Canadian Public Opinion Polls on Afghanistan

[aesop081]

Foreign troops the government has invited for training purposes are different than an invasion for combat purposes.

NATO troops are in Afghanistan on a UN-authorized mission at the request of the democraticly elected Afghan government.

As for Italian airbases, ask Italians. I don't think too many Europeans are happy with US military bases in their country.

I have been to American Airbases in Italy, have you ? Lots of Italian civilians have jobs in Sigonella and the American presence is a huge boost to the economy. What you "think" is not always reality of what the media likes to portray.

Have I been to Afghanistan? Clearly not. But has anyone else here been to Afghanistan? First hand experience would certainly be welcomed.

I have not been there either but lots of members of this site have been. Some more than once.

 

[aesop081]

Its up to the Afghan's to build their own nation, not Canadians.

:brickwall:

They cant do it as long as the Taliban continues to destroy it. We are there to help until they can do it by themselves.

 

[Mike Baker]

No, I can't say I do understand it. Clearly, the people there want us so badly, yet so many soldiers are coming home in body bags. Its a shame. It was never my argument that what we're doing there ISN'T right, just misguided and creating larger problems than were there originally. It was also my argument that the problem will never be solved just so long as we're there. Its up to the Afghan's to build their own nation, not Canadians.

Yeah, soldiers die because there is an enemy there, which is why this is a combat mission.

The Afghan people need our help to push them to democracy, because there are so many that want them to go back to their old style of government.

Can you imagine a world in which women cannot get jobs, go to school, an are aloud to be beaten by their husband?

I sure as hell don't want that, any where in the world. And I don't want a place that will be an area of operation for terrorists to come to our country, an kill our people. That is just one of the reasons we're there.

:brickwall:

They cant do it as long as the Taliban continues to destroy it. We are there to help until they can do it by themselves.

Exactly!

Baker

 

[armyvern]

Foreign troops the government has invited for training purposes are different than an invasion for combat purposes. As for Italian airbases, ask Italians. I don't think too many Europeans are happy with US military bases in their country.

Have I been to Afghanistan? Clearly not. But has anyone else here been to Afghanistan? First hand experience would certainly be welcomed. Unfortuantely, the only poll I've seen is from the National Post which in itself is right wind radicalism that says Afghan's to the tune of like 90% want Canadians there. You can question other polls in terms of what they ask, but I have two questions to ask in terms of the National Post, or whichever news organization it was that surveyed people. 1) What kind of poll was it. Was it a telephone poll? Because that precludes almost all of Afghanistan and secondly, are you really going to have reporters going to Afghan villages going door to door asking poll questions? I think not.

Oh my. Who needs a poll?

Canadian soldiers are thanked every day in theatre by Afghans. With their smiles, and their waves and the appreciation they express.

We live it.

You get what the media wants you to get, that's it and no more, no less.

There's plenty of info out there on google for you that you won't find published in the MSM -- go ahead and educate yourself as to the actualities. You obviously need a whole bunch of educating in this subject area still.

 

[nicky10013]

We're quite open to debate around here.

But, if you want to come to a debate -- especially with soldiers who, contrary to leftists opinion, are NOT just a bunch of automatons and who DO fully inform themselves as to what they actualities and facts are of what they are undergoing and partaking in daily (vice those sitting back here simply listening to spin) ... then I highly suggest that you fully understand that it is not your opinion that we have problems with ...

it is the spin and the mis-information that is tossed about as facts.

You want to debate soldiers involved in Afghanistan on whther their "occuptation" is justified or not on behalf of all those "occupied people" that you speak of and the Canadians who agree with them -- then you'd better come prepared to be corrected on such simple things that people who actually give two-cents about this country already seem to know ... the first and most obvious being your lack of knowledge of Afghanistan evidenced by you referring to the Afghan people as money.

I dismiss them not because I am against other ideas, but because they can't seem to get either their "facts" correct. They always seem to be claiming that we are "occupying" etc and that the population doesn't want us there (based on an extreme minority viewpoint of the populace - that being the one held by the Taliban and extremeists) when they don't even have a clue how to properly adress that population by it's proper name.

And, when we call them on it -- they claim we are the uninformed and misguided ones.  :

Never did I say anyone was automoton's here. I have friends and family who were in the military and I myself was in Cadets for 5 years. I have an idea of what its about. And also, you don't dismiss ideas, but of course, my thoughts are just leftist opinions that are misguided and wrong. Clearly, everyone is open to debate.

Funny, no one has addressed the governmental aspects of the problem I addressed, or the fact that terrorism has gotten worse since the missions began, not better. Or, the fact that even after our involvement in Afghanistan, we've still arrested terrorism supsects that this mission was supposed to protect us from. Or the fact that the government is still in dissaray. I'm the one with the spin, yet no one addresses the real issues at heart. All I get is that everyone loves Canada in Afghanistan and we're doing a great job, the standard military song and dance. If people actually cared about their country, they'd be trying to critique the things we're doing wrong so we can do them right in the future, not tow the line. Clearly, with my involvement in the military in the past I have known some extremely intelligent military people which is why I thought I could come here and have a smart debate wtih people who knew (I was just surfing and came across the site) and convey the feelings of Canadians who are actually against the fight in Afghanistan to those who support it. The fact that there is such a uniformity of opinion is really disturbing and I feel sorry for those who cling to the notion that there's some sort leftist spin conspiracy surrounding the military and Afghanistan.

 

[Sigger]

Sigh

 

[aesop081]

Funny, no one has addressed the governmental aspects of the problem I addressed, or the fact that terrorism has gotten worse since the missions began, not better.

Please explain how it got worse

Or the fact that the government is still in dissaray.

Oh i see. Setting up a functional government, in your eyes, happens overnight ?  Have you looked at our system of government over the last 20 years ? We still have corruption and mismanagement and Canada has been at this democracy thing for over a century.....

If people actually cared about their country, they'd be trying to critique the things we're doing wrong so we can do them right in the future, not tow the line.

I have been serving my country for almost 16 years regardless of the personal cost involved so do not ever imply that i do not care.

 

[armyvern]

Never did I say anyone was automoton's here. I have friends and family who were in the military and I myself was in Cadets for 5 years. I have an idea of what its about. And also, you don't dismiss ideas, but of course, my thoughts are just leftist opinions that are misguided and wrong. Clearly, everyone is open to debate.

Funny, no one has addressed the governmental aspects of the problem I addressed, or the fact that terrorism has gotten worse since the missions began, not better. Or, the fact that even after our involvement in Afghanistan, we've still arrested terrorism supsects that this mission was supposed to protect us from. Or the fact that the government is still in dissaray. I'm the one with the spin, yet no one addresses the real issues at heart. All I get is that everyone loves Canada in Afghanistan and we're doing a great job, the standard military song and dance. If people actually cared about their country, they'd be trying to critique the things we're doing wrong so we can do them right in the future, not tow the line. Clearly, with my involvement in the military in the past I have known some extremely intelligent military people which is why I thought I could come here and have a smart debate wtih people who knew (I was just surfing and came across the site) and convey the feelings of Canadians who are actually against the fight in Afghanistan to those who support it. The fact that there is such a uniformity of opinion is really disturbing and I feel sorry for those who cling to the notion that there's some sort leftist spin conspiracy surrounding the military and Afghanistan.

I didn't dismiss your thoughts -- I corrected your errors.  

When one wants to debate and his remarks contain obvious basic errors in the subject he claims to have informed himself about and is professing to speak about -- he will always find himself and his errors being noted. That IS the nature of debate. It is also the nature of "correcting" misguided thoughts and opinions of others about this mission - ie correcting the actual "facts" - for those who subscribe to those those misguided thoughts, opinions, and erroneus facts ... even should they profess to be delivering those misguided fatcs, opinions, and errors on behalf of someone other than themself.



And, I rather feel sorry for you actually -- funny how that works.

If people actually cared about their country, they'd be trying to critique the things we're doing wrong so we can do them right in the future, not tow the line.

And, this comment further illustrates exactly how misinformed you are regarding our mission if Afghanistan. The above occurs as a matter of course (and constantly) both in-theatre and outside of theatre. We call it Lessons Learned.  :

 

[Good2Golf]

I don't personally view it as such. However, its not what I think of the situation, or indeed what you think of the situation. It's what the Afghani's think of the situation that determines our chances of success or failure. Considering the amount of dead and wounded, I wouldn't imagine that a lot of people think Canadians or other NATO forces are "liberators." That, and if you wan't to be technical about it, isn't a foreign force residing in a different country an occupation?

No.



UN Sanctioned mission to stabilize Afghanistan to assist establishment of country's own democratically-elected government.

UN co-ordinates with NATO to undertake stabilization operations (ISAF).

In fall 2005, Afghans elect their first democratic government.

Government of Islamic Republic of Afghanistan (on behalf of the Afghans that elected its representatives) requests ISAF and coalition forces to continue assisting the Government and its security forces increase security and pave the way for reconstruction and development activities.

When the county's people, through its democratically-elected government, request security forces to assist them in their own country, the assisting are not "occupying" the nation.

Simple as that.  No occupation.  Period. 

NATO serves at the pleasure of the Afghan government.

G2G

 

[2 Cdo]

Never did I say anyone was automoton's here. I have friends and family who were in the military and I myself was in Cadets for 5 years. I have an idea of what its about. And also, you don't dismiss ideas, but of course, my thoughts are just leftist opinions that are misguided and wrong. Clearly, everyone is open to debate.

Funny, no one has addressed the governmental aspects of the problem I addressed, or the fact that terrorism has gotten worse since the missions began, not better. Or, the fact that even after our involvement in Afghanistan, we've still arrested terrorism supsects that this mission was supposed to protect us from. Or the fact that the government is still in dissaray. I'm the one with the spin, yet no one addresses the real issues at heart. All I get is that everyone loves Canada in Afghanistan and we're doing a great job, the standard military song and dance. If people actually cared about their country, they'd be trying to critique the things we're doing wrong so we can do them right in the future, not tow the line. Clearly, with my involvement in the military in the past I have known some extremely intelligent military people which is why I thought I could come here and have a smart debate wtih people who knew (I was just surfing and came across the site) and convey the feelings of Canadians who are actually against the fight in Afghanistan to those who support it. The fact that there is such a uniformity of opinion is really disturbing and I feel sorry for those who cling to the notion that there's some sort leftist spin conspiracy surrounding the military and Afghanistan.

Just my opinion but you don't want a debate, you want someone in the military to agree with your preconcieved idea of "mission bad" to justify your narrow view. People who have been to Afghanistan have told you the locals appreciate us, but to you it is only "the standard military song and dance."

As for this little tidbit you offer,

Clearly, with my involvement in the military in the past

made me spit my coffee all over my monitor. 5 years in cadets does not offer anything approaching involvement in the military. :

 

[Yrys]

Can you imagine a world in which women cannot get jobs, go to school, an are aloud to be beaten by their husband?

CTV link to pictures of  : Women bravely come out to ask for further recognition of human rights in Afghanistan.

 

[nicky10013]

Please explain how it got worse


Oh i see. Setting up a functional government, in your eyes, happens overnight ?  Have you looked at our system of government over the last 20 years ? We still have corruption and mismanagement and Canada has been at this democracy thing for over a century.....


I have been serving my country for almost 16 years regardless of the personal cost involved so do not ever imply that i do not care.

I don't think that you do not care. I think it gets shown in the wrong ways. Loving your country isn't a bad thing. Taking things from the military at face value because it's somehow patriotic doesn't help our democratic situation.

Of course Canada has had trouble with corruption. Every government does. Thats not the point. The traditional definition of government is a body that has a monopoly on the usage of force. We live in a country where there is a bureaucratic rule of law that oversees everything from halting crime to collecting taxes; two things the Afghan government did not do, can not do and will not be able to do for a long time to come. This is the reason why there has been civil war for the past 30 years in Afghanistan and thats why it will continue while we are there and until after we leave. The situation is and will be a lot like Somalia. The country did not have a working state when we intervened, and it still doesn't have a working state. There is no government, only war lords. The sad thing is that there is not much the international community can do not only in Afghanistan, but in Somalia where the mere thought of the international community spurns remarks of disgust due to the fact that we intervened in the first place. While western powers intervene, violence will subside because governments and militaries pick the faction du jour. The Northern Alliance were just as despotic as the Taliban but we picked them because they were fighting the guys who were protecting OBL. Since right now Karzai has support from the west, his government is legitimate in our eyes. But who knows where support really lies in terms of Afghan citizens. Due to the previous history of the country, that could change as I'm sure the government is seen widely as a puppet western government, like there was a puppet Soviet government. It's funny how ironic it is that the whole country of Afghanistan rose up and fought against the Soviet aggressor, but only a fraction of the population today are fighting against the lovely Canadians. And despite our best intentions; whatever we wanted to accomplish from this mission, the fact remains that this mission, in the broader western liberal notion, is to install friendly democratic governments in the middle east. The thing is though, that's not up to us. The fact that we can force democracy on other nations is the most undemocractic principle of them all.  

 

[Sigger]

:deadhorse:

My friend,

The fact that you have your opinions is great. But it is just that - your opinions. I am not sure what you are getting at, but without some form of fact to back up your opinion, it sounds like you have a case of verbal diarrhea.

Out

 

[MarkOttawa]

nicky10013: This comment on another thread is rather relevant here; I urge that you read the whole article:

Terry Glavin
http://transmontanus.blogspot.com/2008/05/in-national-post-about-afghanistan-its.html
in the National Post:

Our Generation's Spanish Civil War
http://www.nationalpost.com/story.html?id=533347

The conclusion:

The British linguist and historian Fred Halliday sets this historic "antiwar" misjudgment in these terms: "To my mind, Afghanistan is central to the history of the left, and to the history of the world since the 1980s. It is to the early 21st century, to the years we're now living through, what the Spanish Civil War was to Europe in the mid-and late-20th century."

What this means is that the heirs and successors of the Mackenzie-Papineau Battalion -- the brave Canadian volunteers who went to Spain to fight Franco's fascists -- are to be found today not in the main ranks of the left, but among the courageous young men and women of Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry, the Royal Newfoundland Regiment, the Vandoos and all those other Canadian regiments that are holding the banner high in Afghanistan.

It means that Canadian soldiers, and not Canada's "anti-war" politicians and polemicists, are at the vanguard of the historic mission of the left. I would have been proud of those soldiers anyway, but as someone who counts himself among the left-wing founders of the Canada-Afghanistan Solidarity Committee,
http://afghanistan-canada-solidarity.org/
I am doubly proud of them.

We have work to do in Afghanistan. We must fight on.

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Good2Golf]

.....The country did not have a working state when we intervened, and it still doesn't have a working state. There is no government, only war lords. The sad thing is that there is not much the international community can do not only in Afghanistan, but in Somalia where the mere thought of the international community spurns remarks of disgust due to the fact that we intervened in the first place...

Okay, clearly you are not going to be convinced otherwise, because it has been pointed out to you by several people that we are there assisting the Afghan government....I worked for 8 months, embedded in the Afghan government, helping redevelopment efforts.  I first saw a government very much retaining the qualities of a Soviet bureaucracy (pushing decisions up higher, with little initiative of their own) and at the end of my tour saw dynamic young Aghans taking charge of rebuilding their country and a very purposeful manner.

You need not agree with me...heck, you don't even have to believe me...that's your choice.  I have to say,your mind appears to have already been made up. 

The irony of your earlier statement about some of us attacking and not being willing to engage in meaningful debate is astounding.

....despite our best intentions; whatever we wanted to accomplish from this mission, the fact remains that this mission, in the broader western liberal notion, is to install friendly democratic governments in the middle east. The thing is though, that's not up to us. The fact that we can force democracy on other nations is the most undemocractic principle of them all. 

This is far from the mission.

Would you please read about the mission here?  (Plus my take on the mission's "raison d'etre" and why to extend (at least) to 2011 - here.)

I'll be straight up with you, I find it incredibly frustrating that even when presented with sources of information that can provide many answers to the very questions that people are asking, it appears as though such information is ignored, and the previous line of argumentation continued.

Honestly, if you're not going to at least consider what some of us are saying, then why even bother with us?

G2G

 

[armyvern]

I don't think that you do not care. I think it gets shown in the wrong ways. Loving your country isn't a bad thing. Taking things from the military at face value because it's somehow patriotic doesn't help our democratic situation.

See, this is where you're wrong again.

Rather than taking things from the military "at face value" why don't you start asking the MSM why they aren't running reports on the news (even IF not during prime time) that shows all the reconstruction that's occuring? That shows the highways being rebuilt? That shows the women actually out and working? That shows kids playing in the streets, listening to music and enjoying themselves actually being kids?

Why don't you ask them, while you're at it -- where are the stories in the papers about all this too?? And the wells being dug for drinking water? And the communications being built for the populace?

It's ALL happening, but don't expect the MSM to show it to you ... it doesn't sell papers (ergo earning the shareholders as much profit) as a story about another dead Canadian Soldier or terrorist attack does (especially when said terrorists are strapping their wares onto kids and blowing up those kids via remote detonations) ...

Then again, seems that us just telling you it's happening is asking you to "take our word for it" -- or is considered to be us "towing the party line" -- even though there's not a single dime in profit to us based on our actual informed viewpoint.  :

Go ahead and google "PRT works" -- you'd obviously be amazed.

Or instead of us just telling you -- do you actually want us to provide you the links and thus do your self-education for you?  :

The PRT
Ignatieff
Canadian PRT in Afghanistan - A Debate
PRT overlooked

Damned if I didn't notice that, overwhelmingly, the google hits were NOT from MSM sites -- go figure eh?

 

[GAP]

Quote from: nicky10013 on Today at 13:40:51

Funny, no one has addressed the governmental aspects of the problem I addressed, or the fact that terrorism has gotten worse since the missions began, not better.

Actually, statistics in one of my sandbox posts, showed that overall, with the exception of Bagdad, terrorism acts in Iraq and Afghanistan have declined in the last year.....they went on to give probable reasons why, I don't remember the details, but I do remember that little tidbit.

Maybe there is a dimishing pool of ardent suicide bombers, God is running out of groups of 72 virgins, whatever.....

 

[armyvern]

Actually, statistics in one of my sandbox posts, showed that overall, with the exception of Bagdad, terrorism acts in Iraq and Afghanistan have declined in the last year.....they went on to give probable reasons why, I don't remember the details, but I do remember that little tidbit.

Maybe there is a dimishing pool of ardent suicide bombers, God is running out of groups of 72 virgins, whatever.....

Probably why they've resorted to strapping their wares onto kids lately and onto gentle giants suffering from mental illness in Britain ...

 

[MarkOttawa]

nicky10013: There is progress of interesting sorts going on of which you seem unaware.  A post at The Torch that you might read in full if you actually are interested in some of the various things happening in Afghanistan:

Now if the Taliban can only be hit for six...
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2008/05/now-if-taliban-can-only-be-hit-for-six.html

Who says there's little progress? I'll be they weren't playing cricket at the time of the three Anglo-Afghan wars:

    Afghan cricket team aims for world cup glory...

Then these news stories (a topic not, for some reason,covered in the Canadian media):

Afghan Pop Idol winner declared
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7309029.stm

The grand final of Afghanistan's hit pop music talent show, Afghan Star, has taken place in Kabul.

Rafi Naabzada, 19, saw off his rival Hameed Sakhizada, 21, to win the contest at a heavily-guarded hotel.

The two male finalists received over 300,000 text message votes.

The programme has become a sensation in Afghanistan where it is estimated that 11m viewers, or over one-third of the population, regularly tuned in.

The show received severe criticism from conservative clerics, partly because a woman reached the final three....

Afghanistan's Pop Idol breaks barriers
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7262967.stm

In the corner of the kebab shop a small television with a crackly picture draws everyone's eye as they plunge their Afghan nan bread into oily sauce and slurp up a chunk of meat.

The cross-legged diners lean to one side as they peer around a sheep's carcass that momentarily blocks the screen as it's passed from the freezer to the hook from which it then hangs in the window.

It's nine o'clock on Friday night and Afghan Star is on the TV, with just a handful of wannabe singers left, competing for fame and fortune in the glitzy and glamorous Afghan version of the talent show Pop Idol.

It's a huge hit on one of the national private stations, Tolo TV, but it's controversial in a country that's still very conservative...

Most of the contestants who've not yet been voted out are men, but there is still one woman left.

Lima Sahaar is from the southern province of Kandahar and each week she travels up to the studios in Kabul for the show with her mother.

Her hair is usually covered with a scarf, her face not. The fact that a young woman from the birthplace of the Taleban is on stage performing each week says a lot about the way Afghanistan has changed in six years...

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Loachman]

Thats the purpose the polls in the first place. To find out whether or not Canadian citizens support Canada's roll within Afghanistan.

The problem with that is that too few people here have any real clue what that role is, and what we're actually doing. You illustrate this quite well.

A valid poll would start out with an explanation of the mission, and then ask people if they supported those aims.

I've seen a lot of arguments that pertain to military members or pro-military people being dissapointed and upset that Canadians could be so naive to not support a mission to fight the people responsible for 9/11.

Then you have not been paying attention.

Afghanistan was a failed state, and its government had allowed its use as a safe haven and training base for international terrorists. As such, even removal of that government was insufficient as the Taliban movement was strong enough to re-assert itself - it was the biggest band of bullies around, which is how it seized power in the first place.

The prime goal is to rebuild Afghanistan, thereby preventing its regression into failed-state status. A prosperous Afghanistan will not be a breeding ground for terrorism.

It is also right to protect people from abuse. Men were beaten for shaving their beards. Sports, music, television, radio, and children's toys were all banned. Food was extremely scarce, and many people faced starvation. Women were forced to wear burkas outside, could be beaten at whim for any of a number of trivial transgressions, stoned or shot on vague suspicion of adultery, and denied the ability to work even if they were the sole surviving parents. As they could not work at any job, they could not become doctors or nurses, and as it was also not acceptable for male doctors to treat them, they had an unnecessarily high mortality rate from illness and injury. Girls were denied education. The Taliban was an extremely repressive and opressive regime, and few Afghans harbour nostalgia for those days.

As someone who is totally against the war in Afghanistan,

If you are against the mission, then what are you for? A return to the situation that I described above? Misery, starvation, terror, and death? That is what would befall the Afghan people if we pulled out.

First, the military is too blunt an instrument to deal with the problem of radicalism.

Is it? Says who? Your cadet experience gives you no basis whatsoever to make this claim.

Was it too blunt of an instrument to bring peace to Cyprus, and the former Yugoslavia?

Our combat role is only one aspect of the mission. We are training the Afghan National Army and Afghan National Police. We are assisting ordinary Afghans in villages to dig wells, build schools and mosques, and all-important roads while giving them a secure environment in which to do that. Note that I said "assist". We are not doing it for them - we are helping them, providing materials where necessary, showing them how, and paying them for their labour. This gives them training and experience that they can put to use on other projects, pride in their work and a sense of real ownership, and a kick-start to an economy at the lowest level, where it is most needed. Many Taliban fighters take up arms not because they believe in the cause, but because they are paid to do so and the income is necessary for their survival. Providing an alternative shrinks the Taliban recruiting pool.

The Canadian Armed Forces is the right instrument for the job at present, and the only Canadian instrument that is truly effective as the situation stands right now.

Indeed, as it has shown in both Iraq and Afghanistan, military presence in both countries seems to have enflamed the situation rather than help the situation.

I will leave Iraq aside. It is not our fight, despite the presence of serving CF personnel in exchange positions there, and the situation is radically different from Afghanistan.

How has a NATO-led presence in Afghanistan "enflamed" (sic) the situation? On what do you base that claim?

but the population of those countries don't necessarily see it in such a manner.

They don't necessarily see it your way, either. And given that very many people on this site have direct experience in both places, I see no validity in your position. You are speaking from pure ignorance.

How would we take it if we were occupied even if they were making our lives infinitely better than we had it before?

Who is "occupied"? If the Afghan population felt that we were attempting to "occupy" them, our loss rate would be staggering. As it is, we've only lost approximately the same number of dead from all causes, including accident and suicide, as were murdered in Toronto last year. There is no mass uprising, as occurred during the last real occupation, the Soviet one. Their army lost 13,000 to 15,000 during that operation. Afghans aren't even holding protests in Western cities, and neither are Iraqis for that matter. In fact, Afghans living in Canada are assisting us in predeployment training because they welcome our assistance in their homeland.

The very notion that international troops are on their soil is an affront to their country and to their religion which contributes to the problem, it doesn't help it.

Facts would indicate otherwise.

Secondly, through large operations, civilian casualties are bound to happen. This also radicalizes the population.

Yes, they are, unfortunately, bound to happen. We go to unbelievable lengths to ensure that they do not, however, and the Afghans are aware of that.

The same is not true of the Taliban, and Afghans know that, too.

'Tis the Taliban who have the image problem with ordinary Afghans.

Though we haven't seen any terrorist activity in North America since 9/11, the incidences of terrorism since that day is exponentially higher than it was before through attacks in Asia and Europe.

Is it? Or do you just notice it more. There have been terrorist movements operating in Europe and elsewhere for decades prior to that day - IRA (Ireland), ETA (Spain), Baader-Meinhof Gang and Red Army Faction (Germany), and a whole menagerie of Middle Eastern, African, and South-East Asian ones come to mind. Al Qaida just did it bigger, and since being cleaned out of its Afghan safe havens, hasn't been able to come close in seven years.

Clearly, since the epidemic of global terrorism is getting worse not better,

Clearly, you are wrong.

And even if you weren't, there is a truism in statistics that says that "correlation does not equal causality", ie just because two things happen at about the same time, Thing X causes Thing Y. It could be that Thing Y actually caused Thing X, or that Thing X reduced Thing Y, or that the two are completely independent.

Any increased level of terrorism, real or perceived, may then not actually be a result of action in Afghanistan and/or Iraq. It may have occurred anyway, and it may have been a lot worse had those actions not focussed terrorists elsewhere, reduced their effective strength, eliminated much of their command structure, deterred recruiting, and set back their training efforts.

How many terrorist attacks have been prevented in Canada by troops in Afghanistan?

Who can say?

How many might have occurred if Afghanistan had been left as a breeding ground for terrorists? Had Al Qaida and its Taliban hosts not been smacked hard, who knows how many more airliners would have been flown into large buildings, reservoirs been poisoned, ocean liners sunk, trains blown up, or political leaders been assassinated?

Now, how many terrorist attacks have been prevented in Canada? CSIS, RCMP, Metro Toronto Police and Durham Regional Police were watching the Toronto 17 for two years before they were arrested.

And had the infection not been rooted out at its source, how can you know that all of these other agencies would not have been overwhelmed?

You simply cannot deal with a threat of this nature with only one method. That is sheer stupidity.

we have to pull out of Afghanistan and put emphasis on border crossings, CSIS and local and federal crime enforcement.

Doing so only grants terrorists the freedom to choose where and when they will strike. Defence never won a war. Offensive action is the only thing that can. You take the fight to the enemy, or he will take it to you. Study some history.

To attack the groups is to attack the society which only radicalizes otherwise uninterested citizens of the middle east and other countries and indeed, even citizens in Canada.

Wrong. To attack the groups that prey on the (Afghan) society helps that society, and there are extremely few "radicalize(d) otherwise uninterested citizens" protesting our role in Afghanistan anywhere.

No matter how peaceniks long for the "good old days" of the late sixties and early seventies, nothing comes close to the protests back then. It just ain't happpening.

Finally, to Afghanistan to be a truly independent nation, like Iraq, a peaceful government MUST be designed and ratified by the Afghani population while foreign troops are not present. The same situation goes for Iraq. Until that happens, no government will ever be a legitimate government in the eyes of the locals. As long as the government is viewed as a non-legitimate entity, there will always be factional infighting within the country as we see today.

Without the presence of those foreign troops, a "peaceful government ... designed and ratified by the Afghani (sic) population" is a complete impossibility. It had government by thuggery, and that is all that it would ever have without our presence.

May I remind you that, despite threats of death and violence by the Taliban, Afghanistan had a higher rate of voters turning out to exercise what we here take for granted than any Canadian election in years? They truly wanted what, without us, they could not have had and, without our continued presence for a few more years, they will never have again.

People like you would deny them that, and other simple freedoms and pleasures that we also take for granted.

The Middle East has a history of colonialism, and to the populations there, they don't see any difference with what is happening today than what happened 60-70 years ago with the British. They didn't like it then and as it's been proven time and time again that they don't like it now.

Apparently, simply by their lack of opposition to our efforts, let alone more positive indicators, the Afghan population disagrees with this premise.

Again, these are proud, nationalistic people who will never rest until occupational forces are out of their country.

If, by "occupational forces" you mean the Taliban coming in from Pakistan, then yes, you are right in this regard.

A very large number of Afghans are working tirelessly, with our help, to ensure that the Taliban never again gets a grip on their country.

That should not be too difficult to understand.

This is a no-win fight.

For the Taliban, most definitely, so long as we stick with it.