You were expecting what? Democracy, human rights? No, no, no - that's what you were told Canada's mission to Afghanistan was all about but that was so 2007 and this is 2008 and 2011 will be here before you know it.
You gullible fools - the 40-odd per cent of you who really believed all that spin about how our Canadian soldiers were giving life and limb in Afghanistan to bring freedom to the people - you had better put away your gingham bag of delusions. You were had.
Even Lib turncoat David Emerson, the consummate turd polisher himself, has folded his tent and says it's time mission enthusiasts stowed their rose coloured glasses. From Canadian Press:
"I don't think any of us should be under the illusion that Afghanistan is going to be a thriving, prosperous democracy by 2011.
"But we hope we can get to the point where Afghanistan has become a viable state and we can normalize Canada's relationship," said Emerson, chair of a cabinet committee overseeing Ottawa's war-and-development strategy."
But not everyone is without hope. Generalissimo Rick Hillier who conceived this fiasco said, "The mission continues in a positive direction, but that threat remains high especially in the south of Afghanistan and especially, from our perspective in the west and north of Kandahar city itself."
You gullible fools - the 40-odd per cent of you who really believed all that spin about how our Canadian soldiers were giving life and limb in Afghanistan to bring freedom to the people - you had better put away your gingham bag of delusions. You were had.
Even Lib turncoat David Emerson, the consummate turd polisher himself, has folded his tent and says it's time mission enthusiasts stowed their rose coloured glasses. From Canadian Press:
"I don't think any of us should be under the illusion that Afghanistan is going to be a thriving, prosperous democracy by 2011.
"But we hope we can get to the point where Afghanistan has become a viable state and we can normalize Canada's relationship," said Emerson, chair of a cabinet committee overseeing Ottawa's war-and-development strategy."
But not everyone is without hope. Generalissimo Rick Hillier who conceived this fiasco said, "The mission continues in a positive direction, but that threat remains high especially in the south of Afghanistan and especially, from our perspective in the west and north of Kandahar city itself."
A positive direction, is that right Rick? And just what the hell would that be, boyo? I expect it's positive for the Taliban and there's no doubt it's positive for the drug barons and the warlords but, from our perspective, isn't that negative? I suppose it doesn't really matter any more, now that we've ditched the idealism and settled for "realism" which sounds more and more like fatalism, eh?
2 comments:
I would think it would be difficult to find any thinking person who thought that in 2011 Afghanastan would be able to stand on its own. 25 to 50 years maybe. The CBC did a great documentary on the lone woman athlete from Afghanastan who will be competing at the Bejing Olympics, how her training facility ironicly used to be the same stadium where 10 years ago the Taliban would fill the seats with men women and children and watch as hands, arms, fingers were cut off for punishment, and, where women were stoned for, well, being women. I live just outide of Pettawawa and I get a chance to hear their story's, to hear how our volunteer military men and women feel about what they do, and, to most of them, if it takes a 100 years its worth it. I know my opinion is just that, mine, but, we either work the the UN and NATO to alter the paths of coutry's such as Afghanastan, or, go back to embargo's, platitudes, warnings and rally's in the warm July sun in front of some embassy in Ottawa. Both are wrong, but, at least one of them makes a difference. billg
Bill, anyone who believes Afghanistan will ever amount to more than a temporary lull between civil wars ignores that country's rich history of ethnic strife. The Tajiks, Hazara, Uzbeks and Pashtu clobber each other relentlessly until exhaustion, strike a deal that may last for one or two decades, and then it's back at it.
I know our soldiers are well-intentioned but with Pakistan unchecked on one border, Iran on the other, and a legacy of centuries of sectarian warfare, what in hell can our people expect to achieve in that place that could possibly hold and last?
The Afghan warlords are already gaming our departure, positioning themselves for the opportunities that will present - and they're our ALLIES!
We're not going to "alter the path" of Afghanistan. If the Afghans do emerge from their Dark Ages fundamentalist feudalism, it'll be their doing, not ours and it will be on their timetable, not ours.
If it takes 100 years it's worth it? What, we tie down the entire NATO alliance in Afghanistan for a century, are you serious?
There are much bigger fish to fry coming down the pike, Bill, and we'll need those NATO forces much more elsewhere before long.
We're going to have to give up our lease on Afghanistan's civil war, Bill, and let the warlords carry it on on their own.
Sorry, amigo, but even David Emerson is now preaching the gospel of "realism" for Afghanistan. It's over, all except the leaving.
Post a Comment