The news reports of a major Taliban offensive in southeastern Afghanistan are inaccurate, as Coalition offensives and Taliban attacks have been lumped together to give the impression of a coordinated Taliban assault in multiple provinces. A reading of the various reports indicates that while the Taliban has launched a major strike on a police station and government center in Helmand province and a small scale attack on a police patrol in Ghazni, as well as two suicide attacks against U.S. contractors in Herat and an Afghan army base in Ghazni, the fighting in Kandahar was initiated by Afghan and Coalition security forces during planned operations. Over 100 have been reported killed during the fighting, with 87 being Taliban. Well over half of those killed were killed during the Coalition offensives in Kandahar.
There were two separate major engagements in Kandahar province, and both were initiated by the Coalition. Coalition forces conducted a raid and subsequent air strikes against a Taliban safe haven in the village of Azizi. As many as 27 Taliban are believed to have been killed during the operation. A joint Canadian and Afghan security force conducted a sweep in the Panjwai district of Kandahar, and killed 18 Taliban and captured 26 in the process. One Canadian officer was killed and three Afghan police were wounded during the operation.
[…]
It is important to understand how the fighting was initiated, as the current reporting is giving the impression of a coordinated Taliban uprising. This provides the Taliban with a propaganda victory, as their power is perceived as far greater than it actually is, which can negatively influence the government and peoples of the Coalition forces serving in Afghanistan. The narrow passage of the extension of the Canadian mission in Afghanistan (by a 149-145 vote in Parliament) illustrates the fragile nature of the support for the mission in some Western nations.
Emphasis mine. More on Afghanistan at Strategy Page.
Bill goes to Afghanistan to embed with the Canadian Forces next week. Be sure to bookmark him.
At war with MSM too ….
Coincidence, I just did a piece on how the CTV is lamenting it’s inability to have a media circus at Capt. Goddards repatriation. I say mean things to them for that … Here
At war with MSM too ….
Coincidence, I just did a piece on how the CTV is lamenting it’s inability to have a media circus at Capt. Goddards repatriation. I say mean things to them for that … http://tinyurl.com/agfqx
Let the Dhimwits in the MSM have it….
I’ve noticed the MSM lately seems to be doing reports that suggest that the Taliban is gaining strength and resuming former operations all over Afghanistan. Like conducting executions.
But that doesn’t surprise me.
The MSM, after all, does tend to be anti-war and sometimes seems to inexplicably root for the bad guys.
Further, I would suggest that the MSM might be doing stories like that based upon hoaxical information… like the yellow piece of cloth story (if it isn’t true) just below with over 200 comments.
Ah, well… how often do the MSM behave scrupulously when reporting facts or falsehoods? We know the answer!
CTV(tass) is as bad as CBCpravda . both have stories that always end with “critics say” or “many critics say ” or “others are critical” but really it is only themselves. these “critics” are a nameless lot they use to make it look like there is some majority.
check out CBCpravda story on the “three gorges dam” a litany of nameless “critics”
You guys are simply too much.
If the “MSM” downplayed the Taliban strength, it would (although likely true) undercut Harper’s rah-rah “Hold the line till 2009” sabre-rattling. Then you’d be all over the “MSM” like flies on a turd.
If they’re currently over-estimating Taliban strength (which is likely), that might hand the Taliban some kind of “propaganda victory” (since they’re no doubt glued to Radio Canada International and the Globe & Mail, in between bouts of insurgency and amputation), but it hands Harper even more of one.
OUr PM must be right pissed that his choir is singing off-key.
When will our focus shift to Pakistan?
Seems to be a cozy little hideout for these terrorist pricks,but somehow they are cruising under the radar.
Good Question, CO. But President Musharaff really doesn’t seem to be any sort of a threat to the Free World. I don’t think he’s anything like the Jihadists. I hope I’m right. Maybe he’s secretly an apostate? It’s possible.
The logistics of rounding up terrorists in Pakistan are, I believe, monumental. I don’t think it’s that easy. Terrorists know how to hide, which is something they do well, since they’re cowards, sending others to blow up in pizza parlors and whatnot, right?
Dr. Dawg,
You just know-it-all don’t you? A regular mind reader.
Gee, why not predict some market items, I could use a little capital gain.
Dawg, if you have a clear point, please make it. Otherwise we’ll just think you’re here to entertain yourself. Even Dawgs need a change sometimes, for licking one’s winky can get boring, I’d imagine. Heh.
BTW, Dawg, I’m not currently in the employ of the PM.
Inexplicably, I’m in the employ of partisan, card-carrying Librano$. Believe it or not.
Reality check.
The good guys are going to have 40,000 troops in Afganistan this year because…the resurgence of the Taliban is overrated. Okay?
Poppy production was up in 13 of the 36 provinces. Record levels of poppy production have decreased prices of opium by 50%. The Taliban apparently impose a tax on poppy production.
In Nangahar province they saw a 96% drop in poppy production last year. It is expected to bounce back to normal levels this year as farmers complained that promised alternate crop aid production never materialized.
The more things change the more they remain the same. And so it goes.
“When will our focus shift to Pakistan?
Seems to be a cozy little hideout for these terrorist pricks,but somehow they are cruising under the radar.
Posted by: Canadian Observer at May 20, 2006 07:08 PM ”
Perhaps only when and if Musharref’s reign is threatened to be toppled by the fundamentalist extremists. At that point Musharref might welcome a stronger western presence, or perish the though, the west would be compelled to step in uninvited, to keep the crazies at bay.
Don’t forget that getting Pakistan’s nuclear technology would be one of the goals of the terrorist nutbars.
Musharref is playing both ends against the middle. He can’t appear to cozy up too much towards the US-led coalition, but yet in the long run he may need their assistance to stave off the extremists.
hahaha. too funny Canadian Sentinel.
thanks Kate, 2 very good links.
Afghanistan on one side, stabilized by NATO, Iraq on the other side, both with nacent democracies and the whackjobs in Iran in the middle. The world waits for the Iranian economy to continue dying and the mullahs to continue repressing their own people. Can’t last for long.
So George is stupid eh ??
Grand strategy is being pracised in front of us.
Just a little something to piss off the moonbats.
Enjoy.
steve d.,
Please disclose your sources of information.
Ural
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/asia/article363606.ece
steve d.,
Thanks.
I seem to remember Mr. Bush singing a little ditty that went something like this:
“In this war on terror,you are either with us or against us!”
Seems to me they are incapable of stopping this threat from within their borders,or unwilling.Either way,they are aiding and abetting the Taliban by allowing them safe haven,they need to be pressured.
Then again,in a world where,in our NA war on drugs we are protecting top suppliers of opium who supply drug dealers in that war while participating in the war on terror,meanwhile the Taliban,who denied these farmers their profitable opium for our arch enemy drug dealers,are being hunted down by the west who do not want opium coming from the farmers who they were stopping it coming from.Clear everyone?
With the strange bed-fellows diplomacy and war create,who knows what is going on behind the scenes…I still think Pakistan is getting a free ride.
steve d,
This might be a little better source:
http://tinyurl.com/lcj3f
Here’s one for you CO, this guy agrees with you.
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/afghan/2006/0510patten.htm
The NDP, Blocheads and some Liberals want to cut and run from Afghanistan which would allow the Taliban to re-establish themselves and exact their vengeance upon the people. A show of strength by Taliban forces only adds hope to NDP wishes.
The NDP’s cavalier attitude toward human life is disgusting, the Afghan people are nothing but talking points for Jack Layton – he cares not a whit whether they live or die apparently, so long as he can get on his high horse and pontificate.
If the Taliban could re-establish their terrorist training camps then they would be in a better position to send jihadis into our subways and restaurants to kill us – another fact that demonstrates the NDP’s lack of concern for human life even closer to home.
It’s tough but let’s kill the terrorists in their country, not wait until they arrive here – they only blow themselves up at the same time anyhow.
Poor Canadian Sentinel is having a hard time with reading comprehension this evening. Working for Liberals might have that effect. 🙂
So let me make it simple:
1) The “MSM” are being castigated for “over-estimating” Taliban strength.
2) Were the “MSM” to downplay Taliban strength, you people would be on them with equal ferocity.
Is that clear enough for you? Or do I need to dumb down the obvious even further?
In a nutshell, the “MSM” can do no right. Which is convenient for blogsters who imagine they are delivering an alternative to “the news.” You’re living, frankly, in a closed delusional system.
Ural
Yes they seem to know they have a problem alright. They have a plan. But they’ve had a lot of plans. Especially in the last 6 years.
They know they have a corruption problem but they are not going to lick it by cracking down. These people are dirt poor and go to the highest bidder. Government investigators will go in drive a tractor through the poppy field be given $50 to go away and report the field has been de-croped. The Americans get the report and think, wow! thats progress! In fact the people writing their reports have been paid at both ends and opium production reaches record levels.
However, Stephen Cobert’s assessment of the media sure hit mark. Check it out, if you haven’t seen the clip of him at the White House Correspondent’s dinner:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-869183917758574879
anon
yeah for about 5 years the Republicans convinced everyone in the media that criticism constructive or otherwise was unAmerican. It was amazing to see how thoroughly the MSM was completely intimidated. It shows how fragile freedom of speech is.
steve d.
Once again I’d wish you actually know what you were talking about before spouting. I can assure you that NATO has an independent verification process that relies heavily upon technology to confirm the level of poppy eradication. I can’t tell you what that is (Operational Security) but it is there. And just so that you know, the British are actually leading the poppy eradication process, as a key national policy for their involvement in Afghanistan.
The area that is commanded by the Canadian General Fraser, has a British chief of staff. Just under half of his headquarters is international (US, UK, NL, CA and Afghan — as liaison officers).
I just really, really wish you’d do some research before you make false statements.
EdtheHun
when is a “G” a geewhiz.
when CBCpravda has a link to Guantanomo and you find that all the references are to Abu Ghraib.
check out their links and find out about the torture going on- being scared by dogs, saying the way you are going you’ll end up the only virgin in muslim heaven.
CBCpravda is not inclined to report beheadings, or thousands of Kurds murdered. doesnt fit their
obvious agenda.
“…I still think Pakistan is getting a free ride.
Posted by: Canadian Observer at May 20, 2006 09:00 PM”
For the moment. But eventually there will be a price to pay, one way or the other.
Perhaps a little like Canada getting a free ride off of America’s power and influence, and many Canadians either do not appreciate that fact, or even resent that fact. But in the end, there is a price to pay.
Steve d.: You posted this “What Gwyn doesn’t mention is that the allies he doesn’t want to disappoint are not there yet. Holland and England won’t send their troops until the Taliban spring offensive is over!
Posted by: steve d. at May 19, 2006 09:59 PM” on this thread “May 19, 2006
Reader Tips”.
I posted this:
‘2) Dutch (May 11; Google News for
“Dutch confident about Afghanistan mission”):
‘…
Despite parliamentary delays in approving the mission amid a heated national debate about it, Morsink said he believed 80 percent of parliamentarians supported the deployment, “and that is very important for the soldiers”. The political support could prove decisive: Western military officials in Afghanistan think the Taliban will try to play on the doubts of the Dutch public in a bid to force their withdrawal.
The about 800 soldiers who are already in Uruzgan, waiting for the arrival by the end of July of some 550 more, have had been engaged by militants twice in the past weeks. The first time was “quite heavy”, involving rockets, grenades and machine-gun fire, Morsink said, adding the soldiers had coped “extremely well”…
The commander will have at his disposal six Apache attack helicopters and, in a few months, eight F-16 fighters. “They are my Apaches so nobody can tell me in a case of emergency, ‘I cannot help you.’ I have my own means to help myself,” he stressed. The soldiers also will undergo special training in Kandahar before leaving for Uruzgan. AFP’
Any reaction?
Canadian Forces, it must be said, have no close air support of their own, unlike the Brits and Dutch.
(Putting in URLs delays posting of comment.)
Mark
Ottawa
Posted by: Mark Collins at May 20, 2006 03:38 PM’
Will you now admit there is no delay in the deployment of Dutch troops?
Mark
Ottawa
“It was amazing to see how thoroughly the MSM was completely intimidated. It shows how fragile freedom of speech is.”
steve d, you got that right on press intimidation. It was truly amazing to see the MSM dhimmis capitulate rather than stand on the principles of the First Amendment when Islam fundamentalists and their street thugs objected to the Mohammed cartoons, a stance not usually excercised for any other religion.
I bet Bush could stop classified information leaks in print if Karl Rove had the same clout as an imam. Think selective censorship may be at play there, steve?
EdtheHun
Let me assure you that long after the USA and NATO have lost interest in Afganistan the poppy and its by-product opium will flourish.
All you have to do is go back and survey the history of Afganistan over the ages. Occupiers and invaders come and go but Afganistan remains the same,pigheadedly independent and tribal.
I saw Pres. Bush at the WH correspondents dinner. He was followed by Colbert.
Pres. Bush along, with a comedian who impersonated him, was very good and really funny.
I ALMOST felt sorry for Colbert having to follow such a great act.
And then Colbert tanked.
The room fell silent.
There were no laughs.
And now the loony left is telling us that was because his comments were so well written and insightful.
Hahaha. That is pathetic.
To anyone who follows the link to Colberts act that night, be sure to watch President Bush too.
He was great.
Mark
The Dutch like us have had a small contingent in there since 01. But now they are going for numbers that are significate,over 2000 as opposed to 80 or 100 special ops.
They will have air support. They take good care of their men. I don’t think the support for the mission is 80% otherwise they wouldn’t have argued over sending them for eleven months.
It does sound like they had a solid debate over the issue unlike us. I didn’t even realize the Liberals had sent 2200 over there until they started engaging the enemy. Then to have a six hour debate on extending the mission is not much better. So troop deployment is basically an executive decision and not a parliamentary one.
steve d.: From my readings of the various postings and threads, you are being shown to be wrong on practically every point, yet you cannot admit to errors. The last desperate response at 11:46 am is a bit pathetic.
A bit of advice that has been espoused by a number of responders…please add “in my opinion” or “I wouldn’t doubt” or “I suspect” to your postings. This way, no one will have to so vociferously denounce your silly statements of seeming “fact”. You’re entitled to your opinion, but unless you can back up what you say with some proof, just note that it is your opinion. Okey doke?
Unless, you so crave attention that you willingly call the attacks on yourself…and that is part of the definition of a troll.
concrete:
It appeared to me that most people were laughing up until they realized that their particular group was mocked. He made fools of everyone that deserved it…
I find it truly depressing that a country like Holland can field a half dozen apache helicopters and same in F-16’s and we can’t.We cannot even field our F-18 fighter/bombers as the costs would be too high.Instead we end up looking like fools depending on handouts from other nations militaries.
One day,we are going to call for air support and it will be s.o.l. for Johnny Canuck if they are engaged elsewhere.A country like Canada should have the ability to protect itself and have the resources to do it.
Some of you may not know it,but Australia faced the same dilemma we are in now 20 years ago,and built up its forces…small, efficient….helicopter borne and helo defended(Apaches, etc..)they are now tough quick and mobile.
After selling our heavy lift Helos to the Dutch(again lack of foresite on our part) they quickly went and bought top rated 2nd line(pre-loved?) Apaches and F-16’s from the Americans, Griffons from the South Africans and all manner of Nato equipment on the cheap…this has allowed them to get up to speed very quickly and inexpensively.
As someone who has experienced being shelled,twice for over 10 hours,i can assure you that pleasant thoughts are often directed to those who eliminate said threats with vigour,while not so nice thoughts are directed at the incompetants that would lead you into the field unsupported.
No one and i mean no one,sends in modern forces without adequate air cover or lift or rapid reaction extraction helos…except us….
I for one think that if we had any sense,we would buy U.S. second hand equipment (from say,National guard units,though that may be tough given that they are as operational as our Militia..)
One would imagine that the Liberals never saw the day that they would be out of power,and their shameful legacy would come home to roost.Buying all the equipment at once is never a cheap option,but it never should have got to this stage of rust out in the first place..to wit,the opposition playing politics with the defence minister on something as basic as truck purchases….
Good lord,you lost…shut up and let the healing of our forces take shape.As they say,lead or get out of the way…
steve d: “I didn’t even realize the Liberals had sent 2200 over there until they started engaging the enemy.”
Perhaps you never bothered to take any interest in the issue until it became controversial.
1) “Matthew Fisher, The Ottawa Citizen
Published: Monday, November 07, 2005
http://www.canada.com/ottawa/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=064f79ac-ed1a-49f3-a047-cea78e7ff20d
KANDAHAR, Afghanistan – A Canadian general is to take command early next year of all coalition forces hunting Taliban and al-Qaeda insurgents in the treacherous mountainous terrain of southern Afghanistan.
Brig.-Gen. David Fraser, currently based in Edmonton, is to replace an American commander. He will oversee 2,200 Canadian troops being deployed to Kandahar, an elite fighting brigade that will include more than 4,000 U.S., British, Dutch and Australian troops, and warplanes from the U.S., Britain and the Netherlands…
Defence Minister Bill Graham and Defence Staff Chief Gen. Rick Hillier have in recent months repeatedly warned Canadians about the mortal dangers that will come with Canada’s very different military role once it takes over the lead in fighting terrorism in southern Afghanistan from the Americans. While their words have helped create greater public awareness of what is at stake, Col. Noonan’s personal opinion is some Canadians still have not heard the message.
“Canadians perhaps do not yet have a full understanding of what we are getting into,” Col. Noonan said. “It is only fair to tell Canadians that this is dangerous stuff and that people may be killed in the attainment of our national will.”..”
2) “Chris Wattie, National Post
Published: Tuesday, November 15, 2005
http://www.canada.com/national/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=a63ddfc2-e884-4c12-be30-a9dd0f020416
The general who is to lead more than 2,000 Canadian soldiers into their biggest combat mission since the Korean War has shaken up his command, saying he is taking only his “A Team” into the dangerous region of southern Afghanistan to hunt the Taliban…”
3) “Local Troops at top of list: To tangle with Taliban (Edmonton Sun, November 24, full text no longer online but I saved this):
Some 1,300 Edmonton-based troops [this is the battle group and does not include the PRT or teh brigade HQ staff] will lead a multinational force into the Taliban’s backyard of southern Afghanistan early next year.
“We are in a risky business. The rational use of force is a risky business,” said Canadian army commander Lt. Gen. Marc Caron.
“We prepare for risk, we try to eliminate risk, but we cannot eliminate all the risk,” he said.
“Yes, there is concern with casualties, but I’m also reassured that the people getting ready for operations are taking measures to reduce that risk to the lowest minimum possible.”
Canada will lead the new mission, which was requested by the Afghan government, for nine to 12 months…
[Brig.-Gen. David] Fraser will lead the nine-to-12 month multinational mission, which will also include troops from the United Kingdom, Netherlands, Estonia, Denmark, Australia and Romania…”
4) Thomas Walkom in Toronto Star, December 3 (URL reference no longer works but I saved this):
“Canada is slowly and incrementally getting itself involved in a major conflict overseas — not as a peacekeeper but as a combatant.
Yet, no one talks about it. The government keeps quiet [no it didn’t–see 1) above]. So do the opposition parties. The media, when they do deal with Afghanistan (which isn’t often) seem confused, unsure of whether to be worried or proud that Canadian troops there are operating in mortal danger.
In an election campaign that seems bereft of issues, this very real matter of life and death does not come up…”
So the matter had already received good press coverage, and a major national columnist had raised a red flag, by early December last year. Where were you, most of the public, and our politicians. Why was this not raised in the election debates? Because no-one really cared until their were casualties and until the Conservatives got involved as the government.
But there was no excuse for not knowing.
Mark
Ottawa
The Liberals have a shameful legacy when it comes to the military, but the Conservatives haven’t been any better. Most notable is their cancellation of the Avro Arrow project just as it was coming to completion. Thousands of jobs lost, millions of dollars down the drain and the virtual destruction of Canada’s military aircraft industry so that additional money could be spent in order to buy inferior US aircraft.
More recently there was Mulroney and his faltering commitment to the military. Where are our 12 nuclear subs and Polar 8 icebreaker? Not that these would have necessarily been the best way to spend the taxpayers money, but in the end it was just lots of tough talk with nothing to show for it. This kind of fickleness can be economically harmful: For example, one of the casualties of the cancellation of the Polar 8 was the bankruptcy of Versatile Pacific/Yarrows shipyard in Victoria. They were misled into purchasing expensive equipment to build the Polar 8, only to have the contract cancelled.
Perhaps the only positive thing the Mulroney Conservatives did for the military was to give back the distinctive environmental uniforms to the air force and navy. I don’t recall much else. I was in the navy from ’86 to ’91 and I remember how the budget was cut and the ships were forced to cut back on repairs and keep trips to a minimum to save money. Even stays in foreign ports were curtailed in order to save on jetty charges.
The Mulroney Conservatives had 8 years of majority government, yet they didn’t find a replacement for the Sea King until the end of their rule. The Liberals (very unfortunately) managed to turn the new helicopter purchase into a political football.
Although there are other examples of politics at the expense of the military, it is sufficient to say that neither Liberal or Conservative past history is inspiring when it comes to looking after the practical needs of the armed forces. Regardless of all the tough talk, I doubt that this will change under Harper’s rule.
anon: The Arrow was almost 50 years ago–that is half a century. Get over it.
It was the right decision. Canada could not afford it on our own and no other country in NATO had a requirement for an aircraft with both its performance and range. It was a white elephant, like Mirabel.
After its cancellation no Soviet bomber attack ever took place.
Blaming the end of the Arrow on some plot by others is an uniquely Canadian, and silly, conspiracy theory.
Mark
Ottawa
anon: But I will agree with you that neither party has been especially helpful in buying our military the equipment they need.
The Liberals agreed last November to fast-track a Hercules replacement. I wonder when the new government will get around to taking a decision on the matter.
Mark
Ottawa
hassle
Look these are my opinions that is a given. I also take everyone else’s comments as opinion. I like to read different opinions. That is why I read Conservative blogs. If I wanted constant agreement I would go to a Left blog. But that would be boring. I don’t need to be agreed with constantly.
Mark Collins
I am not saying the media didn’t cover it. I am just saying I missed it. I must have been more involved in American political web sites. Now that the Canadian scene is more interesting with the Liberals having real opposition I have been spending more time on Canadian issues again. You have to admit Canadian politics was boring through the 90’s and up until about a year ago.