A Misguided Mission That Is Destined To Fail

Posted on Sunday, April 09 at 12:27 by 4Canada
Some of the limited allocated time will go, as it must, to paying tribute to our soldiers. But part of the opposition rhetoric will be devoted to deflecting the Harper strategy, copied from George W. Bush, of equating criticism of politicians with disloyalty to the troops. It is now clear that Gen. Hillier and the Paul Martin Liberals have been less than honest about what they've got us into in Afghanistan. Our 2,300 troops are part of a "multinational operation" in which we are the only nation, the Dutch and the British having delayed their deployments. We are part of a NATO operation that doesn't quite exist. We are working for, and under, the U.S. command. That's no sin until you realize what Ottawa has committed our troops to. The twin tasks assigned them — beating back the Taliban's guerrilla warfare, and eradicating opium — are misguided and, for the most part, destined to fail. Our soldiers will inherit the ill-will generated by Americans in the last four years of failed attempts at finding Osama bin Laden, using such obtuse tactics as terrorizing entire villages with scary nighttime raids, mass arrests and with little care for civilian deaths. http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1144446612409&call_pageid=970599109774&col=Columnist969907621513

Note: http://www.thestar.com/...

Contributed By


Topic


Article Rating

 (0 votes) 

Options




Comments

  1. Mon Apr 10, 2006 3:01 am
    Makes some good points...the entire article is worth reading.

    ---
    People who openly hate America, while making money from America, burning U.S. flags, waving Mexican and Jamaican flags, while demanding the right to be American

  2. Mon Apr 10, 2006 3:54 pm
    Today I read that Bush's group is actually considering using
    NUCLEAR air strikes against Iran. Those would be "first strikes"
    automatically invoking the victim's right to use Nuclear retaliation.

    What possible gain does the Canadian government (whether
    Martin's or Harper's) see in aligning ourselves with these lunatics!

  3. by Jeff
    Mon Apr 10, 2006 5:01 pm
    Posturing I don’t agree with, but posturing nonetheless. Seymour Hersh was doing the circuit this weekend as he’d broken the news in the latest issue of the New Yorker. Man, Hersh is a monster.

    Anyhow, even he acknowledged that when the JcoS want the options laid out for the complete removal of a site 75 feet underground, a tactical thermo-nuclear is the best option as far as eliminating doubt – that hidden facility will be no more. That’s the job of an advisor in this case – to lay everything out on the table.

    The problem is, of course, the administration’s reluctance to do the obvious – remove that option entirely for very self-evident reasons.

    Again, I think it is pure posturing and nothing more. Even their own estimates have Iran not being truly capable for about 8 years. Plenty of time for diplomacy (fingers crossed).



view comments in forum


You need to be a member and be logged into the site, to comment on stories.




Your Voice

To post to the site, just sign up for a free membership/user account and then hit submit. Posts in English or French are welcome. You can email any other suggestions or comments on site content to the site editor. (Please note that Vive le Canada does not necessarily endorse the opinions or comments posted on the site.)

canadian bloggers | canadian news