[cheryl08]

Demian_164 Demian_164:

This is unreal. You do not support canadian troops in afganistan, keeping youre liberal dream of equal rights for all safe in a foreign country for economic issues, yet its ok for canadian tax dollars to aimlessly go into foreign nations? I see you are a liberal. Is a "green shift" in the best economic interests of this country?. The thing I usually understand about liberals is that they have no knowledge of economics whatsoever. If they did, they would not be liberal. You're statements are moronic at best.

I never said i did not support Canadian troops in Afganistan; there already there mine as well make the best of it. But I don't see how this will benefit the Canadian economy with corporate tax cuts and a deficit.

As for the "green shift", it may not the out of the best interests of the Canadian public but it will produce some form of revenue to balance the money lost from corporate tax cuts which seems like something more economically sound in terms of managing finances. I'm not a big fan of the "green shift" but i can say that it's the liberals way of looking for other sources of taxation.

[Wada]

We've thrown in with a country who really seems to have forgotten how to bring any war to completion. We've committed to MORE time and MORE troops, fine, but one has to wonder when the Americans will commit enough troops and etc. to see this job done once and for all or will they waste our investment and turn this operation into a long term investment in their war-machine to make money for the few.

[ridenrain]

All you lefties will just have to wait intill Obama gets in and shifts the surge from Iraq to Afghanistan.

[cheryl08]

Wada Wada:

We've thrown in with a country who really seems to have forgotten how to bring any war to completion. We've committed to MORE time and MORE troops, fine, but one has to wonder when the Americans will commit enough troops and etc. to see this job done once and for all or will they waste our investment and turn this operation into a long term investment in their war-machine to make money for the few.

both senator obama and mccain are promising to bring more troops and military support to Afghanistan

[herbie]

Oh grow some balls! You're letting these Eagles in Beaver's clothing shove you around. Two pages of posts and no-ones called Emerson a fucking moron.
Sending more troops to Afghanistan? Thank God Emerson doesn't have a flaming chance in Hell of being re-elected.
We should use this idea to drive the last stake into the heart of Harpo et al.
I support our troops 100% too. Get them the fuck out of there.

[mtbr]

cheryl08 cheryl08:

As for the "green shift", it may not the out of the best interests of the Canadian public but it will produce some form of revenue to balance the money lost from corporate tax cuts which seems like something more economically sound in terms of managing finances. I'm not a big fan of the "green shift" but i can say that it's the liberals way of looking for other sources of taxation.

Revenue Neutral, Revenue Neutral, Revenue Neutral....do you even listen to your own leaders plans?

[PluggyRug]

herbie herbie:

Oh grow some balls! You're letting these Eagles in Beaver's clothing shove you around. Two pages of posts and no-ones called Emerson a fucking moron.
Sending more troops to Afghanistan? Thank God Emerson doesn't have a flaming chance in Hell of being re-elected.
We should use this idea to drive the last stake into the heart of Harpo et al.
I support our troops 100% too. Get them the fuck out of there.

Must be a full moon tonight.


No need to grow more balls the ones I have are more than adequate thank you.

Good move from Emerson.

[cheryl08]

mtbr mtbr:

cheryl08 cheryl08:

As for the "green shift", it may not the out of the best interests of the Canadian public but it will produce some form of revenue to balance the money lost from corporate tax cuts which seems like something more economically sound in terms of managing finances. I'm not a big fan of the "green shift" but i can say that it's the liberals way of looking for other sources of taxation.

Revenue Neutral, Revenue Neutral, Revenue Neutral....do you even listen to your own leaders plans?

ya its another source of taxation to balance out the amount of corporate and income tax cuts he plans to make....he's trying to make a shift from taxing personal income and expenses to carbon emissions in an attempt to reduce pollution...it may not work but it's a bold move
And i did state that in my other post...sorry if i didn't call it revenue neutral

[SprCForr]

I think the idea of a troop increase is OK, so long as it's teeth, not tail.

Having another Combat Team available on the ground will help with the load.

[Smacle]

SprCForr SprCForr:

I think the idea of a troop increase is OK, so long as it's teeth, not tail.

Having another Combat Team available on the ground will help with the load.

Great, more WOGs. I don't think a lot people understand how few "soldiers" are actually there. There are 2500 Canadian Forces Members in Afghanistan. Whats the ratio for support troops to each soldier? something like 5 to 1? We need more infantry and armored.

This "increase of troops" is only to support the chinooks and the chinooks will mostly just help the battle group get supplies/will make it more easy to extract casualties. I supose there won't be so many road trips back to KAF in that case, but the infantrymen won't be using these chinooks to go on partol or to battle for that matter. They aren't going to replace the LAVs with Chinooks. So wtf. Who cares? It's a band aid, which isn't quite large enough. It might save a few lives, but it won't make a dramatic difference.

[herbie]

Yeah right, we need to escalate. Without any more support from a single ally. Germany, France, Holland, Poland, the USA are all wrong. Emerson's the ONLY sane one.
Let's all whine about 2c carbon tax and spend $20 more in Afghanistan fighting someone else's war...

[Bacardi4206]

I hate all this military bitching about the war, we entered Afghanistan. We had a obligation to our allies, and NATO. No matter what you think of the war, or what is going on such as civilian deaths due to taliban suicide bombers. Nothing will result from the other trueth that we are there to accomplish something good, the rebuilding of Afghanistan and its Security. Not only that but the rebuilding of hospitals so the people there can get treatment, and building of schools for education for kids so they can have a future. With stabalization comes jobs and oppertunity for Afghanistan.

Now with that, we also got to battle the Taliban that threats the very existance of that. Although they are not fighting us because we are here to help Afghanistan, they got there reasons for fighting us but how are we suppose to accomplish these goals plus fighting the taliban with such a small force, expecially ill-equiped force. No matter how well trained they are.

The more troops we have there, the faster we can get this done and the more area and support we can have for our troops.

The only reason to think putting in more troops is crazy is due to casualties during the war. They are painful, and sad however they signed up for a cause they believe in and are ready to die for that cause. It's part of there job as a soldier. They WANT to be there, and they believe in there mission.

Who are we to decide for them what they want, or anything about the war when we aren't the ones on the front lines viewing it for ourselves. If the soldiers want to be there, then let them finish there mission and goals instead of retreating with our arms in the air from a war that we got ourselves involved in all because we got some troop casualties that are apart of warfare.

That's like getting married to somebody, and halfway through your marriage you say "I had a great time, but my wedding ring has some rust on it. I thought about replacing it, but its too much work. I think I just want a divorce instead".

[Arrowhead]

And our brave young soldiers certainly did us proud this week by shooting first and asking questions later. The answers to those questions? Two dead children and their wounded mother and father.
http://canadianpress.google.com/article ... der5QD6sqg

I suppose people are going to tell me to toughen up, get real, shrug this off, maybe the victims deserved this, without a secure afghanistan Canada might fall to the Taliban and/or evil Muslims. Yeah right, I'm feeling safer already...

[saturn_656]

Arrowhead Arrowhead:

And our brave young soldiers certainly did us proud this week by shooting first and asking questions later. The answers to those questions? Two dead children and their wounded mother and father.
http://canadianpress.google.com/article ... der5QD6sqg

I'm feeling safer already...

Unfortunately our troops were not given the opportunity to ask questions, they had mere seconds to make a life or death decision. Hindsight is always 20/20.

This a case for the dazzlers that certain posters here were so pissed off about. They could have prevented this unfortunate incident.

[Hyack]

$1:

Military officials say the car was behaving in a "threatening manner" by racing toward the convoy near Kandahar City as soldiers repeatedly tried to warn the driver away, using hand signals, flashing lights and a siren.

As a last resort, they opened fire.

To reduce the risk of an accidental shooting, the NATO-led coalition runs regular ads in local news media warning civilians to stay well clear of military convoys. Armoured vehicles also carry large red signs telling cars to stay away. The vast majority of Afghan drivers pull over to the side of the road whenever they see a military vehicle approach, much as Canadian drivers do for an ambulance or fire truck.

What would you have them do? The civilian population has been warned time and time again the actions displayed could cause them to be fired upon. How were they to know it wasn't a suicidal attack?