Ignatieff you are right. Maybe.
Ignatieff just stated that he would support a type of Afghan mission to last longer than the July 2011 period. I have said this before: Canada should have some sort of involvement in Afghanistan after the military mission. Now, I think if Afghan officials are not yet trained enough to beat the Taliban, we should stay for a minor time until they are, but still end the mission anyway. Now Ignatieff is proposing to keep on schedule, but believes that there should be a "fixed period" of training. I support this only if it is needed. I still believe in leaving Afghanistan, but I think what is more important is for all countries to have some sort of involvement to make sure that Afghanistan is stable for the civilians after 2011.While I commend Harper on his decision to leave Afghanistan as scheduled, I believe that Harper should stay committed to Afghanistan after 2011 (non military). We can have a post Afghanistan involvement without military, but again we would have to wait to see if the Afghanistan is ready and stable.
Along with a continued civilian presence to bolster Afghanistan's
fledgling government, Ignatieff proposed that some Canadian troops to
remain in the Afghan capital Kabul for an undefined "fixed period" to
provide training at a military and police staff college.
In the meantime, he accused Prime Minister Stephen Harper of "walking away" from the Afghan mission "as if it never occurred."
Read more at CBC.
It's going to be 10 years soon. Why was the training not happening simultaneously? Please don't suggest that they needed first to root out the Taliban, because they still have not, nor will they have by next year.
ReplyDeleteThe problem isn't training Afghan soldiers, it's their army's desertion rate. It's like bailing a leaky boat. If they can't - or won't - hang onto their soldiers why should we feel under any obligation to stay on to train more? That's insane. Worse still, those that are trained and do stay on have a troubling record of ducking the fight. American troops report a lot of what remains are village dimwits who can't get anything else in the way of work and turn into stoners even when they're supposed to be on duty.
ReplyDeleteOnce again Michael Ignatieff doesn't let facts get in the way of a profoundly stupid policy.
Why don't YOU join the army, Vanillaman. Mudfortunatey, you didn't grow up right. Unand you disgust me, Vanillaman
ReplyDeleteAs Thomas Walkom righty noted,"in 2007, the Liberals rejected as a sham the idea of replacing combat with training."
ReplyDelete"It would be a travesty to continue the current mission and simply to rename it as ‘training mission,’ " the Liberals said then. “Neither parliament nor the people of Canada would tolerate such a deception.”
Ignatieff has got to go.