Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Canada says can't keep up Afghan tour without help

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Canada says can't keep up Afghan tour without help

    Canada says can't keep up Afghan tour without help

    19 Oct 2006 18:55:02 GMT
    Source: Reuters
    Afghan turmoil
    More By David Ljunggren

    OTTAWA, Oct 19 (Reuters) - Canada increased the pressure on reluctant NATO allies to send more troops to war-torn southern Afghanistan on Thursday and said it could not maintain its 2,300-strong military mission there without more support.

    Several European NATO members have troops in more peaceful parts of Afghanistan, but they restrict the missions the soldiers may carry out or refuse to send them to the south, where Canadian forces have frequently clashed with Taliban militants.

    More than 40 Canadian soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan so far.

    Canadian Foreign Minister Peter MacKay said he had told NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer that Canada was finding it increasingly hard to continue.

    "My point to him was that we cannot continue to do this without further support," he said in a speech at the foreign ministry which was also carried on live television.

    "No one country, or even a handful of countries, can do all that is necessary to provide the kind of security environment needed in the other parts of the mission -- reconstruction and development."

    De Hoop Scheffer told BBC radio on Thursday that other NATO members needed to do more in Afghanistan.

    Canadian Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor said late on Wednesday that he hoped the questions of troop numbers and restrictions would be solved by the time NATO holds a summit in the Latvian capital Riga at the end of November.

    "We are using the consultative councils of NATO to ensure that our allies are aware of the boots-on-the-ground requirement for (NATO) troops other than the Canadians in this region," said MacKay.

    Canada's mission is due to stay in Kandahar until early 2009, but senior officials have openly mused about maintaining some kind of military presence after that.

    The 26-member alliance admits it underestimated Taliban resistance in the south, where British, Dutch and Canadian soldiers are embroiled in what has been the toughest ground combat in NATO's 57-year history.

    MacKay said Ottawa would continue putting pressure on NATO, and he lashed out at domestic critics of the mission who either want the troops to be withdrawn or are suggesting NATO needs to open talks with the Taliban.

    "It fuels frustration and demoralization for our proud soldiers, and it motivates and emboldens the Taliban," he said.
    To sit down with these men and deal with them as the representatives of an enlightened and civilized people is to deride ones own dignity and to invite the disaster of their treachery - General Matthew Ridgway

  • #2
    How many soldiers do the Canadians have in total?
    Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservative.
    - John Stuart Mill.

    Comment


    • #3
      2300 Soldiers. + JTF and info is hard to find on those guys.

      Comment


      • #4
        It's JTF 2, Green Sqn.

        Comment


        • #5
          If I had things my way we'd have a Battlegroup over there with you, but the simple fact is, some of our soldiers would die, the public would wail and cry about it, and they'd get withdrawn.

          Comment


          • #6
            I have had a few friends go over and return. One of my Best Friends is there right now. He Comes home in Febuary.

            Most of them went before Canada got into active combat.
            Last edited by Canuck; 01 Dec 06,, 04:42.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Canuck View Post
              I have had a few friends go over and return. One of my Best Friends is there right now. He Comes home in Febuary.

              Most of them went before Canada got into active combat.
              really so there were there before october 2002?

              Comment


              • #8
                When I said Active combat I meant Khandahar Vs Kabul. As you are prob aware Kabul was not as dangerous as Khandhar.

                The other 2 guys, I know who went over left before the Canadian Forces moved into Khandahar.

                Sorry for the confusion I guess one could consider the entire mission Combat. From what I have heard it is pretty crazy right now. My Buddy told me RPG attacks on the base are a fairly regular occurance.
                Last edited by Canuck; 02 Dec 06,, 22:55.

                Comment


                • #9
                  This would be the 2nd offensive combat operation in Afghanistan. The 1st was when 3 PPCLI BG was tasked to the 187 Regt.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Canuck View Post
                    When I said Active combat I meant Khandahar Vs Kabul. As you are prob aware Kabul was not as dangerous as Khandhar.

                    The other 2 guys, I know who went over left before the Canadian Forces moved into Khandahar.

                    Sorry for the confusion I guess one could consider the entire mission Combat. From what I have heard it is pretty crazy right now. My Buddy told me RPG attacks on the base are a fairly regular occurance.

                    This has never been a non-combat mission, every second the boys are over there, there lives are at risk. Doesnt matter if for a year they dont see any combat, there is still the possiblity. I hate it when people equate the moving of operations from Kabul to Kandahar as a switch from non-combat to combat. It has always been combat, we lost 3 of our boys in Kabul. Two to a landmine that vaporized there plastic iltis, and another to a suicide attack.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Different ROEs between the two AOs.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        definition of 'combat':

                        some w@nker with a rifle/RPG/IED/tank wanting to have a pop at you.
                        before criticizing someone, walk a mile in their shoes.................... then when you do criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I'd sure like to see a few more Nato country's steping up to the plate. If Canada can contribute why can't they? French jokes aside, they have plenty of troops they could send in to remove that "surender monkey" title that hangs round their neck like an albatross.
                          Facts to a liberal is like Kryptonite to Superman.

                          -- Larry Elder

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            One thing about this mission. The myth that Canada is a doing nothing, insignifcant NATO member who relied on others to do her fighting has been shattered.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
                              One thing about this mission. The myth that Canada is a doing nothing, insignifcant NATO member who relied on others to do her fighting has been shattered.

                              Very true.

                              I heard they had the tanks in action earlier this week. Hopfully they all come home safe.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X