NATO shirkers.

[Sassylassie]

Germany, Italy and France refuse to help in the fight in Afghanistan, wow great allies NOT. Perhaps Canada should consider pulling out of the hot spots and leave our allies who refuse to get their hands dirty take over. I can't believe they won't put their people in harms way. Hello France, Germany and Italy our troops died liberating you. Maybe it's time to rethink NATO? Canada the US and those countries that are "Actually" aiding us should form a new version of NATO that excludes the cowardly countries?

Afghanistan: NATO shirkers


These Canadian headlines and excerpts say it all; if combat does not lessen over the next year in the south (and east), and if others don't cough up some fighting troops, the Alliance will be pretty close to bust. Maybe time to think of an Anglosphere coalition, plus any others like the Dutch and some central/east Europeans willing to help.

"Germany dodges call for troops" (full text subscriber only)

Canada's anger before the summit has mostly been directed at Germany.

The reason may be partially explained by a story published yesterday on Der Spiegel's website.

The German news magazine reported that Berlin had refused several requests for its forces to come to the aid of NATO's embattled warriors in the south during the Canadian-led Operation Medusa in late August and early September. The missions Germany wanted no part of included deploying a medevac aircraft to the base where Canadians were located in Kandahar, allowing a drone aircraft to be used for reconnaissance of the area and having its special forces commandos deployed as forward air controllers to direct airstrikes against the Taliban across the south, the weekly said...
​

"NATO needs more soldiers in Afghanistan, former general says"

Earlier Wednesday, NATO leaders meeting in Europe agreed that more support would be provided to the soldiers on the ground, and some of the troops already there who are restricted in their operations would be allowed to be sent into danger zones.

The additional support includes fighter planes, helicopters, several infantry companies and training teams, NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said...

Soldiers from NATO members such as France, Germany and Italy, who are already on the ground but deployed in the calmer north and often under restrictions which keep them away from the fighting, will be able to move in emergencies...
​

"Canadians still will do `heavy lifting' in Afghanistan, Hillier says"

"Limited success convincing NATO to help in southern Afghanistan"

Yesterday in Riga, reporters were told that three of the NATO members would be stepping up their efforts in Afghanistan. but which three were not named.

Czech President Vaclav Klaus said his country would add 75 more soldiers next year, reaching a total of 225...
​

"More words than help from NATO"

"Canada can't fight alone"

...countries with modern, well-equipped militaries, such as France and Germany and Italy, are not only restricting their troops to working in the relatively peaceable north of Afghanistan, they're tut-tutting about our warlike insistence on shooting back at insurgents who are shooting at us.

At a two-day summit in Riga, Latvia, this week, Canada insisted that our allies need to help. Little good it did. The closest they'll come is agreeing to support us in emergencies: If we're about to be overrun by Taliban, they'll come help. They'll stop us from obviously losing, in other words. If we want to win, we're pretty much on our own...​

 

[Colpy]

Yep.

And when the mission fails totally, because the lack of combat-ready manpower is unable to cover reconstruction efforts and the military is forced to depend on airstrikes to kill Taliban (pissing off the locals mightily by increasing civilian casualties), and Afghanistan slips back into complete chaos........guess who everyone will say is to blame?

The USA, of course.

A sort of bonus for the Frankish Empire. (Germany and France)

 

[Tonington]

Do you guys think the Americans will recommitt to Afghanistan once they sort out what they're doing in Iraq? I hope so, we need them there. Say what you will about the USA, at least they aren't afraid to roll up their sleeves and get dirty when the situation warrants it. Our NATO brothers that have experience in these kinds of provincial reconstruction teams chose the easier provinces right away before we had any idea what we were going to be doing there, and now they're restricting their military to keep them out of harm's way. I don't know about you guys, but I prefer my friends to be the type who aren't afraid to get a black eye to give you help when you need it.

 

[wallyj]

Amen. Soon there will be people posting here about how we should never be in Afghanistan. These are the same people who say we must live up to our international KYOTO commitment,which is deeply flawed,but are so gung-ho about abandoning our NATO commitment.Bloody small-minded hypocrites.

 

[gc]

Germany, Italy and France refuse to help in the fight in Afghanistan, wow great allies NOT. Perhaps Canada should consider pulling out of the hot spots and leave our allies who refuse to get their hands dirty take over. I can't believe they won't put their people in harms way. Hello France, Germany and Italy our troops died liberating you. Maybe it's time to rethink NATO? Canada the US and those countries that are "Actually" aiding us should form a new version of NATO that excludes the cowardly countries?

Afghanistan: NATO shirkers

I'd also like to see more of a commitment from the U.S. We have more people in afghanistan per capita than the United States, and THEY were the ones that were attacked, and they have a much larger army than ours. Instead, they decided to focus their attention on a pointless war I understand the criticism of France and Germany, but the U.S. deserves more criticism for not pulling their weight.

 

[Sassylassie]

No I don't agree gc, I'm not in the habit of blaming the US for what ails the world. France, Germany and Italy are members of NATO and they were tasked with a job to do but they refuse to move outside their "OWN" imposed Rules of Engagement. Those in the Military are calling these countries cowards and I agree. Canadian troops died on their soil to free them and this is how they act, hiding in tents digging wells and wasting time lounging in the sun while our troops are dying. :evil3:

 

[MikeyDB]

Colpy

Why do you care what happens to Israel or Palestine for that matter?

Were you as energized and dynamic in response to genocide in Rwanda as you’ve demonstrated for Israel?

Were you as excited and effusive when the stated rationale for the decimation of Iraq turned out to be nonsense? Regardless of the numbers of civilians and innocents killed in Iraq by America did you howl for the U.S. to be held accountable for their action in invading a nation on the basis of a lie?

Would you also be among those celebrating the execution of Saddam for murdering Kurds?

And of course celebrating the on-again-off-again policies of western governments in arming both sides of regimes locked in mutual self-destruction?

Never mind who has or doesn’t have the “right” to wage war all over the planet (United States where their “interests” are deemed to be in jeopardy regardless of law )but then the balancing argument is available to anyone who can point to the ringing successes of the United States in exporting democracy and peace to many other nations around the world right?

Why do you care about Israel Colpy?

Are you willing (or even available) to the facts regarding the number of times (with America’s blessings and support) Israel has failed to ratify U.N. resolutions?

I’ve just read that you denounce international law, interesting.

Do you really believe that Israel is a “democracy”…and a “democracy” worth pitting nation against nation repeatedly over the past sixty years?

Do you realize that what happens half a planet away will eventually bring change to your neighborhood? Whether its famine and drought, internecine eruptions or tribal disputes, would you rather have those folk whom you’ve declared as expendable in Afghanistan and other nations around the world moving in next door to you with the memory of hatred and violence as their perception of Canadians and Americans or would you simply prefer that the carnage continue anywhere else, sufficiently remote from you to allow you to ignore what’s going on?

The reality is that even if peace erupted among all those warring factions and fanatics and the world slipped into a century of peaceful cooperation, our rate of consumption will increase exponentially thereby accelerating the necessity for many to leave their newly formed deserts and land left unsuitable to grow crops to survive and eat and will end up moving where there is greater potential….

Next to Colpy….

From the air we all breathe to the water we all drink, every living creature on this planet is inexorably bound to the existence of every other. When we invest in reinforcing hatred disharmony and prejudice we demonstrate our failure to appreciate the reality of our existence.

But of course if the Colpy solution is to simply eradicate anyone and everyone who doesn’t embrace and endorse the same world view as Colpy, we’ll be witness to not only a planet-wide decimation of our planets capacity to renew and recover (if we learn to harness our runaway habits of consumption) in the wake of bullets bombs and missiles….., but a future filled with escalating horror.

Which policy works best in building a future Colpy?

If you’d provide an example of how some nation or people who’ve actualized exercised and manifested those policies, and the peaceful stable and prosperous experience of those living in that newly created nirvana… that would be a great help.

You seem to forget that France and Germany and many other NATO nations are much MUCH closer to the consequences of “shock and awe”, the influx of radicals from Pakistan and other nations, and have much larger populations of affected people than does Canada or the United States. You can drive ten tons of explosives into Berlin on a rainy day but it’s a little more difficult to do the same thing to Washington D.C. or Ottawa. It makes a difference where you live Colpy!

 

[gc]

No I don't agree gc, I'm not in the habit of blaming the US for what ails the world.

Neither am I.

France, Germany and Italy are members of NATO and they were tasked with a job to do but they refuse to move outside their "OWN" imposed Rules of Engagement. Those in the Military are calling these countries cowards and I agree. Canadian troops died on their soil to free them and this is how they act, hiding in tents digging wells and wasting time lounging in the sun while our troops are dying. :evil3:

You can say the same about the U.S. Canadians are dying to "free the U.S." and the U.S. would rather go off and fight a useless war in Iraq.

 

[Colpy]

Why do you care what happens to Israel or Palestine for that matter?

A longtime interest in world politics, a respect for the Jewish achievement in Israel, a historical knowledge of the extreme persecution of Jews for the last 2000 years.........a hatred for terrorists.

Were you as energized and dynamic in response to genocide in Rwanda as you’ve demonstrated for Israel?

Honestly? Yes. Pissed off at the UN and Clinton, and Romeo D'allaire (despite his Liberalness) is one of my personal heroes.

Were you as excited and effusive when the stated rationale for the decimation of Iraq turned out to be nonsense? Regardless of the numbers of civilians and innocents killed in Iraq by America did you howl for the U.S. to be held accountable for their action in invading a nation on the basis of a lie?

I didn't care if they found WMD. Getting Saddam was enough, for a great many reasons. I will admit it appears the invasion was a mistake, at least if the invaders are not willing or able to bring Iraq to heel.

Would you also be among those celebrating the execution of Saddam for murdering Kurds?

ABSOLUTELY!

And of course celebrating the on-again-off-again policies of western governments in arming both sides of regimes locked in mutual self-destruction?

A loaded question......not one that can be handled in a sentence or two........times change is the best answer. And what western countries?

Never mind who has or doesn’t have the “right” to wage war all over the planet (United States where their “interests” are deemed to be in jeopardy regardless of law )but then the balancing argument is available to anyone who can point to the ringing successes of the United States in exporting democracy and peace to many other nations around the world right?

Loaded.

Why do you care about Israel Colpy?

See above.

Are you willing (or even available) to the facts regarding the number of times (with America’s blessings and support) Israel has failed to ratify U.N. resolutions?

I’ve just read that you denounce international law, interesting.

Who cares about the UN? Rwanda is one of the major reasons I have no respect for the organization.

Do you really believe that Israel is a “democracy”…and a “democracy” worth pitting nation against nation repeatedly over the past sixty years?

Yes.

Do you realize that what happens half a planet away will eventually bring change to your neighborhood? Whether its famine and drought, internecine eruptions or tribal disputes, would you rather have those folk whom you’ve declared as expendable in Afghanistan and other nations around the world moving in next door to you with the memory of hatred and violence as their perception of Canadians and Americans or would you simply prefer that the carnage continue anywhere else, sufficiently remote from you to allow you to ignore what’s going on?

The reality is that even if peace erupted among all those warring factions and fanatics and the world slipped into a century of peaceful cooperation, our rate of consumption will increase exponentially thereby accelerating the necessity for many to leave their newly formed deserts and land left unsuitable to grow crops to survive and eat and will end up moving where there is greater potential….

Next to Colpy….

From the air we all breathe to the water we all drink, every living creature on this planet is inexorably bound to the existence of every other. When we invest in reinforcing hatred disharmony and prejudice we demonstrate our failure to appreciate the reality of our existence.

But of course if the Colpy solution is to simply eradicate anyone and everyone who doesn’t embrace and endorse the same world view as Colpy, we’ll be witness to not only a planet-wide decimation of our planets capacity to renew and recover (if we learn to harness our runaway habits of consumption) in the wake of bullets bombs and missiles….., but a future filled with escalating horror.

Which policy works best in building a future Colpy?

If you’d provide an example of how some nation or people who’ve actualized exercised and manifested those policies, and the peaceful stable and prosperous experience of those living in that newly created nirvana… that would be a great help.

You seem to forget that France and Germany and many other NATO nations are much MUCH closer to the consequences of “shock and awe”, the influx of radicals from Pakistan and other nations, and have much larger populations of affected people than does Canada or the United States. You can drive ten tons of explosives into Berlin on a rainy day but it’s a little more difficult to do the same thing to Washington D.C. or Ottawa. It makes a difference where you live Colpy!

Nothing to answer here.

Except.

A nation that allows its policies to be dictated by the enemies of the very basics of western civilization (rights of the individual, freedom of thought, speech and religion, democracy) is not worthy as an ally.

Sorry about the font. It seems to keep slipping over to BIG, I don't know why.

 

[wallyj]

How soon we forget. The states went into Iraq because saddam refused to allow the UN weapon inspectors to do thier job. saddam agreed to this to stop Desert Storm,which saved his ass and many of his people. He reneged on the deal thereby putting you,me and the rest of the world in jeopardy. These are facts,not opinions.Think about it.

 

[Colpy]

How soon we forget. The states went into Iraq because saddam refused to allow the UN weapon inspectors to do thier job. saddam agreed to this to stop Desert Storm,which saved his ass and many of his people. He reneged on the deal thereby putting you,me and the rest of the world in jeopardy. These are facts,not opinions.Think about it.

True.

Thank you Wally.

 

[Tonington]

I agree that Saddam was a terrible man, and deserves the punishment he recieved. However, if Iraq is not ready for democracy, as they appear to be showing, I fear that another Saddam type person will come into power, and establish a stability at the expense of one of the other ethnic groups. I'm not all that up to date on American civil war history, quite ignorant in fact, but what would have happened if the British had gave their support to one person and provided him the military resources and support needed?

 

[gc]

How soon we forget. The states went into Iraq because saddam refused to allow the UN weapon inspectors to do thier job. saddam agreed to this to stop Desert Storm,which saved his ass and many of his people. He reneged on the deal thereby putting you,me and the rest of the world in jeopardy. These are facts,not opinions.Think about it.

Please. The U.S. did not go into Iraq because Saddam refused weapons inspectors. They went into Iraq because certain people in the administration believed in the conspiracy theory that Saddam was behind 9/11. They were determined to go to war with Iraq and "weapons of mass destruction" was simply further justification for the war. Fact is, Saddam did cooperate (to some extent) and no weapons were found. We now know that there were no weapons of mass destruction (though of course this is easier to say in hindsight). I do not feel any safer because the U.S. is in Iraq, if anything I feel less safe. Afghanistan was justified, the whole world was behind the U.S., even in the middle east, no one (except for a few extremists) would condemn the U.S. for the war in Afghanistan and no one (except for a few extremists) would condone 9/11. Iraq, however, is a different story, which has only inspired MORE extremists, not fewer.

 

[wallyj]

I stand by me earlier post.The first war with Iraq was because of saddam's invasion of Kuwait.The big,bad bully,U.S., did the right thing while the rest of the world stood and watched.Cooperating to some extent is a cop-out. I would love to be able to tell the police that thier search warrant allows them to search my place but they cannot open the closet at the end of the hallway.Do you think they would agree? I wish the states would have pulled out once they determined there was no wmd's.That would have saved many American lives but would have cost many more Iraqi deaths. When they do pull out,there will be a bloodbath. I don't feel much safer with the states in Iraq,but I am glad they went there.

 

[gc]

I stand by me earlier post.The first war with Iraq was because of saddam's invasion of Kuwait.The big,bad bully,U.S., did the right thing while the rest of the world stood and watched.Cooperating to some extent is a cop-out. I would love to be able to tell the police that thier search warrant allows them to search my place but they cannot open the closet at the end of the hallway.Do you think they would agree? I wish the states would have pulled out once they determined there was no wmd's.That would have saved many American lives but would have cost many more Iraqi deaths. When they do pull out,there will be a bloodbath. I don't feel much safer with the states in Iraq,but I am glad they went there.

What makes you believe that Saddam was an imminent threat to the United States?

If you are no safer than before the war, then why are you glad they went there?

 

[MikeyDB]

Sorry Wally

There were UN inspectors doing their job and they were pulled out, besides every document supplied by the CIA "informants" used to legitimize the invasion were completely and totally bogus. Do you really think that Saddam Hussein was less dirty than Suharto or Pinochet or Marcos or ....the list goes on and on of oppressive regimes backed financially and militarily by the United States. I can understand your glee over blood running in the streets of Baghdad Kabul and everywhere other than the streets of Canada or the U.S, but are the continuing deaths of thousands in those places likely to secure the world from terrorism or is it in fact reason for many to join and perpetuate the carnage?

What has the war in Iraq and the action in Afghanistan meant to world peace and what are the numerous benefits that have fallen to us as the result of this mess?

Do you really believe that the world is a better or safer place now than it was before the WORLD COP decided to screw-over the UN, NATO, the Geneva Conventions and hundreds of thousands of people all over the world?

I'd suggest to you that the entire Iraq/Afghan mess hasn't made you or I one iota safer and that the total effect of it will be to push the nations and people involved into escalating conflict not peace. If slaughter and mayhem worked there would be peace in Israel and many other places around this planet...but it doesn't and the legacy is years of cold war, armed "de-militarized zones" and growing hatred and resentment.

Not much of a farking plan at all if history is any measure....

 

[MikeyDB]

Colpy

Obviously there's been some kind of technical glitch...I didn't read your list of nations that the actions of the United States have brought democracy prosperity and peace to as the result of killing thousands upon thousands of people to protect their "big sugar" their "big oil" and their "democracy"....

If invading nations and killing thousands of innocents worked, just tell me where that's been the outcome of action by the United States...

Nicaragua, East Timor, Vietnam, Columbia, you know...places where there now exists a democratically elected government and where everyone lives in peace and prosperity after the Yanks exported their exercise of "democracy"...

Once I receive that list I'll be happy to list the numbers of people killed and provide an outline of how wonderfully these measures have resulted in long term abiding peace and tranquility...take Haiti for example or several different places around the globe....

On balance do you believe that the actions of nations (America, Russia, France, Germany, Spain)...all those nations that believe that their weapons and military "superiority" used against populations outside the national boundaries of those nations has established a long lasting peace and brought self-sustainability and "prosperity" or have they in fact resulted in further death destruction and hatred?

 

[MikeyDB]

Buying the sizzle….

I’ve always liked to be a “hands-on” kind of guy, so when it comes to evaluating the worth/benefit/improvement/superiority of focused application of learnt and practiced skills, the outcome, the result…the consequences obtained are what I’ve always used as metric.

I’ve watched Roman Catholics and Protestants from everywhere …Ireland, America, Central Europe, the East Block countries, Central and South America….as well as Moslems Buddhists Hindus and various pagan religions all over the planet and the commonality emerges that every “belief-system” is at one time or another cited as rationale for the most inhuman and un-“god-like” behavior imaginable.

All that “good-will” and “Peace on Earth” “Love thy Neighbor” and “Turn the other cheek..” is a load of the most foul hogwash ever found amongst the detritus of a “civilized” species.

Measured by the outcomes produced by the practices of every major belief system in the world, every single one of them fails. Not just failed to deliver on the promises of peace and stability but failed most dramatically within the very structures of the paradigms themselves. They embrace gender and ethnic prejudices, invite discrimination and divisiveness practice corruption and manipulate people and governments under the sham of their credos and doctrines.

The very same application of “assessment of outcomes” produced by the willingness of some people to take it upon themselves’ to dictate moral and behavioral codes to the world on the point of a bayonet demonstrates the same legacy of failure after failure.

Of course there will be many eager to equivocate with respect to the “suitability” or “positive” outcomes and “achievements” produced in any given situation under focused examination of these kinds of historical events.

War predicated on greed and/or “need” has been a ubiquitous characteristic of human civilization. If the choice is between watching your children die from hunger or thirst on one hand, is placed beside the observation of a society enjoying abundant wealth, food, water and industry very near-by and capable of helping you, but unmotivated by either their own greed or “belief-system” to help you…that’s hardly a choice at all.

And absolutely nothing has changed or evolved in mankind to offer any hope that the alternative to war and carnage may actually be replaced by compassion tolerance balanced judgment and preparedness to address the underlying issues of injustice hunger and poverty BEFORE the alternative of war is considered….

“God-belief” doesn’t seem to carry enough weight to prevent all forms of depravity and the exercise of greed and fraud right to the very core of these systems, and politics is when all is said and done, far less concerned with justice peace and sustainability than it is with making sure that those most in control of what happens to everyone else, remain in control.

If there were a “god” I’d suggest to you that he/she/it has blown it and if the human being exemplifies the pinnacle of a creator-gods facility at creation, it’s time to examine this dude’s credentials.

Politicians….heh heh….

Politicians are masters of the lie….political correctness and “diplomacy” which at the end of the day are really just more palatable labels for misdirection disingenuousness hubris and corruption.

Perhaps our incapacity as a species to evolve beyond some point approximately 35 to 40 thousand years ago is to “blame”, but this failure to evolve can only result in being selected for extinction….

Will we all die at the hands of people who “think” that war and violence will be the avenue to peace despite the fact that that’s NEVER worked throughout all of human history or will we die because we’re so inured to consumption and greed regardless of the consequences that we’ll repeat the lessons of the Incas the Khamer and other extinct societies that “prospered” them selves to death….

Peace is much more difficult than war, because it demands that you exercise generosity while your greed cripples your "best intentions". It's more difficult because you have to allow the "evil-doers" the barbarians and the primitive their humanity and its far easier to dismiss than embrace.

It may well be that human beings will only exist for a brief flash of cosmic time, but to continue to behave the way we have and do is ludicrous...

 

[BitWhys]

The NATO agreement is an arrangement of mutual defense, not an MoU for whatever nation-building project strikes the fancy of a few nations within the pact even if Canada and a few others are presently trying to pencil in a new definition of "defense" at their convenience. This "shirker" label thing may fly with some success over here on the propaganda front for some, but the countries being "blackballed" in the effort aren't biting. I don't blame them.