Well, it could also mean that an appropriate increase in security forces to accompany the increase in engineers et al, too, though. It'd be disastrous to simply increase the rebuilding crews without increasing the security forces, too, IMO.
Harper says he couldn't live with himself if he reduced Canada's mission in Afghan
- Thread starter Sassylassie
- Start date
Perhaps I'm confused, I thought Harper was implying we had changed from the intent of helping Afghans rebuild, which is what I thought we went there for in the first place (among other things). Unfortunately perhaps, I tend to believe what the gov't website says about our reasons for being there.
Our over all goal is the reconstruction of the country, post Taliban. Perhaps it is I that is confused here, lol.
But that goal can not be achieved with the current state of the country, so for the moment, we are on the offensive. Hey **** happen. We gotta knock some heads to get something done.
I agree, but I still think Harpy is partially wrong; I don't think our role has changed. I still think it's to stabilize things in order to rebuild. If we went there initially for other purposes (or something different than what the gov't website said: "
defend our national interests;
ensure Canadian leadership in world affairs; and
help Afghanistan rebuild. ")
I wish someone would let me know.
Cdn Military
Rebuilding in any country cannot take place without first dealing with those who want to destroy everything - who want women as possessions and children brain-washed to hate. Peace keeping is all well and good but as a few have previously posted here, you can't have peace and rebuild things when people are shooting at you and trying to destroy what has already been built.
In an idealistic world there would be no wars but how do you "rationalize" with people who are irrational or be logical with people who are illogical?? With their belief systems, they are right and everyone else is wrong and there is no tolerance for differences of opinion/beliefs.
Can you even imagine not being able to contribute to this or any other forum because it would likely be illegal (if one is even allowed computer access). One would not be able to express their beliefs, or speak freely to everyone in relative obscurity or let it "all hang out" so to speak no matter how intelligent (or not) the contribution?? Where day in and day out one is told what to do, what to wear, what or who to believe in, how you'll worship (whether you believe in an supreme entity or not) because to voice otherwise would mean your life? I mean, THINK of it!
Just as an aside, I'd be curious as to what kind of "deal" Jack Layton could get negotiating with the Taliban or Al Quaeda (sp) for world peace and stability. I mean, how much would he be willing to give up in the name of peace??
Are we in the West perfect?? Far from it. But we are also free to challenge our governments and get them to admit the wrongs and to right them and if they don't act, we can vote them out. Other societies don't have that option. That's what we're fighting for - for others to have the same options that we have and to ensure we don't lose those same options.
As for Dufar, not unlike Afghanistan a few years ago, I am thoroughly disgusted by the fact that there is nothing being done there. How can the world sanction whats happening there? How many times have we heard "never again" and it continues.
I fear for this world as we know it. Supposidly, good prevails but I tell you, I sure find it hard to see sometimes.
So, on that note, I hope everyone has a very Merry Christmas and a positive, loving, healthy, giving, kind and properous 2007!!
Rebuilding in any country cannot take place without first dealing with those who want to destroy everything - who want women as possessions and children brain-washed to hate. Peace keeping is all well and good but as a few have previously posted here, you can't have peace and rebuild things when people are shooting at you and trying to destroy what has already been built.
In an idealistic world there would be no wars but how do you "rationalize" with people who are irrational or be logical with people who are illogical?? With their belief systems, they are right and everyone else is wrong and there is no tolerance for differences of opinion/beliefs.
Can you even imagine not being able to contribute to this or any other forum because it would likely be illegal (if one is even allowed computer access). One would not be able to express their beliefs, or speak freely to everyone in relative obscurity or let it "all hang out" so to speak no matter how intelligent (or not) the contribution?? Where day in and day out one is told what to do, what to wear, what or who to believe in, how you'll worship (whether you believe in an supreme entity or not) because to voice otherwise would mean your life? I mean, THINK of it!
Just as an aside, I'd be curious as to what kind of "deal" Jack Layton could get negotiating with the Taliban or Al Quaeda (sp) for world peace and stability. I mean, how much would he be willing to give up in the name of peace??
Are we in the West perfect?? Far from it. But we are also free to challenge our governments and get them to admit the wrongs and to right them and if they don't act, we can vote them out. Other societies don't have that option. That's what we're fighting for - for others to have the same options that we have and to ensure we don't lose those same options.
As for Dufar, not unlike Afghanistan a few years ago, I am thoroughly disgusted by the fact that there is nothing being done there. How can the world sanction whats happening there? How many times have we heard "never again" and it continues.
I fear for this world as we know it. Supposidly, good prevails but I tell you, I sure find it hard to see sometimes.
So, on that note, I hope everyone has a very Merry Christmas and a positive, loving, healthy, giving, kind and properous 2007!!
I never get this...
WHY ON EARTH WOULD YOU SEND THE ARMY TO REBUILD.
This isn't a dig on the army, its an appeal to use your brains. Would you send Carpenters to put out a fire? No...you send Firemen to put out the fire. Do the Firemen then stick around and rebuild? No..thats what a carpenter is for.
If you need soldiers there, you cannot rebuild. At what point you can take your soldiers home and send civilian contractors, you are ready to rebuild.
The army, is an ARMY, not a group of contractors. It is not a soldiers job to build a school anymore than it is a bricklayers job to storm a suspected insurgent stronghold.
WHY ON EARTH WOULD YOU SEND THE ARMY TO REBUILD.
This isn't a dig on the army, its an appeal to use your brains. Would you send Carpenters to put out a fire? No...you send Firemen to put out the fire. Do the Firemen then stick around and rebuild? No..thats what a carpenter is for.
If you need soldiers there, you cannot rebuild. At what point you can take your soldiers home and send civilian contractors, you are ready to rebuild.
The army, is an ARMY, not a group of contractors. It is not a soldiers job to build a school anymore than it is a bricklayers job to storm a suspected insurgent stronghold.
I'll have whatever it is your smokin dude!
Have you heard of David Emmerson's leap from BIG LUMBER to a cabinet post? This is of course Haplesses "sticking" to his "integrity" manure right?
Or perhaps you've heard of the Maher Arar case and the lunatics trying to keep the Hapless adolescent popular in the eyes of his Whitehouse masters?...
Integrity doesn't exist in politics Zach and it doesn't matter if it's Stephe Hapless or "Who wants to be a Millionaire?? Paul Martin....
I don't know about you but I can multitask. Didja know even the Yank's army has branches in it? Branches such as the Corp of Engineers (who build things), Chemical Corp, just about any kind of religious leadership you can think of, mechanics, paper shufflers, cooks, etc. I think the Canadian forces are pretty similar.
Last edited:
And the things they tend to know how to build tend to be those of immediate use to an army, bridges..roads..water purification plants.
You know who is better at building things than the army? Trained proffessionals in the civilian sector, thats why they tend to build everything. Again not a dig at the army engineers, but that isn't their purpose.
If we wanted a force to rebuild we wouldn't call it the armed forces, it would be called the reconstruction corps and it wouldn't be military.
You know who is better at building things than the army? Trained proffessionals in the civilian sector, thats why they tend to build everything. Again not a dig at the army engineers, but that isn't their purpose.
If we wanted a force to rebuild we wouldn't call it the armed forces, it would be called the reconstruction corps and it wouldn't be military.
Remembrance
In Flanders fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses, row on row
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.
Today we fight in Afghan fields,
Killing farmers to lower poppy yields.
Braying leaders playing to the crowd,
Northern imitation of southern policy maybe not so loud.
Armed with abstractions of just cause and threat,
We bask in warm southern words and feel no regret.
We send armies to reconstruct but armies kill and maim,
Shells at $150 thousand don’t build much but Cain.
The selling of self-interested policy may deliver us to shame.
But remember our soldiers for they are without blame.
There is no moral compass for killing others beyond: ‘There is something trying to kill me at this moment, so I killed rather than be killed.’ Governments carryout the moral muddle of killing others for various abstract reasons. Governments have monopolies on the use of deadly coercive force applied to their own subjects. Governments make mistakes. It’s a price we pay.
There is no world government. There is no moral compass. None of us are the subject of a world government. Our humanitarian relief may not that of those we kill because we consider them horrible, or they are interferring with our 'good deeds.' If we are not being killed, then we are only taking sides. We’ve killed others for professing the wrong flavour of Christianity. What else do we kill for?
That done by our governments is done in our names. The British Empire promoted structure, as does the IMF. The CIA prefers certain structures and promotes the special squads that protect those structures. People die. Thousands of children die daily mostly for lack of clean water, and we kill to reconstruct. We kill to protect somebody else's government that we 'like.' We bear responsibility for our governments. We too are subject to making mistakes. It may be necessary--just don't call it moral. We vote and little else.
Once force is used to deter there is no way to say what was deterred, what might have been, or what was produced. The present happens and the future carries on from there. “The past is dead and the future is blind. I live one day at a time and dream one dream at a time.” -- Willy Nelson.
In Flanders fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses, row on row
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.
Today we fight in Afghan fields,
Killing farmers to lower poppy yields.
Braying leaders playing to the crowd,
Northern imitation of southern policy maybe not so loud.
Armed with abstractions of just cause and threat,
We bask in warm southern words and feel no regret.
We send armies to reconstruct but armies kill and maim,
Shells at $150 thousand don’t build much but Cain.
The selling of self-interested policy may deliver us to shame.
But remember our soldiers for they are without blame.
There is no moral compass for killing others beyond: ‘There is something trying to kill me at this moment, so I killed rather than be killed.’ Governments carryout the moral muddle of killing others for various abstract reasons. Governments have monopolies on the use of deadly coercive force applied to their own subjects. Governments make mistakes. It’s a price we pay.
There is no world government. There is no moral compass. None of us are the subject of a world government. Our humanitarian relief may not that of those we kill because we consider them horrible, or they are interferring with our 'good deeds.' If we are not being killed, then we are only taking sides. We’ve killed others for professing the wrong flavour of Christianity. What else do we kill for?
That done by our governments is done in our names. The British Empire promoted structure, as does the IMF. The CIA prefers certain structures and promotes the special squads that protect those structures. People die. Thousands of children die daily mostly for lack of clean water, and we kill to reconstruct. We kill to protect somebody else's government that we 'like.' We bear responsibility for our governments. We too are subject to making mistakes. It may be necessary--just don't call it moral. We vote and little else.
Once force is used to deter there is no way to say what was deterred, what might have been, or what was produced. The present happens and the future carries on from there. “The past is dead and the future is blind. I live one day at a time and dream one dream at a time.” -- Willy Nelson.
Our Forces, are varied and excellent at rebuilding, supplying education and the like. We have been doing it for years. I would love to see the carpenters put out the fire as they try to rebuild. The division in your analogy is, the US style of post combat reconstruction, tended by multinational mega corps. Something our Army and mandate does not allow. We fight, we secure, we rebuild.
True to some extent, but you can refer to my above response.
See my first response. Then add...
We can do this as you stated, but the out come would likely be the same as in Iraq, huge mega corps, reeping financial gain at the expense of not only our wallets, but the people they are being paid to rebuild for.
blah blah blah
While the Canadian Army CAN rebuild, Im not disagreeing with that, I don't think it SHOULD rebuild.
It seems like a distraction that can get soldiers killed. Often the Army is called in to rebuild for political reasons, IE, its not safe enough to send in civilians to get murdered trying in vain to rebuild.
Personally I think a better solution would be a separation of politicians and the military.
The Military should only be able to be forced to go overseas with a declaration of war, during a state of war (thus making them veterans). And the military should have complete control of running the war, up until the politicians decide to end the state of war (and then the soldiers can go home).
but getting people killed for a few votes is insane.
It seems like a distraction that can get soldiers killed. Often the Army is called in to rebuild for political reasons, IE, its not safe enough to send in civilians to get murdered trying in vain to rebuild.
Personally I think a better solution would be a separation of politicians and the military.
The Military should only be able to be forced to go overseas with a declaration of war, during a state of war (thus making them veterans). And the military should have complete control of running the war, up until the politicians decide to end the state of war (and then the soldiers can go home).
but getting people killed for a few votes is insane.
Can't argue with that. Except to say, there is nothing wrong with rebuilding, using the military to do the work. I think it is a great tradition of our Peacekeeping forces. One that should be maitained.
As for the rest of your post, you hit that nail and drove it through the board, my friend.
well, i suppose you could send unarmed civilian "experts" but I doubt that they'd hang aound very long ... especially after a few were killed! Duh! The military is set up to do what they're doing and they are very good at it.
Parents of dead soldier 'offended'
Any one who thinks Harper gives two ****s for the soldiers is dreaming.
Parents of dead soldier 'offended' by O'Connor's assertion on funeral costs
Meagan Fitzpatrick , CanWest News Service
Published: Thursday, May 31, 2007
OTTAWA - Prime Minister Stephen Harper ignored calls for Gordon O'Connor's resignation Wednesday after a military family disputed the defence minister's statement that his department pays full funeral costs for fallen soldiers.
The parents of Cpl. Matthew Dinning, killed by a roadside bomb in Afghanistan last year, say there were "offended" when they heard O'Connor make the assertion Monday in the House of Commons.
After media reports were published about another family which was having trouble getting compensated for funeral costs, the issue was raised in question period by the Liberals. The defence minister said when he took office he directed his department to pay full funeral costs and that "we have been doing it since I have been in office."
var addthis_pub = 'canada.com'; function textCounter(field,cntfield,maxlimit) { if (field.value.length > maxlimit) // if too long...trim it! field.value = field.value.substring(0, maxlimit); // otherwise, update 'characters left' counter else { var divLabel = document.getElementById("divLabel"); divLabel.innerHTML = maxlimit - field.value.length + " characters remaining"; } }
"After reading these comments, my wife and I were offended and felt that our family's integrity was being called into question by Mr. O'Connor," Lincoln Dinning said at a press conference with his wife Laurie. The couple drove eight hours to Ottawa from Wingham, Ont., to go public with their story about how their requests for compensation have been ignored for months.
"We stand here today telling you that we have not been fully reimbursed for Matthew's funeral costs, despite that Mr. O' Connor stood up in the House of Commons and told the Canadian people the exact opposite," Dinning said.
The couple has received some money from the military -$5,600 - to pay the $12,000 funeral bill but several expense claims submitted by the family have not been addressed.
For example, the parents paid the $3,000 cost of holding the funeral in an arena, which was necessary to accommodate the 2,300 people who attended it, they explained. They would also like to be reimbursed for the grief counselling that the fallen soldier's mother is taking, which has so far totalled about $4,000 and continues. The family is not asking that the military pay for the grand total for the funeral. The parents paid for the reception held afterwards, for example, and are not expecting to be reimbursed.
Lincoln Dinning said he followed the proper channels and sent two letters, with receipts, to the appropriate military liaison officers and never heard back.
"We have been more than patient in waiting for replies from the Department of Defence and government," Dinning said.
The father, who was quite emotional at times during the press conference, said that helping families with the financial burdens brought on by the death of their loved one is a "no-brainer" and that there should be no "penny-pinching" over expenses.
"When I say funeral costs, I think when a person dies anything associated with that death is a funeral cost," he said.
Less than two hours before the Dinnings met with the media on Parliament Hill, O'Connor and Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Rick Hillier held their own hastily called press conference where they reiterated their "unwavering" support for the Canadian Forces and their families. Hillier promised to contact the Dinning family directly and to get to the bottom of why their letters went unanswered and O'Connor pledged to change the rules on covering funeral costs.
Any one who thinks Harper gives two ****s for the soldiers is dreaming.
Parents of dead soldier 'offended' by O'Connor's assertion on funeral costs
Meagan Fitzpatrick , CanWest News Service
Published: Thursday, May 31, 2007
OTTAWA - Prime Minister Stephen Harper ignored calls for Gordon O'Connor's resignation Wednesday after a military family disputed the defence minister's statement that his department pays full funeral costs for fallen soldiers.
The parents of Cpl. Matthew Dinning, killed by a roadside bomb in Afghanistan last year, say there were "offended" when they heard O'Connor make the assertion Monday in the House of Commons.
After media reports were published about another family which was having trouble getting compensated for funeral costs, the issue was raised in question period by the Liberals. The defence minister said when he took office he directed his department to pay full funeral costs and that "we have been doing it since I have been in office."
var addthis_pub = 'canada.com'; function textCounter(field,cntfield,maxlimit) { if (field.value.length > maxlimit) // if too long...trim it! field.value = field.value.substring(0, maxlimit); // otherwise, update 'characters left' counter else { var divLabel = document.getElementById("divLabel"); divLabel.innerHTML = maxlimit - field.value.length + " characters remaining"; } }
"After reading these comments, my wife and I were offended and felt that our family's integrity was being called into question by Mr. O'Connor," Lincoln Dinning said at a press conference with his wife Laurie. The couple drove eight hours to Ottawa from Wingham, Ont., to go public with their story about how their requests for compensation have been ignored for months.
"We stand here today telling you that we have not been fully reimbursed for Matthew's funeral costs, despite that Mr. O' Connor stood up in the House of Commons and told the Canadian people the exact opposite," Dinning said.
The couple has received some money from the military -$5,600 - to pay the $12,000 funeral bill but several expense claims submitted by the family have not been addressed.
For example, the parents paid the $3,000 cost of holding the funeral in an arena, which was necessary to accommodate the 2,300 people who attended it, they explained. They would also like to be reimbursed for the grief counselling that the fallen soldier's mother is taking, which has so far totalled about $4,000 and continues. The family is not asking that the military pay for the grand total for the funeral. The parents paid for the reception held afterwards, for example, and are not expecting to be reimbursed.
Lincoln Dinning said he followed the proper channels and sent two letters, with receipts, to the appropriate military liaison officers and never heard back.
"We have been more than patient in waiting for replies from the Department of Defence and government," Dinning said.
The father, who was quite emotional at times during the press conference, said that helping families with the financial burdens brought on by the death of their loved one is a "no-brainer" and that there should be no "penny-pinching" over expenses.
"When I say funeral costs, I think when a person dies anything associated with that death is a funeral cost," he said.
Less than two hours before the Dinnings met with the media on Parliament Hill, O'Connor and Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Rick Hillier held their own hastily called press conference where they reiterated their "unwavering" support for the Canadian Forces and their families. Hillier promised to contact the Dinning family directly and to get to the bottom of why their letters went unanswered and O'Connor pledged to change the rules on covering funeral costs.
Parents of dead soldier 'offended'
Any one who thinks Harper gives two ****s for the soldiers is dreaming.
Parents of dead soldier 'offended' by O'Connor's assertion on funeral costs
Meagan Fitzpatrick , CanWest News Service
Published: Thursday, May 31, 2007
OTTAWA - Prime Minister Stephen Harper ignored calls for Gordon O'Connor's resignation Wednesday after a military family disputed the defence minister's statement that his department pays full funeral costs for fallen soldiers.
The parents of Cpl. Matthew Dinning, killed by a roadside bomb in Afghanistan last year, say there were "offended" when they heard O'Connor make the assertion Monday in the House of Commons.
After media reports were published about another family which was having trouble getting compensated for funeral costs, the issue was raised in question period by the Liberals. The defence minister said when he took office he directed his department to pay full funeral costs and that "we have been doing it since I have been in office."
"After reading these comments, my wife and I were offended and felt that our family's integrity was being called into question by Mr. O'Connor," Lincoln Dinning said at a press conference with his wife Laurie. The couple drove eight hours to Ottawa from Wingham, Ont., to go public with their story about how their requests for compensation have been ignored for months.
"We stand here today telling you that we have not been fully reimbursed for Matthew's funeral costs, despite that Mr. O' Connor stood up in the House of Commons and told the Canadian people the exact opposite," Dinning said.
The couple has received some money from the military -$5,600 - to pay the $12,000 funeral bill but several expense claims submitted by the family have not been addressed.
For example, the parents paid the $3,000 cost of holding the funeral in an arena, which was necessary to accommodate the 2,300 people who attended it, they explained. They would also like to be reimbursed for the grief counselling that the fallen soldier's mother is taking, which has so far totalled about $4,000 and continues. The family is not asking that the military pay for the grand total for the funeral. The parents paid for the reception held afterwards, for example, and are not expecting to be reimbursed.
Lincoln Dinning said he followed the proper channels and sent two letters, with receipts, to the appropriate military liaison officers and never heard back.
"We have been more than patient in waiting for replies from the Department of Defence and government," Dinning said.
The father, who was quite emotional at times during the press conference, said that helping families with the financial burdens brought on by the death of their loved one is a "no-brainer" and that there should be no "penny-pinching" over expenses.
"When I say funeral costs, I think when a person dies anything associated with that death is a funeral cost," he said.
Less than two hours before the Dinnings met with the media on Parliament Hill, O'Connor and Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Rick Hillier held their own hastily called press conference where they reiterated their "unwavering" support for the Canadian Forces and their families. Hillier promised to contact the Dinning family directly and to get to the bottom of why their letters went unanswered and O'Connor pledged to change the rules on covering funeral costs.
Any one who thinks Harper gives two ****s for the soldiers is dreaming.
Parents of dead soldier 'offended' by O'Connor's assertion on funeral costs
Meagan Fitzpatrick , CanWest News Service
Published: Thursday, May 31, 2007
OTTAWA - Prime Minister Stephen Harper ignored calls for Gordon O'Connor's resignation Wednesday after a military family disputed the defence minister's statement that his department pays full funeral costs for fallen soldiers.
The parents of Cpl. Matthew Dinning, killed by a roadside bomb in Afghanistan last year, say there were "offended" when they heard O'Connor make the assertion Monday in the House of Commons.
After media reports were published about another family which was having trouble getting compensated for funeral costs, the issue was raised in question period by the Liberals. The defence minister said when he took office he directed his department to pay full funeral costs and that "we have been doing it since I have been in office."
"After reading these comments, my wife and I were offended and felt that our family's integrity was being called into question by Mr. O'Connor," Lincoln Dinning said at a press conference with his wife Laurie. The couple drove eight hours to Ottawa from Wingham, Ont., to go public with their story about how their requests for compensation have been ignored for months.
"We stand here today telling you that we have not been fully reimbursed for Matthew's funeral costs, despite that Mr. O' Connor stood up in the House of Commons and told the Canadian people the exact opposite," Dinning said.
The couple has received some money from the military -$5,600 - to pay the $12,000 funeral bill but several expense claims submitted by the family have not been addressed.
For example, the parents paid the $3,000 cost of holding the funeral in an arena, which was necessary to accommodate the 2,300 people who attended it, they explained. They would also like to be reimbursed for the grief counselling that the fallen soldier's mother is taking, which has so far totalled about $4,000 and continues. The family is not asking that the military pay for the grand total for the funeral. The parents paid for the reception held afterwards, for example, and are not expecting to be reimbursed.
Lincoln Dinning said he followed the proper channels and sent two letters, with receipts, to the appropriate military liaison officers and never heard back.
"We have been more than patient in waiting for replies from the Department of Defence and government," Dinning said.
The father, who was quite emotional at times during the press conference, said that helping families with the financial burdens brought on by the death of their loved one is a "no-brainer" and that there should be no "penny-pinching" over expenses.
"When I say funeral costs, I think when a person dies anything associated with that death is a funeral cost," he said.
Less than two hours before the Dinnings met with the media on Parliament Hill, O'Connor and Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Rick Hillier held their own hastily called press conference where they reiterated their "unwavering" support for the Canadian Forces and their families. Hillier promised to contact the Dinning family directly and to get to the bottom of why their letters went unanswered and O'Connor pledged to change the rules on covering funeral costs.
Harper is a very bad man. He should be replaced by a puppet or maybe a dummy or perhaps a booger. He's not even Canadian, he's a dispensationalist, and we know where that comes from don't we. Fundamentaly he's a fundementalist then a yankee and then a conservative, a budding banker, stooge of the filthy rich. Afghanistan is not Canadas mission, it's a war for the bankers and the USA, NATO are all stooges for Uncle Sam. Six million war related deaths among Afghans since 2001 and not one dead poppy plant yet. Poppys get more attention and care than people, Canadian soldiers are taking part in a giant scam.
Last edited:
Dark Beaver for sure, they are nothing but an elitist bunch who do the talk but not the walk. To me they are suck-alls before election time and become assholes after they get the key to Sussex drive in Ottawa.
War is an elitist game, the poor need food to eat not bullets.
The young bright minds in Afghanistan are Harpers sacrificial lams.
If Harper gave two ****s for the young Canadian solders he would have ended this mission to begin with.
But instead the man is a total political opportunist knowing that the Libs initiated the Afghani mission, he is on record defending his brown nosing to Bush saying the Libs started it. The problem is he doesn't have the balls to end it because he would look bad to Bush.
Last edited:
Did you just make up those figures,maybe pulled them out of your ass attached to the greek guy's condom? The fatalities are not even close to that even if you include Iraq ,Lebanon,Israel,in fact the whole Middle East.Poppy fields have been eradicated!! Your facts are as baseless as your opinions.
Wallyj, my goodness what a dirty little brain you have. You don't want young people emulating your tastelessness do you? No poppys have been harmed in the Afghan conflict and the death figures are accurate. Three-hundred-fifty thousand children under five every year since Uncle Sam started the campainge.Dead because of the crooked war that you love so much.