Clear Full Forecast

Report From Parliament's Hill - Oct 12th

By Prince George - Peace River M.P. Jay Hill

Thursday, October 12, 2006 03:45 AM

   

The Questions We Should Ask About Canada’s Afghanistan Mission

Last week, a national poll found public support is rising for the Canadian Forces mission to Afghanistan.  Whatever the results, I don’t put much faith into the polls conducted so far concerning the mission.

Many Canadians are having difficulty grasping why our military men and women are in Afghanistan, what they are accomplishing and why 40 soldiers have made the ultimate sacrifice. 

I have previously admitted my responsibility as an elected representative and as a government MP to better communicate the mission’s objectives.  However, if the pollsters want to better gauge Canadians’ opinions on the mission, they should ask more informative questions. 

Under the category of “I couldn’t have said it better myself”, I would like to share the controversial yet thought-provoking polling suggestions of retired Major-General Lewis Mackenzie.  Here are the questions he proposes pollsters ask Canadians: 

  • Do you support letting the Taliban return to power in Afghanistan? If your answer is “yes”, please go on to the next questions.
  • Do you support beheading teachers in front of their class if they permit even one girl to attend?
  • Do you support denying all Afghan women the right to visit a doctor, as there are no female doctors permitted by the Taliban and male doctors are not allowed to examine female patients?
  • Do you support the government's right to execute women by blowing out their brains in front of thousands of cheering onlookers in a football stadium because the victims were seen in the company of men other than their husbands?
  • Do you support the actions of a suicide bomber who, just before he blows himself up beside elderly Muslims waiting to obtain papers for a once-in-a-lifetime pilgrimage to Mecca, picks up a child and presses her against his explosive vest before detonating himself?

Pollsters and politicians alike need to remind Canadians of these realities.  Afghanistan does not want to return to a Taliban rule that promotes these atrocities and it does not want to resume exporting terrorism around the world.  Afghanistan’s first democratically-elected leader, President Hamid Karzai, came to Canada last month and implored us to not abandon the Afghan people and allow the Taliban to take root once again. 

If we did, what would happen to the women who now make up 28 percent of Afghan’s elected parliament?  What would happen to the roughly two million girls who are now attending school?  What would happen to the 4.7 million Afghan refugees who have been able to return home thanks to the stability and security our Canadian soldiers help to provide?

The most convincing arguments in support of the mission to Afghanistan have come from our soldiers who have seen the plight of the Afghan people first-hand and from the families of those Canadian soldiers who have died trying to help them. 

Our most recent fallen soldier, Trooper Mark Wilson, a father of two young boys, relayed his sentiments about the Afghan mission in a letter he sent to his brother,   “I can’t believe they are paying me to do this.  I would do it for free.”

 


Previous Story - Next Story



Return to Home
NetBistro

Comments

Pity the US government didn't ask those questions before supporting the Taliban in the first place, then all those things could have been avoided.

According to women in Afghanistan, the Northern Alliance isn't that much better than the Taliban. Afghani's, men and women are between the devil and the deep blue sea, unfortunately. All the propoganda and demonising questions in the world won't alter that one, basic, fundamental fact.

Read http://www.malalaijoya.com/
In fact, the media reports that the US government had made a deal before the invasion (which was carried out with a very small expeditionary force) that the Taliban could/would remain in power once they handed over to the Americans any Al Qaeda (including Osama Bin Laden) and any terrorists they knew of.

Bin Laden and his gang escaped and the warlords disappeared in the rugged mountain terrain.

Now they have returned and only a small area of the country is under control of the Karzai regime.

The Taliban even have some elected representatives in the new Afghan government.

The country has a history of resisting and driving out foreign invaders and recently a promiment American senator warned the rest of the world that if things do not improve within the next three months the Afghan people will choose life under the Taliban over the present occupation and the propped up government.

The situation is not as black and white as Mr. Hill's report suggests.



The Taliban came to power in Afghanistan in 1996 and remained in power until the USA with the help of the Warlords in the North toppled the Government in 2001.

It seems that the Americans, Canadians, British, etc; had absolutely no concerns about the people, women, children, economy, etc; of Afghanistan between 1996 and 2001, or if they did I certainly didnt hear about it. Can we therefore assume that we now have an avid interest in the Country because of the American invasion, which was to route out Osama Ben Ladin, and his co-horts, and we are now staying in that Country using the freedom of Women and Democracy as our excuse. Who knows.

Show me any statements from the Canadian Military, Canadian Politicians, or any other Canadians made between 1996 and 2001 that suggested that we should invade Afghanistan to set up a Democratic Government, and protect Womens rights. I dont beleive they exist. I dont think we were to concerned about this Country.

Hill is trumpeting Harpers line on this one because this is not a very well received mission. With 40 Canadian soldiers killed since 2003 and we can assume approx 8 injured for everyone killed (300 injured?) we had better have a good reason for being there.


A couple of questions I have:

Why is Afghanistan one of the lowest funded per capita countries in the world for US developmental aid? Is our missions at odds with the Americans?

Why are we foot patrolling terrorist home turf where they are strong, while doing nothing to close the boarder that supplies them from their protected leaders in Pakistan? Is our mission at odds with the Pakistan agenda, and if so what is the plan to contain Pakistani influence?

Will NATO fail as bad with the Afghanistan Western boarders if the US or Israel strikes Iran, as it has securing Afghanistan’s Eastern boarders? Could this represent an escalation that would endanger Canadian forces, and if so do we have a voice with the belligerents?

What is Canada's foreign policy in regards to North Korea and their nuclear missile threat to global security? Or has Harper not received his plan from Israel yet….

Time Will Tell
Hill is full of good intentions. Unfortunately his five questions remind me of someone asking the famous question: "Are you going to stop beating your wife?" and the answer can be only either "Yes" or "No."

What if the guy NEVER beat his wife?

Of course NOBODY is in favour of these terrible things happening to anyone anywhere, but Hill makes no allowance for the fact that a) the problems have existed there for hundreds of years b) by dialogue and negotiation, i.e. diplomacy more can be accomplished than by open warfare and the killing of thousands of people.

Even Taliban have parents, brothers, sisters, uncles, children and perhaps grandchildren who will inevitably seek revenge in the future if one of their relatives is killed, especially if murdered by foreign invaders.

Their tribal society requires revenge, this is their custom and no amount of interference by outside forces is going to change this in a few years or a few decades.

The leader of North Korea knows full well that if he actually attacks another country in an all out war, or if he uses a nuclear missile against anyone, that he can kiss his butt and the rest of his country goodbye.

It would be a suicidal act. I don't think that he is that stupid.

Instead of isolating North Korea and making the conditions there evermore desperate the rest of the world should engage him and his communist regime in talks and trading pacts.

All this provocative rhetoric like "Axis of Evil" and likewise doesn't contribute one iota to the solving of international problems, in fact it is basically idiotic in nature.

The world trades with the Communist dictatorship China (which has enough nuclear power to destroy the world) so why can't it do the same with North Korea?

Who decides which is the latest "enemy de jour" in the global scheme of things?

If North Korea sat on vast oil deposits, for all I know it might be one of the "best friends" of those who now portray it as a "mortal danger."