It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Canadian Prime Minister says the war in Afghanistan is unwinnable.

page: 1

log in


posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 06:53 PM
During an interview on CNN on the weekend, PM Harper stated that...

"We're not going to win this war just by staying . . . we are not ever going to defeat the insurgency,"

Well, that's just freaking great eh. 108 dead Canadian soldiers and they are coming to this realization now? The Soviet invasion taught us nothing obviously. Afghanistan won't ever be really conquered. The Soviets were much more brutal than NATO is and they couldn't make the population submit. So why did they think we would be able to?

This is the same man that would have sent us to Iraq had he been Prime Minister at the time as he was bangin' the drum as loud as anybody in the States or Britain.

You know what really bugs me about this. He didn't have the guts to do this in Canada. He had to wait till he was in the US to actually make this statement. I wonder what this will do for the moral of the troops in Kandahar for the next two and a half years?

This man makes me sick.

When it was president Bush, he was all for an open ended mission. Now that Obama is president, it's...

"If President Obama wants anybody to do more, I would ask very hard questions about what is the strategy for success and for an eventual departure

The only reason we have a target date for leaving is because he was in a Minority position, otherwise, we would be committed for "as long as it takes".

[edit on 3-3-2009 by GAOTU789]

posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 07:27 PM
Afghanistan has and will always been a graveyard for kings and Empires.

Hopefully the conquerors of today will have learned an lesson, but they likely haven't had.

They will think they can conquer the world after this, but they will soon find that their plan will be doomed from the start, just as it always has been intended to be.

They have no hope, no lessons have been learned from the rage and blood and loss of the past.

Whatever they do, will always come to a strong start at first but their path will crumble like an dry cookie and they will collapse under their weight of evil.

They are doomed, doomed! I tell ya

[edit on 3-3-2009 by star in a jar]

posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 07:30 PM
Well atleast he came up with some honesty for once to tell you the truth. It does take a big man to admit that a war that has been raging for years cannot be won and that he would not commit any more troops past the original timeframe set forth.

I hate Harper as much as the next guy, but this seems to be one of the better things he's done for this country. Keep us out of un-winnable situations.

Although I agree he's a coward for doing it in the States and not here; probably out of fear of being mauled. 108 deaths was 108 too many to come to the realization that it could not be won, and won't be won by us or any other country who is simply attempting to bully their way into having a peacefull middle east.


posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 07:45 PM
Is it honesty or is it prepping for an election call?

He did state that if the opposition gives him any resistance to the speedy passing of projects associated with our stimulus bill, he'd call an election.

He doesn't want oversight into what the money is for. He just wants it fast tracked out the door. I know we need some of that money moving but when a politician says "Do this or else", I get extremely suspicious of motives and agendas.

posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 08:53 PM
He's prepping for the inevitable.

Now the Conservatives and the Liberals are saying pretty much the same thing about Afghanistan, so they've just eliminated it as an election issue. They don't want to fight an election on Afghanistan; they want to fight it on crime, fiscal issues and anything they can dig up from Ignatieff's writings and appearances.

posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 09:23 PM
Ya, the war was an non issue in October so I don't see it coming up this time either. It just makes me angry that he wouldn't do this in front of the Canadian press. In his 3 years as PM, he has basically ignored our media. He has to be one of the most unapproachable leaders we have had. His grip on the message, especially about the war, is close to unprecedented.

There has been some good reporting and books on Afghanistan, written by some good Canadian writers and journalists that have been stating this very thing but ignored by the policy makers. Scott Taylor at Esprit de Corps and John Scully to name a couple.

As far as Ignatief goes, they have tonnes of ammo for them to work with. Over a dozen books and many more articles that he's authored to pick apart.

posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 09:46 PM

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
I hate Harper as much as the next guy, but this seems to be one of the better things he's done for this country. Keep us out of un-winnable situations.

Wasn't he the guy that Canada involved in Afghanistan? Or did the Liberals do that? I thought it was Harper.

I doubt he'd pull the troops if Bush was still in.

posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 10:13 PM
reply to post by GAOTU789

They were running against a different team last time. Ignatieff is a far different animal than Dion and there won't be any of that green shift talk.

Harper's definitely got his party on a very tight leash but that's not surprising. That's how he got the party into power (muzzling candidates during elections) so he's sticking with what works for him. He's a spiteful man who resents the heck out of the Canadian press and this is yet another of his ways to get back at them. Like bailing out banks and automakers and while the CBC is contemplating selling off assets (our assets) to pay the bills because he won't give them an advance or loan.

rizla, the Liberals were in charge when we went to Afghanistan but the Conservatives didn't argue against it.

posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 10:19 PM
I can t stand that joke of a PM.

I'm tired of them arguing and attacking each other in the commons. They spend half the tax payers day doing nothing but being foolish and getting no where. That goes for all them. makes me sick.

posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 10:20 PM
"Wasn't he the guy that Canada involved in Afghanistan? Or did the Liberals do that? I thought it was Harper."

Jean Chretien (Liberal) was the Canadian Prime Minister during Canada's initial deployment of troops in Afghanistan shortly after 9/11. Although Chretien supported the Afghan mission, he was against the Iraq invasion. I have heard rumblings that the USA "asked" Canada politely to stay out of Iraq, so the US would not have to "share the wealth".

In any event, after Chretien retired, Paul Martin (Liberal) took over as PM and continued the Afghan war effort. After Martin's party was defeated by the Harper Conservatives, the mission continued.

One of the reasons why Harper is flip-flopping on Afghanistan is because his party took an absolute beating in the province of Quebec during the last election. Quebec is arguably the most anti-war province in Canada. You can honestly say that Quebec is the reason why Harper does not have a majority, and probably will never get a majority government. You can do the rest of the math.

In addition, certain Canadian military brass have gone on record recently saying the situation in Afghanistan is worsening:

For Harper to continue to deny the hard facts about this mission would amount to political suicide. Most Canadians have been quite perplexed as to why Canada has been in Afghanistan for so long. Now with the economy going down the toilet, there are much more urgent needs on the homefront than trying to "democratize" a stubborn wild beast like Afghanistan.

posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 10:25 PM
It never was about winning in Afghanistan.

We are there to kill as many Taliban and AL Qaeda as we can.

Afghanistan is a country that they can easily get to and die.

This will tie up many of the Taliban and AL Qaeda fighters in one area of the world as possible and keep the numbers that might try to attack the US as low as possible.

It will also draw in as many of the other radical muslim fighters as fall for the trap.

new topics

top topics


log in