Afghanistan debate (Hillier, new troops)

[kEiThZ]

So far, you've stated that you don't want troops to be pulled out, but you don't want to see them operating there, either. You claim that the Taliban is as strong as ever, but fail to recognize that the Taliban's aim is to kill those troops and to be the government of the country. You imagine that nation-building can proceed when such an effort would be under direct attack from the Taliban. You messaging is extremely confused. Maybe you should offer an actual idea (not an idealistic theory) as to what should be done, and why.

Be careful. Pointing out the inconsistencies in Mot's arguments will get you accusations of all sorts and a spot on his ignore list!

 

[kEiThZ]

Lest anyone think that Harper is saying something new here, his position has not really been inconsistent, and it is line with our military, our diplomats, our aid workers, etc. have been advising the government for a while. And it's exactly what I have argued on this thread for a while. The Afghans needed time to develop their security apparatus. They are now getting there. The US surge will buy them a little more time. After that, it'll be time for them to start taking responsibility for their own security.

 

[Mot]

My reference is the fact that they are not the government of Afghanistan any more, nor are they operating in the open any more. The Taliban operate from Pakistan and when in Afghanistan must hide among the people. That means they are not as strong as you claim them to be.


As for references, please back your points first before you demand others do so (and something other than speculative or sensational newspaper articles).


So far, you've stated that you don't want troops to be pulled out, but you don't want to see them operating there, either. You claim that the Taliban is as strong as ever, but fail to recognize that the Taliban's aim is to kill those troops and to be the government of the country. You imagine that nation-building can proceed when such an effort would be under direct attack from the Taliban. You messaging is extremely confused. Maybe you should offer an actual idea (not an idealistic theory) as to what should be done, and why.

My references are from the articles I have posted including and especially the one where our own military admitted the power of the Taliban is still very real and very strong. It's ok to admit you have no real proof and it's just your opinion. I accept that. I amrunning on my opinion based on articles I read about the Taliban solidly being in control after 7 years of bad policy.

My message is clear, we are failing in our mission there. I wish you would prove me wrong, a link would help like I provided and I can look up more articles if you want. Your side of this debate offered none so far. Heck, even Harper knows we don't have a plan. I certainly wouldn't expect some guy from Toronto such as yourself or I to come up with one. It's beyond our job titles and expertise. I can be a critic without being an expert. I don't need to be a mechanic to know that my car isn't working properly.

 

[kEiThZ]

My references are from the articles I have posted including and especially the one where our own military admitted the power of the Taliban is still very real and very strong. It's ok to admit you have no real proof and it's just your opinion. I accept that. I amrunning on my opinion based on articles I read about the Taliban solidly being in control after 7 years of bad policy.

Stir around falsehoods and repeat. Still no link proving that the Taliban are back in power....just an interpretation that they are 'solidly in control' with no evidence to back that assertion up. Sigh.

I don't need to be a mechanic to know that my car isn't working properly.

But he would tell his mechanic to leave the job half done!

 

[Mot]

i have to complement his honesty. even though i don't agree with him on all issues, harper is no dummy.

there is a real need to protect innocent people over there from acid attacks and other insanity but that country is one Fu<ked up place that's not gonna be fixed for a long time. it's a tragedy. just look how long it took our western societies to get to the point where they are today. and the change didn't come from the outside, it came from within.

True my friend. Democracy doesn't seem come from the end of a gun pointed at you or because your country was invaded and they force it on you. It has to come from within. Let's hope Afghanistan manages to do it.

 

[Hydrogen]

My references are from the articles I have posted including and especially the one where our own military admitted the power of the Taliban is still very real and very strong. It's ok to admit you have no real proof and it's just your opinion. I accept that. I amrunning on my opinion based on articles I read about the Taliban solidly being in control after 7 years of bad policy.

My message is clear, we are failing in our mission there. I wish you would prove me wrong, a link would help like I provided and I can look up more articles if you want. Your side of this debate offered none so far. Heck, even Harper knows we don't have a plan. I certainly wouldn't expect some guy from Toronto such as yourself or I to come up with one. It's beyond our job titles and expertise. I can be a critic without being an expert. I don't need to be a mechanic to know that my car isn't working properly.

I have proof. It's called an elected Afghan government, the safe movement of aid, schools for children increasingly free of extremist dogma, a populace increasingly free of control of religious zealots.

Does that mean perfection has been achieved? No, not at all. But it all stands as pretty good evidence that the Taliban are not in control as you constantly repeat. I guess for you, it's perfection or nothing. Always an easy stance to take.


Honestly, sometimes you come off sounding just a bit like the right-wing's favourite caricature of a liberal. You first pound the table at the realization of an injustice somewhere else in the world, and then demand something be done by your government. When the government finally acts, you immediately find fault, claiming they are doing everything wrong, failing the people, are acting inappropriately and then finally conclude by calling them invaders and occupiers (all the while claiming that you want the original injustices dealt with). You feel free to criticize everything while never offering any realistic alternatives, that way you never have to defend a position. In the end, you state the government has failed and must be held accountable for the injustices going on in that part of the world. But had they listened to you, things would have been dandy. In the end, you were not really paying any attention to the people in that country anymore. It was the politics at home that really mattered. It always was.

Then a week later, you become aware of an injustice somewhere else in the world...



What would you have done, Mot? What would you do now? I still have not seen any effort whatsoever to address these questions.

 

[Mot]

I have proof. It's called an elected Afghan government, the safe movement of aid, schools for children increasingly free of extremist dogma, a populace increasingly free of control of religious zealots.

Does that mean perfection has been achieved? No, not at all. But it all stands as pretty good evidence that the Taliban are not in control as you constantly repeat. I guess for you, it's perfection or nothing. Always an easy stance to take.


Honestly, sometimes you come off sounding just a bit like the right-wing's favourite caricature of a liberal. You first pound the table at the realization of an injustice somewhere else in the world, and then demand something be done by your government. When the government finally acts, you immediately find fault, claiming they are doing everything wrong, failing the people, are acting inappropriately and then finally conclude by calling them invaders and occupiers (all the while claiming that you want the original injustices dealt with). You feel free to criticize everything while never offering any realistic alternatives, that way you never have to defend a position. In the end, you state the government has failed and must be held accountable for the injustices going on in that part of the world. But had they listened to you, things would have been dandy. In the end, you were not really paying any attention to the people in that country anymore. It was the politics at home that really mattered. It always was.

Then a week later, you become aware of an injustice somewhere else in the world...



What would you have done, Mot? What would you do now? I still have not seen any effort whatsoever to address these questions.

Duly noted, you've got no links. Thanks for trying. BTW- Ad Hom attacks are not proof of your argument in any way, shape or form. Perhaps it's time to put you on ignore as others recommended. I'll give you one more chance.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Mot:

That's enough - try not to use ignore as part of your argument? If you want to ignore, that's fine - but try not to make drama out of it and name names?

re: Harper

I think all that talk is about an exit strategy - especially knowing continued involvement in Afghanistan probably won't be politically palatable to Canadians (much less so when the economy is in the doldrums). You would not have heard him say that in opposition, or even in his early years in power - when he was still using his alpha male posturing re: "strong leadership".

AoD

 

[urbandreamer]

I'm kinda thinking Harper's "reality check" re: Afghanistan is really being driven by his anti-Obama handlers...whatcha y'all think?

Of course the army is gonna leave. And the Taliban types will be back in force, anyone talk to the local Afghani-Canadians lately to see what they're hearing?

 

[Prometheus The Supremo]

Taliban bomb killed children, probe finds

more developments:

TheStar.com - World - Taliban bomb killed children, probe finds

March 02, 2009
Murray Brewster
THE CANADIAN PRESS

KANDAHAR, Afghanistan–The explosion that killed three Afghan children last week was the work of the Taliban and not Canada's fault, say military officials who admit they're still struggling to understand the outburst of anti-Canadian sentiment touched off by the tragedy.

Forensic analysis of fragments from the bomb that killed the three young boys determined it was likely an old munition, perhaps left over from the Soviet occupation, that may have been fashioned into a booby trap, officials said.

Using old explosive material in a homemade bomb is a classic Taliban tactic, said Brig.-Gen. Jonathan Vance, the commander of Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan.

"The burden of proof and experience in this part of the province places the likelihood of harming people with explosives squarely on the shoulders of the insurgency, not on the shoulders of Canadians," Vance said.

The children, aged 4, 12 and 13, likely found the device in a field on the way home from school and brought it into the village of Salehan, west of Kandahar city, before it detonated as they stood on a gravel pathway, he said in a prepared statement.

"The most likely cause of this explosion was an anti-personnel IED, based on all of the factors at the scene."

Grief-stricken villagers paraded in the streets of Kandahar after the blast, displaying the shattered bodies of two of the victims and crying for vengeance against Canada.

A Panjwaii district elder claimed the blast was the result of an unexploded Canadian mortar the boys found while scavenging for scrap metal, a common – if perilous – source of revenue in dirt-poor Afghanistan.

Almost from the outset, Afghan police blamed the Taliban for the attack and theorized that the children had likely come across a booby trap that may have been meant for Canadian soldiers.

The fact villagers were eager to blame Canadians is troubling and difficult to explain, Vance conceded.

"Perhaps we can also muster some understanding as to why the initial reports and grief expressed by the families towards Canadian soldiers was sadly misplaced."

The answer may lie in the fact that Salehan includes a separate community for the many local Afghans who have been left maimed and handicapped by years of living in the midst of armed conflict.

Canadian troops have conducted weekly range practice in the area, firing from heavy tanks and artillery in exercises that Vance defended Monday as both necessary and safe.

"It was a good spot to do a range," he said. "The actual aiming point was far away from the village."

For the military, such range exercises serve two purposes: they allow for training and target practice, but also serve to demonstrate the might of Canadian firepower in a region known as a transit point for Taliban fighters.

Vance did not address the question of whether it was appropriate to conduct live-fire exercises in such proximity to a group of people badly scarred by war, nor that of whether such practice could have bred simmering resentment.

He did acknowledge there had been complaints about the noise, and called it "a reasonable request" to move the range – something he intends to do.

There was no immediate reaction from Salehan to Monday's news, which was delivered to Afghan media by Kandahar governor Tooryalai Wesa.

In spite of the fact coalition forces were not to blame, families of the dead and injured have already been compensated by Wesa, an Afghan-Canadian who has been on the job a scant few weeks.

Unlike the complex, litigious nature of the western approach to a wrongful death, the Pashtu culture is more straightforward. Whenever someone is killed, be it deliberately or accidentally, those responsible assume a debt obligation.

Each affected family was paid the rough equivalent of about $2,700 Cdn, since nothing would be forthcoming from either the Taliban or the long-departed Soviets, Panjwaii district leader Haji Baran said in an interview with The Canadian Press.

Indeed, it's possible the anguished display of fiery anti-Canadian rhetoric was little more than a play for compensation in a society where children, no matter their age, are vital contributors to the family's income.

"Those people have already lost a lot," Baran said of the handicapped villagers. "Those kids were looking for metal to sell it, because they are so poor."

The father of one of the victims lamented the loss of his eldest son, 13-year-old Sadar Mohammed, who was engaged to be married and intended to help support his family.

Ghazi Toor Jan, who is blind in one eye from a mine explosion during the Soviet occupation, said last week that his son was everything to him.

That grief, shared by the entire village, mingled with lingering frustration to create a highly volatile mix of emotions that erupted in last week's gruesome display in Kandahar, Baran said.

Just a couple of months ago, Canadian development officials had made contact with the tiny hamlet, which is nestled near the soaring volcanic peak of Tur Ghar. They had hoped to make inroads among notoriously suspicious locals.

Baran said the people believed the promises they heard and were generally impressed.

"These people like Canadians because they know Canadians."


source

 

[kEiThZ]

^ Called it.

 

[kEiThZ]

Duly noted, you've got no links. Thanks for trying. BTW- Ad Hom attacks are not proof of your argument in any way, shape or form. Perhaps it's time to put you on ignore as others recommended. I'll give you one more chance.

The guy can't provide a single link to the Taliban government in exile homepage, yet the rest of us get labelled the illogical bunch. Meanwhile a simple google search yields this:

http://www.president.gov.af/

Perhaps it's time for the rest of us to hit ignore on Mot.

 

[afransen]

^ Called it.

Will Afghans believe it or assume the investigation was rigged?

 

[kEiThZ]

Will Afghans believe it or assume the investigation was rigged?

They'll be happy they got compensation and they'll move one. It's a sad thing, but life is cheap in that part of the world. The life expectancy in Afghanistan is in the high 40s. This is a place where people die all the time. It's a sad thing but thats reality. Part of the big reason that LE is so low is because a lot of kids get killed. The suffer the consequences of poverty, the ongoing war and quite often are victims to leftover ordinance or bomblets. It is also a place where parents have kids so that they can be taken care of by what the kids will earn. And in most cases that earning potential is a big part of the worth of that child. We can't of course compensate for the human being who has lost his/her life but we can compensate the parents for the loss of income of that child and help out with the funeral expenses.

I am fairly sure in this case that they probably knew that it was ex-soviet UXO or a Taliban IED. It would be a violation of a range procedures to leave unexploded ordinance (UXO) lying around. We even collect our own casings after a shoot (mostly for environmental reasons). And we do try to keep people off the range, despite being fairly sure that we don't leave stuff on the range for their own safety. So I think the Afghans are probably fairly sure of what happened. If not, I would suspect that the confusion has since been cleared up. It's quite common to see the Afghans treat UXO without the care it deserves. It's not uncommon for the ANP or ANA to occassionally toss an IED or UXO in the back of a pickup and drive it back to KAF (and then not understand why we get pissed that they parked a truck with a bomb outside the office) or for them to try shooting at the stuff instead of waiting for Canadian engineers. They've lived with this stuff longer than a few of us have been on the planet and familiarity does breed contempt.

I am willing to bet that the loss of income (troops stop and buy things from the locals occassionally) and security that comes from the range moving away might well prompt some elders to reconsider their request to move the range in due course.

 

[Hydrogen]

Duly noted, you've got no links. Thanks for trying. BTW- Ad Hom attacks are not proof of your argument in any way, shape or form. Perhaps it's time to put you on ignore as others recommended. I'll give you one more chance.

Put me on your ignore list. I'll forfeit the offer of a chance.

I still see nothing in the way of what you would have done in the past, or what you would do now.