Afghanistan and Iraq - stay until we win

[Karlin]

President GW Bush and PM Harper have both decalred that their military forces will stay in Iraq and Afghanistan "until the terrorists are beaten".

Ya, RIGHT
...as IF
NOT going to happen - the "terrorists" will be there the day after we leave, whenever that is. One of the terrorists favorite ploys is to wait it out until the attacks are over and then crawl out of their hidey-holes to strike again. They will never be "finished off", but thats exactly the declared goal of Bush and Harper.

Perhaps Harper and Bush should offer up some definition of "winning" in Iraq and Afghanistan, like "no attacks for a whole day", or "when there are less killings this month than last month". A laying down of weapons and terrorists coming out with their hands up isn't going to happen in this war.

But neither leader is offering up any definition of winning, which leads us to see that they are doing all they can to keep their troops in those nations, basically forever. "We will leave when the job is done, and not before" means they are staying forever.

If that was the basis on which they ask for the public's support for these missions [to stay forever], it would not be had. So, they steer us away from definitions, from identifyable goals.

Here is an article that tells why the NATO and USA forces are not going to "win"

Canada's Afghan mission:
Experts hold out little hope that the NATO-led campaign will succeed.
http://www.straightgoods.ca/ViewFeature6.cfm?REF=531
'
quote from that link showing the Taliban tactic of waiting it out:

"Many analysts actually expected something of a Taliban comeback last year. That really didn't happen to any large extent. It happened on a much bigger scale this year. There is an inference that in fact the reason it didn't happen last year was quite deliberate on the part of the Taliban. They were actually conserving and developing their resources for large scale operations this year. In other words, they are planning, not just months and months, but year to year."

Harper and Bush must be taken to task on this issue of "winning". As it is, they have created a way to skirt public opinion on how long the military occupation of those Islamic nations [that happen to be rich in oil] should last. Are we going to let them get away with this scam?

Karlin

PS - for every Afghan or Iraqi killed by Americans there will be about four more terrorists created, to revenge their deaths. The resistance strength of the terrorists grows, it does not diminish, the longer we stay there.

 

[Colpy]

I agree with your post to this extent: both Bush and Harper are foolish for leading people to expect some definible final "victory" over terrorism in the region.

As I have said before, keeping the Taliban out of power makes our effort in Afghanistan a success. Stabilizing the country would not only be a success, it would be a miracle.

However, we are commited to staying at least until the Afghan Army has enough of a hold on enough of the country to keep the Taliban on the defensive.

 

[CDNBear]

I too agree. I was not for US involvement in Iraq, I was however devistated by 9/11 and backed Bush to the wall on the invasion of Afganistan.

In hind sight, which is always 20/20, I erred. It's a fools war. But I would not call for the Troops to be pulled at this point. That would give ammunition to the enemy. I do however support our Troops whole heartedly. They have commited themselves to the task and are performing their duties as only Canadian soldiers can. With honour, courage and compassion.

 

[gopher]

Time to get the hell out, impeach and remove Bush, hold him on trial for treason, and to conduct a Nuremburg Tribunal for criminals like him, Blair, and Aznar.