So tell us then, we pull our troops, as with all NATO members then the Taliban return, now how do you propose to fight poverty? Please save the usual anti global , US, blah blah rant and give us your actual plan.
Canada’s cost in Afghanistan!
- Thread starter Socrates the Greek
- Start date
Re: RE: Canada’s cost in Afghanistan!
Maybe he has a plan at SocratesTheGreek.com? Like when John Kerry said he had a plan at JohnKerry.comLineman said:
Re: RE: Canada’s cost in Afghanistan!
It is interesting lineman; you worry about the Taliban coming back while your people Harper and his conservatives can sit there and think that they are in full accomplishment of what they promised the people on election night. Well let me tell you my fellow Canadians. For Harper it was a priority to get heavily involved in Afghanistan, while an election promise was broken in helping all the victims that were failed miserably by a blood bank that had gone wrong and sown to be incompetent. Harper promised to all the suffering victims if he got elected he will immediately get compensation on the way in order to ease the suffering these people are living with day to day. Four months have gone by and Harper is on a mission of power hungry tourism in Afghanistan to show the world here is the Canadian Military PM while under the carpet sits the persons infected with hepatitis C from no fault of their own. Harper makes a great opportunist as well a great Hypocrite.
I will do to you what I do not want done to me!
War sucks, and if you justify the Afghani war while your Canadian country men are suffering from a problem the government brought upon them, than Lineman your priorities are all screwed up.
You and Johnny the winner.
How can you look at your self’s and allow your people here at home suffer from no fault of their own and instead you sit here telling some of us that because we don’t love war we are bent in your view. What a bunch of suffering self serving happy hypocrites. Same on you.
And you know what Lineman & Johnny? I am only repeating my self, if the Americans were not in Afghanistan and they were in Iran Canada will be in I ran, almost the little boy that wants to be a big boy and the little boy also knows that will not be possible and instead the little boy hands around with the big boy and while with the big boy the little boy talks tuff, while alone the little boy is more humble. So the Americans have influenced Conservative Governments her North America and abroad.
A famous close for Bush is “are you with us or not?” What a manipulative question. If you are not with us you will be left out. Garbage that smell, Bush has the lowest rating with in his two terms and that alone must confirm that the American voter may be considering a taste of the Democratic Machine, enough of the Republican bang bang you are dead and I take your oils. Sad, very sad and then sadder to try and justify that we are there to help the poor people.
No, the real reason is to brown nose to Bush, not the poor people that will die in the hands of the Taliban. What about our infected people why would they loose priority in this country and they instead are subjected to die while we try to save the People of Afghanistan? While we sacrifice our men and women of our military plus our infected Canadians. Come on People think think a little harder what is happening here is an insult, to kill two Canadians to save one Afghani. So Sad.
Lineman said:
It is interesting lineman; you worry about the Taliban coming back while your people Harper and his conservatives can sit there and think that they are in full accomplishment of what they promised the people on election night. Well let me tell you my fellow Canadians. For Harper it was a priority to get heavily involved in Afghanistan, while an election promise was broken in helping all the victims that were failed miserably by a blood bank that had gone wrong and sown to be incompetent. Harper promised to all the suffering victims if he got elected he will immediately get compensation on the way in order to ease the suffering these people are living with day to day. Four months have gone by and Harper is on a mission of power hungry tourism in Afghanistan to show the world here is the Canadian Military PM while under the carpet sits the persons infected with hepatitis C from no fault of their own. Harper makes a great opportunist as well a great Hypocrite.
I will do to you what I do not want done to me!
War sucks, and if you justify the Afghani war while your Canadian country men are suffering from a problem the government brought upon them, than Lineman your priorities are all screwed up.
You and Johnny the winner.
How can you look at your self’s and allow your people here at home suffer from no fault of their own and instead you sit here telling some of us that because we don’t love war we are bent in your view. What a bunch of suffering self serving happy hypocrites. Same on you.
And you know what Lineman & Johnny? I am only repeating my self, if the Americans were not in Afghanistan and they were in Iran Canada will be in I ran, almost the little boy that wants to be a big boy and the little boy also knows that will not be possible and instead the little boy hands around with the big boy and while with the big boy the little boy talks tuff, while alone the little boy is more humble. So the Americans have influenced Conservative Governments her North America and abroad.
A famous close for Bush is “are you with us or not?” What a manipulative question. If you are not with us you will be left out. Garbage that smell, Bush has the lowest rating with in his two terms and that alone must confirm that the American voter may be considering a taste of the Democratic Machine, enough of the Republican bang bang you are dead and I take your oils. Sad, very sad and then sadder to try and justify that we are there to help the poor people.
No, the real reason is to brown nose to Bush, not the poor people that will die in the hands of the Taliban. What about our infected people why would they loose priority in this country and they instead are subjected to die while we try to save the People of Afghanistan? While we sacrifice our men and women of our military plus our infected Canadians. Come on People think think a little harder what is happening here is an insult, to kill two Canadians to save one Afghani. So Sad.
May 25, 2006
"Bush Prepares to Cut and Run in Afghanistan"
http://tinyurl.com/npoyd
When we see Bush leaving Afghanistan and Canada moving in, what should we think? Are we being taken for a ride? Left to do the dirty work, or possibly be left holding the LOSERS bag?
Is it now a quagmire with no possiblity of winning?
What would constitute a victory for Canada in Afghanistan? is it possible, ever?
Cut and Run would leave a lot of Afghan civilians without protection from the Taliban, who would try to take over government again if given the chance.
Maybe we should take a vote, have a referandum in Afghanistan, and really ASK the citizens if they need or want us there "to protect them from their own radicals".
Maybe we have been told this is what they want, without anyone ever actually asking them.
ok, your turn again!
Karlin
"Bush Prepares to Cut and Run in Afghanistan"
http://tinyurl.com/npoyd
When we see Bush leaving Afghanistan and Canada moving in, what should we think? Are we being taken for a ride? Left to do the dirty work, or possibly be left holding the LOSERS bag?
Is it now a quagmire with no possiblity of winning?
What would constitute a victory for Canada in Afghanistan? is it possible, ever?
Cut and Run would leave a lot of Afghan civilians without protection from the Taliban, who would try to take over government again if given the chance.
Maybe we should take a vote, have a referandum in Afghanistan, and really ASK the citizens if they need or want us there "to protect them from their own radicals".
Maybe we have been told this is what they want, without anyone ever actually asking them.
ok, your turn again!
Karlin
Re: RE: Canada’s cost in Afghanistan!
You're answering questions I did not ask
So, one more time, What is your plan to end poverty in Afghanistan?
Socrates the Greek said:
You're answering questions I did not ask
So, one more time, What is your plan to end poverty in Afghanistan?
Re: RE: Canada’s cost in Afghanistan!
Hey Lineman, if you are so abscessed with the Afghanistan situation causing you to completely deny consideration of an election promise by Harper. Why don’t you go to Afghanistan and take care of business in stead seating on the fence trying to convince me that war in a foreign country is justified because you want to watch the old western movies with the lone ranger. Poverty in Afghanistan is not the title of my post. My post is about the hallow phoney promise Harper made to the HC infected Canadians. Where is the money to help them? Poverty in Afghanistan gets you moving while you can’t look after your own before you will squander young men and women to prove nothing. Talking about priorities all screwed up or what?
Lineman said:
Hey Lineman, if you are so abscessed with the Afghanistan situation causing you to completely deny consideration of an election promise by Harper. Why don’t you go to Afghanistan and take care of business in stead seating on the fence trying to convince me that war in a foreign country is justified because you want to watch the old western movies with the lone ranger. Poverty in Afghanistan is not the title of my post. My post is about the hallow phoney promise Harper made to the HC infected Canadians. Where is the money to help them? Poverty in Afghanistan gets you moving while you can’t look after your own before you will squander young men and women to prove nothing. Talking about priorities all screwed up or what?
Shame to any one who thinks war is the answer to fight poverty
This was the closing line in your post. Since you think supporting this war is shameful you must have an other option on how to help these people. All I have asked is "what's your plan?" and I've asked you to keep your answer focused on my question. Simple question but obviously not a simple answer is it. If you don't have an alternate plan then simply say so.
This was the closing line in your post. Since you think supporting this war is shameful you must have an other option on how to help these people. All I have asked is "what's your plan?" and I've asked you to keep your answer focused on my question. Simple question but obviously not a simple answer is it. If you don't have an alternate plan then simply say so.
RE: Canada’s cost in Afgh
Afghanistan Rising Against The Occupation:
“When This Sort Of Mass Resistance Starts, It Means That It Is A Collective Decision Of Afghans”
“The Whole Environment Is Now Conducive To Resistance”
“The Jirgas Are Unanimous: There Should Be All-Out War In Afghanistan”
May 26, 2006 By Syed Saleem Shahzad, Asia Times [Excerpts]
KARACHI
The bulk of the fighting in Afghanistan in the past week, which has claimed more than 300 lives among the Taliban, US-led forces, the Afghan National Army (ANA) and civilians, has taken place in the southern Pashtun heartland of the country.
However, the Taliban's spring offensive is fast turning into a massive resistance against the foreign presence all over Afghanistan, and already some influential characters are jockeying for a post-spring role.
And the indications are that the resistance could transcend a simple Taliban-led insurgency to evolve into a powerful Islamic movement.
Thousands of Taliban have emerged in the provinces of Helmand, Ghazni, Urgzan, Kandahar, Kunar and Zabul, and in all of them the story is the same: where allied forces have taken on the Taliban, the ANA holds the "fort". In places beyond the access of allied forces, the Taliban are in control.
In the less-populated Farah and Nimroze provinces, where the Taliban have a nominal presence, violent incidents against the ANA have begun. The same is true in western Herat province on the border with Iran.
Former acting Afghan premier Engineer Ahmad Shah Ahmadzai commented by telephone to Asia Times Online from Kabul, "There are now sporadic incidents of violence in northern Afghanistan. We are hearing news that rockets are being fired on coalition forces in Maidan Shahr, and there have been incidents of bomb blasts and violence in the north.”
[A]sia Times Online spoke to a man who knows Afghan society and most of its characters inside out, former Pakistani army general and director general of the Inter-Services Intelligence Hamid Gul. Gul has for many years been associated with the various groups of the Afghan resistance, since the days it fought against the Soviets in the 1980s.
"Firstly, when this sort of mass resistance starts, it means that it is a collective decision of Afghans. So you can see that though the Taliban resistance is centered in a very specific area, sporadic incidents have erupted all over.
“To me, the Taliban may be one group, the HIA (Hizb-i-Islami) of Gulbuddin is a second and Khalis' HIA would be another.
"But there are tribes as well who would be digging in against allied forces in their specific areas. This is a specific Afghan style of rebellion in which parties fight throughout Afghanistan under their flag, but the tribes restrict themselves to their areas. All fight for the same cause, but under their own disciplines. All fighting factions develop a sort of understanding with each other," Gul said.
This kind of "netwar" is very much the case in southern Afghanistan. The Taliban are in action under their commanders and the overall field command of Jalaluddin Haqqani, while the HIA is fighting under its commanders and various tribes are coordinating with the resistance.
"This is just the tip of the iceberg you are watching; this situation will further escalate as the whole environment is now conducive to resistance," said Gul. "Russia is annoyed with the Americans, Iran is hostile to Western interests and Pakistan is no more in a position to adhere to American directives.
Contacts in the Pakistani tribal areas of Bajaur and North Waziristan tell Asia Times Online that at least seven different tribal jirgas (councils) are meeting on a daily basis among the Afghan population.
And Miranshah Bazaar in North Waziristan is once again full of posters of Osama bin Laden and Hekmatyar, while slogans are written in support of the Taliban.
The jirgas are unanimous: there should be all-out war in Afghanistan.
Five Canadians Wounded In Gumbad Roadside Bombing:
Idiot Canadian General Calls IEDs “Crude”
May 25, 2006 KANDAHAR, Afghanistan (CP)
The latest roadside bomb in Afghanistan wounded five Canadian soldiers and an Afghan Thursday in an area where Taliban insurgents have repeatedly used explosive devices to attack coalition vehicles forced to move along certain routes by the rugged terrain.
Their light armoured vehicle, or LAV III, took the brunt of the explosion and likely shielded them from more serious injuries, said Lieut. Mark MacIntyre, a spokesman for the Canadian Forces at the main coalition base at Kandahar Airfield.
The soldiers and their Afghan interpreter were evacuated from the blast site in the Gumbad area to the Kandahar base hospital for treatment.
Asked about the Canadians, MacIntyre said: "All five are in stable condition with non-life-threatening injuries." "I can tell you that of the five soldiers that were wounded, four were able to call home immediately after the attack to let their next of kin know they were OK."
Afghanistan Rising Against The Occupation:
“When This Sort Of Mass Resistance Starts, It Means That It Is A Collective Decision Of Afghans”
“The Whole Environment Is Now Conducive To Resistance”
“The Jirgas Are Unanimous: There Should Be All-Out War In Afghanistan”
May 26, 2006 By Syed Saleem Shahzad, Asia Times [Excerpts]
KARACHI
The bulk of the fighting in Afghanistan in the past week, which has claimed more than 300 lives among the Taliban, US-led forces, the Afghan National Army (ANA) and civilians, has taken place in the southern Pashtun heartland of the country.
However, the Taliban's spring offensive is fast turning into a massive resistance against the foreign presence all over Afghanistan, and already some influential characters are jockeying for a post-spring role.
And the indications are that the resistance could transcend a simple Taliban-led insurgency to evolve into a powerful Islamic movement.
Thousands of Taliban have emerged in the provinces of Helmand, Ghazni, Urgzan, Kandahar, Kunar and Zabul, and in all of them the story is the same: where allied forces have taken on the Taliban, the ANA holds the "fort". In places beyond the access of allied forces, the Taliban are in control.
In the less-populated Farah and Nimroze provinces, where the Taliban have a nominal presence, violent incidents against the ANA have begun. The same is true in western Herat province on the border with Iran.
Former acting Afghan premier Engineer Ahmad Shah Ahmadzai commented by telephone to Asia Times Online from Kabul, "There are now sporadic incidents of violence in northern Afghanistan. We are hearing news that rockets are being fired on coalition forces in Maidan Shahr, and there have been incidents of bomb blasts and violence in the north.”
[A]sia Times Online spoke to a man who knows Afghan society and most of its characters inside out, former Pakistani army general and director general of the Inter-Services Intelligence Hamid Gul. Gul has for many years been associated with the various groups of the Afghan resistance, since the days it fought against the Soviets in the 1980s.
"Firstly, when this sort of mass resistance starts, it means that it is a collective decision of Afghans. So you can see that though the Taliban resistance is centered in a very specific area, sporadic incidents have erupted all over.
“To me, the Taliban may be one group, the HIA (Hizb-i-Islami) of Gulbuddin is a second and Khalis' HIA would be another.
"But there are tribes as well who would be digging in against allied forces in their specific areas. This is a specific Afghan style of rebellion in which parties fight throughout Afghanistan under their flag, but the tribes restrict themselves to their areas. All fight for the same cause, but under their own disciplines. All fighting factions develop a sort of understanding with each other," Gul said.
This kind of "netwar" is very much the case in southern Afghanistan. The Taliban are in action under their commanders and the overall field command of Jalaluddin Haqqani, while the HIA is fighting under its commanders and various tribes are coordinating with the resistance.
"This is just the tip of the iceberg you are watching; this situation will further escalate as the whole environment is now conducive to resistance," said Gul. "Russia is annoyed with the Americans, Iran is hostile to Western interests and Pakistan is no more in a position to adhere to American directives.
Contacts in the Pakistani tribal areas of Bajaur and North Waziristan tell Asia Times Online that at least seven different tribal jirgas (councils) are meeting on a daily basis among the Afghan population.
And Miranshah Bazaar in North Waziristan is once again full of posters of Osama bin Laden and Hekmatyar, while slogans are written in support of the Taliban.
The jirgas are unanimous: there should be all-out war in Afghanistan.
Five Canadians Wounded In Gumbad Roadside Bombing:
Idiot Canadian General Calls IEDs “Crude”
May 25, 2006 KANDAHAR, Afghanistan (CP)
The latest roadside bomb in Afghanistan wounded five Canadian soldiers and an Afghan Thursday in an area where Taliban insurgents have repeatedly used explosive devices to attack coalition vehicles forced to move along certain routes by the rugged terrain.
Their light armoured vehicle, or LAV III, took the brunt of the explosion and likely shielded them from more serious injuries, said Lieut. Mark MacIntyre, a spokesman for the Canadian Forces at the main coalition base at Kandahar Airfield.
The soldiers and their Afghan interpreter were evacuated from the blast site in the Gumbad area to the Kandahar base hospital for treatment.
Asked about the Canadians, MacIntyre said: "All five are in stable condition with non-life-threatening injuries." "I can tell you that of the five soldiers that were wounded, four were able to call home immediately after the attack to let their next of kin know they were OK."
RE: Canada’s cost in Afgh
Massive resistance? Hardly. Massive was the Battle of Shah-e-Kot in 2002. This is pretty piss poor. As for all over Afghanistan? The person who wrote that obviously hasn't been to the North. Then again what would I know, only having been there and gotten the medal. FYI, look at the name of the guy writing the article. Syed Saleem Shahzad Biased much? Too fun
Massive resistance? Hardly. Massive was the Battle of Shah-e-Kot in 2002. This is pretty piss poor. As for all over Afghanistan? The person who wrote that obviously hasn't been to the North. Then again what would I know, only having been there and gotten the medal. FYI, look at the name of the guy writing the article. Syed Saleem Shahzad Biased much? Too fun
RE: Canada’s cost in Afgh
Hey Mogz I got a medal once, know what it's worth, nothing. Your comment about the author of the article is racsist. It'll be interesting to hear from you in about six months when your expert analysis will be just as skewed for the empire as it is now. Do yourself a favour and look up the meaning of brainwashed.
Hey Mogz I got a medal once, know what it's worth, nothing. Your comment about the author of the article is racsist. It'll be interesting to hear from you in about six months when your expert analysis will be just as skewed for the empire as it is now. Do yourself a favour and look up the meaning of brainwashed.
You're so full of :bs: !Socrates the Greek said:Johnny Utah said:Bloody Hell you're more smug then Clooney!Socrates the Greek said:
Yeah North Korea is bad, duh! But Canada can't even begin to make a difference there as we are committed to Afghanistan so there's other routes Canada will have to take as we can't simply abandon one country for another such as with Darfur..
My Ass Will be Grass? Wow listen to the tuff guy.. :lol:
Canada is not in Afghanistan because of Bush, so stop using we are there because us neocons are kissing Bush's Ass it makes you look like a fool everytime you say that..
Canada is in Afghanistan because of 9/11 as Canadians were killed also or did you forget that? You have made it clear you don't give a dam about the Afghanis because you would rather have the Taliban in control publicly executing women because you're selfish!
You hate Canada being in Afghanistan because the United States is there with the rest of NATO, you also hate it because the Liberals are no longer calling the shots so you come up with "It's Harper's War" :bs:
Where's you're links that say 65% percent of Canadians are against the Mission? There are no links are there? It's nothing more then more :bs: coming from you
Pwned! Keep Meltingdown "SO-CRAAAAAATES!!!!!"
Johnny war sucks, it doesn’t matter what side of the fence you are on, war sucks, and can you honestly believe that Canada is in Afghanistan because of NATO? If the Americans were not in Afghanistan Canada would be staying home, wake up Johnny humanity doesn’t have to kill each other, in order to set things straight. Do the research it is 65% of the Canadian people want the troops to come home, Bush’s popularity is plunging lower than expected, and truth is Harper in on the same path, Johnny in spite of the fact that you don’t like fence sitters like me you have the right to your opinion, and I know I am right, war sucks Johnny!!
There was no 65% percent of Canadians against Canada being in Afghanistan expect in you're head.. :lol:
Research this you're Pwned! :tard:
Johnny Utah said:You're so full of :bs: !Socrates the Greek said:Johnny Utah said:Bloody Hell you're more smug then Clooney!Socrates the Greek said:
Yeah North Korea is bad, duh! But Canada can't even begin to make a difference there as we are committed to Afghanistan so there's other routes Canada will have to take as we can't simply abandon one country for another such as with Darfur..
My Ass Will be Grass? Wow listen to the tuff guy.. :lol:
Canada is not in Afghanistan because of Bush, so stop using we are there because us neocons are kissing Bush's Ass it makes you look like a fool everytime you say that..
Canada is in Afghanistan because of 9/11 as Canadians were killed also or did you forget that? You have made it clear you don't give a dam about the Afghanis because you would rather have the Taliban in control publicly executing women because you're selfish!
You hate Canada being in Afghanistan because the United States is there with the rest of NATO, you also hate it because the Liberals are no longer calling the shots so you come up with "It's Harper's War" :bs:
Where's you're links that say 65% percent of Canadians are against the Mission? There are no links are there? It's nothing more then more :bs: coming from you
Pwned! Keep Meltingdown "SO-CRAAAAAATES!!!!!"
Johnny war sucks, it doesn’t matter what side of the fence you are on, war sucks, and can you honestly believe that Canada is in Afghanistan because of NATO? If the Americans were not in Afghanistan Canada would be staying home, wake up Johnny humanity doesn’t have to kill each other, in order to set things straight. Do the research it is 65% of the Canadian people want the troops to come home, Bush’s popularity is plunging lower than expected, and truth is Harper in on the same path, Johnny in spite of the fact that you don’t like fence sitters like me you have the right to your opinion, and I know I am right, war sucks Johnny!!
There was no 65% percent of Canadians against Canada being in Afghanistan expect in you're head.. :lol:
Research this you're Pwned! :tard:
Hey Johnny what are you doing with the Israeli flag, in general Jews are very friendly and happy people, you come across so angry man, you will enjoy life if you can get rid of your anger. Johnny you can do it just except that being a dork it doesn’t open doors. No pun intended but a meaningful discussion is what this form of communication between people is all about, not anger combined with hypocrisy. Hey Harper has the right to Government, much like the next politician, to trouble starts when the guy says I will give you good government when in fact 100 later his report card is nothing to brag about on the final analysis. So, send your anger to the storage depot, and vote for the Liberals in the next election.
STG wrote:
wake up Johnny humanity doesn’t have to kill each other, in order to set things straight
Again a reference to another option besides the war and you also make reference to meaningful discussions so let's have one. I'll ask again, how do you propose to do this in Afghanistan?
wake up Johnny humanity doesn’t have to kill each other, in order to set things straight
Again a reference to another option besides the war and you also make reference to meaningful discussions so let's have one. I'll ask again, how do you propose to do this in Afghanistan?
Re: RE: Canada’s cost in Afghanistan!
Lineman in the eyes of the world to be self appointed to specific missions, particularly when in some regions the presence of foreign military forces have divided countries like Iraq in to a civil war, while the Americans are in thought ready to abandon the mission in Iraq, so the answerer is short and to the point, Afghanistan is not our project, we are only there because Harper wants to be recognized by a president whose days are numbered. Again Lineman, look at the math we are killing two Canadians to save one Afghani, one Canadian is the soldier, and the other is the Hepatitis C victims, they are dieing due to luck of funding, because they were promised by Harper that he will look after them, when instead Harper found it more opportune and appropriate to put the funding forward in supporting the Afghan mission in order to entice Bush. So again Lineman we start by taking care of our people here at home before we run off around the globe looking for a fight that has messy consequences, think about it Lineman, think about it war sucks.
Lineman said:
Lineman in the eyes of the world to be self appointed to specific missions, particularly when in some regions the presence of foreign military forces have divided countries like Iraq in to a civil war, while the Americans are in thought ready to abandon the mission in Iraq, so the answerer is short and to the point, Afghanistan is not our project, we are only there because Harper wants to be recognized by a president whose days are numbered. Again Lineman, look at the math we are killing two Canadians to save one Afghani, one Canadian is the soldier, and the other is the Hepatitis C victims, they are dieing due to luck of funding, because they were promised by Harper that he will look after them, when instead Harper found it more opportune and appropriate to put the funding forward in supporting the Afghan mission in order to entice Bush. So again Lineman we start by taking care of our people here at home before we run off around the globe looking for a fight that has messy consequences, think about it Lineman, think about it war sucks.
Haha you're saying I come across angry when in you're past posts you're the one who seemed to be very angry blaming Bush, Harper for Canada being in Afghanistan..Socrates the Greek said:
Again I am waiting for a link by you that backs uo you're statement 65% of Canadians are against the Mission in Afghanistan, oh wait that was a :bs: statement from you wasn't it? :lol:
Ya know what Johnny, I don't think we'll ever get an answer to any of our questions. STG is only here to spout his own agenda. Guess he's not ready for a meaniful discussion because the only thing meaningful to him is his own opinion.
"in general Jews are very friendly and happy people"
Racial stereotyping? Tsk Tsk
"in general Jews are very friendly and happy people"
Racial stereotyping? Tsk Tsk
Re: RE: Canada’s cost in Afghanistan!
Hey Lineman and Johnny, at this point of the conversation we are not going anywhere productive, simply because I don’t see Bush and Harper fit to govern, while Bush’s ratings are at an all-time low, and with Harper on a minority, hey we for sure are not talking about the saviours of time in political international history.
As for stereotyping the Jews, I happen to have many Jewish friends and let me tell you guys they are happy people, if you think that is wrong me making such a statement well, let others judge me on that.
For sure we will realise one thing in the future, keep in mind Viet Nam became an unforgettable night mare for the US back then, and for many who stubbornly choose to believe otherwise for Afghanistan, well guys let me tell you if Bush decides to pull out of Afghanistan we will meat again to discus the failure of another war, while Harper will be asking Bush where do we go next? I they both stay in office that is, Bush is about to get his walking papers and Harper we are still on a test drive with Harper. Socrates the Greek is not dreaming, pragmatic thinking is my bag,"Not ideology but pragmatic politics"
Lineman said:
Hey Lineman and Johnny, at this point of the conversation we are not going anywhere productive, simply because I don’t see Bush and Harper fit to govern, while Bush’s ratings are at an all-time low, and with Harper on a minority, hey we for sure are not talking about the saviours of time in political international history.
As for stereotyping the Jews, I happen to have many Jewish friends and let me tell you guys they are happy people, if you think that is wrong me making such a statement well, let others judge me on that.
For sure we will realise one thing in the future, keep in mind Viet Nam became an unforgettable night mare for the US back then, and for many who stubbornly choose to believe otherwise for Afghanistan, well guys let me tell you if Bush decides to pull out of Afghanistan we will meat again to discus the failure of another war, while Harper will be asking Bush where do we go next? I they both stay in office that is, Bush is about to get his walking papers and Harper we are still on a test drive with Harper. Socrates the Greek is not dreaming, pragmatic thinking is my bag,"Not ideology but pragmatic politics"
Re: RE: Canada’s cost in Afgh
Perhaps your medal in basket weaving means nothing, however the one I was given, at least to me, gives me the rights to discuss with merit something I was a part of. My comment wasn't racist, it's highly accurate. To me, someone who spent a great deal of time in South West Asis, the article is utterly moronic. It's chalk full of inaccuracy, and clearly anti-coalition. I merely pointed out the corelation between the spin of the article and the name of the person writting it. If that bothers you, I don't care. Anywho, you're right, my analysis won't change, because it's based on life experience, what's your experience based on? How old are you beaver? I won't expect an answer on those. You'll just sulk until you find some other biased article to post :lol:
Now to more important things:
I find it funny how people often deem the War in Afghanistan a "failure of a war", or fall one step short and deem it a failure in the making, when the end is no where in site. I myself find it rather a presumptuous conclusion to make, especially by individuals sitting in North America, utterly removed from the war. I've come to realise that more often than not the same people making such baseless claims, are those with a deep dislike of the United States and/or George W. Bush. It's interesting how a corelation can somehow be drawn between Canadian military action in South West Asia and the United States President. Tunnel vision is a pathetic thing.
That said, with regard to Canadian cost in Afghanistan, i've been meaning to touch on this for some time, however never had the time nor inclination to actually post on it. I would like to point out for the edification of those on these forums (regardless of how ignorant some of you really are) that the situation in the region is often misleading. Take for example, darkbeavers utterly stunning post on the "uprising" of Afghanistan. The author of said article would have you, the reader, believe that the entire nation is utterly taken up in arms against the coalition, when in reality, it's far from that. Couple that with media reports of 300 dead in the following weeks, and it's easy to see how the hamburger-helper eating masses could believe it. Folks, I won't beat around the bush, Afghanistan is a warzone, but certainly not an uprising, and most certainly going our way. When you hear 300 dead, what do you think? Coalition troops? Civilians? Militants? The poignant truth is that the vast majority of the 300 killed in Panjwai Province in the last two weeks have been militants. In the last week alone, 130 were killed by Canadian Forces supported by the Afghan National Army and United States Air Force. We've, sadly, lost 1 Canadian Killed (Captain Goddard). While I am certainly no military tactician, i'm inclined to think that a kill ratio of 130:1 is pretty good. Granted yes we've taken casualties other than KIA, we've had several Canadians wounded, and an Afghan interpreter working with the PPCLI lost both his legs in an RPG attack. However what the media utterly fails to get across is the severity of the "wounds" the soldiers receive. A great example is how the media often lumps everyone involved in an "incident" as wounded, and often utterly fail to use the term injured when it should apply. A brief lesson:
In a War Zone:
Wounded - Bodily harm as a result of weapons and/or the enemy
Inured - Bodily harm as a result of an accident and/or circumstantial incident
When a LAV-III Infantry Fighting Vehicle is hit with a militant RPG and the media deems 5 soldiers are wounded, they fail to accurately report the situation. Yes, the crew commander in the turret received facial shrapnel and is in serious condition, he's truely wounded. The other 4 inside that were tossed around by the explosion and suffered a black eye, whip-lash, and bruised muscles are NOT wounded, especially when the article states they returned to duty a few hours later. The press has been increasingly misleading since the campaign started in 2001. It's misinformation on an epic scale, and the masses are buying in to it.
In summary, a word of advice to the self-proclaimed "pragmatics" on these boards. Before you start running off at the mouth about something you have no knowledge on, I highly urge you to get informed on the War, and ALL the circumstances surrounding it. If you think a biased article properly unveils all the information you require to be impartial, then I say poor you.
darkbeaver said:
Perhaps your medal in basket weaving means nothing, however the one I was given, at least to me, gives me the rights to discuss with merit something I was a part of. My comment wasn't racist, it's highly accurate. To me, someone who spent a great deal of time in South West Asis, the article is utterly moronic. It's chalk full of inaccuracy, and clearly anti-coalition. I merely pointed out the corelation between the spin of the article and the name of the person writting it. If that bothers you, I don't care. Anywho, you're right, my analysis won't change, because it's based on life experience, what's your experience based on? How old are you beaver? I won't expect an answer on those. You'll just sulk until you find some other biased article to post :lol:
Now to more important things:
I find it funny how people often deem the War in Afghanistan a "failure of a war", or fall one step short and deem it a failure in the making, when the end is no where in site. I myself find it rather a presumptuous conclusion to make, especially by individuals sitting in North America, utterly removed from the war. I've come to realise that more often than not the same people making such baseless claims, are those with a deep dislike of the United States and/or George W. Bush. It's interesting how a corelation can somehow be drawn between Canadian military action in South West Asia and the United States President. Tunnel vision is a pathetic thing.
That said, with regard to Canadian cost in Afghanistan, i've been meaning to touch on this for some time, however never had the time nor inclination to actually post on it. I would like to point out for the edification of those on these forums (regardless of how ignorant some of you really are) that the situation in the region is often misleading. Take for example, darkbeavers utterly stunning post on the "uprising" of Afghanistan. The author of said article would have you, the reader, believe that the entire nation is utterly taken up in arms against the coalition, when in reality, it's far from that. Couple that with media reports of 300 dead in the following weeks, and it's easy to see how the hamburger-helper eating masses could believe it. Folks, I won't beat around the bush, Afghanistan is a warzone, but certainly not an uprising, and most certainly going our way. When you hear 300 dead, what do you think? Coalition troops? Civilians? Militants? The poignant truth is that the vast majority of the 300 killed in Panjwai Province in the last two weeks have been militants. In the last week alone, 130 were killed by Canadian Forces supported by the Afghan National Army and United States Air Force. We've, sadly, lost 1 Canadian Killed (Captain Goddard). While I am certainly no military tactician, i'm inclined to think that a kill ratio of 130:1 is pretty good. Granted yes we've taken casualties other than KIA, we've had several Canadians wounded, and an Afghan interpreter working with the PPCLI lost both his legs in an RPG attack. However what the media utterly fails to get across is the severity of the "wounds" the soldiers receive. A great example is how the media often lumps everyone involved in an "incident" as wounded, and often utterly fail to use the term injured when it should apply. A brief lesson:
In a War Zone:
Wounded - Bodily harm as a result of weapons and/or the enemy
Inured - Bodily harm as a result of an accident and/or circumstantial incident
When a LAV-III Infantry Fighting Vehicle is hit with a militant RPG and the media deems 5 soldiers are wounded, they fail to accurately report the situation. Yes, the crew commander in the turret received facial shrapnel and is in serious condition, he's truely wounded. The other 4 inside that were tossed around by the explosion and suffered a black eye, whip-lash, and bruised muscles are NOT wounded, especially when the article states they returned to duty a few hours later. The press has been increasingly misleading since the campaign started in 2001. It's misinformation on an epic scale, and the masses are buying in to it.
In summary, a word of advice to the self-proclaimed "pragmatics" on these boards. Before you start running off at the mouth about something you have no knowledge on, I highly urge you to get informed on the War, and ALL the circumstances surrounding it. If you think a biased article properly unveils all the information you require to be impartial, then I say poor you.