PM to speak in defence of Afghan mission

[CHIMO]

OTTAWA -- Prime Minister Stephen Harper plans to use Monday's fifth anniversary of the al-Qaeda attacks on the United States as an opportunity to lay out the case for Canadian military operations in Afghanistan.

Mr. Harper will make a statement Monday afternoon in the foyer of the House of Commons about the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and the 24 Canadians who perished when the World Trade Center in New York was hit by hijacked jetliners, his office said.

He will also talk about the Afghan mission, where more than 2,200 Canadian soldiers are fighting a counterinsurgency against the Taliban. The old Taliban regime allowed Osama bin Laden to set up al-Qaeda training camps and plan the Sept. 11 attacks.

Canadian diplomats in Washington say touting Canadian military operations in Afghanistan helps open doors with U.S. President George W. Bush's officials.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20060909.HARPER09/TPStory/

[tuvor]

1. This "24 Canadians died" talking point is bullshit.

I don't remember Harper--or anyone else--ever using that as a reason to go to Afgnanistan until around the time of the last election.

On the bright side, maybe he'll finally explain what exactly our goal is in Afghanistan, and how we'll be able to measure the progress.

[daleo]

2. 24 Canadians died in an attack on New York, so we go to war in Afghanistan

By that logic, since 8 Canadians died in an Israeli attack on Lebanon, we should go to war with Israel.

[MrPrax]

3. Harper can't convince this guy...

Top soldier quits as blundering campaign turns into 'pointless'

THE former aide-de-camp to the commander of the British taskforce in southern Afghanistan has described the campaign in Helmand province as “a textbook case of how to screw up a counter-insurgency”.

“Having a big old fight is pointless and just making things worse,” said Captain Leo Docherty, of the Scots Guards, who became so disillusioned that he quit the army last month.

...

“All those people whose homes have been destroyed and sons killed are going to turn against the British,” he said. “It’s a pretty clear equation — if people are losing homes and poppy fields, they will go and fight. I certainly would.

“We’ve been grotesquely clumsy — we’ve said we’ll be different to the Americans who were bombing and strafing villages, then behaved exactly like them.”

TimesOnline -- good observations...and tragic that the much older British experience in Afghanistan is NOT being consulted by our own homeland warriors.

:rant:

More evidence we are being lied to about the mission and it's purposes...food for thought for 'Bush's cheerleaders' (you know who you are) here in the Canada forum and their various attempts to help 'catapult Tory propaganda' through generic strawman arguments:

'cut and run' = whatever the fuck that means...is this a credible policy or a braggard's barroom taunt designed to undermine one's virility?

'we broke it, we GOTTA fix it', = we GOTTA? Why not pay reparations and let them do it?

'womens' rights' = perhaps the first time in human history since Troy that a war was fought over women or maybe not:
The very next day, forces under his command shot and killed an unarmed American serviceman; wounded another; arrested and brutally beat a third American serviceman; and then brutally interrogated his wife, threatening her with sexual abuse. That was enough.
Bush1 Address on the Fake Pretext of Invading Panama (Operation Just Cause) Text...another monster that required us to kill up to 4000 people...but the drugs still flow?

'help the Afghanis, not the Taliban' = same fuckin' people of course...anyone we KILL is going to be Taliban because we don't kill innocent Afghanis, right?...even if the news reports says 300 taliban killed...shit Americans never kill innocent people...oh well, other than Canadian soldiers...then it's a mistake!

The proverbial Hunt for Osama and AQ = people still the drinking the kool-aid on that one...neither the US OR Pakistan is looking for him, so why should good Canadian kids get killed over it...


Now I understand the Tories have slyly increased our committment by sending tanks? Link

So let's stop talking about our noble mission in Afghanistan and start talking about a government dedicated to a 'smaller footprint' (read: cutbacks), while at the same time using this HORSESHIT to increase military spending at the expense of the programs that Canadians have fought for decade after decade, huh?

To the warmongers!

There are 180 or so countries in the world that you can examine and find fault with in varying degrees...any of these expensive corrections to them worth undermining your own rights, freedoms and services?

If turn our countries into RW paranoid militarist countries based on secret show trials, corporate largesse and 'war' spending, then exactly what 'western values' are we suppose to be representing? Which one of these values are we exporting? War? Profiteering? Failure?