4 Canadian soldiers killed in Afghanistan

[Retrovision]

www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2006/04/22/afghanistan-deaths060422.html

[Starbucks Queen]

If they had stayed in Canada, they would probably still enjoy their life.

I´m not sorry for not feeling sorry for people who mess in other country´s backyards.

[Neil]

Should it be flying at half mast?

[Balfour]

It is customary to fly the flag at half mast when someone dies.

[Neil]

'someone' ?

[Scott]

Anyone who doesn't respect our troops, doesn't deserve respect. If you've got a problem with the mission, take it up with the politicians. It's a sad day.

[Low Light Mike]

admin said:

Anyone who doesn't respect our troops, doesn't deserve respect. If you've got a problem with the mission, take it up with the politicians. It's a sad day.

John, I presume that your directing that comment at Canadians, and not at our global sample of members on this forum?

As an internal-matter for Canadians, I agree with you. And I'm very sad at the recent increase in Canadian deaths in Afghanistan. I don't have an informed opinion on whether they should be there or not.......but as a Canadian, my heart bleeds when I see someone wearing the maple-leaf go down.

4 Canadian soldiers dead in 1 day is pretty staggering by our Canadian standards. (I believe the record is 907 Canadians killed at war on a single day - August 19, 1942 at Dieppe. The Dieppe story breaks my heart, everytime that I think about it)

[Retrovision]

admin said:

Anyone who doesn't respect our troops, doesn't deserve respect. If you've got a problem with the mission, take it up with the politicians. It's a sad day.

Rhetorical Question, to the entire forum:

Who did you vote for?

[Neil]

Canadians can be proud of our long and, mostly, honourable record of peacekeeping missions abroad. The tragic aspect is that occasionally, soldiers are going to be killed on those missions. Has it been customary in the past to fly the flag at half mast when a Canadian soldier is killed? If so, then it should be done now.

[Johnson]

chivapcici said:

If they had stayed in Canada, they would probably still enjoy their life.

I´m not sorry for not feeling sorry for people who mess in other country´s backyards.

Well if those (moderator-deleted ignorant words) didn't fly into the Trade Center we wouldn't be over there bringing those (more moderator-deleted ignorant words) to justice.

[Dane]

Brazo Zulu - job well done.

CHIMO

[Starbucks Queen]

I do think, we should ask ourselves, are this kind of "peacemaker" actions legitime at all ? I am not sorry for these Canadian soldiers who died, as well I´d not be sorry for any other soldiers that died in Afghanistan or Iraq.
Because, ask yourself - why did they have to go there ? There is no real reason. To bring peace to the country ? Really ? Do you think it was that sort of humble task ? I don´t believe it..
Al Quaida ? Yes they are a terror - organisations. But why does it need a war for this, where are the secret services ?

As well another thought: As a woman I can not be pro the Afghanistan government now and in the past, as I think in their standards, a dog is more valuable than a woman.
Though, I think, the way of thinking - that "democracy above all others" is wrong. Whether we agree or not, their culture is thousands of years old, and it´s simply a different culture, a different way of thinking, not understandable for us. See it from their point of view, many people there see these interventions of American US/CA troops as invading, and do not like the attempts to put OUR system on their countries. It does not work, and it´s oil on Al Quaida´s fire who make some of the folks believing, that they need to fight the west as they will be invading, they disrespect their culture etc.

I wonder, what do you feel ? I do fear something - I fear a war of religions. It´s not anymore a war for peace, for oil but it becomes more and more a war of ideologies. Democracy vs. old Middle East cultures. Christians against Muslims - how many of those who are "pro" these wars claim also that the Christian religion is the only right one ?

To be honest - I´m simply worried about our world.

[Political Incorrectness]

Watching Meet the Press, Democratic Senator, Edward Kennedy of Massachusets says we need to pull out soon. It is true, we are wasting money on the war in Iraq and having to cut programs here on our homefront. Why should we fear like cowards on the homefront? yet not using a thing called INTELLIGENCE to find out more about Al Quadia?

Bottom line, this war is wasting money, air strike in Iran is just going to have the middle east wanting to kick the US in the keister. If we have millitary power just to get Iraq under control and we hate the Saudis along with that oil addiction of Bush, JUST BOOT THE SAUDIS OUT AND WE WOULDN'T HAVE THE PROBLEM! So many problems, so many solutions, that create other problems.

[Scott]

I agree that the war in Afghanistan is questionable. If it's to bring peace to the region and to fight against a terrorist organization, then I think it's reasonable to be there. On the other hand, you're defending a "democratic" regime that still discriminates against women and kills people for being Christians.. etc.

Of course it's not a black and white situation... there are good reasons to be there and good reasons not to be there. To blame a soldier for being there... is basically saying that he/she should desert the army because it's an unjust war. It's like saying that everyone who fought for Germany in World War II was a Nazi. Four Canadian soldiers died defending our country's interests... it should be a sad day in Canada.

And it wouldn't have mattered who you voted for. The Liberals put us there, the Conservatives are keeping us there, and neither the Bloc or the NDP wants us out of there.

[Retrovision]

Johnson said:

chivapcici said:

If they had stayed in Canada, they would probably still enjoy their life.

I´m not sorry for not feeling sorry for people who mess in other country´s backyards.

Well if those sand @@@@@@@ didn't fly into the Trade Center we wouldn't be over there bringing those brown skinned scumbags to justice.

Moderators: Please Delete this Post. Thank You.

24 hrs. of this word on our forum is *far* too long. This isn't a portrayal of the Prophet Muhammad that we're talking about here; *that* word is blatently-ignorant RACISM.

[Neil]

I'll second that. And then you can delete my post replying to it.
I agree with a lot of what Chivapcici said, but not entirely with the part about always staying out of other countries' affairs. The United States has sabotaged a number of democratically elected governments over the years to protect their own, and corporate, interests- and that is clearly indefensible. However, standing aside, without exception, makes it very easy for barbarians like the Burmese generals to enslave and impoverish a nation, with impunity. There are times when the world needs to protect human beings, before protecting the autonomy of tyrants. The difficulty is in reaching a consensus on when to do that, and in restraining imperialists like the Americans who use phony concerns about 'freedom and democracy' to disguise monetary ambitions. Canada is fairly well respected world wide for our peace keeping missions, and for showing interest in the plights of others, without trying to cow others with our 'superiority'.

[Low Light Mike]

offending words deleted.

I saw those words yesterday, and considered deleting the whole post right-away, but I didn't want to censor ignorance.....read on, for my reasoning:

My intention was to leave the post "as is", in order to display the ignorance that is still in our society. ie. not to give a false impression that 2006 is moron-free re those old attitudes.

Offending words now removed, but the guts of the post I've left, as a testament of the person's ignorance. So it can be a reminder for us not to take tolerance and decency for granted.

[Low Light Mike]

hornbyguy said:

There are times when the world needs to protect human beings, before protecting the autonomy of tyrants. The difficulty is in reaching a consensus on when to do that, and in restraining imperialists like the Americans who use phony concerns about 'freedom and democracy' to disguise monetary ambitions.

Makes you wonder why the North American mainstream media is having lots of coverage about Iran recently, and yet you rarely hear mention of the people of Myanmar, one of the most oppressive nations on Earth.

[Retrovision]

unfortunately the control of our world is left to such an concept.
...but nothing ever seems to work out, for some *odd* reason.


This recently came up while with talking over coffee my parents... it turns out that we agree that polititians should not be able to be recalled, given a fixed-term, because they were chosen by the people for a fixed term, and to allow otherwise would not only undermine the process, but give the illusion that the voters aren't accountable.

[Dane]

Calling the war unjustified is narrow minded and ignorant of global politics and realities, IMHO.

- THe talliban regime was an international threat and had to be removed. Sovergnty is forfitted with pre-emtive, aggressive, and hostile actions against another state (and this logic leads me to believe the war in Iraq is NOT justified)
- "since the evil government didn't effect me" isn't a valid argument
- When people say that we're forcing democracy on them, they're correct. However, actually take a moment to do more than read a commercial paper and see what Afghantistan's government used to be before its overthrow - a very functional democracy!
- It's not a war of religion, there's no reason to say that other than the people have different religions. Seriously when people say that I just get upset, it was a reactive strike against the government of Afghanistan. If the initial terrorism had bearings in rascism, the response did not. She we only use the military against other Christians?
- The Afghani government is still discriminatory, but it's hypocritical to say we're forcing government on them and then being upset that the government isn't taking a form we'd like. It's an idiosycracy with in the anti-Afghantistan mission
- Advertising the war as a human-aid mission is done because that is what it is - when a state gors into another and causes unrest like Canada, the US, Britian and others did it is their duty to ensure that the country is in a position equal to or greater than when they arrived. We did it in Japan, too. Why doesn't anyone mention that? Because it wouldn't cause a stroy.

[Neil]

The 'recall' thing is one of those wierd Americanisms; it sounds really democratic, but in effect is nothing more than knee jerk reactionism. Kind of like their belief in electing judges- you just get political hacks pandering to the latest media induced paranoia in order to get elected. All the more reason why America shouldn't be exporting their brand of 'democracy' around the world- it's so dysfunctional at home.
Dane makes a good point about the need to leave an invaded country in better shape afterwards, but the only problem is, who makes that assessment? Wall Street? Amnesty International? Afghanis can vote, but they can't feed their families. Probably not the right kind of lesson about the value of democracy, but then, look at the 'teacher'.

[Starbucks Queen]

- Advertising the war as a human-aid mission is done because that is what it is - when a state gors into another and causes unrest like Canada, the US, Britian and others did it is their duty to ensure that the country is in a position equal to or greater than when they arrived. We did it in Japan, too. Why doesn't anyone mention that? Because it wouldn't cause a stroy.[/quote]

It is not, and was never a human-aid mission. And you are incorrect about what was "done" in Japan, and as well in Europe I remind you. In Japan and Europe, there have been regimes, that did attack other countries, to get resources like oil, wood etc. - this was both the case of Japan, which is an island and Germany with their expansions. During this time, it was right to stop this, especially since Japan attacked the USA.
Though, the Desert Storm Gulf war was legitime when Iraq attacked Saudi Arabia. But now ? That´s just about oil, and revenge.

OK, apart from this - the problem is, that actions like this do hit people like you and me. Ones that do not have anything to do with politics and who are very often not well educated. They take up the thought about the "evil west" with pleasure. But where does that lead ? Families killed, cities bombed and no help creates hate. Hate creates more hate.. where does it end ?

In Japan and Germany the USA created the "Marshall - Plan" - democracies built up. Not left countries in a mess and didn´t give a poopoo.

Now, you brought the arguements about the "evil" countries, which do discriminate people, and are involved in all sorts of criminal actions. Then, in the US case: Before cleaning up elsewhere, clean up your own place. A country that has money for wars overseas but is not able to protect the own folks (see New Orleans) and that cuts social and education funds does not look good internationally - I dare to say here, the reputation is ruined.

Also, let´s stay with the "evil countries" OK, Iraq.. Afghanistan. Now, once you started - you can´t stop. Why not China ? They don´t care about human rights, at all. Why didn´t they choose China for their so humble "human aid" missions ? Oh well, why not North Korea ? Why ? There are no human rights and people die of hunger !! Pakistan ? Don´t forget RUSSIA even !! You know what´s going on there ?

OK, in Iran they are not stupid. Their system is - well, what you might call "evil". And, they fear some attack right now. So they try to go the same way as Russia, North Korea, Pakistan, China etc. and protect themselfes by nuclear weapons. It´s probably the only way.

Now, I do not agree with any of these missions. I do more agree with something that stands in our law here: That military actions in other countries are ONLY legitime, if this country is beeing attacked and needs help ! There is not any other valid reasons, as then you would have - if you are serious about your task - to attack more than HALF OF THE WORLD.

This is why I am worried. I am worried of a new sort of Cold War where stupid guys pretend "human missions" - a stupid excuse for getting oil, resources...

JUST LIKE JAPAN AND GERMANY DID SOME DECADES AGO !!!

[Neil]

Can't argue with a lot of your points, Chivapcici. Intervention seems necessary on rare occasions, but it's a real pandora's box. The Chinese are safe from any American 'pro-democracy' missions by virtue of their emerging consumer culture, which has the western corporate world drooling.
By the way, I see that Canadian military people are suggesting that we temper our emphasis on the four deaths in Afghanistan, given that they might not remain such a rarity the longer we're involved there.

[Starbucks Queen]

Please don´t think that I am against any human-aid actions, but I talk here about some like the UN-blue helmets in ex. Yugoslavia, the actions in Somalia. These were human-aid actions, and not attack-wars covered up as such ones.
I do agree also that it´s hard for the families of these 4 soldiers who died, but on the other side, it surprises me very often - how surprised some people are about when such happens. I mean, if one joins the Armed forces, they should know what can happen.
Unfortunatelly, politicans are very often too light-hearted about such, and it´s a pity that people´s willing to defend the own country is abused too often.

[Dane]

chivapcici said:

It is not, and was never a human-aid mission.

You are wrong.

Canadian has put forward millions of dollars for social infastructure programmes and medical care.

chivapcici said:

And you are incorrect about what was "done" in Japan, and as well in Europe I remind you. In Japan and Europe, there have been regimes, that did attack other countries, to get resources like oil, wood etc. - this was both the case of Japan, which is an island and Germany with their expansions. During this time, it was right to stop this, especially since Japan attacked the USA.

Clearly you seem to have forgotten what happened on September 11th 2001 when 4 planes were hijacked and threatened American soveirgnty in a mission to disrupt the economic and political systems of the state.

That is an act of war - which was committed and financed by the then government of Afghanistan with trained members from Al Quieda.

It is exactly the same as post WW2 occupations, with a more modern context.

chivapcici said:

Though, the Desert Storm Gulf war was legitime when Iraq attacked Saudi Arabia. But now ? That´s just about oil, and revenge.

I agree - but I would note dare compare Iraq to Afghanistan.

chivapcici said:

OK, apart from this - the problem is, that actions like this do hit people like you and me. Ones that do not have anything to do with politics and who are very often not well educated. They take up the thought about the "evil west" with pleasure. But where does that lead ? Families killed, cities bombed and no help creates hate. Hate creates more hate.. where does it end ?

It ends when you eliminate the threat, Afghanistan was that threat.

chivapcici said:

In Japan and Germany the USA created the "Marshall - Plan" - democracies built up. Not left countries in a mess and didn´t give a peanuts.

I don't really understand what you're saying here. The difference in the Japan case is that forces were there long term (and arguably are still there, but that's more a position of strategic advantage to the USA). Now some Canadians are saying pull out, and if we do, and lets say for hypothetical argument, everyone else does, the country will fall right back on itself and more and more problems will arise. When you topple a government, even one that was ineffective to begin with you must ensure that resources are available for the country to be stable once you pull out. Every successful peacekeeping mission that has taken place hgas lasted 20 years+. There is a point where occupation of a country changes to peacebuilding, then to peeacekeeping. That is the point where you exit.

chivapcici said:

Now, you brought the arguements about the "evil" countries, which do discriminate people, and are involved in all sorts of criminal actions. Then, in the US case: Before cleaning up elsewhere, clean up your own place. A country that has money for wars overseas but is not able to protect the own folks (see New Orleans) and that cuts social and education funds does not look good internationally - I dare to say here, the reputation is ruined.

I don't believe that countries should be invaded if their governments have committed an act against international law (genocide) and I don't justify the initial force that entered Afghanistan on ridding an evil government, that was a neccessity for ending a threat against western state's soveirngty rather than for the people of Afghanistan.

chivapcici said:

Also, let´s stay with the "evil countries" OK, Iraq.. Afghanistan. Now, once you started - you can´t stop.

Yes you can. Afghanistan is Canada's only offensive mission, and is the first in a traditional sense since Korea.

You're comment is of a philosophical nature rather than based in the reality of every country - except the USA.

chivapcici said:

Why not China ? They don´t care about human rights, at all. Why didn´t they choose China for their so humble "human aid" missions ?

China has not attacked us.

chivapcici said:

Oh well, why not North Korea ? Why ?

North Korea has not attacked us.

chivapcici said:

Pakistan ? Don´t forget RUSSIA even !! You know what´s going on there ?

Pakistan did not attack us. Russia did not attack us.

Moreover - Canada has a military aid presence in Pakistan and gives aid to every country you listed, except Russia.


Your logic is flawed, and your post out of context. You go on to trash American invasions and American foreign policy, which is fine, but in a threa determining the legitimacy of Canadian actions in Afghanistan. They are unrelated.