Duceppe says Afghanistan mission falls short


BitWhys
#1
Kevin Dougherty, CanWest News Service; Montreal Gazette
Published: Tuesday, August 29, 2006

Quote:

QUEBEC - Bloc Quebecois Leader Gilles Duceppe called on the Harper government Monday to address the effectiveness of the Canadian mission in Afghanistan in light of reports regarding the resurgence of the heroin trade in the battle-scarred country.

Quebec soldiers won't take the lead role in the Afghanistan mission until next year, but troops from CFB Valcartier who have served for six months in Afghanistan have returned and a new contingent of 33 members of the Royal 22nd Regiment left Monday to train the Afghan army.

Duceppe questioned whether the international effort is enough, noting the resurgence of regional warlords and resumption of the heroine production.

And he said Prime Minister Stephen Harper has accepted the view of U.S. President George W. Bush that ''it's the devil against God'' an opinion Duceppe does not share.

''Soldiers do a very risky job and they have all my admiration for that,'' he said. The problem is ''the kind of risky policy that the government has.''

''The question is, are the international efforts enough to maintain peace over there?'' Duceppe asked. ''Are we applying the necessary policies to make sure the Taliban is not coming back?

''It seems not to be the case.''

Nelofer Pazira, the Toronto-based, Afghan-born journalist who starred in the film Kandahar, wrote in an article carried by several British newspapers last week from Kandahar that the Taliban and warlords involved in the heroine trade are making gains, saying the poppy farmers have welcomed the Taliban.

Afghanistan is the source of 90 per cent of the world's heroin. The Senlis Council, a Paris-based think-tank, has suggested the licensing of medical-morphine production to offer the farmers a livelihood and to undercut the illegal drug trade.

Pazira said Canadian troops in the area are also fighting a ''war on drugs,'' quoting an Afghan named Wali saying, ''If tomorrow the British and Canadians announced that the growing of poppies was allowed, the people wouldn't let the Taliban stay in the country.''

Duceppe noted that the Paris-based weekly Nouvel Observateur in its Aug. 14 edition quotes an unnamed diplomat who alleges that ''(Afghan President Hamid) Karzai's brother controls 70 per cent of world heroin production.''

''That is worrying if it is true,'' Duceppe said.

speaking of monopolies, Senlis reports that 75% of the legal opium trade is controlled by two US companies. By legislation 80% of that import is guaranteed to be from Turkey and India.

If there's one thing monopolies hate, its change.
 
sine000
#2
Seriously...QUEBEC cant do ANYTHING>.....all they can do MAX is separate from canada...but i dont think that will happen...
 
BitWhys
#3
whether the truth has wheels is beside the point.
 
Mogz
Conservative
#4
Contrary to popular belief, our current mission is not, I say again, not to combat the opium trade. While there are small units i.e. the International Military Police Company, working on the issue, the vast majority of Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan are deployed on Operation Archer, a combat action against militants in the South. Those soldiers belong to either the Provincal Reconsruction Team (PRT) or Multinational Brigade. Their chief goal is to take the fight to the militants, push them out of the Provinces of interest, and establish a secure environment. The truth is that opium is the lesser of the two evils currently. Yes we could throw all of our efforts in to combating the drug trade, thus leaving the Provinces at the mercy of the militants (as was the case pre-invasion in 2001). By doing that we put anyone and everyone at risk of muslim fanatacism. The stance we've taken in Afghanistan is one of peace making. We stomp the beligerants and thus secure the Nation. This slays me:

Quote:

''The question is, are the international efforts enough to maintain peace over there?'' Duceppe asked. ''Are we applying the necessary policies to make sure the Taliban is not coming back?

I would suggest that Mr Duceepe educates himself FULLY on Afghanistan. First and foremost we're not peacekeeping, as there has to be a peace to keep. We ARE however fighting the militants, thus stopping the Taliban from resurging. A great example is Northern Afghanistan, where the Taliban held power from 1996 until 2001. That region is safe, calm, peaceful. How did it get that way? Combined coalition action from 2001-2003. Now we're working on Southern Afghanistan.
 
BitWhys
#5
I suggest if you really care about the troops you stop cherry-picking and engage in debate instead of just trying to look clever. Try addressing the whole quote for a change.

The problem as I see it, and as Duceppe points out, is PRECISELY because the opium policy is off by a mile, whoever is enforcing it directly. Nobody in the article said we were the ones enforcing it although if you think time and suffering won't drag our troops into the local sentiment eventually you're dreaming. more than usual that is.

There will be no peace to maintain until the opium trade is addressed properly. The current slash and burn policy hasn't worked for the last 4 years and is only making things worse.
 
BitWhys
#6
"combating the drug trade"

you just don't get it, do you?

license

legal

production
 
BitWhys
#7
"establish a secure environment"

you need to work on your wording. that contradicts ISAF's mandated "maintenance of security".
 
Mogz
Conservative
#8
I'm really not in the mood today to get in a bitch session about how (in your world) opium is a greater threat to the security of a Nation than RPG-7 totting militants who's chief goal is to put the general populace back under their boot.

That said:

Quote:

"establish a secure environment"

you need to work on your wording. that contradicts ISAF's mandated "maintenance of security".

Before you try to, how was it you put it? " look clever", I would suggest you actually inform yourself as to how the mission(s) in Afghanistan are layed out.

1. ISAF
2. Multinational Coalition

ISAF is the U.N. mandated task force who's roles include (but are not limited to); providing security to the Northern Provinces, providing Security to the pacified Southern Provinces, providing security to the Government in Kabul, training the Afghan National Army, training the Afghan Police, combating drugs, weapon smuggling, and warlords. ISAF is basically the backbone supporting the Afghan Government.

The multinational coalition is a task force of a FEW Nations that actually provide frontline combat troops to the mission in Afghanistan. Those Nations are:
  • The United States
  • Canada
  • Britain
  • The Netherlands

The chief goal of said coalition is to stomp the hell out of the militants, thus freeing up Provinces for ISAF to move in to and do their thing. As you no doubt can google, Canada has in the neighbourhood of 2,300 men and women in Southern Afghanistan. Of that number, less than 100 work with ISAF. The remainder work with the Multinational Coalition and do not, work to the aims of ISAF (although they support said aims). A good way to look at ISAF and the MNC is to think of ISAF as KFOR in Bosnia and the MNC as SFOR. So I would suggest, in the furture, you actually inform yourself on the subject at hand. Your quote of "maintenance of security" only applies to around 3% of the Canadian Forces working in Afghanistan. The other 97% have a mandate to establish a secure environment.
 
BitWhys
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by Mogz

ISAF is the U.N. mandated task force who's roles include (but are not limited to); providing security to the Northern Provinces, providing Security to the pacified Southern Provinces, providing security to the Government in Kabul,...

"maintenance of security"

UN Security Council Resolution 1510 (2003)

I realize what NATO has made of it but if you want to get ahead you better learn to keep your ducks in a row.
 
EastSideScotian
#10
Who the **** cares what Duceppe thinks...

LIKE REALLY? separatist?.....They dont want anything to do with Canada anyway...

I refuse to read anything about what some anti-Canadian has to say about Canadian issues.
 
Nuggler
#11
"Soldiers have a risky job"

No **** Sherlock.

What was his first clue??

Damn that man's smart.

Short?? He should know.

 
s_lone
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by EastSideScotian

Who the *censored* cares what Duceppe thinks...

LIKE REALLY? separatist?.....They dont want anything to do with Canada anyway...

I refuse to read anything about what some anti-Canadian has to say about Canadian issues.

Who cares about what YOU think?

Duceppe is the leader of a FEDERAL party which happens to be a seperatist one. This isn't a contradiction because the Bloc Québecois respects the democratic rules of Canada; it aknowldeges that Quebec IS, for the moment, part of Canada.
 
BitWhys
#13
I may not agree with all of Duceppe's politics and his historical geography may be a little off but I get the distinct impression he really is the sharpest pencil in the pack.
 
Colpy
Conservative
#14
I have no problem with Duceppe as a person, I think he is a cut above the average politician..............it is hard to believe that a good, intelligent man can be so wrong practically all the time.
 
no new posts