Harper tells Bush we are Leaving Afghanistan in 2009

[kommando17]

i agree, I think we should stay in untill its over. I think the conservatives are doing a good job so far a **** of a  lot better then the librals

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Either way, harper can't afford to look like the hawk right now.

When the VanDoos take a casualty it would be best politically to lay
resposibility at the liberals' feet.

Not very classy, I know - but that's politics.

And Simon Longtin wasn't a Van Doo?

 

[Flip]

I guess I wasn't clear.....

I think the mission should last until it's accomplished too.

Until 2009 - What the PM says is political.
Not necessarily what is going to happen.

I think he's simply trying to step out of the way
of any public anger in Quebec.

 

[civmick]

There is no way the Americans didn't already know the score.  Nothing ever gets decided at summits - it just gets admitted to.

 

[SiG_22_Qc]

I'm wondering about this for a time. Support for the mission in Afghanistan in Canada is low, what about Afghan support?? Does the Afghans are happy about our work? Are they happy to see us here? Does the mission going in the right direction?

We don't have any reports about Afghanistan, or very scarce reports.

Afghans probably got about the same worries than us, quality of life, employment rates, security.
They probably dont share the same values and mentality, but overall, we share a lot.

I dont see how it would be hard to beat taliban support, these guys sent back afghanistan to middle age: banned radio, tv, and any enjoyment others than listening to Allah on speakers. Personally i just don't get it, taliban support should be >0/ NIL, are we getting sat dishes, internet,  jobs, social services to Afghans? If we'd get playboy channel to reach afghan's ? Can we get any Deep constructive report with statistics, polls, rather than bombing, friendly fire, deaths reports???? Who do i call?, who's in charge? If they all want us out of here, so be it, if we're doing a fine job why ending the mission? I've heard there and there, that Talibans lost hundred and hundred of members while nato troops barely 1/10. We got the canadian killcount, right, but it means S@@@ without the taliban killcount, what's the ratio? is it one for one? 1000 for one? 100 for one? 10 for one?....... so many shady areas on that picture.

 

[canadianblue]

I think it would be tricky to lay Afghanistan at Dion's feet, as they can argue that they would not have extended the mission. Especially since we saw these large casualties come in while Harper was PM. The Liberal's could also easily argue that they had a change of heart over the mission, the only party that can claim they didn't want involvement in Afghanistan is the NDP because they haven't supported the mission from day one.

 

[Flip]

Sigs guy, Your right of course - I had a weak moment.

Many Liberals did vote to extend the mission ( if I remember correcly).

But "Change of heart" is an interesting observation.

It wouldn't be hard to paraphrase - So the liberals sent troops to the hostile
part of Afghanistan,  and when casualties occured, changed their minds and wanted them out. - What were the liberals thinking?

No - not an honest, fair or factual process. - just political.

I suspect (from my Alberta vantage point) that Quebecers would have an easier time
being angry with the Liberals than with the Conseratives.  Yes I'm talking about dirty rotten lowdown scape-goating of the liberals. Albertans that I know, would have zero problem with that.

 

[IN HOC SIGNO]

I'm wondering about this for a time. Support for the mission in Afghanistan in Canada is low, what about Afghan support?? Does the Afghans are happy about our work? Are they happy to see us here? Does the mission going in the right direction?

We don't have any reports about Afghanistan, or very scarce reports.

Afghans probably got about the same worries than us, quality of life, employment rates, security.
They probably dont share the same values and mentality, but overall, we share a lot.

I dont see how it would be hard to beat taliban support, these guys sent back afghanistan to middle age: banned radio, tv, and any enjoyment others than listening to Allah on speakers. Personally i just don't get it, taliban support should be >0/ NIL, are we getting sat dishes, internet,  jobs, social services to Afghans? If we'd get playboy channel to reach afghan's ? Can we get any Deep constructive report with statistics, polls, rather than bombing, friendly fire, deaths reports???? Who do i call?, who's in charge? If they all want us out of here, so be it, if we're doing a fine job why ending the mission? I've heard there and there, that Talibans lost hundred and hundred of members while nato troops barely 1/10. We got the canadian killcount, right, but it means S@@@ without the taliban killcount, what's the ratio? is it one for one? 1000 for one? 100 for one? 10 for one?....... so many shady areas on that picture.

It's a little more complicated than offering them material goods (and the Playboy channel  : : )
These are people who are very low on Maslow's needs hierarchy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs

I think for a lot of them it's about who can give me some money or food for my family...work for the Army...who may or may not pay me...or work for the Taliban who will pay me more and not kill me and my family if I go along with them.