Discussions
Afghanistan - should we keep fighting?
Posted by illyamarchak • 10 days ago • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: afghanistan, Canada, illya marchak, nato, opium, taliban, terrorism, toronto, troops, vaughan
I've written an article about Canada's role in Afghanistan: www.illyamarchak.com/2009/11/canadian-role-in-afghanistan/
But it's not too specific about Canada, it could really be about any country in the West.
So what do you think? Is it time to pack up, or should we stay?
User Comments
-
Yes -
No
-
LOL
-
The above three responses should be enough to cover anything that follows.-
Haha I guess...
I was sort of hoping for something a little more in-depth. After all it's not an easy decision.
-
-
Leaving will take the fat out of the fire. And that's where Obama's headed.. he wants to allow Afg government to take over the fight. And once western troops leave the fighters will have less incentive for mischief-
You make a really good point crazyTsu, the insurgents will fight with much less fervor against their own countrymen, but as I said on my blog post, I think that if we pull out the troops now, the Afghan forces will be too weak and inadequately trained to continue their fight.
Which begs the question: will the Taliban eventually come back to power if we evacuate?
-
-
As a Canadian soldier who's requested to be on the last tour in 2011 I absolutely do think we should keep a presence there.
Just because our NATO allies aren't stepping up to the plate and contributing as they should - it does not mean we should cut and run.
Afghanistan is a country in which things like infrastructure and freedom for women is desperately needed. If Canada leaves Afghanistan our troops will be replaced by Americans but we will not be fulfilling our obligations to our own citizens to stop Afghanistan from becoming a terrorist training haven.-
Mr. Paul, it is because of people like you that I am proud to call myself a Canadian. I'm sure that you did not make that decision lightly, and I deeply respect you for it.
Again, I completely agree with what you're saying. I mean what was our mandate going in there in the first place? I think that we should remain there to finish what we came there to do.
P.S. You've got yourself a new subscriber to your blogs
-
You know why really afghan troops are weak? Because many of them belong to the same tribes and castes as the extremists, and they might not be that interested in warring with their own ilk
Will training help? You think so?
But why to make them fight? There ought to be some other creative solution to this. Religious debate, for example -
illyamarchak - thank you for your kind words. Let it be known that I'm not a Canadian... but a British bloke serving with the Canadian Forces who happen to be the greatest armed force on the planet.
crazyTsu... what you said is pretty much true which is why the boffins in charge are trying to get people in the ANA and ANP to serve in areas away from home, so there's less likelihood of tribal allegiances.
-
-
We certainly need to keep Pakistan's nukes secured, but I'm not certain any of more utopian hopes are realizable.-
See, that's the thing - Pakistan is an entirely different situation. Theyre a sovereign nation, with a vulnerable set of nuclear weapons. To add to that they've got a deteriorating security situation, with insurgents springing up left and right, and it becomes an increasing challenge to fight them.
For now all we can do is rely on diplomatic means (and hopefully it will stay at diplomatic means) and they might resolve it on their own.
So, you're right, if we make sure those nukes don't end up in the wrong hands, it can go a long ways to securing stability in the region.
-
-
It is a very tough question. I wish I had an answer. I wish our leaders had a definitive answer. One that hindsight would not question. But such is not possible. No matter what decisions are made, there will always be the "but what if...if we had instead...?"
History will decide. And the winners will write the history. As the saying goes.-
In a way I agree with you Rivy, but I can't help and be critical of the "let history decide" approach. After all, we need a dicision now (or in the very near future). Obviously there is no such thing as a definitive answer anymore.
Every decision you make is a global decision, and every decision has the potential to help some people, while hurting others. The best we can do is weigh our possibilities, make our decision, and hope for the best.
However, I do think that that decision has to be a thorough one.
-
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
