The nature of Canada’s post-2011 mission in Afghanistan

Could combat operations be a part of it after all?


 

A diplomatic source from a NATO member state with large numbers of soldiers in Afghanistan tells Maclean’s his country’s government will push Canada, privately, to expand its post 2011 military deployment to include combat.


 
Filed under:

The nature of Canada’s post-2011 mission in Afghanistan

  1. a) you can't do 'training' without combat anyway

    b) of course he will

    c) Harper&Co will fall for this.

  2. a) you can't do 'training' without combat anyway

    b) of course he will

    c) Harper&Co will fall for this.

    • Aren't Canadian troops often trained without combatting an enemy? Like in years we aren't at war?

      • Here in Canada, yes

        In the middle of a shooting war in Afghanistan, no.

        • That makes no sense. Even if a soldier is not "battle-tested" they can still be "effective".

          • Canadian soldiers aren't often called upon to be in a 'shooting war'.

            Afghan ones are.

          • Is it because this is Afghans war to free their people, women, and children from Saudi Arabian nutter's plot of Islamist fundamentalist subjugation?

            Correction please Emily, Canadian soldiers are most often on the front in Afghanistan, unlike us who are on the safe front of our computer.

  3. Hey … gotta keep the kids warmed up for Yemen.

  4. Hey … gotta keep the kids warmed up for Yemen.

    • I figured it was Iran.

      We'll hardly need F-35s for Yemen!

      • So far it's a US drone playground. Winning friends and influencing people.

        And Israel is getting 20 F-35's …. for free … in hopes that they'll delay West
        Bank construction for three months. Maybe if we throw up a few mobile homes
        deep in the Republic of Madawaska we won't have to pay nuttin' !!

      • We won't for Iran either.

  5. Aren't Canadian troops often trained without combatting an enemy? Like in years we aren't at war?

  6. Here in Canada, yes

    In the middle of a shooting war in Afghanistan, no.

  7. I figured it was Iran.

    We'll hardly need F-35s for Yemen!

  8. So far it's a US drone playground. Winning friends and influencing people.

    And Israel is getting 20 F-35's …. for free … in hopes that they'll delay West
    Bank construction for three months. Maybe if we throw up a few mobile homes
    deep in the Republic of Madawaska we won't have to pay nuttin' !!

  9. We won't for Iran either.

  10. That makes no sense. Even if a soldier is not "battle-tested" they can still be "effective".

  11. Canadian soldiers aren't often called upon to be in a 'shooting war'.

    Afghan ones are.

  12. A diplomatic source from a NATO member state with large numbers of soldiers in Afghanistan

    Just a wild guess: Is the diplomatic source from the United States?

  13. A diplomatic source from a NATO member state with large numbers of soldiers in Afghanistan

    Just a wild guess: Is the diplomatic source from the United States?

    • No.

      • Thanks! My second guess would be the UK and my third guess would be Germany, but maybe I'm reading too much into the "large numbers" thing.

        • It would be rich for Germany to ask considering the cavets they have placed on their troops in entering combat

        • I have a hard time with this information, I doubt it, they can try but I don't think he will agree, because Harper didn't take this lightly, to him having the troops abroad really wear heavy in his heart, this was not an easy choice for him to make.

    • Probably another country with combat troops there. Holland, Poland or England?

      I love how this just keeps ratcheting up in scope and risk and noone seems to care. Not the media, not the opposition, and not the public. Where is the objection? Where is the outrage? Who cares? Let's have another 150 Canadians come back in coffins. Let's have another 1000 come back with broken minds and bodies. Maybe the Americans will throw us a bone and we can go cross-border shopping on our driver's licenses again.

      First we had "the troops are out of there by 2011, guaranteed"
      then trial baloons like "we will have some presence in Afghanistan post-2011"
      then "several hundred trainers mostly to be based on Kabul"
      now "1000 soldiers to be based in Kabul sometimes going out on patrol with the Afghani army"
      tomorrow "1000 soldiers in a combat operation"
      day after tomorrow ?

      • Last I heard it was 950. A very odd small clarification to the number.

  14. No.

  15. Thanks! My second guess would be the UK and my third guess would be Germany, but maybe I'm reading too much into the "large numbers" thing.

  16. It would be rich for Germany to ask considering the cavets they have placed on their troops in entering combat

  17. Probably another country with combat troops there. Holland, Poland or England?

    I love how this just keeps ratcheting up in scope and risk and noone seems to care. Not the media, not the opposition, and not the public. Where is the objection? Where is the outrage? Who cares? Let's have another 150 Canadians come back in coffins. Let's have another 1000 come back with broken minds and bodies. Maybe the Americans will throw us a bone and we can go cross-border shopping on our driver's licenses again.

    First we had "the troops are out of there by 2011, guaranteed"
    then trial baloons like "we will have some presence in Afghanistan post-2011"
    then "several hundred trainers mostly to be based on Kabul"
    now "1000 soldiers to be based in Kabul sometimes going out on patrol with the Afghani army"
    tomorrow "1000 soldiers in a combat operation"
    day after tomorrow ?

  18. I have a hard time with this information, I doubt it, they can try but I don't think he will agree, because Harper didn't take this lightly, to him having the troops abroad really wear heavy in his heart, this was not an easy choice for him to make.

  19. What bothers me most about this whole thing is how very few are asking the simple question…

    WHY are we (still) in Afghanistan?

    60% of Canadians think we should leave. Does this not matter?

  20. What bothers me most about this whole thing is how very few are asking the simple question…

    WHY are we (still) in Afghanistan?

    60% of Canadians think we should leave. Does this not matter?

    • When you consider that only roughly 40% of Canadians voted for the government, I guess it really doesn't matter. Not that I think the Liberals would be doing anything different. NATO pressure on Canada is immense.

      That's the main reason we bought the Victoria class subs.

  21. Was it Pat Martin he hasd got the corner on rumors!!!!!

  22. Was it Pat Martin he hasd got the corner on rumors!!!!!

  23. This decision cost Peter MacKay one vote in his riding. Sucks to have to vote against one of the only "red tories," but I can't bring myself to vote Conservative again. The mission creep on this has been in the realm of the ridiculous for more than half a decade now.

    His riding should still be safe though.

  24. This decision cost Peter MacKay one vote in his riding. Sucks to have to vote against one of the only "red tories," but I can't bring myself to vote Conservative again. The mission creep on this has been in the realm of the ridiculous for more than half a decade now.

    His riding should still be safe though.

  25. When you consider that only roughly 40% of Canadians voted for the government, I guess it really doesn't matter. Not that I think the Liberals would be doing anything different. NATO pressure on Canada is immense.

    That's the main reason we bought the Victoria class subs.

  26. Last I heard it was 950. A very odd small clarification to the number.

  27. Isn't today's Afghan army trainee very likely to be tomorrow's insurgent? Is it possible Canadian soldiers are training some of the men who will be trying to kill NATO occupiers at some later date?

  28. It's quite possible. The Afghani national army is riddled with Taliban.

    Or even better: once a peace treaty is signed which will allow the "moderate" Taliban to take part in the government, the troops will leave. The strongest beast rules the jungle, which means the Taliban goons take over again, only this time they'll have a Western-trained and equipped army at their disposal.

  29. It's quite possible. The Afghani national army is riddled with Taliban.

    Or even better: once a peace treaty is signed which will allow the "moderate" Taliban to take part in the government, the troops will leave. The strongest beast rules the jungle, which means the Taliban goons take over again, only this time they'll have a Western-trained and equipped army at their disposal.

  30. Fighting to keep Afghanistan from becoming an Islamic fascist state that exports terrorists is a noble cause, the West can fight them over there or wait until they come here, but either way we will end up fighting them. We should fight them over there.

  31. Fighting to keep Afghanistan from becoming an Islamic fascist state that exports terrorists is a noble cause, the West can fight them over there or wait until they come here, but either way we will end up fighting them. We should fight them over there.

    • Now I know who was voting me down without a response. Move to the US, Philanthropist. I think it would suit you better.

  32. Is it because this is Afghans war to free their people, women, and children from Saudi Arabian nutter's plot of Islamist fundamentalist subjugation?

    Correction please Emily, Canadian soldiers are most often on the front in Afghanistan, unlike us who are on the safe front of our computer.

  33. I too don't like to have our soldiers extend their time in Afghanistan. With US flooding that country with unaccountable money (buying loyalty and support), it won't be long before the current government will alienate the population due to graft and corruption. The probability of them rebelling at the current government and those who support them will be more likely. This had happen in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia and that had been one of the biggest reasons why America lost that war. Canada should get out from there as soon as they are able.

  34. Now I know who was voting me down without a response. Move to the US, Philanthropist. I think it would suit you better.