[commanderkai]

Streaker Streaker:

Reading comprehension not your forte, eh?

$1:

Article 5

The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.

Canada had no obligation to participate in A-stan.

Actually Canada does have an obligation to participate in Afghanistan. Sending troops was the part that Canada made. However, that one line does not truly comprehend the issue at hand. Canada made the decision, along with her allies, including the United States, to send soldiers. The choice to take force was NATO's and not just America's. This is a NATO conflict led by the United States, not a United States conflict supported by NATO.

Tell me, should Canada not have gotten involved in Bosnia as well? That conflict has the Americans putting, I believe, the majoring of backing in it, yet has very little legitimacy in the NATO charter since no NATO member was truly attacked.

[Zipperfish]

I don't know if Canada had an obligation. I don't think they would have kicked us out of NATO or anything had we foregone the invasion of Afghanistan and the toppling of the Taliban government. I don't even know what direct culpability the Taliban had for the 9/11 attacks or the other activities of Al Qaeda.


But I can't think of any movement since the Nazis more monstrous and more deserving of annihilation.

We need to up the number of forces there drastically and tell Pakistan to straighten out their end or NATO will straighten it out for them.

[uwish]

FireEmUp FireEmUp:

uwish uwish:

man, what kind of Liberal glue are your sniffing? I can't believe you are that blind...oooo wait a minute your a LIEBERAL of course your blind

to common sense. Well good luck with your carbon tax shaft plan, hug a thug, ban everything social engineering experiment. Just wait until the majority CPC.

Then we can FORCE idiots like you to do things you don't like. Just so you know what it feels like, kinda similar to the last 14 years under that crooked face guy and dithers.

I agree that the liberals are crooked, but having a majority Conservative government will ruin everything good about this country. If you want concentration camps, go to America. Dont' bring that shit here and voting Harper will do just that.

The man is more crooked than anyone else in Canada and has done nothing but lie every since he's been elected. He will force the North American Union. He will force a disappearance of the middle class. He will continue to let our countrymen die in a 100 year war on terror that is built on lies.

This man is dangerous and you blind neo-con supporters will help him ruin this country if you don't wake the hell up.

as far as I am concerned crooked face and dithers fucked this nation up almost beyond repair. We need to straight laced guy to stop the ship from sinking.

Or do u like more scandals?
u like billion dollars boondoggles?

I think not

[commanderkai]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

I don't know if Canada had an obligation. I don't think they would have kicked us out of NATO or anything had we foregone the invasion of Afghanistan and the toppling of the Taliban government. I don't even know what direct culpability the Taliban had for the 9/11 attacks or the other activities of Al Qaeda.


But I can't think of any movement since the Nazis more monstrous and more deserving of annihilation.

We need to up the number of forces there drastically and tell Pakistan to straighten out their end or NATO will straighten it out for them.

I agree for the most part. We wouldn't have been kicked out of NATO, however our reputation and our relations with NATO nations, especially with the United States, would have been impacted. Streaker is right that Canada did not have to provide backing with its military forces, however he is wrong that Canada had no obligation, we would have done something, even if it was purely symbolic like making a speech saying "Blah blah blah supporting NATO blah blah blah we think this is justified blah blah blah."

Invading Pakistan, however, by "straightening them out" is something of the likes of Iraq. That can backfire a lot worse, since we KNOW they have WMDs, especially nuclear ones and their population hasn't been as ruthlessly oppressed as Iraq or Afghanistan. So 150 million pissed off Pakistanis, with better technological capabilities and military infrastructure seems to be a bad thing to be threatening. The upside, however, is that India would be more than glad to help the "straightening out" process.

[PENATRATOR]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

But I can't think of any movement since the Nazis more monstrous and more deserving of annihilation.

We need to up the number of forces there drastically and tell Pakistan to straighten out their end or NATO will straighten it out for them.

Be careful man, you'll have Streaker after you with posts like that then you'll be calling him the A-hole!

[wpnsguyBill]

I have been there (Afghanistan) and a few other places that shal remain nameles and yes i fully agreee that it is impossble to ID freindly local from Taliban or someone who supports them. The clown who has his hand out for free food or somthing may be the dickhead who launched the rocket or set of the IED that killed or injured your buddies the night before.....

And as for everyone thinking this is a US war due to 9/11... that was the match that started it BUT it was going to happen sooner or later....It is a NATO war as stated and Canada to keep face within NATO should have boots on the ground.....

Not enough boots is the reason given for Canadian Deaths.......In my opinion Not True....Being hobbled by ROE (Rules of Engagment) that do not take into account every situation and by the time approval is given to do what is required it is to late....The Commanders on the Ground (Combat Team/Convoy/Patrol) should be given the authourity to do what is required....Meet force with equal force BUT to WIN and not Loose More good Men and Women...

[Zipperfish]

commanderkai commanderkai:

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

I don't know if Canada had an obligation. I don't think they would have kicked us out of NATO or anything had we foregone the invasion of Afghanistan and the toppling of the Taliban government. I don't even know what direct culpability the Taliban had for the 9/11 attacks or the other activities of Al Qaeda.


But I can't think of any movement since the Nazis more monstrous and more deserving of annihilation.

We need to up the number of forces there drastically and tell Pakistan to straighten out their end or NATO will straighten it out for them.

I agree for the most part. We wouldn't have been kicked out of NATO, however our reputation and our relations with NATO nations, especially with the United States, would have been impacted. Streaker is right that Canada did not have to provide backing with its military forces, however he is wrong that Canada had no obligation, we would have done something, even if it was purely symbolic like making a speech saying "Blah blah blah supporting NATO blah blah blah we think this is justified blah blah blah."

Invading Pakistan, however, by "straightening them out" is something of the likes of Iraq. That can backfire a lot worse, since we KNOW they have WMDs, especially nuclear ones and their population hasn't been as ruthlessly oppressed as Iraq or Afghanistan. So 150 million pissed off Pakistanis, with better technological capabilities and military infrastructure seems to be a bad thing to be threatening. The upside, however, is that India would be more than glad to help the "straightening out" process.

ha ha ha. You trying to get me started on Iraq? I'm not sure I would invade Pakistan, but something has to be done. The Pakistan ISI is and historically has been more connected to Al Qaeda than the Taliban was. Musharaff was a suitable ally at the time, the US figured, but I never agreed with that. The guy presided over Pakistan selling the Bomb to Libya, North Korea and Iran.

as I understand it the Taliban simply disappaear into Pakistan to recharge. That has to stop.

[commanderkai]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

ha ha ha. You trying to get me started on Iraq? I'm not sure I would invade Pakistan, but something has to be done. The Pakistan ISI is and historically has been more connected to Al Qaeda than the Taliban was. Musharaff was a suitable ally at the time, the US figured, but I never agreed with that. The guy presided over Pakistan selling the Bomb to Libya, North Korea and Iran.

as I understand it the Taliban simply disappaear into Pakistan to recharge. That has to stop.

Oh no, I totally agree something MUST be done with Pakistan. However, I believe India has suffered the brunt of Pakistani terrorism over the years. I believe and/or make a bet that just about every major attack in India has been in one way or another had some sort of Pakistani involvement. Of course, from we see on the surface, we don't really know what's being done, we only know what we're told. However, there are also many lose lose scenarios that are around with Pakistan. An invasion would backfire. Sponsoring anti-government rebels will backfire just like it did with Afghanistan. Using India to counterbalance Pakistan can have India sponsoring terrorist activities in Pakistan, or worse. All these can backfire on the West. Hell, even political condemnation can be bad since they might be more open with our enemies and rogue states.

[wpnsguyBill]

I agreee with what you say about the dickheads going to Pakistan to recharge reload rebomb......But.....Try getting the clowns in Ottawa,Washington,London, and other nations capitals to all agree on a course of action to stem the tide...Instead of just saying there is a problem.

[wpnsguyBill]

I totally agree with commanderkai...helping the Pakistani anti Government would backfire most completly.....Can you say Bin Laden......Saddam Hussein...both helped by the US....which had to clean there mess and still is...

[ridenrain]

wpnsguyBill wpnsguyBill:

Not enough boots is the reason given for Canadian Deaths.......In my opinion Not True....Being hobbled by ROE (Rules of Engagment) that do not take into account every situation and by the time approval is given to do what is required it is to late....The Commanders on the Ground (Combat Team/Convoy/Patrol) should be given the authourity to do what is required....Meet force with equal force BUT to WIN and not Loose More good Men and Women...

I can definately agree with you're point that the time to approval is a killer and I supose the proof of that was Rwanda and the UN.
keeping it general but what changes to the ROE would you suggest?

[wpnsguyBill]

As I stated allow commanders on the ground in the thick of it to make the decisions needed and answer for them after the dust has settled...to many times on my tour things went real bad because approval was to slow to do anything.....If we know who is sympathetic to the dickheads and know who they are then allow us to get them not what until they are CAUGHT in the act by that time damage done IED planted or rocket launched....

[commanderkai]

wpnsguyBill wpnsguyBill:

I agreee with what you say about the dickheads going to Pakistan to recharge reload rebomb......But.....Try getting the clowns in Ottawa,Washington,London, and other nations capitals to all agree on a course of action to stem the tide...Instead of just saying there is a problem.

See the thing is, all the possible solutions or course of actions are bad. Just thinking of a few off the top of my head, going from condemning to praising/rewarding

Nuclear annihilation
Complete invasion
Special Forces strikes/airstrikes
Covert operations
Funding anti-government groups covertly
UAV/Aerial recon
Economic embargo
Alliance with India/support of India over Kashmir
economic sanctions
Covertly supporting third-party nations with their covert operations
Condemnation at the United Nations
Public condemnation
Do nothing
Public praise
Praise at UN
Economic incentives
Free Trade deal
Full fledged alliance/support of Pakistan over Kashmir

Every single one of these can explode right into the West's face. Some of these are self explanatory, others are not...Basically, any positive reaction to Pakistan would basically be ignoring their actions against both the West and India or even indirectly lead to more attacks...since any economic package might as well be funneled into ISI or their military.

[ridenrain]

wpnsguyBill wpnsguyBill:

As I stated allow commanders on the ground in the thick of it to make the decisions needed and answer for them after the dust has settled...to many times on my tour things went real bad because approval was to slow to do anything.....If we know who is sympathetic to the dickheads and know who they are then allow us to get them not what until they are CAUGHT in the act by that time damage done IED planted or rocket launched....

IS that a matter of inteligence not being carried up the pipe or that info not being accepted and acted upon? I've always found that the folks who do the job almost always know the best way to do their job, you can appreciate that the government is always scared to give these people a blank cheque.

Without violating opspec, can you be more specific? I can't fo SFA about it and it's probably good that I can't but I'd be interested in what you have to say.

[wpnsguyBill]

Sorry but that is all i have to say on the matter and all of this is MY OPINION and DOES NOT reflect Canadian Military Commanders or serving personnel.