- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
And, who the heck are we going to send? JTF 3 ... ? (yes - I meant "3" - it's a joke ...)
Maybe the smarmy little Liberal party fartcatching pollsters can fabricate a solution ... ?
("Okay - each election year, we let several thousand refugees into Canada from Darfur, we let them vote Liberal, and then we send them back to Darfur as peacekeepers armed with Immigration Canada application forms ... the sheer workload of all that paperwork will bog down the belligerents to the point that it'll be safe for Parliamentary junkets ... hoo-hoo!")
No Canadian Iraq troops for Kerry, PM says
CP - Oct. 28, 2004. 02:07 PM
OTTAWA â †Canada won't commit troops to Iraq regardless of the outcome of the U.S. presidential election, Prime Minister Paul Martin indicated today.
Martin offered his standard reply when asked if he would send more troops in the event of a victory next week by Democratic challenger John Kerry.
Canada's military resources are simply tapped out, he suggested.
"The reason we made the decision on Iraq is we are very involved in Afghanistan," Martin said after a cabinet meeting.
"We are involved in Haiti. We intend to get involved in the Darfur issue. And there is a limit to our resources."
Kerry has presented himself as the best man to lead an international coalition in Iraq. The Democrat has relentlessly attacked President George W. Bush's failure to bring Canada and other allies onside.
But Martin again offered his stock line when asked if he was in effect telling Kerry, `No.'
"What I want is for Canada to be involved where we can have a significant influence or impact," he said.
"We have that in Afghanistan â †we are very important there. Same thing in Haiti."
Canadians are already involved in training Iraqi police officers in Jordan, Martin added.
There are about 1,600 troops deployed overseas right now. For each one abroad, you need two at home â †one recuperating from the last mission, one training for the next rotation.
The chief of the defence staff has said he doesn't have the resources to take on a new commitment without more rest for the troops.
The largest contingent is in Afghanistan, where about 950 Canadian soldiers are fighting the war on terror there.
Former prime minister Jean Chrétien shot down Bush's request for Canadian troops when the U.S. president launched the invasion of Iraq in early 2003. Polls suggest the vast majority of Canadians supported that decision.
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Co...968705899037&DPL=IvsNDS/7ChAX&tacodalogin=yes
Maybe the smarmy little Liberal party fartcatching pollsters can fabricate a solution ... ?
("Okay - each election year, we let several thousand refugees into Canada from Darfur, we let them vote Liberal, and then we send them back to Darfur as peacekeepers armed with Immigration Canada application forms ... the sheer workload of all that paperwork will bog down the belligerents to the point that it'll be safe for Parliamentary junkets ... hoo-hoo!")
No Canadian Iraq troops for Kerry, PM says
CP - Oct. 28, 2004. 02:07 PM
OTTAWA â †Canada won't commit troops to Iraq regardless of the outcome of the U.S. presidential election, Prime Minister Paul Martin indicated today.
Martin offered his standard reply when asked if he would send more troops in the event of a victory next week by Democratic challenger John Kerry.
Canada's military resources are simply tapped out, he suggested.
"The reason we made the decision on Iraq is we are very involved in Afghanistan," Martin said after a cabinet meeting.
"We are involved in Haiti. We intend to get involved in the Darfur issue. And there is a limit to our resources."
Kerry has presented himself as the best man to lead an international coalition in Iraq. The Democrat has relentlessly attacked President George W. Bush's failure to bring Canada and other allies onside.
But Martin again offered his stock line when asked if he was in effect telling Kerry, `No.'
"What I want is for Canada to be involved where we can have a significant influence or impact," he said.
"We have that in Afghanistan â †we are very important there. Same thing in Haiti."
Canadians are already involved in training Iraqi police officers in Jordan, Martin added.
There are about 1,600 troops deployed overseas right now. For each one abroad, you need two at home â †one recuperating from the last mission, one training for the next rotation.
The chief of the defence staff has said he doesn't have the resources to take on a new commitment without more rest for the troops.
The largest contingent is in Afghanistan, where about 950 Canadian soldiers are fighting the war on terror there.
Former prime minister Jean Chrétien shot down Bush's request for Canadian troops when the U.S. president launched the invasion of Iraq in early 2003. Polls suggest the vast majority of Canadians supported that decision.
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Co...968705899037&DPL=IvsNDS/7ChAX&tacodalogin=yes
- Reaction score
- 21,930
- Points
- 1,260
:
We have 1 COY of INF in AFGHAN
1 Recce Sqn of Armoured
1 Engineer SQN
The rest is fluff - and it is less that 700 pers BTW
The fact is we have 3 Brigade (1,2,5) - the majority of "fighting troops" Inf,Armd, Arty and Engineers are sitting around with their finger in their ass.
If we assigned a Bridage to the US and let them do our service support (beyond 1-2line) and run our admin we could easily send them there and you'd have hands in the air for volunteers.
:-*
Sudan - July ish I heard
We have 1 COY of INF in AFGHAN
1 Recce Sqn of Armoured
1 Engineer SQN
The rest is fluff - and it is less that 700 pers BTW
The fact is we have 3 Brigade (1,2,5) - the majority of "fighting troops" Inf,Armd, Arty and Engineers are sitting around with their finger in their ass.
If we assigned a Bridage to the US and let them do our service support (beyond 1-2line) and run our admin we could easily send them there and you'd have hands in the air for volunteers.
:-*
Sudan - July ish I heard
AmmoTech90
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,118
- Points
- 1,010
KevinB said:
Oh good, I'll have to add fluff to my resume.
KevinB said:
Canada doesn't deploy anything above 2nd line support except when 3 CSG comes over to set up or close down a mission. So who are you not going to deploy? Or do you mean we'll just let the US set up and tear down our camps and provide all the equipment that normally comes in from Canada? So now the logistics trail would go from the unit in theatre demanding it, to Montreal, who would send it somewhere in the States, and then they would fly it/sail it over to where ever where are. Or maybe we should just get all US equipment (which might not be a bad idea)?
- Reaction score
- 21,930
- Points
- 1,260
Ammotech - as far as doing the job, most of the positions in Afghan are Fluff - sorry if that hurts people feelings, but it is true.
What I am saying [if WE wanted to go to IRAQ], is simply chum along with a US DIV - like the 3VP Battlegroup did with the Raks...
Sent the Units - but the excess "Fluff" is not needed.
and by units I meant the CSS postion to them
I defy ANYONE to come up with a defensible rational for the layout of the NSE/NCE system.
Send a Bridage - without fluffing up officer and NCO postions so people can come over to get a medal before they retire. That's it thats all.
IF the unit CO's or Brigade commander are not competant to command without and eye over their shoulder they should not have the position - and if they are competant (which I would say 99.99% are) they dont need the added bodies to second guess or hamstring them.
We have fighting formations for a reason - why would we not deploy that way?
But a warfighting tour does not need the internet cafe, the volleyball net, the Officers Mess, Sr NCO mess, and JR's mess the BS about CANCAP and stuff like that has to go.
GO--> DO THE MISSION --> COME HOME
What I am saying [if WE wanted to go to IRAQ], is simply chum along with a US DIV - like the 3VP Battlegroup did with the Raks...
Sent the Units - but the excess "Fluff" is not needed.
and by units I meant the CSS postion to them
I defy ANYONE to come up with a defensible rational for the layout of the NSE/NCE system.
Send a Bridage - without fluffing up officer and NCO postions so people can come over to get a medal before they retire. That's it thats all.
IF the unit CO's or Brigade commander are not competant to command without and eye over their shoulder they should not have the position - and if they are competant (which I would say 99.99% are) they dont need the added bodies to second guess or hamstring them.
We have fighting formations for a reason - why would we not deploy that way?
But a warfighting tour does not need the internet cafe, the volleyball net, the Officers Mess, Sr NCO mess, and JR's mess the BS about CANCAP and stuff like that has to go.
GO--> DO THE MISSION --> COME HOME
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
I highly doubt we'll be sending much of anything to Darfur. OP SAFARI is the mission in Sudan supporting the North/South peace process, but there is yet to be anything considered for Darfur, expect the pile of helmets and flak vests, etc. I think the only way that we (or any non-African nation for that matter) will be involved is if the AU seriously screws up over there or the GoS decides to start fighting them.
That being said, we probably SHOULD send atleast something to Darfur to help out...but with this supposed "regeneration" period for the Army happening, I can't see that happening. Even something along the lines of humanitarian support (i.e. Water purification or mine clearing, etc.) would probably go a long way. I am very sure that the people would much rather see us there than the Americans.
As for Sudan - Julyish....I just dagged the last 10 months for a mission that is already on the ground there (SAFARI), so considering that it's still to be decided on, I highly doubt that anything will be (if ever) on the ground in Sudan for over a year. The peace process there keeps getting delayed again and again, and the UN keeps stalling on making a firm resolution. But who knows....stranger things have happened.
That being said, we probably SHOULD send atleast something to Darfur to help out...but with this supposed "regeneration" period for the Army happening, I can't see that happening. Even something along the lines of humanitarian support (i.e. Water purification or mine clearing, etc.) would probably go a long way. I am very sure that the people would much rather see us there than the Americans.
As for Sudan - Julyish....I just dagged the last 10 months for a mission that is already on the ground there (SAFARI), so considering that it's still to be decided on, I highly doubt that anything will be (if ever) on the ground in Sudan for over a year. The peace process there keeps getting delayed again and again, and the UN keeps stalling on making a firm resolution. But who knows....stranger things have happened.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
291er said:
Have no fear! We're deploying the ... PM to Sudan ... (?)
Martin heading to Sudan
By BRIAN LAGHI
From Wednesday's Globe and Mail http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20041102.wmarty1103/BNStory/National/
Ottawa â †Prime Minister Paul Martin will consider touring a refugee camp in Sudan as part of a visit to the strife-torn country this month, sources say.
Mr. Martin's office confirmed yesterday that he will add the Sudanese capital of Khartoum to an already lengthy itinerary that includes visits to Chile, Brazil and Burkina Faso.
Scott Reid, a spokesman for the Prime Minister, said that Mr. Martin wants to meet with Sudan's leaders to urge them to make good on their commitment to do everything possible to secure peace in the country.
"Unimaginable suffering has occurred and the weight of direct appeals from G8 leaders is needed to help advance the cause of peace," Mr. Reid said. He refused, however, to comment on reports that the Prime Minister was considering a visit to one of the refugee camps.
Mr. Martin spoke yesterday with UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, who encouraged him to make the trip, as did British Prime Minister Tony Blair when the two leaders met last month. Mr. Blair is one of the few other heads of government to have made the trip.
The Prime Minister had already been scheduled to attend a summit of francophone countries in Burkina Faso, a meeting of the organization on Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation in Chile and to make an official visit to Brazil. After discussing the issue with a delegation from the European Union late last month, Mr. Martin decided to add Khartoum to his travel plans.
About 1.5 million people have been driven from their homes in the Darfur region of Sudan. Sources said Mr. Martin is considering a visit to one of the camps that houses displaced persons.
Yesterday, the Sudanese army and police surrounded several refugee camps in the war-torn region of Darfur and denied access to humanitarian groups, the UN said. The Sudanese government denied that its security forces blocked access to the camps but said angry Arab tribesmen have gathered in the area.
The UN World Food Program said three camps were surrounded â †apparently in retaliation for the abduction of 18 Arabs by Darfur rebels â †and that it was forced to pull 88 relief workers from those areas.
The WFP fears the government may force people from the camps back to their home villages, where there is less protection from government-backed janjaweed militias that have been attacking towns, spokeswoman Christiane Berthiaume said.
Last month the UN health agency estimated that at least 70,000 people have died since March from poor conditions in the camps and warned that more will die unless countries provide more money.
Rebels in the country say the government is backing a group of Arab militias who have burned and looted villages with non-Arab inhabitants. Both sides also say the other has broken a UN ceasefire.
Mr. Martin's visit might be part of a growing movement to apply high-level pressure on the country's government. Pressure to resolve the conflict has grown as the humanitarian difficulties get worse.
The UN Security Council is to meet in Kenya next month to discuss the situation.
Canada has already promised $20-million to support of the African Union to resolve the conflict. Mr. Reid said the Prime Minister has resolutely backed the doctrine of Responsibility to Protect; a set of guidelines that obliges other nations to intervene when foreign administrations refuse or are unable to protect their own people.
Recent articles looking at the current crisis in Sudan
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20041102.wmarty1103/BNStory/National/
Civilians set on fire in Darfur, report says Attack carried out by Khartoum-backed militia, African Union observers say
In Darfur, security is paramount When it comes to dealing with Sudan, STEPHANIE NOLEN finds, diplomacy can yield very little
African Union troops arrive in Sudan Hostile reception greets soldiers assigned to protect ceasefire observers
Sudan pays for ignoring prophet
Jeneina offers displaced a haven from war Host families stretch meagre resources to shelter desperate Sudanese refugees
Disaster in Darfur: 'This isn't the worst I've seen' Remote region is the latest stop for relief worker who has seen humanitarian crises unfold around the globe, STEPHANIE NOLEN reports
Into the heart of janjaweed territory The mysterious Arab horsemen were fast and fierce and carried Kalashnikovs in their saddles. But were they the feared rebel fighters? STEPHANIE NOLEN followed them to find out
Rape fear traps women in 'concentration camp'
'The Hero' of Darfur lifts spirits at camp
A new peril, this time from the sky Hunkering down in teeming rain that hits almost daily, STEPHANIE NOLEN wonders how Darfur's refugees will last the season
In fetid camps of Darfur, refugees need to know world is watching ANALYSIS: The UN gave Khartoum 30 days to solve the crisis, and it has done almost nothing. Now the international community must respond, STEPHANIE NOLEN writes
U.S. finds 'genocide' in Darfur Bush's use of politically charged term could spark international action on Sudan
- Reaction score
- 1,009
- Points
- 1,010
http://www.canada.com/national/story.html?id=ffa59f9a-0a09-4933-a10e-b53a2dee5393
Amy Carmichael
Canadian Press
Saturday, November 13, 2004
PENTICTON, B.C. -- Canada will move ahead on a plan to outfit and train peacekeepers in Sudan's Darfur region and other countries in need, Prime Minister Paul Martin said Saturday, slapping the United Nations for not working fast enough to stop genocide in the area.
Canada has pledged $20 million to support the Sudanese region which has been soaked with blood from a violent civil war.
Martin urged other nations to step up with Canada and provide aid.
On Saturday, the prime minister said he's not waiting for other nations and suggested Canada could provide more money to meet the needs of an African peacekeeping force being currently being raised.
"I spoke to the president of the Nigeria this morning, the head of the African Union responsible for providing the troops, and it will come down to the number of troops," Martin told a press conference after a speech to the B.C. federal Liberal caucus.
"They're not quite sure what their needs will be and I've asked the president to give us a list of their needs."
So far, a quarter of the $20 million in funding Canada has donated has been spent. About 1,000 troops have been assembled and are ready to go into the east African state, but Martin said 5,000 are needed.
There's been a real delay in organizing the force to help the Sudanese people because the region lacks expertise and equipment, Martin said.
Canada will not ignore this void, the prime minister promised. It must help create a permanent pan-African peacekeeping regiment that will be ready to move in the future to stop fighting before it gets as deadly as it has become in Darfur.
"We have a responsibility as one of the richest nations in the world.
"Canada, you've gotta know this is put on the table. If (the Africans) are prepared to put up the troops to go in there, we will supply the flak jackets, we'll supply the equipment, we'll supply the training, we'll supply the money.
"We are not going to stand by and watch these massacres take place any longer."
He said the African Union has put forth an idea to organize 75,000 troops -- picked from various African nations -- who would be ready, trained and equipped.
Martin said it makes sense that locals do their own peacekeeping, as opposed to parachuting in Canadian troops who don't understand the culture.
"The offer I have made is obviously to deal with Darfur. Canada, because of our experience in peace keeping, should be training the trainers. That's part of the larger offer that I will be discussing in Burkina Faso when I speak to the head of the African Union," he said.
© The Canadian Press 2004
***
So, what happened to CDS saying CF will have slow op tempo?
Amy Carmichael
Canadian Press
Saturday, November 13, 2004
PENTICTON, B.C. -- Canada will move ahead on a plan to outfit and train peacekeepers in Sudan's Darfur region and other countries in need, Prime Minister Paul Martin said Saturday, slapping the United Nations for not working fast enough to stop genocide in the area.
Canada has pledged $20 million to support the Sudanese region which has been soaked with blood from a violent civil war.
Martin urged other nations to step up with Canada and provide aid.
On Saturday, the prime minister said he's not waiting for other nations and suggested Canada could provide more money to meet the needs of an African peacekeeping force being currently being raised.
"I spoke to the president of the Nigeria this morning, the head of the African Union responsible for providing the troops, and it will come down to the number of troops," Martin told a press conference after a speech to the B.C. federal Liberal caucus.
"They're not quite sure what their needs will be and I've asked the president to give us a list of their needs."
So far, a quarter of the $20 million in funding Canada has donated has been spent. About 1,000 troops have been assembled and are ready to go into the east African state, but Martin said 5,000 are needed.
There's been a real delay in organizing the force to help the Sudanese people because the region lacks expertise and equipment, Martin said.
Canada will not ignore this void, the prime minister promised. It must help create a permanent pan-African peacekeeping regiment that will be ready to move in the future to stop fighting before it gets as deadly as it has become in Darfur.
"We have a responsibility as one of the richest nations in the world.
"Canada, you've gotta know this is put on the table. If (the Africans) are prepared to put up the troops to go in there, we will supply the flak jackets, we'll supply the equipment, we'll supply the training, we'll supply the money.
"We are not going to stand by and watch these massacres take place any longer."
He said the African Union has put forth an idea to organize 75,000 troops -- picked from various African nations -- who would be ready, trained and equipped.
Martin said it makes sense that locals do their own peacekeeping, as opposed to parachuting in Canadian troops who don't understand the culture.
"The offer I have made is obviously to deal with Darfur. Canada, because of our experience in peace keeping, should be training the trainers. That's part of the larger offer that I will be discussing in Burkina Faso when I speak to the head of the African Union," he said.
© The Canadian Press 2004
***
So, what happened to CDS saying CF will have slow op tempo?
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 260
*shakes head* :-X
R
R031button
Guest
Speaking as somebody wearing OD's and who's never even seen a real live tac vest, I'd like to know why we can supply and equip the African Union but not ourselves.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Hopefully we will not issue a single flak jacket to any non-Canadian soldier until we can properly dress and equip every Canadian soldier, Regular or Reserve. The only exception would be any of the old "life preserver" type we used to have. Funny what the Govt can find money for. Now, if we were really smart, we'd figure out how to slide the re-equipment of our Army under the cover of things like this. Cheers.
N
NavyGrunt
Guest
We're acting without UN approval? But thats what keeps us from Iraq..... >
Similar threads
