Enacting a hasty withdrawal

Well itís good to be back and having taken a two week sabbatical from CC forums I can tell you that it has been a happy time. As some of you know my Oldest Son has returned from his mission overseas. We are happy to have him back, but we know that as a soldier he will be called upon again. Thanks so much to you folks at CC who showed support and offered kind words.

I am sure I missed a wrangling session over the Flags not being flown at half-mast and the unfortunate call of the Harper Government to restrict media coverage during the de-bussing of our fallen. Iím not going to dredge that up, to do so would probably bring a barrage of WE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THAT or GET WITH IT!

My first post I wanted to extend an olive branch to the left leaning folks and pose a couple of questions. I have heard considerable rumblings about pulling out of Afghanistan and a call for the immediate American withdrawal of US troops from Iraq. So here are my questions.

How would you folks on the Left propose such a pullout? Should our troops simply pull pole and make the quickest departure logistically possible?

In the event of withdrawal will you folks who oppose our presence be prepared for the repercussions of a pullout? (I.e.: All out civil war, or possible genocide?)

Finally Iíll wrap this up by saying the following: ďIím not baiting anyone with this post. There has been lots of argument about the legitimacy of our presence in Afghanistan and our Allies in Iraq. Whether you agree with the mission or not is relevant to this post. I want to hear your ideas on a tactical pullout. How should we do it? Is it justifiable? Where do you stand on collateral damage?

Please donít respond with a WE SHOULDNíT BE THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE. I already understand your position, now I want to hear your ideas.

How about it?
Good to see you around again, Retired_Can_Soldier !

You're correct, you missed quite a few discussions and threads on the issue of the National Flag , and on the issue of media access to the repatriation of deceased members of the Canadian Forces ; most of those conversations have, however, for the most part, now ended (or are in the process of tapering off). It's too bad! I'm sure you would have had something to contribute.

Strategic Withdrawal

To be quite clear, before I speculate on how one could best executive removing the Canadian Forces from the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan , I would like to re-iterate that I support the current intervention, and that I think we have some work yet to do in that country before we should consider removing the presence of our courageous Forces. My speculation in terms of withdrawal in no way indicates a wish to do so.

I think that we could only remove our Forces from Afghanistan, in good conscience, if we were certain that we were not leaving the situation in such a state where it could degenerate into some sort of catastrophic disaster, or undo the hard work that our Forces have risked, and sometimes lost, their lives to accomplish. We would need to carefully co-ordinate our withdrawal with whatever authority happened to be in effective control of Afghanistan at the time, to ensure that trusted forces could be prepared to compensate, to the best of their ability, for the removed presence.

We would need to ensure that we were phasing out the Forces from the region, rather than immediately removing everyone at the same time. We should, in my opinion, remove some Forces, while phasing in trusted Afghani forces, and the remainder of the Canadian Forces in the area could show them the strategies and initiatives that are being used to further peace and stability in the region ó in this way, while withdrawing our Forces, we could ensure that the area continues, insofar as would be possible under the circumstances, to continue to move in a good direction.

There we go, my two cents.

We missed you, Retired_Can_Soldier !
RCS, I am happy you could spend some time with your son.

He is a brave man and deserves our thanks.
Thanks Five. A very well thought out response. I'm gonna be awol for another day or two, but will be back on Friday to see how badly I've been lambasted.

Thanks for the welcome sign.

I would think that a full withdrawl would be not the greatest idea. Lots of people get food, shelter and healthcare from our armies. If we leave, then things would go back to nearly the same way as they were before. Various groups would fight over power of the country(i.e. civil wars, ect.), and the unstable government there would be nearly useless.
Theres my two bits

Joeph was here
Quote: Originally Posted by joeph

I would think that a full withdrawl would be not the greatest idea. Lots of people get food, shelter and healthcare from our armies. If we leave, then things would go back to nearly the same way as they were before. Various groups would fight over power of the country(i.e. civil wars, ect.), and the unstable government there would be nearly useless.
Theres my two bits

Joeph was here

Yep. My point exactly. The lack of presence of those who want a pullout is very telling, but I'm a patient guy.


Just saw this message about your reunion with your son - I welcome him back home, thank him for his courage and service to his country, and wish him the best of fortune in what his next
choices are going to be in his life.


I often think the military are being used to condemn all they are fighting for - peace - democracy - the rights of humans to live with free will - and will leaving a country early or later make any difference? I think not. I hate to see Canadians become demonized as the American forces are.

Food and health care? Isn't that the work of the United Nations who continually criticize all things military while watching them do their work of care and sustenance of occupied lands?

Something (again) doesn't compute here????
I am in full support of a total withdrawal, and here's the way I see things shaking down..

We don't necessarily have to simply cut and run, so what we have to do is what the NDP (in particular) have been suggesting all along- define a few things, accomplish them and get out- and none of this "ensure that a perfectly stable democracy is formed" because, as much as progressive types like myself get called "crazy" (or moonbats or whatever) the idea that ANY occupying force can somehow instal a palatable, stable-for-the-ages government of any kind is sheer lunacy, and I think that is where a lot of the "heat" comes from on the left- the idea that we are somehow going to build an Arab Canada or US over there in Afghanistan OR Iraq is totally ridiculous and downright impossible, and I think that any thinking person of any political stripe would have to admit that...

SO we have to get a list of do-able things, make a timeline, inform the local "government" of our intentions and then follow through- in our case, with Afghanistan., this should be possible by the end of the year.. (and I think from here on, I'm gonna focus on Canada in Afghanistan just to I can avoid making too many similar-yet-different points)

The completely unstable nature of the country even at this moment will NOT change too much, even in the face of a full pullout- right now, the Taliban are gaining strength every day in the south, and violence against the occupation forces continues, while the "elected government" is full of warlords-
I think that if/when the "coalition" pulls out, be it in 2 months, years or decades, there WILL be a power struggle, out of which there will eventually be a new "system" formed... this is inevitable unless the west indeed wants to turn the country into a colony, in which case keeping permanent bases full of military hardware and troops would have to be maintained in order to continue to impose the artificially created "status quo" (which is, in essence, what is happening right now)

SO if the western powers are TRULY interested in a self-governed country, a full pullout is pretty much the only way, however I think that there is no-one among us who knows the true reasons for the mission (and I mean the REAL reasons, not any of the ones I've seen posted so far, here or anywhere else- there are a lot of things that I'm sure are factors, but I am sure I don't know the ACTUAL reason and I would bet that no-one here knows for sure either)

There would be collateral damage, but there's lots of warlords with centuries-old loyalties, centuries old grudges and a lot of warriors in their influence- it might not be the "way better" country we are supposedly trying to build, but I am pretty ocnfident that it would not be much worse, and the power struggle would likely last a lot less time than the current" mission" is looking like it will take....

And as for the future, I have no problem having diplomatic relations, sending aid and aid workers and encouraging stability once the dust clears (which it most certainly will) but if we are doing what we are supposedly doing over there right now, it'll never happen
Damn if you do, damn if you dont!

Sounds simple,but we are past the point of return.

We could have created our little(big) world with all the nice things Canadians need long time ago; like Switzerland or even Sweden .
Staying out of big time politics.

But our wise leaders in Government and Corporation did not manage well to have a clear separation to the superpower next door, and were allways supereager to enter into the sandbox to play and assert the "Canadian way" by getting a piece of the action. If not publicly then secretely for sure.

This started way before Pearson got his Nobel price; and the desire to stay under this halo is strong.

Just today the CBC reported how the shady investments our CPP agency is doing helps failed states like Birma.(Ivanhoe Mining..)
Think about TALISMAN and Dafour.

But in the end you the little guys will pay the piper.

Just wonder how much hassle the widows of the fallen Canadian
sodiers have to endure to get their insurance and widow pension, while the inquiry for Air Inidia bombing enriches the appointed judge with $400 to $600 per hour.

It is fun to wake up and hear the news and wunder what is next!!!