A Thought About Our Troops
- Thread starter bluealberta
- Start date
Babysitting the Mayor of Kabul eh? That's all we did? Man are you clueless buddy. That was ONE aspect of our role in Kabul. In addition to providing close support to Kabul Police and local Governing officials, we conducted raids on weapons warehouses, provided security for the national election, knocked out bomb making facilities. We sent scout snipers in to the foot hills surrounding the city to observe movement at night. We deployed a recon team for 30 days in to the mountains to track and monitor militants. We deployed on three (3) combat operations during my roto to knock out Taliban operating basis in the hills surrounding Kabul. Furthermore we conducted long-range patrols to remote villages to both sweep and secure them from militants. During one of those visits my convoy was attacked while we handed out school supplies. You base all your "knowledge" on just what you've seen on the news. Are you even aware of how many "aggressive" deaths the CF suffered while in Kabul? The answer is three (out of a total of 8 ). Jaime Murphy was killed by a suicide bomber and Berenfeenger and Short were killed by an IED. That translates in to roughly 37% of our combat deaths. You think babysitting the mayor would result in deaths such as these? No bitwhys, you're typical of the Canadian public, utterly out to lunch on what exactly we're doing, and what we've done, in Afghanistan. The mission, since 2001, has been combat. We've fought militants since we landed in that nation, right up until today. I will never argue that Kandahar is more dangerous than Kabul, it is, but the mission hasn't changed, just the threat level.
Lastly, with regard to the PRT and Combat Troops. Perhaps you're unaware, but the PRT, is mostly combat troops. Their chief goal is the stabilization of Kandahar, Gumbad, and Helmand Provinces. The name is something of a misnomer, and no actually "reconstruction" is conducted by the team. Their first and foremost goal is the security of their respected patrol routes and the surrounding villages. So saying there's a change in the ratio of combat troops to PRT members is like saying there's a change in the ratio of police officers to members of the police force. But i'm sure you already knew what exactly the PRT was didn't you bitwhys?
Lastly, with regard to the PRT and Combat Troops. Perhaps you're unaware, but the PRT, is mostly combat troops. Their chief goal is the stabilization of Kandahar, Gumbad, and Helmand Provinces. The name is something of a misnomer, and no actually "reconstruction" is conducted by the team. Their first and foremost goal is the security of their respected patrol routes and the surrounding villages. So saying there's a change in the ratio of combat troops to PRT members is like saying there's a change in the ratio of police officers to members of the police force. But i'm sure you already knew what exactly the PRT was didn't you bitwhys?
Re: RE: A Thought About Our Troops
Its a damned allegory, you people, get over it. If you want to take things totally literally, go ahead, but some of you need to get a life. You have the right to disagree with the government, but you do not have a right to diss our soldiers. None at all.
thecdn said:
Its a damned allegory, you people, get over it. If you want to take things totally literally, go ahead, but some of you need to get a life. You have the right to disagree with the government, but you do not have a right to diss our soldiers. None at all.
Re: RE: A Thought About Our Troops
You quote says nothing about a mission. It clearly states that your support for the troops ended on the 17th of last month.
Even for you, this is quite clear. Wiggle, wiggle.
BitWhys said:
You quote says nothing about a mission. It clearly states that your support for the troops ended on the 17th of last month.
Even for you, this is quite clear. Wiggle, wiggle.
Re: RE: A Thought About Our Troops
Yeah, right. Wiggle wiggle. :roll:
I repeat your quote:
Most of us get what you said. You oughta be proud. You were very clear and concise.
BitWhys said:
Yeah, right. Wiggle wiggle. :roll:
I repeat your quote:
Most of us get what you said. You oughta be proud. You were very clear and concise.
BitWhys said:
Hahaha amazing answer to my reponse to your previous post bitwhys. Here's what you wrote:
I responded to that, and utterly shot down what you said. So, in affect, my "point" was to prove you have no idea what you're talking about. I think that's highlighted by your response, or lack there of. Your retort?
Mogz said:
that's what I thought. just making sure.
neither does this guy then (and please note the tense)...
Mr. Dave MacKenzie (Oxford, CPC) - November 15, 2005
the one time I decide to take a Conservative at his word and you have to go and gun it down. go figure. :roll:
everyone is well aware that our troops (notice I left out the quotation marks this time) haven't been running around with blue helmets all this time. some of us are also well aware there's a marked difference between holding a line and moving it, as well as the difference in the costs involved.