A Tragic Loss

While all losses in war are painful, few are more heartbreaking than those caused by friendly fire. So we should take a moment and acknowledge the sacrifices of our Canadian allies in Afghanistan over the last few days, and in particular the death of one soldier in an accidental strafing incident.

That said, the Canadians have so aggressively conceptualized their military as peacekeeping specialists over the years that they have had real difficulty in getting their public to accept what is clearly a combat mission, with the risks and losses of combat, and public support for their participation is sinking steadily. This is, to be frank, a disappointment. Whatever the disagreements over Iraq, everyone claimed to understand and support the importance of the mission in Afghanistan, and the Canadian military is one of the best -- we need those guys.

Comments

[ME]

Iraq may have poisoned the well. Lumping a cynical imperialistic was (Iraq) into a broader, ostensibly respectable endeavor (War on terror) simply cheapens and degrades the more respectable endeavor. Hence Afghanistan as a war is less respectible. I'm not saying it should be, but in people's minds I think it is.

[Agathena2]

"Canadians have so aggressively conceptualized their military as peacekeeping specialists"

This Canadian considered the invasion of Afghanistan to be a search and destroy for Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda and the ruling Taliban. I now consider this to be a failed mission.

Maybe Americans consider their military to be so much in need of "support" that they are unable to find fault with its tactics. This is not the first 'friendly fire' by Americans in Afghanistan.

I hope for a real re-construction of war-torn-poverty-stricken-lawless Afghanistan.

[Sirkowski]

Whatever the disagreements over Iraq??? What the fuck do you mean by 'whatever' you talentless prick? You mean whatever were we supposed to do in Afghanistan, catch Bin Laden?

Maybe the reason the Canadian has problems accepting this might have something to do with the way your retarded administration is conducting this WOT.

War is serious business, it's no place for nancy boys like you, asshole.

[BKP]

Sirkowski - I have a couple of comments on your post.

1) Bluster is the last refuge of those who cannot formulate a coherent and logical argument.
2) The original post stated: "Whatever the disagreements over Iraq, everyone claimed to understand and support the importance of the mission in Afghanistan, and the Canadian military is one of the best -- we need those guys." In this context, "whatever" means "regardless." I.e. The existence of widespread opposition to the war in Iraq is not the issue.
3) I suspect that you oppose the Canadian presence in Afghanistan because of the "way your retarded administration is conducting the WOT." This is entirely too broad to engage in a discussion about. Would you elaborate? In essence, the main point of the original post was that the Canadian support for presence in Afghanistan was declining because they were taking casualties. Your counterpoint was only that it was the conduct of the WOT. What makes you think this? Of course, if your ... ahem ... emotional reaction is any indication, there might not be much logic behind the opposition at all, just frustration. You'd be in good company with the frustration, if not your specific language.

[Ajlouny]

Strange how this is written in '06 and nothing has changed in '09.

[buy viagra]

I think that Iraq may have poisoned the well. Lumping a cynical imperialistic was (Iraq) into a broader, ostensibly respectable endeavor (War on terror) simply cheapens and degrades the more respectable endeavor