Our prime ministerial brain trust claims Canadians' rejection of the mission to Afghanistan isn't based on moral objections but on the casualties our forces have sustained.
If it ain't "A" then it's gotta be "B", eh? Maybe it's not really "B" either but "B" along with "C", "D", "E" and "F".
I don't believe that it is the casualties issue that is driving this as much as the combination of so many other factors. It's the haplessness of the Karzai government; the indifference of other NATO members; the ineptitude of George Bush and his stupid war in Iraq that keeps his military off the job in Afghanistan; the inability of our side to sort out Afghanistan's narco-economy; the corruption in the Afghan government, police and security services; the resurgence of al-Qaeda throughout Asia, the Middle East and Africa; the resurgence of the Taliban and the wishes of Karzai and his parliament to negotiate with our supposed mortal enemy; our complete vulnerability to insurgents and terrorists operating with relative freedom across the border in Pakistan; the amount of time, effort and lives expended with no demonstrable result save for the resurgence of our opponents; the deaths of civilians caused by our addiction to artillery and airstrikes and - most of all - the total inability of our leaders - political and military - to present an understandable and convincing plan to win this thing.
No, Stevie, Canadians aren't deciding this on an "A" or "B" call. You and your buddy, Rick Hillier, have given us any number of reasons to say "no" to the mission.