Ban on hired guns will complicate Afghan exit: PM

Praxius

Mass'Debater
Dec 18, 2007
10,677
161
63
Halifax, NS & Melbourne, VIC
Ban on hired guns will complicate Afghan exit: PM - CTV News

Prime Minister Stephen Harper says a ban on private security contractors in Afghanistan will "complicate" Canada's military exit from the country next year.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai announced last week that all private security contractors had to end their operations within four months.

His decree came months after Karzai promised Afghan voters that he would close down all private security operations in Afghanistan by the end of November 2011.

It is believed that as many as 40,000 people are working as private guards in Afghanistan.

But Karzai's aggressive timetable to put private security contractors out of business has left Harper concerned about how Ottawa will protect the diplomats and aid workers who will remain in Afghanistan beyond next year.

"I will certainly concede that President Karzai's recent decision will complicate some of those choices in the future but I'm not in a position today to answer those questions but we are working on them," he told reporters Tuesday at a news conference in Manitoba.

At the moment, private companies provide security at four Canadian operating bases in Afghanistan, which has cost Ottawa $9 million to provide this year.

Foreign Affairs also uses hired guards, but it not publicly known how much money that department spends on private security.

Canadian troops are due to pull out of Afghanistan in July of next year, an exit date the Harper government has said has been set in stone by parliamentary mandate.

But Ottawa has yet to decide precisely what its involvement in Afghanistan will be after the troops leave, other than it will be focused on diplomacy and development.

A recent Globe and Mail report published government documents that suggest Ottawa intends to spend up to $600 million to prevent Afghanistan from becoming a "haven for terrorists."
"But Karzai's aggressive timetable to put private security contractors out of business has left Harper concerned about how Ottawa will protect the diplomats and aid workers who will remain in Afghanistan beyond next year."

Pretty simple solution..... pull them out too.

But for some reason, my spidy senses are tingling over this comment about the time table "Complicating" things...... Harper stated the pull out date is set in stone, yet as we continue to get closer to the deadline, it's beginning to sound to me like it'll either be delayed or just won't happen.

Time will tell I suppose
 

Johnnny

Frontiersman
Jun 8, 2007
9,388
124
63
Third rock from the Sun
Whether you folks like it or not we need the private contractors to stay in Afghanistan for a good while till after we leave. If the private contractors are pulled out before we leave, it will complicate things alot cause we cant leave that much slack lying around and stretch our allies to the max. You people may hate America and the UN Resolution that brought us to Afghanistan but cant leave them hanging dry.

Personally i want us to leave by 2011 and i will be upset if we do stay longer, but id rather commit to our allies than turn our backs to them....
 

Praxius

Mass'Debater
Dec 18, 2007
10,677
161
63
Halifax, NS & Melbourne, VIC
Whether you folks like it or not we need the private contractors to stay in Afghanistan for a good while till after we leave. If the private contractors are pulled out before we leave, it will complicate things alot cause we cant leave that much slack lying around and stretch our allies to the max. You people may hate America and the UN Resolution that brought us to Afghanistan but cant leave them hanging dry.

Personally i want us to leave by 2011 and i will be upset if we do stay longer, but id rather commit to our allies than turn our backs to them....

And exactly how long would you be willing to not turn your back on them? The mission for us has already been extended a couple of times now..... shall we extend it again and again for another 10, 15, 20 years?

We're not the only country with plans on pulling out around 2011, and with a mission such as this with no real objectives or tangible goals.... it can continue on forever.

That's the problem with wars like this..... in order to have it end, you need to know what the target is, what the objectives are, how to accomplish those objectives and have some sort of time line to accomplish those objectives...... BEFORE you start the war..... otherwise you end up with this sort of mess that has no clear objectives other then to continue the "War on Terr'ism"

The excuse of not turning our backs on our allies have been parroted and used since we sent our troops over there and was the excuse used to extend the mission as long as we have already.

The problem with the Mercs being used in the country is that like in Iraq, there's very little accountability on their shoulders for their actions and when they do something stupid..... somehow the red tape states they're out of legal jurisdiction since they're not in the countries they originated from...... and while various changes over the years have been made to show the public there's some level of accountability, in the end, very few are ever charged or somehow held accountable for their actions.

That's why the Afghan government wants them out of their country.... and regardless of how it may or may not complicate our troops withdraw from the country in 2011, imo, too damn bad...... that's the date, as Harper said, it's set in stone...... perhaps they should have thought about this complication long ago by looking at what happened in Iraq with their mercs.

And regardless if they try and keep most of our troops there with some stupid technical label of "Assist & Advise" or "Training" they're not fooling anybody..... they'll still be sent into combat situations to "Assist & Advise" the Afghan troops leading the charge...... even if they're not leading the charge for the Afghans, they'll still be in or very near a combat situation and will most likely take fire from the Taliban from time to time....... and if something like that happens, you can bet a lot of Canadians will be a tad PO'd about it.

I think it's high time we stop thinking and worrying about other country's best interests and start thinking and worrying about our own interests and our own troops.

As far as I'm concerned, we did our part for much longer then we originally planned to and extended it twice already...... if our allies can't figure their sh*t out by now, what makes you think they ever will?
 

Cliffy

Standing Member
Nov 19, 2008
44,850
193
63
Nakusp, BC
We (including NATO) went into Afghanistan on BS premises, set up a puppet government that is not so puppet anymore, re-established poppy growth as their number one export crop, blew the countries infrastructure all to heel and then claimed we were there to rebuild their infrastructure. The Taliban were friendly and were financially supported by the US until they banned poppy growth. Suddenly they became enemy number one. Now that poppy growth has risen 100 fold and the CIAs drug flow has been restored, none of NATOs troops have a reason to be there.