Troops may stay in Afghanistan, MacKay hints

[bran]

Interesting story from CBC.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/09/29/afghanistan-mackay.html

 

[Occam]

Why is this news?  Oh right, it's the CBC reporting it.  : 

The government announced that we would have at least some personnel there after the 2011 deadline a long time ago.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canadavotes/story/2008/09/10/harper-afghanistan.html

Troops would stay 'in some technical capacities'

The Tory government, supported by the Liberals, extended the military mission in Kandahar province to 2011 earlier this year, with a shift to emphasize the mission's priorities to reconstruction and development in the region.

Harper has made past statements in support of a shift in Canada's priorities in Afghanistan, but the prime minister's latest comments appear to show for the first time his acceptance of a troop pullout by the date.

"It's fair to say he was clearer and perhaps more forceful than before on what is going to happen in 2011," the CBC's Paul Hunter reported from the Harper campaign.

While there may be a few Canadian soldiers who stay on after 2011 as advisers, the bulk of the troops will be home by then, Harper said.

"I don't want to say we won't have a single troop there, because obviously we would aid in some technical capacities," he said.

Oh look - it's even from the CBC website.  I guess they have short memories in the newsroom.

 

[Journeyman]

Perhaps it's a matter of terminology and the civilian-audience mindset.

Previously stating Canada would provide technical advisors (notwithstanding OMLT troops still get shot at), versus now emphasizing providing development personnel security (oh, PRT folks get shot at too), may suggest more risk to troops remaining in country.

With an election potentially in the offing, even hinting that troops may remain in harm's way beyond 2011 is a pretty interesting "trial balloon."

Now, if I was of a quid pro quo mind, I may see a linkage between a reported Canadian exemption to the US Buy American legislation, NATO's and Obama's request for additional allied troops, and MacKay's "hint." 

I'm just sayin'  :nod:

 

[Jammer]

This was always a given...not news to most of us.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Previously stating Canada would provide technical advisors (notwithstanding OMLT troops still get shot at), versus now emphasizing providing development personnel security (oh, PRT folks get shot at too), may suggest more risk to troops remaining in country.

Zackly - it'll be interesting to see how such protective forces can be "messaged" into being "non-combat" assets.

With an election potentially in the offing, even hinting that troops may remain in harm's way beyond 2011 is a pretty interesting "trial balloon."

Now, if I was of a quid pro quo mind, I may see a linkage between a reported Canadian exemption to the US Buy American legislation, NATO's and Obama's request for additional allied troops, and MacKay's "hint."

Good catch on both points - but how does one "square the circle" in light of last year's motion in Parliament saying no more Canadian troops in Kandahar by end of 2011 (the PM and other Ministers have referred to this as a rationale behind "the mandate is clear)?  To me, it's pretty clear that the wording there means "Canadian troops to be replaced entirely by Afghan troops by end of 2011."

 

[bran]

I figured that for most on this site, hearing this wouldn't really be news. I just thought i'd post it anyways.

 

[Occam]

I figured that for most on this site, hearing this wouldn't really be news. I just thought i'd post it anyways.

Yup, definitely well worth discussing.  If there was any doubt, my snarky attitude was directed at the CBC, and not you. 

 

[bran]

Yup, definitely well worth discussing.  If there was any doubt, my snarky attitude was directed at the CBC, and not you. 

Yeah I know it was towards them haha 

 

[Spr.Earl]

Yes/maybe the pointy end i.e. Inf./Eng will be given a break but we will still be in the Sand Box for years to come.
Just look at KAF and there is your answer.

 

[X-mo-1979]

Yes/maybe the pointy end i.e. Inf./Eng will be given a break but we will still be in the Sand Box for years to come.
Just look at KAF and there is your answer.

yes! Your pointy end doesnt  involve Arty or Recce or tanks...Can I borrow your car while your gone back over? lol