Afstan: Good on Bobbety, though in this piece he only hints at a continuing role, i.e. non-combat training in the Kabul area, for the CF post-2011. Will the prime minister be willing to take up and run with what is clearly more than a hint? Note that Mr Rae writes in the Toronto Star, for maximum effect amongst Liberals:
Why Afghanistan is not Vietnam
The death last week of a French humanitarian worker in North Africa at the hands of Al Qaeda reminds us that the battle against extremists [now what kind of "extremists" might those be? others are a bit more, er, explicit: "French premier says country ‘at war with Al Qaeda’"] is not a conventional war. The 10-year NATO, UN and Canadian effort [good word, it's not been a nine-year war] in Afghanistan has been extraordinarily difficult…
Canada’s combat role should end in Kandahar. Our political effort, with the needed appointment of a peace envoy to the region, should increase, and our aid should continue. A weak state, with army and police forces unable to provide security to the people, needs to be sustained and encouraged [by that CF training role?], with the knowledge that this is not a task with an easy timetable…
Parliament will need to re-engage on this issue in the fall, and before then all parties need to show a willingness to listen to sensible ideas that reflect the best within us.
Earlier, on the views of Senate and Commons committees:
For what it’s worth (politically): Continuing CF Afghan role post-2011
And from Adrian on Bobbity:
A Bizarre Reversal Of Support For Afghan Mission
Meanwhile down south it may be a longish tunnel:
Gates hints at a gradual Afghanistan drawdown
U.S. troops are slated to start leaving the country a year from now. The Defense secretary says the numbers may be limited at first. ‘It will depend on the conditions,’ he says.
2) Iraq: Pulling out on schedule and in good order, bad guys not having won (so far):
Obama to Reaffirm Iraq Exit Plan Despite Violence
President Barack Obama on Monday will reiterate the U.S.’s determination to end the U.S. combat mission in Iraq by Aug. 31, despite a surge in violence there last month and continued political deadlock in Baghdad.
“The hard truth is we have not seen the end of American sacrifice in Iraq,” Mr. Obama will say at the Disabled American Veterans’ national convention in Atlanta Monday, according to excerpts of his prepared remarks. “But make no mistake, our commitment in Iraq is changing—from a military effort led by our troops to a civilian effort led by our diplomats.”..
The U.S. will maintain a transitional force until all U.S. troops withdraw from Iraq by the end of next year, Mr. Obama said. During this period, U.S. military personnel will focus on supporting and training Iraqi forces, partnering with Iraqis in counterterrorism missions, and protecting U.S. civilian and military efforts, he said…
All pretty much according to what President Bush was planning, not that most of the major media like to acknowledge that.
Update: Most of this post in the National Post’s “Full Comment”.
Mark
Ottawa
By now you are well acquainted with TIME Magazine’s controversial cover of a young Afghan woman whose face was mutilated by the Taliban.
Many claim that it is but a cheap publicity stunt to sell the magazine, which definitely is true but I believe the magazine has had an epiphany correcting itself with true journalistic integrity.
Those who believe in our country’s efforts and our troops now have a weapon to expose and shame those who oppose the Afghan effort along with their media supporters.
To the multitudinous woman’s rights groups “Why have you been silent on the plight of your Afghan sisters?” Wearing pink lipstick while complaining that your Pradas pinch illustrates how shallow you have become..
Canada’s loyal opposition are anything but loyal with failed attempts to cast a shadow over our brave men and women as war criminals. Shame on the lot.
Afghanistan is worth the fight.
So (beard stroke), Bob Rae may have changed his mind on the Canadian mission in Afghanistan – this won’t last until the next election or September (whichever comes first). The best before date for his stance will expire before the end of summer. The man needed a little face time with the MSM – Ignatieff was hogging all the limelight. PM Harper will keep to the schedule – and not be drawn into a discussion of our role before the withdrawal date set by Parliament. Cheers.
As has been pointed out here several times, the House of Commons’ motion (not Parliament’s) only called for withdrawal from Kandahar, not Afstan.
Mark
Ottawa
As Paul pointed out, Harper is only concerned with appeasing the Quebec pacifists in order to secure his “white whale” majority. It’ll never happen, but then political expedience is his M.O. these days.
[...] Afstan: Two cheers for Bob Rae/Iraq: Clearly not Vietnam [...]
[...] defence and security matters, from Terry Glavin at The Propagandist (Mr Glavin contrasts him with Bob Rae). Plus a post from Adrian two years ago dealing with the senator: Conservative Support Of [...]
[...] The Harper government continues to give every indication that it means what it has repeatedly said: the Canadian military — its battle group, its trainers in Operational Mentor and Liaison Teams, and its soldiers in the Provincial Reconstruction Team in Kandahar — will be out of Afghanistan in 2011 [Liberal Bob Rae and some other politicians, including Conservative senators, may be open to some continuing military role]… [...]
[...] Defence appears to have opened the door a fair way; now if only the Liberals are serious and come through it. I am of course assuming the MND spoke with the prime minister’s authorization; [...]