[Newsbot]

<strong>Title: </strong> <a href="/link.php?id=29971" target="_blank">Harper, Sarkozy talk about bolstering French troops in Kandahar</a> (click to view)

<strong>Category:</strong> <a href="/news/topic/16-world" target="_blank">World</a>
<strong>Posted By: </strong> <a href="/modules.php?name=Your_Account&op=userinfo&username=Hyack" target="_blank">Hyack</a>
<strong>Date: </strong> 2008-02-06 13:36:36
<strong>Canadian</strong>

[martin14]

whats the French Foreign Legion up to these days ??

seems like this would be a perfect job for them.

or some boys from South Africa would be nice to see.. yes i know its not NATO, but why be so fussy ?

[ridenrain]

Funny that Dion's president comes to the rescue, despite him wanting it to.

[ryan29]

so i wonder who dion voted for during the last french election , he can vote right with his dual citizeship ?


but i suspect if the french do send troops there it will be do the less dangerous areas of the country . doudt they will go to the more dangerous areas or have much interest in doing so .

[sasquatch2]

$1:

One European observer said Canada might have better luck looking outside NATO for help, perhaps by going to Australia, New Zealand, or one of three Muslim countries - Egypt, Jordan or Morocco

So much for european observers. Troops from Egypt, Jordan or Morocco will just mean more troops to be mentored.

[Normalguy]

sasquatch2 is right....

Quality of troops IS an important consideration. One classic example is the Sudanese government's steadfast refusal to have "Non-African" troops there as part of a UN/UN mandated mission. AU nation's armed forces are poorly equipped, paid, trained and the list could go on. They are ineffective and therefore not able to do much to stop the carnage - NOT THAT THEY WON"T or ARE NOT making a great effort. french Foriegn legionaries are great for kicking in the door and out terrorizing the terrorists, but not for asymetric operations. They would be a liability unless under command of a competant non-French commander.

Try to imagine an armed force (you pick one) that cannot communicate with it's allies because it's communication gear is antiquated, dissimilar wepons systems, cannot re-supply itself, does not have sufficient transport or does not have the appropriate level of staff training or leadership skills, black marketeering of donated or loaned equipment. Some nations have sent their troops on missions with no boots! More of a burden than of any real assistance.

Bad enough dealing with pseudo proffessional, unwilling and effette European armies. There are armies and there are armies.....No, the UN mandated NATO because it undertands these difficulties, so it must be NATO armies doing the heavy lifting