quote:

---

CBC: Coalition forces are planning a major offensive in the Taliban stronghold of the Panjwaii district and warning civilians to evacuate the area immediately.

NATO has not announced a timeline as to when the offensive will begin.

CBC's Carolyn Dunn said that Col. Steve Williams has issued a warning to the Taliban in the area, saying that if they don't want to die, they had better leave Pashmul.

---

Why, it's just like Israel in Lebanon. And, unsurprisingingly, progressive people should oppose BOTH occupations.

NATO [including Canada] says "Leave or die".

This latest story just adds further confirmation.

Canadian Press has picked this story up:

quote:

---

One Afghan leader from the area said NATO is in for a tough fight that won't end once troops move in. He said the alliance should attempt some form of reconciliation with local militants.

Haji Agha Lalai, the chief Panjwaii district elder who was chased out of his village by Taliban, said the insurgents have infiltrated every aspect of life there.

"They own shops, they own homes there, they will not retreat," Lalai predicted. "There are many types of Taliban, but these are the warriors. They have been told to fight and they will fight."

"If it is followed by a reconciliation program, it would be better," said Lalai, who is also a provincial councillor and a regional director of Afghanistan's reconciliation program.

[Col. Steve] Williams said the time for reconciliation is over.

"I can tell you right now that the only talking we're doing to the Taliban is, if they want to die, stay. . . . If they don't want to die, give up," said Williams. "That's about all the talking we're doing."

---

[ 31 August 2006: Message edited by: M. Spector ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by IgnoramusMaximus:
And what happened to all those staunch defenders of our "mission" (whatever that is) in Afghanistan who used to wax musical around here about the monumental achievments which our forces were delivering to those awe-struck Afghanis all over? Webgear? Reason? Bueller? Bueller?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Farmpunk:
Has anyone asked when we moved to serious offensive manouevers in Afganistan over helping the security of the democratic government? Or asked why this is happening? And why NATO thinks it will be successful where a thousand years of history says that Afganistan is a not a country that tolerates outsiders? ...

---

We seem to have moved to the offense with the move from Kabul to Kandahar. Why? Because CDS Rick Hillier wanted "more bang for the buck" and talked the politicians into our taking over the hunt for Taliban that the Americans had been doing in the same location for 5 and a half years.

But this time it's different!

quote:

---

"This is going to be different because we're going to stay," said Williams, the plain-talking leader of 2,500 U.S. troops based with NATO forces in Kandahar.

"Part of the problem in the past is forces would go in, engage the Taliban and then leave. We've realized you have to leave forces in the area to keep the Taliban from coming back. So that is our plan."

---

And it only took just over 5 years for the quick witted military types to figure out that when they leave, someone tries to step in and restore order.

Although if this article is correct, even the village elders are complaining about the Taliban.

quote:

---

International forces plan to stay in the area, maintain a security presence and offer humanitarian assistance for anyone displaced by the offensive.

---

Watching Carolyn Dunn's report on CBC tonight, I also heard her mention that reconstruction teams would be on hand after the NATO operation to help repair homes damaged in the fighting.

I'm assuming she's referring to one of the Provincial Reconstruction Teams, whose work was supposed to be at the heart of our integrated, 3-D approach that combined defence, diplomacy and development.

quote:

---

The PRT's mission is to help extend the authority of the Afghanistan government in Kandahar province by promoting local stability and security, improving local governance structures, and engaging in reconstruction activities.

---

Engaging in 'reconstruction' of damage we ourselves cause in conducting a major military counterinsurgency operation is probably not what was hoped for when these doctrine behind these PRT's and the 3-D approach was being developed.

There's also some interesting information here, including some comments from a Canadian Lt. Col on what was supposed to happen with Canada's PRT mission in Kandahar:

quote:

---

When we establish the PRT in August 2005, they will actually work for the Americans, who control the region down south, who respond to Combined Forces Command Afghanistan-the U.S.-led coalition force "war against terror." Then as ISAF and NATO transition and take control of the area to the south in February 2006, then Canada will step up and provide the regional command headquarters for that, as well as providing potentially a task force of up to 750 in addition to the PRT of 250.

We will have the element from CIDA and Foreign Affairs embedded right into the PRT, so it is completely a 3D team that we are taking down to Kandahar. Right now, because of the security situation, the military will sort of lead it with the biggest element, but realistically we do see in the future that the military requirement will lessen and the public and private sector reform portion will build.

---

'sort of lead it' has turned into a major understatement.

Also, there's been broader debate for a while about the whole question of whether military units should be delivering 'humanitarian' aid, and I know some in the NGO community have been critical of the theory and practice of this PRT-idea.

This report lists one of the common concerns:

quote:

---

Humanitarian organizations seek to alleviate suffering without regard for the aid recipient's affiliation with any of the parties to a conflict. When military units in combat provide "humanitarian-type" relief, it is typically associated with political objectives. For military forces confronting an insurgency, it may be a matter of military necessity to ensure that assistance is provided to displaced civilians and that civic action projects are undertaken to cultivate popular support and increase force protection. When the focus shifts from humanitarian assistance to reconstruction, the salient concerns that arise are the blurring of civil and military roles and interference with each other's efforts.

---

You can actually see some of the mixing of motives in this story championing the work of a US PRT in January, which tells of road clearance work and the construction of 'hygiene facilities':

quote:

---

WASHINGTON, Jan. 23, 2006 – Humanitarian efforts continue in Afghanistan as coalition forces helped remove snow from impassable roads and built "hygiene facilities" at a small school. In addition, international diplomats visited a provincial reconstruction team Jan. 21.

[snip]

The snow and ice removal helps accomplish the military mission by allowing trucks to travel to remote locations. It also makes these same roads available to civilian and commercial traffic, Cook said.

[snip]

"The construction of these [hygiene] facilities not only provided jobs and much needed currency for the local residents, but they also show the Afghan people that coalition and U.S. forces are here to help," said Army Lt. Col. Jerry O'Hara, Combined Joint Task Force 76 spokesman."

---

(The American PRT described here in Uruzgan has since been taken over by the Dutch.)

Finally, this story about the civilian aftermath of counterinsurgency efforts in Uruzgan province (north of Kandahar) gives you some idea of what ordinary Afghanis are facing:

quote:

---

Maulvi Abdul Hakim Munib, Governor of Uruzgan, said a total of 2.5 million afghanis were distributed among 50 families from Tikrek and Omarabad villages. He said the amount was provided by the government.

Every family, which had suffered material or human losses during the operations, was provided with 50,000 afghanis as compensation, he informed. He said more aid would be extended to the families in the days ahead.

Residents of the area, on the other hand, demanded the government should rebuild their houses destroyed during military operations.

Abdul Hai, resident of the Omarabad village, said distribution of the cash amount would not end the grief they had received in the loss of their dear ones. At the same time, he said the amount was not enough to help the families of the victims.

---

[ 31 August 2006: Message edited by: sgm ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:

Stupendousgirlie? Andrew_Jay? Brett Mann?

---

You forgot to mention ME.
At least they (NATO) are letting people know to get out of the way. So did Israel in Lebanon. Terrorists however target the general population, without any warnings. Taliban are terrorists and therefore need to be wiped out one way or another. It is clear. If we to support this barbarians then we are not far off ourselves on my view. I’d rather be on side of the democratic world (where I reside) then support someone who severely abusing woman, growing deadly opium and producing uneducated society so to have more control over it. I do support Canadian troops.

[ 05 September 2006: Message edited by: venus_man ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by IgnoramusMaximus:
And what happened to all those staunch defenders of our "mission" (whatever that is) in Afghanistan who used to wax musical around here about the monumental achievments which our forces were delivering to those awe-struck Afghanis all over? Webgear? Reason? Bueller? Bueller?

---

quote:

---

Although if this article is correct, even the village elders are complaining about the Taliban.

---

Well of course the guys overthrown by Taliban are going to complain about the Tablian ^^

quote:

---

Taliban are terrorists and therefore need to be wiped out one way or another.

---

(eddited as per the post below)

[ 05 September 2006: Message edited by: Noise ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Noise:
Unionist has nailed it on the head with the pipelines and America's ambitions, however at the same time there is a strong desire to actually do good within the region and to legitimately help the people of Afghanistan.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Webgear:

Webgear is in Kandahar, part of the PRT.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by venus_man:
Wipe out does not necessarily mean killing.

[SNIP]

When you do cockroach extermination it’s better to leave the house.

---

Absolutely. And removing "Israel from the pages of time," is merely a euphemism, for correcting the historical record.

Speaking of euphemisms, you racist asshole, "cockroach extermination" is precisly the type of language used by the Nazis when talking about Jews in Auschwitz.

And you actually have the temerity to denounce Hezbollah as racist fascists! Fair enough, it takes one to know one, as they say.

[ 05 September 2006: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

When you do cockroach extermination it’s better to leave the house.

---

quote:

---

Equating people to cockroaches are we now? I wonder how many historical comparissons I can find that have a people actively supporting a 'Gas the cockroaches' view towards a people they view as lessers to themselves?

---

Certainly a lot more than you will ever find where one nation, or one ethnic group, or even one individual looked favourably on another that's for sure.

[ 05 September 2006: Message edited by: otter ]

And those who abuse woman and children do deserve to be punished, if they are to continue commiting their dirty deeds. Jews were never involved in such (unless you are thinking they were). Don’t compare Jews with those terrorists who kill their own for no reason and who sells opium around the world killing tens of thousands.

I do salute our troops!

[ 05 September 2006: Message edited by: venus_man ]

quote:

---

I do salute our troops!

---

You pathetic chickenshit. If you want to exterminate the cockroaches so bad, get off your worthless racist ass and head on down to the recruiting center. I should tell you though that they would probably reject you as a complete fucking psycho.

I do have friends in the military and they are proud to serve in Afghanistan. And i do salute them for job they do. Because they, unlike you are, like the job they doing and Afghanistan for a military personnel, is like a dream job. And Taliban terrorists-your idols, are cockroaches.

If a woman was raped, she was executed and there were no consequences for the rapist. "Women were brutally beaten, publicly flogged, and killed for violating Taliban decrees." If that's not terrorism, I don't know what is.

What the taliban did has been labelled gender apartheid.

Here are some more allegations:

“Most shocking to the West was the Taliban's treatment of women. When the Taliban took Kabul, they immediately forbade girls to go to school. Moreover, women were barred from working outside the home, precipitating a crisis in healthcare and education. Women were also prohibited from leaving their home without a male relative—those that did so risked being beaten, even shot, by officers of the "ministry for the protection of virtue and prevention of vice." A woman caught wearing fingernail polish may have had her fingertips chopped off. All this, according to the Taliban, was to safeguard women and their honor.

In contrast to their strict beliefs, the Taliban profited from smuggling operations (primarily electronics) and opium cultivation.”

[ 06 September 2006: Message edited by: venus_man ]

quote:

---

venus_man: In contrast to their strict beliefs, the Taliban profited from smuggling operations (primarily electronics) and opium cultivation.”

---

[ 06 September 2006: Message edited by: babblerwannabe ]

[ 06 September 2006: Message edited by: venus_man ]

quote:

---

Doesn’t sound quite right, does it?

---

I quite enjoy reading your simplistic posts Venus... It's like you truely believe that it's possible to beat someone until they like you. Like it's possible to get rid of a few warriors and have everyone dance the giant victory dance of democracy knowing that they'll finally be subjected to our far superior set of morales.

Just so you're aware of how backwards your logic is... The majority of opiate trades from Afghanistan have no connection to the Taliban(where your electronics comment came from is unknown). The worlds at your finger tips, go look for some information rather than regurgitating a few headlines, k?

[ 06 September 2006: Message edited by: Noise ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by venus_man:
Well, I don’t think it is just OK. It sounds like, oh well, they torture woman, children etc. They are burning down schools, hold public executions on a regular basis and conspiring against the west etc. Not a big deal. They are not terrorists, they are not terrorising anyone they are..uhm-normal people. Just leave them alone, that’s the way they are. Peace dudes.
Doesn’t sound quite right, does it?
Perhaps we should send them flowers and a love postcard saying-good job, continue the course, with love. Oh, we are so peaceful, we are against killings, and yet we support torturing, murders and executions. Or what?

Idealism was never a good advisor for action. Plato's 'Republic' is a perfect example of such.

[ 06 September 2006: Message edited by: venus_man ]

---

If the people of Canada wants to discuss whether they would like to send soldiers to save the women in Afghanistan or women else where living under oppressive regime, than so be it. However, this current mission is mingled up with the “War on Terrorism”, which is a bit dishonest and confusing. Are we killing terrorists or are we waging a war against the “bad people of the world”? Maybe we should also send soldiers to destroy the puppet government of Iraq. After all, the Iraqi constitution states that “Islam will be the foundation of the law and that the various civil liberties shall be limited by "public morality"

And after Iraq, we will go after Iran, they are great human rights violators too.
And what about the women living in Saudi Arabia? It seems NATO don't seem to care too much about those women.

[ 06 September 2006: Message edited by: babblerwannabe ]

[ 06 September 2006: Message edited by: babblerwannabe ]

And truth is in simplicity, one day you may understand that.

And democracy is freedom. One dances by the dictatorship tune, or one of those fanatics who would chop your head off should you disobey them or criticize them openly.

And regarding opium trade. Just one of examples:

quote:

---

Originally posted by babblerwannabe:

And after Iraq, we will go after Iran, they are great human rights violators too.
And what about the women living in Saudi Arabia? It seems NATO don't seem to care too much about those women.

---

quote:

---

NATO message to civilians: Leave or die

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by venus_man:
Wow, what a fuss. Asshole, shamshole. I used cockroaches as an illustration of the process. I didn’t say-this race or that race are cockroaches, you sophistic-whatever- you- are. How we love and hate words aren’t we. Just waiting, like a shark, for a right, sweet word to launch the attack, to accuse, to swear off etc. But it’s nothing new. Those tactics were used even in time of Socrates, and he made enough fun of such behaviour.

---

Shut up a bout scorates you asshole. When the Nazi's were talking about exterminating Jews, they used the vermin analogy, in just the manner you used it now. And yes, they were talking about the "process."

What a fucking creep.

Dehumanizing "the enemy" is a primary ideological tool of Holocaust. Fuck you.

[ 06 September 2006: Message edited by: Cueball ]

So then Nazis trademarked the term cockroaches? This is a pathetic argument. There is no connection, unless in your oh so fearful and twisted brain, between what I said and the Holocaust. Perhaps we should now humanize the Nazis and present them as fair individuals, a bit lost perhaps, but fair and nice. That’s what you saying? Perhaps we should create a society to repatriate the war criminals. Because they are not bad, but nice, so let’s compensate their families and award them medals.

A bunch of bull.

[ 07 September 2006: Message edited by: venus_man ]

quote:

---

I know by now that you seem sympathetic to all those terrorist regimes.

---

Advocating policy beyond 'KILL ALL THOSE COCKROACHES' is apparently sympathy. Thick racist asshole.

quote:

---

It can be seen clearly where your ideals are.

---

quote:

---

Warrior is a noble title applied to someone who fights for higher purposes of common good and not a band of murderers, rapists, executioners and abusers who are Taliban.

---

good good, argue a definition. Your still basing your entire opinion on expecting tribes of 'barbarians', or whatever the new buzzword the media is using today, excitadely awaiting your superior morales to come free them... You are superior and they shall come to accept that, they'll want to accept that, and if they don't the terrorist barbarian cockroaches deserve death! And you wonder why, with this overly common belief, that the 'cockroaches' fight back. Then you manage to equate 'Hey there might be a better way than bomb them till they accept our superiority' as sympathy? Man is your nice little world fucked up beyond repair, someone needs to beat you till you like them more ^^

I only continue to respond to you so any others reading this can see how short-sited and narrow minded your opinion is, I'm rather convinced you haven't read a single thing presented on this war beyond 'Ahh, terrorists!!!'. Anyone who has looked at any military acton post 9-11 can tell you that these tactics failed, will continue to fail, and if we can't see past our own arrogance to see this we'll be doomed to fail in yet another country. Bush wasn't even aware there was a difference between Shi'a and Sunni (they're all terrorists anyway, who cares?)... It's great to see a Canadian rushing headlong to label everything as terrorists, barbarians, or cockroaches in an identical manner.

A $3 million dollar opium seize is next to nothing, if you want to see the real profits, go check out the composition of the great and enlightened Afghan gov't we're fighting for.

[ 07 September 2006: Message edited by: Noise ]

[ 07 September 2006: Message edited by: venus_man ]

[ 07 September 2006: Message edited by: Noise ]

quote:

---

Plus, did I ever say that?

---

quote:

---

You are calling the Talliban morons warriors

---

Morons now? Keep up the name calling, it worked in elementary, I'm sure it'll work in the adult world ^^ If beating them till they like us didn't work, I'm sure this will. What shall I call people willing to stand up to your far superior values then Venus?

quote:

---

Another thing I’ve noticed about you-you dislike Canada

---

Heh, theres a page right out of the Repbulican book. "You don't support the slaughter of Iraqi's? You must be anti-american". Have we really run out of enough things to type that you need to resort this?

quote:

---

then you show your support for Taliban

---

Anything short of declaring your want for their complete and utter destruction, as you repeat time and time again, is support for the Taliban. Sure, you keep thinking that... The world you live in must be a bueatiful place.

quote:

---

And it is not for you do define Canadian values. Unlike what you like to see, Canada is a democracy.

---

Heh, I'm preserving that quote for good measure. Apparently not advocating the extermination of cockroaches (by cockraoches I mean any people who have value systems obviously far lesser to our own) means I dislike democracy? I enjoy when you're arguements become lil more than name calling...

[ 07 September 2006: Message edited by: Noise ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by venus_man:
Perhaps we should now humanize the Nazis and present them as fair individuals, a bit lost perhaps, but fair and nice.

---

It would be a mistake to de-humanize the Nazis, or the Taliban. The Nazis were human, Hitler was human, the Taliban are human. None of them were cockroaches or vermin. No human being is.

Humanizing them is not the same as saying they were/are fair individuals. Humanizing a criminal is not the same as condoning the crimes committed. Humanizing the enemy does not preclude the possibility that you may have to go out and fight him, and maybe kill him.

quote:

---

"We cannot eliminate the Taliban, not militarily anyway," O'Connor told Reuters in an interview. "We've got to get them back to some kind of acceptable level, so they don't threaten other areas."

---

Venus - Consider this quote (and perhaps try to understand where I'm coming from for a change?). The tactics you openly advocate do not work and haven't worked throughout history. You cannot bomb a people into liking you and you cannot force your 'Far Superior Morales' upon another people. As I've said, you seem to truely beleive that you can beat someone until they like you and accept that your values are far superior.

I do not disagree with you that the Taliban are huge human rights violaters. I completely disagree with the tactics you advocate and your labelling of any people as far lessers that deserve only death. And yet you take that as I hate Canada, dislike Democracy, and am pro-Taliban?

I hope you can see how badly your blind hatred for anything you feel is lesser to yourself has clouded your opinion... Beyond just Afghanistan.

[ 07 September 2006: Message edited by: Noise ]

Venus_man, you can believe what you like about the Taliban. Just because people disagree with you does not mean they are Taliban supporters or that they hate Canada. The tone of your debate is descending to the foaming-at-the-mouth level. Dial it back or you'll be taking a break.

Certain others: (yeah, you know who you are) Lets knock off the name calling. If there's a real problem with another poster, or if you think someone is being racist etc, contact a moderator:

[email protected]

[email protected]

The UN's "ISAF" mission has long since been taken over by NATO; and now, in four months' time, the NATO multinational force and the United States' "Operation Enduring Freedom" will come under a single command.

quote:

---

There is growing alarm at increases in Taliban strength, numbers and brutality after the group was all but defeated by 2003. The U.S. military estimates 4,000 Taliban fighters are operating just in Afghanistan's southern provinces.

Many here - including Taliban rebels - believe Washington displayed weakness by handing the toughest Afghan counterinsurgency battles to Canadian, British and Dutch troops, said Antonio Giustozzi, a military researcher in Kabul with the London School of Economics.

"They thought it looked like the Bush administration was paving the way for a withdrawal," Giustozzi said. "Maybe sending a four-star general is a way to show the commitment is still there. It's also cheaper than sending more troops."

---

quote:

---

Pentagon officials said the transfer of troops currently in Afghanistan's eastern region would entail the biggest deployment of US troops under foreign command since World War Two.

---