|
Lest we forget and vote conservative: re joining in Iraq war (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| ChemEnhanced |
| What we all forget is that there were Canadian Soldiers in Iraq. Our special forces group was there and Bush let out that they were there...Moral....I foget the name of this special unit but hasn't the government denied its very existance for the longest time.....then oops...bush lets the cat outta the bag. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by ChemEnhanced
What we all forget is that there were Canadian Soldiers in Iraq. Our special forces group was there and Bush let out that they were there...Moral....I foget the name of this special unit but hasn't the government denied its very existance for the longest time.....then oops...bush lets the cat outta the bag. |
You're confusing two seperate incidents (crackhead).
The "secret" special unit you refer to is Joint Task Force 2 (JTF2) - a highly specialized and mobile counter terrorism/covert operations unit. JTF2 was deployed to AFGANISTAN prior to any official declaration from the Canadian Forces or government. JTF2 was a "secret" (in quotes because many including myself knew of their existance long before this incident) unit and Bush refered to them by name when he was thanking countries for their support.
The troops that were in Iraq were there under a US flag, not a Canadian one. Canada, USA, UK, and probably some other NATO nations routinely send members to train/serve as parts of units for their allies. This is mainly done as a cross training exercise so that troops from each nation will be familure with the workings, command structure, and equipment of their allies. It is a very effective way a sharing information and refining techniques. Some Canadian troops were on exchange with a US unit when that unit was deployed to Iraq. As the protocols of this program requires that the exchange troops participate in all the activities of their host unit (including deployment) our troops were sent to Iraq. It must be remembered, however, that during the exchange period troops are deemed to be members of the host nation's military, subsequently, we had no grounds upon which to impeid their deployment. |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
It was be a falicy to think that Canadians would actually let our partners do this on thier own anyways.
While the 'official' party stance was a spineless one, make no doubt about it, we were there... |
|
|
| ShadoWolf |
| Hey swilly, should the Canadian Forces be in Afghanistan? |
|
|
| swilly |
| quote: | Originally posted by ShadoWolf
Hey swilly, should the Canadian Forces be in Afghanistan? |
Nope! If they had left the socialist government that was present in afghanistan and not support all the radical Islamic groups which resulted in the invasion of the soviets, none of this would be a problem. |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
How about we address the fact that Paul martin was ALSO in favour of sending troops to iraq and was also against same sex marriage.
No one ever talks about that though do they? |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by swilly
Nope! If they had left the socialist government that was present in afghanistan and not support all the radical Islamic groups which resulted in the invasion of the soviets, none of this would be a problem. |
but it IS a problem and it needed to be dealt with. Hindsight is 20/20 |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
but it IS a problem and it needed to be dealt with. Hindsight is 20/20 |
+1. Yes, Nato should have kept their nose out of Afganistan during the Soviet war but the we didn't. We created a problem by involving ourselves in their conflict. That problem eventually bit many Nato nations in the ass. It is a problem that needed and still needs solving. Moreover, even if not for our past sins.... we participated in the removal of the established government and the power structure that went along with it. Once you remove the government of a state you destroy order. As a result it is necessary that someone stay behind to maintain order until the new government can establish it's legitimacy and it's infrastructure. To pull out prior to that happening would simply destabalize the area resulting in much larger problems then existed prior to the military intervention. |
|
|
| sufee_b |
| quote: | Originally posted by swilly
just remember that although we lost some 200 million over the sponsership scandel it is still probably cost us a hell of alot less then going to war in Iraq not to mention that at least we are not out there killing innocent civilians.
Swilly san |
yeah lets ILLEGALY attack countries just as long it doesnt cost us much :rolleyes: |
|
|
| EvilTree |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
+1. Yes, Nato should have kept their nose out of Afganistan during the Soviet war but the we didn't. We created a problem by involving ourselves in their conflict. That problem eventually bit many Nato nations in the ass. It is a problem that needed and still needs solving. |
Interesting considering the Soviets decided to involve themselves in the conflict, setting up their own puppet govt. (Ironically, removing a Socialist govt in place)
| quote: | | Moreover, even if not for our past sins.... we participated in the removal of the established government and the power structure that went along with it. Once you remove the government of a state you destroy order. As a result it is necessary that someone stay behind to maintain order until the new government can establish it's legitimacy and it's infrastructure. To pull out prior to that happening would simply destabalize the area resulting in much larger problems then existed prior to the military intervention. |
A bad govt is still a bad govt, no matter how much 'order' it kept. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by EvilTree
A bad govt is still a bad govt, no matter how much 'order' it kept. |
I think you misunderstood me. What I was saying is that because we removed the existing government in Afganistan (2001) we need to maintain a presence to maintain order until the new government can be legitimized and established. If we (meaning NATO) were to pull out now it would create a power vacuum which would result in the current government controling some areas but the vast majority being controled by local warlords. We cannot do that, it would be irresponsible. |
|
|
|
|
