“Canadian soldiers are now less safe, thanks to the decision taken by the United States to ignore Canadian advice and destroy poppy crops after our troops had promised farmers their crops would be left alone. Poppies are a major source of income for the Afghani people and their eradication has left starvation and devastation in areas where Canadian troops are responsible.”
The Green Party would heed advice from the Senlis Council, an international think-tank. The Senlis Council suggests growing poppies under controlled conditions for medicinal purposes, helping farmers to break the cycle of growing poppies for illicit use.
http://www.greenparty.ca/en/www.greenparty.ca/en/releases/09.04.2007
[Proofreader's note: this article was edited for spelling and typos on April 10, 2007]
Note: http://www.greenparty.c...
Green Party: Canada Should Focus Effort On Relief In Afghanistan, Not Combat
Posted on Monday, April 09 at 17:44 by JimmyDContributed By
Topic
Article Rating
(0 votes)
Options
Stumble It!Comments
view comments in forum
They should pull back to Kabul, then the people in Kandahar that really need the aid that the UN won't deliver won't be able to get it! We made them rich enough by building a road through their property they should afford their own aid now. Those ungrateful bindle stiffs.
/sarcasm
"Canadian soldiers are now less safe, thanks to the decision taken by the United States to ignore Canadian advice and destroy poppy crops after our troops had promised farmers their crops would be left alone."
Yes, great move there. Poppies are bad, but dead soldiers are worse.
"The Green Party would heed advice from the Senlis Council, an international think-tank. The Senlis Council suggests growing poppies under controlled conditions for medicinal purposes, helping farmers to break the cycle of growing poppies for illicit use."
Good idea, gets rid of three problems with one action. (Illicit crop, poor farmers and worldwide shortage of codine). Trouble is, the people that call for the pull out of troops are also citing the growth of the poppy crop as one of the major failures, and we should bring 'em home.
Man, I don't know what it is about Afghanistan. Sometimes, trying to refrain from commenting on it is just impossible for me. I guess it has to be compounded by really poorly thought out political policy. Perhaps it's the friends I've lost there, compounded by the Vimy ceremonies today.
---
The preceding comment deals with mature subject matter, however immaturely presented. Viewer discretion is advised.
That's also a little mixed up logistics, equating Green Party policy with 'those who want us out of there'. The Green party policy is what it is, they didn't say to leave completely, they said to move south, which incidentally is where most countries have agreed to move, except for sucker Canada.
As for aid, that can be done any number of ways even if troops lead. The taliban has ground forces, but what they don't have is air power. If allied forces can drop bombs on people, they can sure as hell drop aid in any number. Even the Taliban would have no problem with that, there is no point in ruling a territory where there are no people-getting rid of the people, that was OUR idea.
If people are looking for a break then turn off the TV and look at the other side. They talk and talk about Vimy Ridge, but they don't say much about it. For example the fact that 85% of the german guns were wiped out by artillery fire before the attack even happened in what the germans still call "the week of suffering". War creates problems, it doesn't solve them, it only lets politicians pretend they care. Say no to war, then go from there.
James Connolly in the Glasgow Forward August 15, 1914 (WWI)
As you said in your opening “…the Armed Forces were a combat oriented organization.” And as a combat organisation there will be deaths, horrible deaths. Those men are not lost, they are dead, dead because they believed the “really poorly thought out political policy.” Feed them.<br />
<br />
The war machine is ever hungry for believers <br />
<br />
I can understand that it is difficult for you to refrain from commenting it is equally difficult for many of those of us who see senseless slaughter of all involved<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Not that it matters a fiddlers f**k but, I fully agree.<br />
<br />
Exactly why are we in Afghanistan?<br />
<br />
<a href="http://rabble.ca/news_full_story.shtml?sh_itm=ca5c647c616c8f1e450e02b348f1af4e&rXn=1&">http://rabble.ca/news_full_story.shtml?sh_itm=ca5c647c616c8f1e450e02b348f1af4e&rXn=1&</a>; <br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.rabble.ca/everyones_a_critic.shtml?x=48813">http://www.rabble.ca/everyones_a_critic.shtml?x=48813</a> <br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.fpri.org/enotes/americawar.20011012.radu.fearafghanistan.html">http://www.fpri.org/enotes/americawar.20011012.radu.fearafghanistan.html</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Afghanistan/Afghanistan_CIA_Taliban.html">http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Afghanistan/Afghanistan_CIA_Taliban.html</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/BEH502A.html">http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/BEH502A.html</a><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<p>---<br>"And God said: 'Let there be Satan, so people don't blame everything on me. And let there be lawyers, so people don't blame everything on Satan."<br />
<br />
* George Bu
- Albert Einstein
This is a serious matter, and sarcasm does not fit with being part of the solution.
---
"The world will not evolve past its current state of crisis by using the same thinking that created the situation."
- Albert Einstein
Not just in this matter, but all matters. We've all seen governments that rule by opinion polls, and it is invariable the ones who need help the most that suffer when a government decides to do what is popular, not what needs to be done because it is the right thing to do.
Withdrawing from Kandahar is the wrong thing, because we have started to earn the respect and trust of locals. We are making a positive difference, and to withdraw because we got a bloody nose is the wrong thing to do.
"have you bought into the 'support our troops - send them to war' mantra?"
Ad hominem attacks don't work on me. Marcarc makes a good point, but "common retort for imperialists" just flows off me. Your attempt to paint me as a war monger is the same.
---
The preceding comment deals with mature subject matter, however immaturely presented. Viewer discretion is advised.
I didn't mean to pose an ad hominem attack, and I apologize for the tone of that question.
---
"The world will not evolve past its current state of crisis by using the same thinking that created the situation."
- Albert Einstein
Passions are bound to be aroused, but I take no offense at it. I hope you won't take offense at my ramblings ethier.
---
The preceding comment deals with mature subject matter, however immaturely presented. Viewer discretion is advised.
Ahh! Now we get to the meat!
As Marcarc points out - look at the other side. Me, I'm disgusted. The Taliban are IMHO, scum. I'm not saying that to dehumanize them, for they want what they believe is Utiopa. Where women serve men unquestionably, and children are the spoils of war to be sold and used as The Men see fit.
They however, control through fear and ideology, much of the south of the country. In order for the UN to deliver aid, there must be security. The Taliban will not let the UN through, because it usurps their authority. So, force is nessecary. The Canadians are famous for wrangling a Herc on aid drops to troops and civillians alike - but it's not NATO's responsibility. It's the UN and the Afghan governments responsibility. Until the Afghan forces are trained enough to protect their own country, NATO is responsible for the security of the UN.
It's basic training for Canadian forces NOT to hand out food and aid. It sucks, but there is a reason behind it. If you give food and wather to everyone who shows up at the camp, they tell two friends (and so on and so on) and the next day there is a hundren, then a thousand . . .it's preferrable to go to the people where they live and deliver the aid. And again, the Taliban won't allow it. I saw the exact same thing in Somalia with the Warlords. The Warlords took the food from the UN to maintain their power over the people.
So "focus effort on relief in Afghanistan, not combat" is a poor political decision that will accomplish nothing. It a knee jerk response to the death of 6 men.
---
The preceding comment deals with mature subject matter, however immaturely presented. Viewer discretion is advised.
Why should we trust our political rulers on this any more than on any other issue? Our politicians have proven time and again to be corrupt liars, what makes you think they would genuinely care about the Afghan people?
I do believe we should help the Afghan people. But, seriously, our troops are in Afghanistan with NATO, with the US, not as a peace-keeping mission. We're not there to help people, we're helping the US occupy the place, nothing more.
Our leaders, the Talibans, the US government, none of them give a damn about the Afghans. So soldiers kill each other for the petty agendas of their rulers while innocents are caught in the crossfire. Our government supports a corrupt Afghan government which was installed by the US when they invaded. And we should remember why the US supposedly went in there: to capture Osama bin Laden, which the Talibans were supposedly hiding. Also, the Talibans were able to come to power through the past actions of the US government. What's the difference between Afghanistan and Iraq, really?
So, why the hell is focusing on aid rather than combat, or getting out of there supposed to be a bad thing?! Currently, we're just doing the dirty work of the US government, which uses the events in the region to destabilize and destroy whole countries and justify their presence.
They never caught Bin Laden. He was soon forgotten in favor of Iraq's imaginary WMDs.
They have lied again and again and again and again and we are helping them. Why are you believing them now? We're there to protect the Afghans from the Talibans? Yeah, right. We're there to help the US get in control of the place. Nothing more.
We cannot make a difference. We're doing the dirty works of warmongers. We're not there to help. We're there to fight on behalf of the NATO, which pretty much means on behalf of the US, these days. If our politicians we're genuinely interested in the well-being of people all over the world, things might have been different. But they're not. They don't hesitate to feed the army and the people false information if it suits their needs. They don't care how many people have to die for them to quench their endless thirst for riches.
In this context, how can our troops know who is really the enemy? Are they going to raid the house of dangerous and blood-thirsty terrorists? Or the house of a family whose members spoke out against the occupation? How can we know? How can we believe our rulers to tell us the truth when they have lied so much?
That's why I think we should get the hell out of there *immediately*. We're only making matters worse. We're only helping the US in their pursuits of world domination. We're attacking our "enemies" based on what corrupt liars tell us. We're not helping anyone. Someday, maybe things will be different and we'll be able to come back and truly help people there.
Someday.
Not now.
The Sharp Wolf
"We're often told that we are there to help rebuild Afghanistan. Little is said as to why we have to *RE*build in the first place."
Promises are very cheap when there are no consequences for breaking them.
You used the words "high hopes" which implies having "faith" that something desirable will happen without any reason to assume that will be the case.
You are free to have faith in whatever belief system you subscribe to, but I have good reason to have no faith in the system of politics. Unless those who make political promises are held to their word at the point of a loaded gun, it is wise to go with the historical fact that the high priests of politics will continue to lie, cheat, steal, and do the exact opposite of whatever they promised before getting elevated to a position of power on faith alone.
There is every reason to assume that The Green Party of Canada will do what all political parties have done in the past, and that is to break their cheaply made promises and swindle the people who blindly supported them on faith alone.
We shouldn't. So talk to the soldiers on the ground who are there, and know what the situation is. I had friends there, so I had the inside scoop. I don't trust the MSM, I trust the soldiers who were sent to do a job, and are doing a job they believe in. Enough that they are willing to die for it.
"Our politicians have proven time and again to be corrupt liars, what makes you think they would genuinely care about the Afghan people?"
It is in their best interests, and they are sending our best soldiers. Time and again, it's been shown that failed economies are the prime breeding grounds for terror. More Canadian civillian deaths because politicians did nothing is not the way to get re-elected.
The proof the politicians care is they are not sending politicians with money.
"I do believe we should help the Afghan people. But, seriously, our troops are in Afghanistan with NATO, with the US, not as a peace-keeping mission. We're not there to help people, we're helping the US occupy the place, nothing more."
So, if we are occupiers, why send only 2500 troops? And we haven't been on a 'peacekeeping' mission since Suez. Why do you believe the MSM now? Afghanistan was never about peacekkeping.
"What's the difference between Afghanistan and Iraq, really?"
Dead Canadians. One of those countries harboured people responsible for this.
"So, why the hell is focusing on aid rather than combat, or getting out of there supposed to be a bad thing?! "
Because, as I said, the Taliban won't allow indirect aid; they will keep the money to line their own pockets. The won't allow direct aid, because it interferes with their agenda. To ensure direct aid, we have to be there to ensure it gets delivered to whom it is needed.
"Yeah, right. We're there to help the US get in control of the place. Nothing more."
So why donate aid at all? If the US is there as occupiers, why allow Taliban and Warlords to hold seats in Parlament? If the oil is in the north, why are we protecting the south?
"We cannot make a difference."
Especially if we don't try. But we are making a difference. So I think we should continue to try.
"In this context, how can our troops know who is really the enemy? "
The 'enemy' could just put on uniforms and meet us face to face, instead of blowing up civillians. But they tried that, and failed. That has contributed to the people swaying towards us, and making the Taliban irrelevant.
"That's why I think we should get the hell out of there *immediately*."
As is your right, but I thought you said above that we should help the Afghan people?
"Someday, maybe things will be different and we'll be able to come back and truly help people there."
No, we won't. If history teaches us anything, is that Afghans are very independent. They are waiting to see which side to back, and we have shown them we are both willing to help, and willing to die to protect them from the Taliban. If we leave, we send the clear signal to one of the strongest fighters ever that we don't have the stomach to do what it takes to help them. They will never forget that, and we can never go back. Like the British and the Russians.
---
The preceding comment deals with mature subject matter, however immaturely presented. Viewer discretion is advised.