• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Taliban Jack

Hi Tow Tripod,I received exactly  the same email form letter
from Layton after sending him an email.In my email I wrote..."Dear Sir,if you
wish to negotiate with the taliban,book your flight immediately.The first thing
you might want to discuss is whether they will kill you before,during,or
after your negotiations.How out of touch with reality can you be?"
  I was surprised to get a response from his office,'til I read your post and realized
it was more form letter junk.
  With regard to his content.He leaves out some facts.NATO went to Afghanistan to
kill taliban...and they've been very successful at it.
 
Huzzah:
NATO went to Afghanistan to kill taliban...and they've been very successful at it.

Actually NATO took over ISAF (originally a non-NATO, UNSC-santioned mission) in August  2003 to maintain security in Kabul.
http://www.nato.int/docu/pr/2003/p03-091e.htm
http://www.nato.int/issues/afghanistan/040628-factsheet.htm

Non-combat PRTs were first established in the north over the next year or so.  A true combat role for NATO only emerged when ISAF took over Regional Command South, with Canada in charge, in the summer of 2006.

Mark
Ottawa
 
Big Foot said:
Or some other first world country that isn't at war. Wait, why don't we just save the expense and keep our troops in Canada? That way, we could strip the CF down to nothing more than a glorified police force.

Isn't that what the liberals did?

Layton has no idea what Peace Keeping is about, he glorifies in our history of Peace Keeping but he  has no grasp of ROEs and how restrictive and damaging it is to troops to have their hands tied behind their backs writing reports to the UN or NATO that never get read.  He's an idiot, if he wants to  negotiate with a bunch of barbaric savages let him step up to the plate in Afghanistan and negotiate.  I'll loan him hubbies old blue beret, with a big ole target on the back portion.  Anyone got a spare kit in size xx small for Taliban Jack?
 
the usual disclaimer:

NDP call for military program reforms

Jul 18, 2007 04:38 PM
Alison Auld
Canadian press

HALIFAX–Kevin Landry fumbles for one of the prescription pill bottles in his pocket and explains how he had to increase his dosage Wednesday morning just to make it out the door.

The Canadian Forces veteran suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder linked to his service in Bosnia and Croatia in 1995, and rarely leaves the seclusion of his rural Nova Scotia home.

But Landry, slight and soft-spoken, wanted to join several other veterans in Halifax as they criticized the federal government for clawing back their disability payments and leaving many of them on the brink of financial ruin.

"It's not a question of whether we'll go bankrupt next week or next month – it's every day," he said at a news conference. "The first day that you join the military, they tell you that if you get hurt they will take care of you and your family, and that is the biggest lie."

Under the military insurance plan, injured veterans are entitled to a percentage of their former salaries. But the plan treats monthly pension payments as income and deducts the pension amount from what is paid to former Forces members.

Landry, 33, loses about $1,700 a month in clawbacks and estimates the practice has cost him $40,000 since he began receiving his Veterans Affairs pension after his release in 2005.

Landry, who takes eight pills a day to control panic attacks and other ailments, has joined dozens of other veterans from across the country in a class-action lawsuit against the government to end the controversial clawback.

Dennis Manuge, a Nova Scotia veteran who filed the suit last March, said the case illustrates how poorly the federal Conservatives treat veterans who have been hurt serving their country, yet have to fight to get benefits.

"The bottom line is we are having money stolen from us," he said angrily as veterans from the Korean and Second World Wars looked on. "It just doesn't make sense. We are owed a certain debt of gratitude by the government."

Defence officials have said the department is reviewing the issue and "wants to make a decision that is fair to all members and former members of the Canadian Forces balanced with fiscal accountability to Canadian taxpayers."

Manuge said there are up to 6,000 veterans across the country whose disability pensions are being clawed back, putting the cost of stopping it and reimbursing veterans at around $320 million.

A military ombudsman has also called on the government to get rid of the clawback, describing it as "profoundly unfair."

Veterans also criticized the Conservatives for failing to move quickly enough to extend the national veterans independence program, which provides housekeeping, home maintenance and home-care services for 97,000 eligible veterans, their spouses and widows.

Access is restricted and many veterans or their spouses have been denied claims.

When he was Opposition leader in 2005, Prime Minister Stephen Harper promised in writing that a Conservative government would ``immediately" expand the program at a cost of about $300 million a year.

But Harper has said an expansion won't come until the next budget. Veterans Affairs also has to complete a review of its programs before proceeding with any changes.

Chris Beattie's husband became ill and later died after helping in the cleanup of a nuclear spill in Chalk River, Ont., in 1958 while he was doing basic training at Canadian Forces Base Petawawa.

She said the federal government is failing widows who tended to their husbands round the clock rather than put them in nursing homes.

"I find it an embarrassment that I have to beg (Veterans Affairs) to acknowledge the promise that was made in 1999 and again in 2005 that we the widows would be taken care of," said Beattie.

Peter Stoffer, the NDP's veterans affairs critic, said he has repeatedly asked the government to eliminate the clawback and extend the veterans independence program, but has been stonewalled.

"Supporting our troops doesn't just mean when they're wearing the uniform – it means supporting them throughout their lives," Stoffer said.

Veterans Affairs Minister Greg Thompson said the government is committed to moving ahead, but can't reform the programs "overnight."

"We're dealing with many issues that have been left over by successive Liberal governments and so we can't fix everything in one day," he said in an interview from his riding in St. Stephen, N.B. http://www.thestar.com/News/article/237365


 
Every time i come on here somthing about taliban jack is put up heres somthing youl all love who dont like that man and cant figure why people seem to enjoy electing him its a well written article

http://www.damianpenny.com/archived/007838.html
 
Has Mr Layton ever visited a Military Base? Has he ever sat down with some military folks to here what they, the ones who volunteered to serve, what they think about his positions?

Didn't think so.
 
skoalbandit,

We welcome anyone who wishes to contribute, but first, please read the User Guidelines regarding, punctuation, grammar and use of 'spellcheck' and spelling. It will go a long ways in people taking your posts seriously, if they are at least comprehensible (which yours above was not).
 
FSTO said:
Has Mr Layton ever visited a Military Base? Has he ever sat down with some military folks to here what they, the ones who volunteered to serve, what they think about his positions?

Didn't think so.

Look at the recent Ruxted article; about half way down the page it cites a Toronto Star article which says, "“But every time a Canadian soldier is killed, the doubts of a conflicted nation spasm and the same chorus of opportunists kick up their indignation, whipping that pale rider on a horse. Yet these are, to a large extent, the same people who don't really give a toss about soldiers or their families and view dimly the whole military ethos, as if service in uniform were an anachronism … Canadian soldiers hate them … At Kandahar airfield, when Layton's face appears on the TV screen, soldiers jeer. When anti-war rallies are broadcast, or reported in newspapers that arrive weeks late, they grow quiet and downcast, feel their willingness to sacrifice all is being undermined and exploited.” (My emphasis added.)

I suspect most serving soldiers have a similar regard for Dion and Coderre and I would not be surprised if Harper and O'Connor are not approaching the same level of respect.
 
E.R. Campbell said:
Look at the recent Ruxted article; about half way down the page it cites a Toronto Star article which says, "“But every time a Canadian soldier is killed, the doubts of a conflicted nation spasm and the same chorus of opportunists kick up their indignation, whipping that pale rider on a horse. Yet these are, to a large extent, the same people who don't really give a toss about soldiers or their families and view dimly the whole military ethos, as if service in uniform were an anachronism … Canadian soldiers hate them … At Kandahar airfield, when Layton's face appears on the TV screen, soldiers jeer. When anti-war rallies are broadcast, or reported in newspapers that arrive weeks late, they grow quiet and downcast, feel their willingness to sacrifice all is being undermined and exploited.” (My emphasis added.)

I suspect most serving soldiers have a similar regard for Dion and Coderre and I would not be surprised if Harper and O'Connor are not approaching the same level of respect.

I'm not sure I understand. Why would troops be starting to disrespect a PM and MND who are building up the Forces and acquiring equipment in a timely fashion to support the troops....tanks, chinooks, C17s, Nayalas on an IOR etc etc. I would agree that the announcements of Defence spending in Quebec is politically self serving.....but then they are going to be spending money in other parts of Canada on ship building and air craft housing and maintenance (Trenton). Would we prefer a return to the rust out and dilly dallying of the last Government for whom defence spending was a definate political football.
 
I think he probably means how poor a job they're doing at explaining the mission and rallying support from Canadians. The lack of "leading" (there's a thread on that around here somewhere...)
 
Munxcub said:
I think he probably means how poor a job they're doing at explaining the mission and rallying support from Canadians. The lack of "leading" (there's a thread on that around here somewhere...)

In that regard I agree. they are doing a very poor job and have done from the get go of getting the word out on the positive stuff going on with the mission. I wonder how much of this is due to the MSM resisting and obfuscating?
 
Every time I see Jack, I see George Galloway. 

I have little doubt that if Jack could've been bank-rolled by Saddam as Galloway was, he'd have taken the money in an instant.



Matthew.  :threat:
 
But why pay Jack when Galloway by comparison has real ability (of a twisted sort) and lives in an important country?

Mark
Ottawa
 
I know this is a bit off the topic but here it goes:  Where is Jack now???  This is almost his back yard and still haven't heard anything out of him 

Second man charged in T.O. boy's killing  http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070723/gun_violence_070723/20070723?hub=TopStories

bily
 
Back
Top