Afghanistan-strategic Counsel Says 54% Want Canada Out

[Jean]

Our guys are kicking sorry taliban butts

72 suspected Taliban killed in Afghan fighting

20/08/2006 9:52:21 AM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan were embroiled in fierce fighting overnight that left as many as 72 suspected Taliban insurgents dead, according to NATO officials.

CTV.ca News Staff

A presidential security officer stands guard during the Afghan Independence Day from Britain in Kabul, Afghanistan, Saturday. (AP / Rodrigo Abd)

No Canadians were killed in the fighting west of Kandahar that began late Saturday and lasted through the night. Hurray

However, the Canadian Press cited sources who reported that as many as seven Afghan police were killed in the fighting, and four Afghan soldiers were killed and another four were injured.

Though it is not clear who initiated the fighting, it took place after suspected Taliban insurgents attacked a market in Panjwaii and overran a police checkpoint, said CTV's Matt McClure, reporting from Kandahar.

"Afghan forces battled on their own for some four hours trying to repulse these insurgents before Canadian forces arrived on the scene in their Light Armoured Vehicles," McClure told CTV Newsnet.

"We're told the battle then raged through the night, some 12 hours, almost into the morning time."

Heavy artillery and coalition air support and heavy artillery were called in before the fighting ended, McClure said.

NATO said in a statement the fighting was part of "deliberate operations," in the region.

''Afghan National Security Forces and ISAF inflicted heavy casualties against Taliban fighters in Kandahar's Panjwaii district,'' the statement read.

It was ''a deliberate operation to extend security along southern Afghanistan's Highway 1 corridor.''

On Saturday, four American troops were killed and six were wounded in two separate attacks in Afghanistan.

The Taliban have been active in the Panjwaii region, the district where Canadians suffered their heaviest casualties when four soldiers were killed and another 10 were injured early in the month.

A Taliban source, who did not want to be identified, told CP late Saturday that ''the war is on.''

The recent round of fighting had calmed by Sunday morning, and no civilian casualties were reported.

In an unusual move, NATO claimed victory in the conflict.

''The latest engagement in which the insurgents have been defeated is another clear demonstration that ISAF, working with Afghan National Security Forces, is resolutely committed to bringing security to the areas of Afghanistan that most need it,'' said the statement.

The latest round of violence came as thousands of Afghans celebrated their national independence day with parades, fireworks and speeches.

[Fanpuck33]

In fact its the best way in my opinion because guns don't solve anything. Wars aren't won anymore like they were back in Roman time were you just killed everybody. You have to ultimately sit down at a table somewhere and talk to each other.

If guns never solved anything, then America would just be a huge, western province of Great Britain. Slavery would still be acceptable in the South. All the Jews in Europe would be dead and Naziism would be a way of life. While diplomacy is obviously the first option during conflicts, sometimes war has to happen. Sometimes wars don't solve anything, sometimes they do. Sometimes diplomacy works, sometimes it doesn't. The UN is supposed to combine the two in order to keep peace in the world, and they have failed horribly. They don't enforce their own sanctions. Leadership is often corrupt (i.e. Food for Oil Program). The UN has allowed feuds between member countries take precedence over doing the right thing.

[Pierre the Great]

And Washington skipped diplomacy on Iraq.

Chamberlain let Hitler run a muck.

The British Fired first remember and did illegal search and siezures like the current admistration does now.

You can't use World War II as an example for everything single conflict.

And no Europe Imperalism died with World War II America would be like Canada.

The Civil War wasn't about slavery. It was about state rights. Ever since the signing of the constitution its been a battle between State vs. Federal.

The UN isn't the power it should be because only 5 countries are in the security council and 1 country has the power over it (U.S.).

Leadership is always corrupt. Non corrupt leadership is a joke. If you run on an anti corruption platform i.e. (Prime Minister Harper) its going to back fire... see (Emerson).

There will always be corruption in politics. Thats what politics is. Why do you think we have lobby groups? They are legal corruption groups trying to persuade someone to come on there side.

[Fanpuck33]

And Washington skipped diplomacy on Iraq.

Don't kid yourself. For years Iraq was breaking the rules that the UN kept placing on them, but the UN never did anything about it. We begged them to enforce the rules, but they refused. Thus, we had to go in without them.

The Civil War wasn't about slavery. It was about state rights. Ever since the signing of the constitution its been a battle between State vs. Federal.

Wow, a person who actually realizes that. You and I are in the minority there. Still, had the South not rebelled to fight for state's rights, slavery might still exist today. They could have continually threatened to rebell if the North tried to outlaw slavery. Any number of things could have happened. Ending slavery was a direct effect of Federal rights winning over state's rights.

[Pierre the Great]

Yup. Civil War was not about slaves, if the south would have won would there have been slavery? Maybe for a little while longer but forces of change would have most likely changed that during the dawn of the industrial revolution. And countries would have made them change. Look at what happens today. They would have been under what today would be called economic sanctions.

(Personally I think the whole country (U.S.) should have been under economic sanctions from after the civil war until the Civil Rights era we basically had apartied in this country without calling it that but since it was the United States it got a free pass while countries like South Africa didn't.)

[Colin]

Don't kid yourself. For years Iraq was breaking the rules that the UN kept placing on them, but the UN never did anything about it. We begged them to enforce the rules, but they refused. Thus, we had to go in without them.

Wow, a person who actually realizes that. You and I are in the minority there. Still, had the South not rebelled to fight for state's rights, slavery might still exist today. They could have continually threatened to rebell if the North tried to outlaw slavery. Any number of things could have happened. Ending slavery was a direct effect of Federal rights winning over state's rights.

You know I luv ya Fanpuck, but...

If *any* other country in the world had done what the States did and the US had been against it, the leaders would have been brought up on charges of breaking international law. Since no one can really oppose the US, the broke international law and got away with it. Imagine if Germany had been the ones that decided to get Saddam out of power? The US would have called in the Chancellor and put him on trial for war crimes. But since Bush did it, he gets away with it.

Bush runs the US through propoganda and fear - not that everyone else doesn't use some form of propoganda, but Bush has almost perfected it for a so-called democratic, free society. (If you can call a society free which doesn't allow protestors at rally's anymore, and that also wiretaps its entire population.)

And I'll bite my tongue there, because I can really start running rampant when it comes to this subject.

[Fanpuck33]

I'm not scared.

[Pierre the Great]

I am I was verbally assaulted at a Walmart for my Canadian bumper sticker.

[Fanpuck33]

Life's tough. Get a helmet.

[Pierre the Great]

Ah such sage advice.

Sucks though when you've got a racist extended family like me though.

They think they live in the middle of nowhere and think the quote "turbin heads" and "dirty mexicans" are out to get them.

[shortcat1]

I am I was verbally assaulted at a Walmart for my Canadian bumper sticker.

That's interesting....

I always thought that the Canadian identity was, at the worst, a benign presence in the world.

:king: :hlogo: :king:

[Pierre the Great]

LOL.

[Athlétique.Canadien]

CBC: Liberal and NDP MP want to remove Hezbollah from terror list

I guess the mastermind terrorist that was instrumental in the 1983 Beirut barracks bombing, the Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland and TWA flight 800 who is the lead terrorist in Hezbollah isn’t a terrorist after all. Nor is Hezbollah.

WHAT WERE WE THINKING?

[Pierre the Great]

well they keep talking about the IRA, while there are parallels there are some key differnces between the two. If Hezbollah got rid of those differnces then yeah I could see them getting off the terrorist list. But until then they stay on.

[Athlétique.Canadien]

Let's rewrite history while we are at it. The German state was so integrated with Nazis that calling that state fascist is just not fair???? What we really need to do is sit back and realize that the population and the group are not one in the same. That is, not judge the Lebanese based on this group. I wouldn't be so unsympathetic if these attacks were directly motivated via war. But the hijacking of planes off of Lebanese soil makes it very difficult to accept this argument.

Also, if we remove them from the list we are legitimizing that group. We are advocating that this behaviour is acceptable. If Hezbollah and the Lebanese want the group off of the list, then surely they can change what led them to being flagged.

IT'S A 2 WAY STREET!

Edited August 21, 2006 by ATHLÉTIQUE.CANADIEN

[Pierre the Great]

woah, hold it, I think you misunderstood what I was saying. I'm saying that if Hezbollah got off there destroying israel off the map routine things would change in a hurry, if they disarmed things would change in a hurry. Thats what the IRA did (publicly anyway) and thats what I think the MP's where saying.

The ball is in Hezbollah's court. They can continue isolation or come out of the shadows.

[Athlétique.Canadien]

I wasn't attacking you. Just making another further point. It's probably that these MP's have a high population of Lebanese in their ridings.

Edited August 21, 2006 by ATHLÉTIQUE.CANADIEN

[Pierre the Great]

Oh okay because my point is the most widely held view I think.

[Athlétique.Canadien]

Canadian killed by 'friendly fire' in Afghanistan

It's at times like this that my blood pressure rises when I think about how we are never doing enough in the eyes of some.

Newt Gingrich sorry for comments about Canada

U.S. congressman blasts Canada on terrorism

John Hostettler and Newt Gingrich is the weekly news annoyance that we go through north of the border. The problem with accusations, correct or not is that no one ever remembers the retraction. It's getting to the point where most Americans are starting to hate us.

But now, here we go again. There was a tragic accident in Afghanistan today. Sometimes when things like this happen I wish those political people would realize that dung flies both ways between our country's.

Rest in Peace to the Canadian soldier. It was an accident. I guess what I'm trying to say is we all carry a heavy weight and maybe it's time to start trusting each other more. On this side of the border there exists this ridiculous fascination with Canadians being superior to Americans which is garbage.

We just lack a national identity and it's easier to compare. My mom always taught me never to compare. If I got a C in a subject and I said everyone in the class got a C, does that mean a C is adequate? That's comparing.

Congressmen and political leaders int the US and Canada should stop using each other as a news flavour of the week to boost their campaigns and Canadians should stop putting down Americans.

It was an accident but as a Canadian I'm angry at the Americans today. It wouldn't be so bad if it never happened before. But, our friendship is so strong I'll be over it by tomorrow.

[Pierre the Great]

Most republicans in office won't ever like Canada period. They see it as this demi god socialist place that shall not enter the U.S. Just ask pyscho IRA supporting Peter King.

Plus most of the Repubs in the white house are from Texas and they probly couldn't locate Canada on the map.

Remember then Gov. Bush and him telling Rick Mercer to thank Prime Minister Mr. Poutine?

[Sir_Boagalott]

Most republicans in office won't ever like Canada period. They see it as this demi god socialist place that shall not enter the U.S. Just ask pyscho IRA supporting Peter King.

Plus most of the Repubs in the white house are from Texas and they probly couldn't locate Canada on the map.

Remember then Gov. Bush and him telling Rick Mercer to thank Prime Minister Mr. Poutine?

I agree. I dont mean I hate Americans when I say bad things aboot them. However, Americans are the ones constantly voting in Republicans, so who really is the problem?

Personally I'd like to see the Republicans treated like our Karibu, and pumell them with Tim Bits.

Newt Gingrich sorry for comments about Canada

Hard to beleive. What a crock of shite. What's that jack hole running his festering gob aboot now? Every week/month the bunk comming of Republican mouths like his changes, but its always the same crap: Canada sucks.

It's not like Newt is the only Republican jack hole making a career out of inceascently bashing Canada. Several of them are still passing it off as factual that the 9-11 terrorists came from Canada.

[edit] hahaha, just read the link, that is what he's apoligising for. I pretty much refuse to even pay attention to what Newt says, its always ignorant anti-Canadian propaganda[/edit]

I support the troops 110%, as a proud Canadian, we have to. People like Layton need to tone it down, it sends the Taliban the wrong msg. Unfortunately, I dont agree with our scope in Afgan. The Tories had no right to change our original mission. Canadian troops, unlike the US, are fully trained. Canada puts a lot more resources into troop training, and because of this, our troops arent expendible, and they shouldnt be put into harms way when its not exactly required.

The way the Tories are handling Afgan, is similar to the US in Iraq, and its doomed for failure. Canada needs to change what our troops are doing there, before the death toll gets insane, and the majority of Canadians want to pull out, which would make all the sacrifices for nothing.

What disgusts me, is all the terrorist bashing and the mention of Afgan and Iraq, like those 2 countries are the sole problem. The truth is, that 18 of the 19 9-11 high jackers are Saudi's, and all the Taliban are Paki's. Keeping these people out of Afgan, sure might help the Afgans, but its not like they wont just take over some other country that would be easy to take over.

The only way to win in Afgan, is to control the boarders, especially the Pakistan boarder. Like i've said, all the Taliban are from Pakistan, and the Pakistans have absolutely no reason to stop them leaving Pakistan. It's good riddence to bad rubbish for Pakistan when more Taliban head into Afgan. When ever the coalation troops in Afgan kill 10 Talibans, 100 more just make the hike ovre the boarder to come heed the call to fight. It's truely a never ending cycle which is an excercise in futility, unless the replenishing of the Taliban is stopped.

Edited September 6, 2006 by Sir_Boagalott

[Pierre the Great]

Well here's an eye opener Osama will never be caught:

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=2395509

Pakistan won't go after Osama if Taliban don't attack the Pakistani troops.

[Fanpuck33]

Way to stereotype half of the United States, that is very kind of you. I am an American who votes primarily Republican, so you are assuming I hate Canada. I guess that's why I root for the Habs.

The Congressman who "blasted Canada" was simply trying to send a message. It's just like the senator who started a vote to reinstate the draft just to prove a point. He was trying to open eyes with his statements, because he feels Canada needs to tighten anti-terrorism laws. Canada is as much a target as the US, as the country is an ally and trading partner to the US, as well as being a Western, non-Muslim country. And when the Canadian prime minister is saying that he can ""live with all these threats as long as they're not from my caucus," doesn't exactly show that Canada is worried about terrorism. I'm no expert on Canadian law, but you are directly adjacent to the US, so any terrorists who work in Canada are within striking distance of the US.

It doesn't help that there are groups in Canada who harbor deserters and help them apply for asylum in the country. Under Canadian law, from what I understand, a person may only be granted asylum if they are able to prove they will be persecuted and killed in their home country. According to the United States Code Military Justice, a deserter during an undeclared war, as the Iraq war is, cannot face the death penalty. Despite this, the first known deserter of the Iraq war to flee to Canada, Jeremy Hinzman, has been in Canada for two years and has still not been sent back to the states. After over a year and a half his petition was finally denied, but he is now in the appeals process. These soldiers signed up for the military, so they knew there was a chance they would see action. They knew there was a chance they could be asked to fight in a war they didn't like. If they didn't want to face that decision, then they should not have signed up.

By the way, it was Republican John Ashcroft, who was appointed by Republican George Bush, who headed the committee that disproved the hi-jackers came in across the Canadian border.

And Pierre, I am a little baffled by your assessment of that treaty. All it says is that the Pakistanis won't attack if the militant don't attack, and vice versa. The militants also agreed to stay where they are and not harbor foreign militants. Well, Osama is a foreign militant, so if the Pakitanis get wind of him being there, they have just cause to go after him, since the militants broke the treaty. The treaty will hamper the effort, I am sure, but it isn't a given that it means Osama will never be found.

[Athlétique.Canadien]

Way to stereotype half of the United States, that is very kind of you. I am an American who votes primarily Republican, so you are assuming I hate Canada. I guess that's why I root for the Habs.

The Congressman who "blasted Canada" was simply trying to send a message. It's just like the senator who started a vote to reinstate the draft just to prove a point. He was trying to open eyes with his statements, because he feels Canada needs to tighten anti-terrorism laws. Canada is as much a target as the US, as the country is an ally and trading partner to the US, as well as being a Western, non-Muslim country. And when the Canadian prime minister is saying that he can ""live with all these threats as long as they're not from my caucus," doesn't exactly show that Canada is worried about terrorism. I'm no expert on Canadian law, but you are directly adjacent to the US, so any terrorists who work in Canada are within striking distance of the US.

It doesn't help that there are groups in Canada who harbor deserters and help them apply for asylum in the country. Under Canadian law, from what I understand, a person may only be granted asylum if they are able to prove they will be persecuted and killed in their home country. According to the United States Code Military Justice, a deserter during an undeclared war, as the Iraq war is, cannot face the death penalty. Despite this, the first known deserter of the Iraq war to flee to Canada, Jeremy Hinzman, has been in Canada for two years and has still not been sent back to the states. After over a year and a half his petition was finally denied, but he is now in the appeals process. These soldiers signed up for the military, so they knew there was a chance they would see action. They knew there was a chance they could be asked to fight in a war they didn't like. If they didn't want to face that decision, then they should not have signed up.

By the way, it was Republican John Ashcroft, who was appointed by Republican George Bush, who headed the committee that disproved the hi-jackers came in across the Canadian border.

And Pierre, I am a little baffled by your assessment of that treaty. All it says is that the Pakistanis won't attack if the militant don't attack, and vice versa. The militants also agreed to stay where they are and not harbor foreign militants. Well, Osama is a foreign militant, so if the Pakitanis get wind of him being there, they have just cause to go after him, since the militants broke the treaty. The treaty will hamper the effort, I am sure, but it isn't a given that it means Osama will never be found.

I'm a righty too actually. And, to PTG's disgust I prefer the Elephant over the Donkey! I just worry that sometimes "the baby gets thrown out with the bathwater" with some of these statements. That is, we are lacking in our security and we do have a loose imigration policy. But at the end of the day, I'm sure that there are some who believe some of the hijackers 5 years ago came from Canada. It is true that the millenium bomber did and there are other credible examples. It's just feeling like being lopped into one group by a small amount of people. After a while...

My nephew is a longhaul trucker and does all of the US. He hears constantly about these "negative" things over and over. So, I worry.

Please remember fanpuck33, I did roast some nonsense about this country.

Didn't mean to offend.

I think Pierre the Great has noticed my affiliation. He's constantly tweaking my nose over it. The latest was his declaration that the NDP would be best to govern this country. Simple response: GOD HELP US.

PS. New York is the capitol of the world IMO. As far as I'm concerned, 5 years ago I said "Shoulder to shoulder with you". I still feel that way now.

It blows my mind how quickly this has been forgotten.

Edited September 6, 2006 by ATHLÉTIQUE.CANADIEN

[Pierre the Great]

I dunno about New York being the 'capital of the world' Tokyo could give it a run for its money.

The treaty says we won't attack you if you don't attack us. Osama is in that area and the only way to get to him is by attacking. So by Bush's doctrine Pakistan is "harboring terrorists". Unless of course Georgie is going to change that just like he said if there were leakers found they'd be fired. Then changed it to. if it was criminal and the person was charged.

Now Bush is saying that anyone who disagrees with him are like the Nazi apoligists in the second world war. Yeah keep saying that George and you'll have 5 seats in the house next year.

Yeah AC I know this board mainly tilts to the right. But I have a litmus test that I put on some conservatives and tell them they aren't really conservative.

First thing is abortion and "pro life issues"

Then its making christianity the offical religion

Bombing and invading all of the middle east

privitizing everything and anything

tax cuts for the rich and slashes in benefits to the poor

If you meet any of those criterias then you are a true conservative in the american sense because conservatives in my state have done all 5 in the past year.