"Afghanisation" a myth? What does that mean? Ask Susan.

[Flip]

Um, How do we feel about this?
I spotted it in the Edmonton Journal.
Opinion Article Link

There is a way to extricate most of our soldiers from Afghanistan, and, as a happy byproduct, avoid an unwanted spring election, but it means everyone has to buy into a beguiling fiction: "Afghanisation."

This drive to have Afghans take responsibility for their own security -- and, in so doing, let wary, and weary, western countries off the hook -- is the policy flavour-of-the-moment within NATO.

I don't know what the truth is, but a major source of hers seems to be Scott Taylor
and her tone is one of defeatism and the usual smug airs of the journalistic class.

Anyhow, It'd be interesting to hear what you guys have to say.... ;D

 

[ghyslyn]

leaving and letting afghanistan to fend itself is as much a possibility for them as it is for canada to create a 5 000 000 cubic foot nuke.... in other words not gonna happen

 

[vonGarvin]

leaving and letting afghanistan to fend itself is as much a possibility for them as it is for canada to create a 5 000 000 cubic foot nuke.... in other words not gonna happen

This shows your ignorance.
Consider late summer, 2006 (18 or so months ago).  There were large numbers of insurgents dug in around the Zhari-Panjwaii area.  NATO conducts its first deliberate offensive operation EVER, with Canada in the lead.  From media reports, the Afghan Army, though participating, was in low (perhaps token?) numbers.  Flash forward to last Autumn (some 6 months ago, and a mere 12 months after MEDUSA).  The Afghan army react to Taliban in the Arghandab district.  With low (perhaps token?) numbers, NATO assists in the final clearance.  That, my friend, was an Afghan lead operation, from start to finish.  The future is bright, and soon the Afghan army will be able to do things on its own (by "soon" I mean in a few years, perhaps).  There will be pitfalls (there are in every war: google "Operation Market Garden" and "Wacht am Rhein": the results may surprise you).

 

[ghyslyn]

This shows your ignorance.
Consider late summer, 2006 (18 or so months ago).  There were large numbers of insurgents dug in around the Zhari-Panjwaii area.  NATO conducts its first deliberate offensive operation EVER, with Canada in the lead.  From media reports, the Afghan Army, though participating, was in low (perhaps token?) numbers.  Flash forward to last Autumn (some 6 months ago, and a mere 12 months after MEDUSA).  The Afghan army react to Taliban in the Arghandab district.  With low (perhaps token?) numbers, NATO assists in the final clearance.  That, my friend, was an Afghan lead operation, from start to finish.  The future is bright, and soon the Afghan army will be able to do things on its own (by "soon" I mean in a few years, perhaps).  There will be pitfalls (there are in every war: google "Operation Market Garden" and "Wacht am Rhein": the results may surprise you).

I totally agree, but what I state is that soon isn't now, personally I find that if exterior assistance gets removed, its morally an insult to afghanistan itself, the assistance that is there is extremely productive and I'm assuming admired by the afghans. Afghanistan's reconstruction(in all ways the term is meant to be used) would be far more difficult without the assistance they are receiving.

And please don't call me ignorant.

 

[Gimpy]

leaving and letting afghanistan to fend itself is as much a possibility for them as it is for canada to create a 5 000 000 cubic foot nuke.... in other words not gonna happen

So what you are saying is that the chance of Canada pulling out of Afghanistan is about as likely as a 5 million cubic foot nuke being made? Am I reading that properly, because if so that doesn't make any sense.

Also, rhetoric like that is a tool for the ignorant, so Mortarman is correct in calling you such. Try to make an argument without using absurd comparisons and you wouldn't get unwanted labels.

[quote author=ghyslyn]
Afghanistan's reconstruction(in all ways the term is meant to be used) would be far more difficult without the assistance they are receiving.
[/quote]

I'd also think that without ISAF forces in Afghanistan reconstruction would be nonexistent. Reconstruction isn't want the Taliban want, they want to disrupt it and paint the picture of ISAF and the government doing nothing to help the local people. If Canada left Afghanistan it would be disastrous for the country as a whole as well as other ISAF troops there.

 

[ghyslyn]

So what you are saying is that the chance of Canada pulling out of Afghanistan is about as likely as a 5 million cubic foot nuke being made? Am I reading that properly, because if so that doesn't make any sense.

Also, rhetoric like that is a tool for the ignorant, so Mortarman is correct in calling you such. Try to make an argument without using absurd comparisons and you wouldn't get unwanted labels.

I'd also think that without ISAF forces in Afghanistan reconstruction would be nonexistent. Reconstruction isn't want the Taliban want, they want to disrupt it and paint the picture of ISAF and the government doing nothing to help the local people. If Canada left Afghanistan it would be disastrous for the country as a whole as well as other ISAF troops there.

1: thank you for agreeing with me
2: what is it with the reactions of everyone on army.ca? it seems to me everyone, or at least a large number of people are naturally hostile for the sake of hostility and rather then agree that hostilities should stop they try to defend that the insult is right.

it doesnt matter if someone is mentally retarded or obese, you're not going to say it to their face just because its true.

please people stop it.

 

[George Wallace]

2: what is it with the reactions of everyone on army.ca? it seems to me everyone, or at least a large number of people are naturally hostile for the sake of hostility and rather then agree that hostilities should stop they try to defend that the insult is right.

it doesnt matter if someone is mentally retarded or obese, you're not going to say it to their face just because its true.

please people stop it.

:

I do think you have picked the wrong profession.  I doubt you have what it takes to be a soldier, let alone an officer.  If you can't handle it here, then you will not last long on Course.  Perhaps it is time you looked into another creative, less antagonistic, not so aggressive a career.  Something sponsored by a Fine Arts School perhaps.

 

[Flip]

2: what is it with the reactions of everyone on army.ca? it seems to me everyone, or at least a large number of people are naturally hostile for the sake of hostility and rather then agree that hostilities should stop they try to defend that the insult is right.

You misunderstand.......It's not hostility for hostility's sake.
It's about credibility and accuracy.

This crowd expects that we think and behave in a rational and thoughtful manner.
Yes, many are impatient with silly stuff, but it's important that the silly stuff is
confronted for what it is and we can all be proud of the discourse here.

IfWhen I write something thoughtless or stupid I am better for having it pointed out
and learning from it.  And I can honestly say - I've learned much from these people.

Regards Ghyslyn

 

[time expired]

Read a great quote from George Orwell and have been looking
for a thread to post it on,I think this one will do-
Quote-The quickest way of ending a war is to lose it,
          and if one finds the prospect of a long war
          intolerable, it is natural to disbelieve in the
          possibility of victory.
                              Regards
         

 

[Colin Parkinson]

How quickly we forget, we already tried that route and the Taliban are the result, in fact anti-everything types claim that it's all our fault for "abandoning"Afghanistan after the Soviets left. With these types nothing you do will make them happy.

 

[Flip]

With these types nothing you do will make them happy.

+1

And I think we all notice the absence of any proposed alternatve. 

Great quote Time Expired. Sounds a little prophetic.