Congo
- Thread starter zakiuz
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 25
- Points
- 430
There seems to be a scratch on this record. Can someone remove the needle and put on another?
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Ohh!
The what if/speculation game! Seriously zak- look at how many times people have tried to insert themselves into Africa's affairs. Thousands of years of the power of the day trying to drag them kicking and screaming into "the now". They refuse to have any operating government beyond tribal alliances. Even on best intentions it only lasts a few years- in my reading anyways. Unless Canada and the allies want to move in and live there forever and ever there isn't anything you can do. If an African mission opened up to me I'd love to go. But I'd be under no delusions about what mission success would be.
Dictator/ coup/ new dictator/ country splits/ 2 dictators/ new coup/ military government/ redraw country lines/ new dictator
What if maybe your aunt had testicles? She'd be your uncle! Maybe's and What If's are pretty limited in their usefullness I find.
The what if/speculation game! Seriously zak- look at how many times people have tried to insert themselves into Africa's affairs. Thousands of years of the power of the day trying to drag them kicking and screaming into "the now". They refuse to have any operating government beyond tribal alliances. Even on best intentions it only lasts a few years- in my reading anyways. Unless Canada and the allies want to move in and live there forever and ever there isn't anything you can do. If an African mission opened up to me I'd love to go. But I'd be under no delusions about what mission success would be.
Dictator/ coup/ new dictator/ country splits/ 2 dictators/ new coup/ military government/ redraw country lines/ new dictator
What if maybe your aunt had testicles? She'd be your uncle! Maybe's and What If's are pretty limited in their usefullness I find.
You can't compare how the situation was thousands of years ago and now. People change, of course the mission would fail if all the soldier went there thinking it's a lost cause. Africans are not all about tribal alliances. They do have technologies and proper system, (not all of course).
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Im really not trying to be rude. Im really not- but your good intentions will do Africa no good. Especially the part about us doing the "real missions" instead of handing out food?
Who exactly would you have us go fight? The infrastructure in Africa, in my experience, is crap. And thats in the parts that people visit. The places you'd have us riding white horses into have even less.
Showing up to fight....somebody.....armed with good intentions and positive thoughts....because, gosh darn it, you saw something on TV and decided that you really had to do something......ANYTHING will get you nothing.
Africa does not want change. The UN "peace operations" training I received had to go out of its way to mention that no matter what its not okay to have forced sex with people who aren't interested. This is training that is suggested for African police mentors.....does that sound like society that just needs a chance to change? Until they take the reins of their own society, learn to treat each other with respect, value human life we can do nothing for them.
And when that day comes that the good people demand change and need our help- I'd be willing to help.
I wasnt comparing thousands of years ago to now. I was comparing the fact that FOR thousands of years, this century on back, nobody has been able to help out Africa. There is a difference.
Who exactly would you have us go fight? The infrastructure in Africa, in my experience, is crap. And thats in the parts that people visit. The places you'd have us riding white horses into have even less.
Showing up to fight....somebody.....armed with good intentions and positive thoughts....because, gosh darn it, you saw something on TV and decided that you really had to do something......ANYTHING will get you nothing.
Africa does not want change. The UN "peace operations" training I received had to go out of its way to mention that no matter what its not okay to have forced sex with people who aren't interested. This is training that is suggested for African police mentors.....does that sound like society that just needs a chance to change? Until they take the reins of their own society, learn to treat each other with respect, value human life we can do nothing for them.
And when that day comes that the good people demand change and need our help- I'd be willing to help.
I wasnt comparing thousands of years ago to now. I was comparing the fact that FOR thousands of years, this century on back, nobody has been able to help out Africa. There is a difference.
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 13,372
- Points
- 1,140
zakiuz said:
We tried that in the Congo in the 60s. It didn't work out very well. Somalia didn't work out very well and anything in Africa doesn't seem to work out well for us.
Africans do not want the white man running their continent, or us telling them how to run their continent.
- Reaction score
- 33
- Points
- 560
zakiuz said:
There are lots of places where tragedy strikes, but please explain how intervening in the Congo is in Canada's vital interest? Even if the Congo were to be depopulated, I fail to see how it would affect Canada or Canadians.
It sounds cold (and it is), but given our very limited resources, this sort of calculation needs to be done before we go anywhere or commit to doing anything.
- Reaction score
- 3,868
- Points
- 1,140
zakiuz said:
I am losing patience.
List three "vital interests of Canada", and then I will listen. Failing that, I would even be satisfied if you cut and paste a Wikipedia (shudder) definition of "vital interest".
I guess what I am trying to not so delicately say is that while this may be an opinion forum, the expectation is that the opinions will be, at the very least, slightly informed.
zakiuz said:
I don't post often but this one caught my attention. I certainly believe that being in Afghanistan is in Canada's interest. I'm not saying the combat mission itself is in its interest, but having a presence there is certainly important. Here's why...
1. NATO. As a contributing member to NATO, it is imperative that we pull our own weight in that organization. To have a viable say in the matters which contains to NATO, having a large number of contributing troops in a high profile mission certainly helps at the negotiation table.
2. We can do the job. (when I say we, I mean the armed forces, as I am not a member of the armed forces... yet) The Canadian Armed Forces are there because they are an armed force, capable of doing good, and we have the resources to get the job done.
3. Terrorism. One of our closest political/economic/trade partners was deliberately attacked by a recognized terrorist organization. What does Afghanistan have to do with this? Members of Al-Qaieda and the Taliban cross the Afghano-Parkistani border like it's a walk in the park (or they used to anyways). Helping out friends in need will only make us stronger against a common enemy... Don't be so naive to think that it's impossible for Canada to get attacked, because New York ain't so far from Toronto or Ottawa.
That's my opinion. I hope I have satisfied the higher beings in proving that I am not a complete ignorant little brat that wants to be heard. If anybody wants to know my background, feel free to PM.
Frank
- Reaction score
- 9,738
- Points
- 1,260
frank1515 said:
Uh really - does spilled milk in Brunnsum really matter to Joe and Jane Smith in Raymore, Saskatchewan?
That's an interest?
You'll have a hard time finding someone in Afghanistan looking to knock down the CN Tower....
Anyways, time for someone else - let me try.
na·tion·al in·ter·est
[nash-uh-nl ˈɪntərɪstl]
–noun
1. the ability of Canadians to get up, have a bowl of Cheerios, drive their SUV to work, put in 9 to 5, fill up on the way home and catch the news after American Idol.
Therefore:
1. Stable trading relations and unfettered borders with the United States
2. Good access to Asia for Canadian natural resources.
3. Reliable source of petroleum (who cares where it's from) to fuel our domestic economy.
Did I get any right?
If milk is spilled in Brunnsum no one in Canada would care, no. That wasn't my point. My point is, the CF is in Afghanistan, in part, to support our NATO allies. I believe this to be a valid argument. I guess having the knowledge to do the job is not an interest, so I will agree with you on that one. We can't deny that if the American's wouldn't have been attacked on 11 Sep 2001, we would not be in Afghanistan, so I believe that fighting terrorism is in our interest, yes. To show support to the Americans, is keeping a good working/trading relation with them.
My :2c:
My :2c:
- Reaction score
- 5,093
- Points
- 1,060
zakiuz said:
They don't want our help. Repeating your same tired line over, and over, and over isn't going to change them, or us. We are not going to the Congo in the forseeable future and we don't want to.
Get over it and get off you're moldy old soapbox. Reiterating your same point time and again, no matter how you try frame it or say it, does not constitute valid discussion.
GR66
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,616
- Points
- 1,160
Infanteer said:
Bingo...give the man a prize! You can spruce up the wording to make it sound more academic or politically correct but that is more or less the underlying truth of the matter.
That doesn't mean that Canadians do or should ignore moral issues that we face in the world. Unfortunately there are so many problems in the world that DESERVE be fixed that it's simply impossible for us to have any real positive effect on more than a small number of them. Therefore where we DO focus our effort should be on those problems that also coincide with our vital national interests.
Oh...and #1 IS the reason we're in Afghanistan. Stable trading relations and unfettered borders require good POLITICAL relations with the United States.
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 13,372
- Points
- 1,140
zakiuz said:
Its obvious so I'll say it again:
Africans DO NOT WANT the white man telling them how to run the African continent, nor do they want Europeans or North Americans to run their affairs.
The Africans will sort themselves out. It will be bloody....has been bloody. Remember that our wars (France vs England, WWI and WWII) were extremely bloody affairs.
I do appreciate your noble sentiments.
OK, maybe they don't want white man help. Right now the only help their getting is with the AK47 pointed at their faces everyday. I'm less convinced for Congo now.. And for the vital interest thing, it's in interest of Canada to go to Afghanistan but is it VITAL interest ?
EDIT : Just close that thread since everybody seems to hate on it, but thanks for those who shared.
EDIT : Just close that thread since everybody seems to hate on it, but thanks for those who shared.
- Reaction score
- 4,654
- Points
- 1,160
When Canada first deployed to Afghanistan (Kandahar in 2002) DFAIT listed three "aims" or "roles" (I cannot remember what they called them) which were, roughly:
1. To defend Canada by helping to replace the Taliban with a government that would not allow the country to be used, again, as an al Qaeda base;*
2. To enhance Canada's reputation in the world by doing a full and (more than) fair share in implementing the UNSC Resolutions on Afghanistan; and
3. To help the Afghan people.
Items 1 and 2 are legitimate vital interests, and would be for any country. Item 3 is not. It is something that is nice to do and it is a "supporting" role for 1 - it is easier to help the new government establish itself and take control if one helps the people, etc, but we (just like everyone from Australia to Zambia) have no vital interest in "helping" anyone else - it may be nice to do, people may like us more and they may even want to "help" us in return, but "helping" doesn't make it up to the vital interest level.
Lord Palmerston, who may have been the best foreign minister of any country, any where, in any era, famously said: "Nations have no permanent friends or allies, they only have permanent interests.” Our interests, especially our vital interests matter: they, and they alone, are an acceptable reason to spend our treasure and the lives of our men and women in uniform on military operations. When we send people to fight and die we must understand "why." And that "why" must, always, equal "vital interest." We must always try to have as few, very well understood, vital interests as we can manage - although we may find that we have too many and that some are too complex; that's one of the perils of power and, make no mistake, Canada has some power and many interests, too.
Lord Palmerston
__________
* Remember, please, that Osama bin Laden had, specifically, named Canada (along with a very few (less than 10)) others as a prime target for attack; thus we had a legitimate need to defend ourselves.
1. To defend Canada by helping to replace the Taliban with a government that would not allow the country to be used, again, as an al Qaeda base;*
2. To enhance Canada's reputation in the world by doing a full and (more than) fair share in implementing the UNSC Resolutions on Afghanistan; and
3. To help the Afghan people.
Items 1 and 2 are legitimate vital interests, and would be for any country. Item 3 is not. It is something that is nice to do and it is a "supporting" role for 1 - it is easier to help the new government establish itself and take control if one helps the people, etc, but we (just like everyone from Australia to Zambia) have no vital interest in "helping" anyone else - it may be nice to do, people may like us more and they may even want to "help" us in return, but "helping" doesn't make it up to the vital interest level.
Lord Palmerston, who may have been the best foreign minister of any country, any where, in any era, famously said: "Nations have no permanent friends or allies, they only have permanent interests.” Our interests, especially our vital interests matter: they, and they alone, are an acceptable reason to spend our treasure and the lives of our men and women in uniform on military operations. When we send people to fight and die we must understand "why." And that "why" must, always, equal "vital interest." We must always try to have as few, very well understood, vital interests as we can manage - although we may find that we have too many and that some are too complex; that's one of the perils of power and, make no mistake, Canada has some power and many interests, too.
Lord Palmerston
__________
* Remember, please, that Osama bin Laden had, specifically, named Canada (along with a very few (less than 10)) others as a prime target for attack; thus we had a legitimate need to defend ourselves.
Similar threads
