Just what the fuck have we been doing in Afghanistan for SEVEN YEARS that we haven't been able to pacify the country yet?
Please explain yourselves. Obviously I could go to a website hosted by "Canada's Worst Government," but I'd like some independent analysis to explain to me why a desperately poor people with low expectations for material comfort couldn't have been made to acquiesce to the Karzai government yet.
Certainly, the Taliban was the government, and its members haven't been wiped-out, but the insurgency is growing year by year, not shrinking. If this is supposedly the fault of Musharraf's Pakistan, well all I can say is that Paul Martin knew Pakistan existed when he signed-up for the invasion. Harper supporters must also concede that the region is a snake-pit of illogical borders, ethnic, sectarian and tribal rivalries, and therefore, they have to have some good plan for getting Canadian soldiers embroiled in such an environment.
So, to the one or two individuals who might see this; what do you have to say for yourselves?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
The writing was clearly on the wall in 2001. When the Taliban was sent packing, our side installed Karzai in government and then expected him, with no viable army, to subdue the warlords and their powerful militias. Today, even American assessments find Karzai controls 30%, the Taliban 10% and the warlords 60% of Afghanistan.
To stabilize the Karzai government, we - the West (NATO and US forces) would have to crush the warlords. Does that sound at all familiar? It's the same scenario the Soviets faced. Nothing unites Afghanistan's fractious tribes quicker than getting together to kick out an army of infidels.
We can't fix it so we ignore that and pretend that putting together an Afghan army of 100,000 will do the trick as though an army even five times that size could hope to prop up a government as hopelessly infiltrated, corrupt and compromised as Karzai's.
Notice how Harpo and Pistol Pete always keep the blinders on when discussing Afghanistan. They only see the Taliban as though if they could somehow magically eliminate every last Talib the Kabul regime would suddenly become legitimate and viable.
There's a huge reality disconnect in everything we're doing over there. It's not our soldiers' fault for they're doing their jobs as well as they can given their insanely small numbers.
If Afghanistan remains a warlord society, it'll remain a state dominated by thugs, drug barons and Islamist fundamentalists.
Don't expect any "right-wing s__t-heads" to give you any answers that go beyond the Taliban.
Don't be too harsh on Paul Martin. It was his decision to allow CF to shift from the defence of Kabul to real warfighting in Kandahar but - and this is important - he was advised and assured by his top general, Hillier, that Kandahar was no big deal. Hillier described the Taliban in Kandahar as a "few dozen.. ..scumbags." Canadians seem to revere the guy right now but I doubt that history will be kind to Rick Hillier.
Remember that Hillier absolutely assured Martin that the Kandahar mission was so limited that the Canadian Forces would always have enough uncommitted strength to be able to take on another major mission elsewhere on the globe. What a joke that turned out to be.
This was Hillier's baby from the get-go and yet he's taking early retirement, apparently so he won't be around for the meltdown.
Thanks mound of sound. I welcome the opportunity to address you as "mound of sound" and not "mound of sand" as I did last time you appeared here.
I have such thorough contempt for Paul Martin that it's difficult for me to absolve him as having been simply duped by the detestable Hillier.
But your overall analysis actually learned me a thing or two.
Post a Comment