America, and will likely be replaced - no, surely will be replaced by another warmongering plutocrat in Warshington whichever of the two presidential candidates wins phony elections in America next month. And our two old line stoogeocratic parties are in a kind of limbo right now wrt what their plans are for the phony war on terror in Afghanistan. Liberals and Conservative await the results of U.S. elections with baited breath and on bended knee.
Tue, 2008-10-07 18:42
#8
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
[b]So is there a mission that is worth doing here?[/b]
Yes, I think there is.
We need to adjust our tactics.
Other government departments (such as CIDA) need to focus more effort and professionalism to the mission.
Tue, 2008-10-07 18:46
#9
quote:
Originally posted by Fidel:
[b]
Well that's not counterinsurgency, is iit? It's not the kind of "mission" our Liberal government was so secretive about in Parliament in 2005. The Liberals continued to lie to opposition parties in Ottawa and Canadians with the very U.S.-friendly Manley Report.
[/b]
You realize counter-insurgency is a type of warfare and not a mission?
Route clearance, raids, holding key and vital ground, presence patrolling are types of missions.
Do you see the difference?
Does Dawn Black know the difference?
Tue, 2008-10-07 19:18
#10
Liberal John Manley doesn't seem to know his ass from a hole in the ground. In his report, at the beginning of the year, he suggested that we use more helicopters and expensive aerial drones, and more training from the U.S., a country which has destroyed a number of countries in the process of waging phony wars.
Manley and the Liberals are out of touch, because former Soviet military commanders have advised against Manley's solution to step up counterinsurgency operations. The Soviets said more helicopters and planes in the air will likely result in insurgents shooting them down with anti-aircraft missiles and, yes, MANPADs. 2500 soldiers, 36000 soldiers, or 100,000 - it doesn't matter according to former Soviet commanders. This phony war is unwinnable. Conservatives and Liberals in Ottawa are not using their heads - they're following orders from Warshington.
Tue, 2008-10-07 19:30
#11
I do not expect much from politicians, especially Defence Critics.
You may want to revisit what the Russians think about recent counter-insurgency lessons.
Hint, I look at their actions in Georgia and Grozny.
Tue, 2008-10-07 19:35
#12
Groznians seem to be more than happy with the rebuilding of the city and bustling economy since Putin.
[url=http://julianwest.ndp.ca/page/6134]NATO in Afghanistan: From Bad to Worse – The wrong role for Canada[/url]
quote:
The first step along this path is the clear indication that we are withdrawing our troops now through an operational plan for a safe and secure withdrawal.Some ask: Why start there?
Quite simply because, being combatants, chasers of insurgents, and escalators of war – [b]will deny us any credibility to serve as leaders for peace.[/b]
Are you a soldier or an assassin, webgear?
[ 07 October 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]
Tue, 2008-10-07 19:46
#13
Can you please stop linking NDP pages?
Is it possible for you to discuss the issue in you own words and thoughts?
Tue, 2008-10-07 19:50
#14
I share those same thoughts, webgear. So you'll just have to bear with me.
John Manley's and Liberal/Tory Parties' thoughts on the matter are not their own. They just follow orders from the imperial master nation. They aren't much more complex in thought than the aerial drones pawned off on them by the war lobby.
Tue, 2008-10-07 20:00
#15
quote:
Originally posted by Fidel:
[QB]
Are you a soldier or an assassin, webgear?
Now this is a very interesting question, the answer quite depends on your definition of what an assassin is?
The definition of "assassination" varies among sources.
The American Heritage Dictionary defines "to assassinate" thus:
[i] ... to murder [a prominent person] by surprise attack, as for political reasons [/i]
however, the Oxford English Dictionary's definition is:
[i] The action of assassinating; the taking the life of any one by treacherous violence, esp. by a hired emissary, or one who has taken upon him to execute the deed. [/i]
Is an army sniper an assassin that kills from 2500m, how about a bomber pilot that fires missiles from 60kms away? What about a soldier that kills with a bayonet?
Soldiers kill for political reasons and often by a treacherous violence.
Tue, 2008-10-07 20:09
#16
I asked you what you think not Oxford or the Americanos.
[b]Col. Kurtz:[/b] You're neither. You're an errand boy, sent by grocery clerks, to collect a bill.
Tue, 2008-10-07 20:16
#17
I am a soldier.
Tue, 2008-10-07 20:21
#18
writer
You are a treasure.
Wed, 2008-10-08 00:24
#19
[url=http://pakistanledger.wordpress.com/2008/10/08/usa-now-wants-its-very-ow... now wants its very own Taliaban back in power[/url]
quote:
We have come a full circle. The US created the Taliban with the help of the Pakistanis and the Saudis. Now the US is using the Saudis and the Pakistan to deal with the Taliban so that America can put the Taliban back to power. . .Now the US wants the Taliban back in power–solutions that were impressed upon the Americans by the Pakistanis. Islamabad which at the time had some influence in Afghanistan could have resolved all the issues and saved American lives. However the Neocons and those who believed in the Plan for an New American Century (PNAC.com) ignored the Pakistani advice and wanted to use brute force.
Brute force has not worked, and all major players in the UK, US, and the UN have publicly stated that there is no military solution in Afghanistan and that the Taliban cannot be defeated.
So now we are all back to square one–the US wants the Taliban back in power.
Malalai Joya was right all along. It is a phony war on terror. The real war is on democracy. All the world's a stage. Charade they are.
Wed, 2008-10-08 22:32
#20
quote:
Originally posted by Fidel:
[b]Well that's not counterinsurgency, is iit? It's not the kind of "mission" our Liberal government was so secretive about in Parliament in 2005. The Liberals continued to lie to opposition parties in Ottawa and Canadians with the very U.S.-friendly Manley Report.[/b]
Of course that's counter-insurgency - a part of it anyways. Offensive operations are only one part of counter-insurgency and a much less important part than development, propaganda, etc.
Counter-insurgency is 85% political, 15% military. To approach it from the opposite view is take a strategy similar to the US in Vietnam and we all know how well that turned out.