Quebec troops in Afghanistan can't fathom antiwar sentiment

Interesting look from the Canadian side.

[quote]Quebec-based troops in Afghanistan can’t fathom antiwar sentiment back home
MARTIN OUELLET, Published Friday August 3rd, 2007

SHAWALI KOT, Afghanistan (CP) - Pte. Francis Archambault says he couldn’t believe what he was hearing during a conversation he had before he left Quebec for Afghanistan.

“Somebody who’s educated, who has diplomas galore, told me there would be no war in the world if people like me didn’t exist,” Archambault, 23, said in an interview with The Canadian Press.

“It really shocked me to hear that from someone who should know better.”

Archambault and other Quebec-based soldiers in Afghanistan expressed frustration and exasperation with the widespread opposition in their home province to Canada’s military mission in the country.

One poll suggested 70 per cent of Quebecers were opposed to the continued presence of Canadian soldiers in the war-torn land, while some members of the national assembly refused to stand up when several soldiers visited the legislature earlier this year.

Archambault said people who are against the mission are misguided when they accuse Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Conservatives of wanting to endorse U.S. foreign policy just to stay in the good books of the Bush administration.

“That has nothing to do with it,” he said. "Canada is not getting a lot out of its presence here. It costs lives and it costs money but we’re trying to give a chance to people who need help.

“It’s probably the biggest thing I’ll do in my life.”

Canada has about 2,500 troops in Afghanistan as part of the NATO force supporting the Afghan government. In the new rotation, most of them will be from CFB Valcartier, near Quebec City.

Canada is slated to leave Afghanistan in February 2009 and Harper has said extending the mission would require the consensus of Parliament.

Master Cpl. David Martel, one of the Van Doos charged with patrolling the Shawali Kot district in southeastern Afghanistan, said the attitude of some people is disheartening.

“You come here because you believe in what you do,” Martel said.

“You want to provide security and help people improve their lot, while back home people aren’t very receptive to that. They say you’re just off to kill people.”

Sgt. Steve Dufour said people are entitled to their opinion but believes the Canadian mission is not understood and is often misinterpreted.

“I spoke to one student who was against the mission,” he said. “I told her ‘In Canada, does anyone prevent you from going to school and getting an education?’ Well, that’s what it’s like here (in Afghanistan).”

On Friday, some of the Van Doos went out on foot patrol with a contingent of Afghan police officers.

At one point, one of the policemen fired his weapon by mistake, leading the Canadians to believe they were being attacked. No other shots were fired and nobody was injured.

Capt. Stephane Girard said later he was angry that the Afghan police had told villagers not to venture outside during the visit by the Canadian soldiers.

“We wanted to meet the locals and speak to them,” Girard said.

“But they (the Afghan police force) got there before us and scared them.”
canadaeast.com/front/article/43243[/quote]

Story gets a bit dis-jointed at the end, but it gives a good overview of how some of the troopies feel about things at home.

I am embarassed how so many of my countrymen take their unthinking antiwar stance as a badge of distinction. Universal medicare, yes of course, we are better for that. :wink:

Jeeze. Support the war or don’t support it, but those soldiers need all the support they can get.

I’ve never understood the whole concept of “I don’t support the war but I support the troops”. If the troops believe in what they’re doing, good luck to them. They don’t need my support, and as far as I’m concerned, they’re part of the problem. If they don’t believe in it, but are there anyway, then, IMHO, they lack the courage to stand up for what they do believe in.

I have a lot more respect for a soldier who believes in what he’s doing (even if I don’t agree with him) than I do for a soldier who doesn’t have the balls to refuse deployment into something he doesn’t believe in.

The Van Doos are the best troops to have there. Support or no, they will get their job done–whatever it takes.

Fence-sitting, that’s what it is. Fence-sitting with the hope that apathy will prevent bombs from going off in downtown TO, Montreal or Van.

[quote=“Wookiee”]The Van Doos are the best troops to have there. Support or no, they will get their job done–whatever it takes.

Fence-sitting, that’s what it is. Fence-sitting with the hope that apathy will prevent bombs from going off in downtown TO, Montreal or Van.[/quote]

Fence-sitting. Hmm. That’s not a bad description. Like how people procrastinate to avoid making hard decisions in the hope that eventually time will take care of them.

[quote=“Wookiee”]The Van Doos are the best troops to have there. Support or no, they will get their job done–whatever it takes.[/quote]Better than the Princess Patricias because…? Best because… why? Seriously, :idunno: Because they’re from Quebec, meaning they enjoy the least local support for deployment, and cause the government to pay the maximum political price for the deployment?

Fence-sitting, that’s what it is. Fence-sitting with the hope that apathy will prevent bombs from going off in downtown TO, Montreal or Van.[/quote]The Canada Forces haven’t been well supported, socially, financially, or governmentally in decades: PMs have had to order MPs to take on the portfolio. Support is so low that the “Armed” has been dropped from the name. That’s something other than fence-sitting, don’t ya think?

I don’t think the average Canadian knows how poorly the military is funded so I don’t think that relates at all to public lack of support.

Our country needs to figure out what we are going to do regarding the practical side of our foreign policy. I personally do not think we should be engaged in many combat activities. Just doesn’t fit with our modern image, nor with the reality of our defense needs. What we should do is create a professional division of translators, civil engineers, agricultural experts, water experts, and police who can operate in unstable areas. We have a role to play to the international arena but sending combat troops is not really it. We need an armed force that reflects Canadians desire to do good in the world but somewhat naively not get too dirty doing it.

[quote=“Muzha Man”]We need an armed force that reflects Canadians desire to do good in the world but somewhat naively not get too dirty doing it.[/quote]I don’t know that building to satisfy that naivety is such a good idea. Scrapping CIDA and creating/supporting non-military rapid deployment units to do some good in the event of disasters, and get more serious about more effective long-term assistance to build up infrastructure in other areas would be a step forward, and address most of those touchy-feely goals while largely leaving the military to areas more properly its own. Having military units offer more than search and rescue creates more problems than it solves.

I’m not sure there’s much else we can do in the long run. Building a robust combative force is a non-starter now, and will be in the conceivable future either. You may be right though that building a highly credible and respected non-aggressive branch of the armed forces may allow for the simultaneous development of better combat units. But Canadians just do not want to be involved in the bloody work of war and nothing is going to change that. However, they do also want to do good, and be seen doing good, and that is where the wiggle room exists. Anything else is just wasting resources funding what the next government is going to defund.

I have long been a critic of the hypocrisy of Canada’s attitude towards our Armed Forces. We believe in the UN and international intervention, but we’re never willing to pay the price for it, and we always end up relying on the Americans to carry the load, even while we sneer at them from our smug moral position

BUT (you knew that was coming, right?) whether or not the troops support a particular position is neither here nor there.

The troops support what they’re doing because that’s why they become soldiers in the first place. They believe that they can make a difference by doing what they do, and more power to them. We’d all want a doctor who think they can cure us, and would fight for that, no matter what the tests show. We’d all want a lawyer who’d try and keep us out of jail, and we all want soldiers who believe in victory.

Nevertheless, there are times when the question is whether to pull the plug, and those decisions, while informed by doctors’ opinions, are not theirs to make.

The legendary Royal 22e Regiment. Certainly one of the core Canadian regiments.
archives.cbc.ca/IDD-1-71-579/con … /van_doos/


[quote] {op’s original link}[i] "Pte. Francis Archambault says he couldn’t believe what he was hearing during a conversation he had before he left Quebec for Afghanistan.

“Somebody who’s educated, who has diplomas galore, told me there would be no war in the world if people like me didn’t exist,” Archambault, 23, said in an interview with The Canadian Press.

“It really shocked me to hear that from someone who should know better.”

Archambault and other Quebec-based soldiers in Afghanistan expressed frustration and exasperation with the widespread opposition in their home province to Canada’s military mission in the country.

One poll suggested 70 per cent of Quebecers were opposed to the continued presence of Canadian soldiers in the war-torn land, while some members of the national assembly refused to stand up when several soldiers visited the legislature earlier this year. [/i][/quote]

Both Laurent & Mackenzie King could attest to the power of the Quebecois aversion to overseas military adventures. Nothing really new there.
What is different these days is the disdain, disrespect and downpressing of the Canadian military in specific, and members of same in general. The average domesticated Canadian has become had his comfortable touque pulled over his eyes for so long, it’s meshed into his eyelids. We’ve piggybacked on the back of our southern friends for far too long, we’ve forgotten our own vital history in securing our own.

But then, of course, I am heavily biased against The Ugly Ones.

British military asks U.S. forces to leave Afghan province

SANGIN, Afghanistan: A senior British commander in Afghanistan’s Helmand Province said he had asked the U.S. military to withdraw its special forces from his area of operations because the high level of civilian casualties they have caused was making it difficult to win over local people. . . .

A precise tally of civilian casualties is difficult to pin down, but one reliable count puts the number killed in Helmand this year at close to 300 - the vast majority of them caused by foreign and Afghan forces, rather than the Taliban. . . . "

Of course the irony is that when the Taliban were in power and destroying the Buddhist statues then the left was united in its shrieking that the US do something. Remember? Shall I go track down all those lovely articles about how the US was “abdicating responsibility” and “not playing the expected lead in doing something.” Shall we conclude that the Buddhist statues were more important than the lives of 6 million Afghan refugees? I really think that sometimes that really truly does matter more to those on the left…

[quote=“spook”]British military asks U.S. forces to leave Afghan province

[/quote]

Huh. And to think I got slammed for advocating that Afghanistan be left to the experts. The U.S. clearly has no idea what it is doing. Just the same old bomb 'em and fuck 'em superior attitude that comes with years of successfully fighting insurgencies/wars in Vietnam, Central America, Somalia, Iraq. Seems like as little has been learned arrogance is the weapon of choice. Useless bastards for all their weaponry and bluster.

BroonArmy

[quote]Huh. And to think I got slammed for advocating that Afghanistan be left to the experts. The U.S. clearly has no idea what it is doing. Just the same old bomb 'em and fuck 'em superior attitude that comes with years of successfully fighting insurgencies/wars in Vietnam, Central America, Somalia, Iraq. Seems like as little has been learned arrogance is the weapon of choice. Useless bastards for all their weaponry and bluster.

BroonArmy[/quote]

So… We hear all about how our smarter British partners are so much better at this stuff than the cowboy Americans…

Tell us how the British effort in Basra is going? I hear that all of your troops are huddled at the airport. No need for them to stay then. When’s Brown going to pull them out and underline your sterling (deliberate) effort? at doing much better policing than the idiot Americans? hahahahahha

[quote=“BroonAle”]Huh. And to think I got slammed for advocating that Afghanistan be left to the experts. The U.S. clearly has no idea what it is doing. Just the same old bomb 'em and fuck 'em superior attitude that comes with years of successfully fighting insurgencies/wars in Vietnam, Central America, Somalia, Iraq. Seems like as little has been learned arrogance is the weapon of choice. Useless bastards for all their weaponry and bluster.

BroonArmy[/quote]

Hang on, the only successes were Panama and Grenada. Not to belittle these grand triumphs, mind you, I mean in the latter some poor American kiddies were liberated from their medical classes, and hell, pineapple head had gone off and stood to threaten global security.

HG

[quote=“fred smith”][quote]Huh. And to think I got slammed for advocating that Afghanistan be left to the experts. The U.S. clearly has no idea what it is doing. Just the same old bomb 'em and fuck 'em superior attitude that comes with years of successfully fighting insurgencies/wars in Vietnam, Central America, Somalia, Iraq. Seems like as little has been learned arrogance is the weapon of choice. Useless bastards for all their weaponry and bluster.

BroonArmy[/quote]

So… We hear all about how our smarter British partners are so much better at this stuff than the cowboy Americans…

Tell us how the British effort in Basra is going? I hear that all of your troops are huddled at the airport. No need for them to stay then. When’s Brown going to pull them out and underline your sterling (deliberate) effort? at doing much better policing than the idiot Americans? hahahahahha[/quote]

The British were hampered in Basra because of the association with the Yanks. had you not interfered and fucked up the rest of the country, Basra would be an oasis of relative calm. Unfortunately, when the U.S. has overall charge of military matters, chaos and loss inevitably follow. Your track record on losing in the last 50 years has also been sterling. Our successes though go relatively unnoticed because we don’t suffer from the inherent arrogance you bunch of foreign policy amateurs have.

Brown would do well to pull them out now and distance himself and us from your failings. and they are your failings.

BroonAirport

Explain to me what the US has to do with any of your failings in Basra, and they are YOUR failings. See you at the airport oh stalwart scion of a degenerate race!

[quote=“Huang Guang Chen”][quote=“BroonAle”]Huh. And to think I got slammed for advocating that Afghanistan be left to the experts. The U.S. clearly has no idea what it is doing. Just the same old bomb 'em and fuck 'em superior attitude that comes with years of successfully fighting insurgencies/wars in Vietnam, Central America, Somalia, Iraq. Seems like as little has been learned arrogance is the weapon of choice. Useless bastards for all their weaponry and bluster.

BroonArmy[/quote]

Hang on, the only successes were Panama and Grenada. Not to belittle these grand triumphs, mind you, I mean in the latter some poor American kiddies were liberated from their medical classes, and hell, pineapple head had gone off and stood to threaten global security.

HG[/quote]

Er…there was just a hint of sarcasm in listing American successes. I heard that some Cuban airport construction workers in Grenada actually fired back at the marines, some of whom were spotted crying. I mean, the audacity of firing back at an invasion force, especially an American force. Gosh!

Panama doesn’t really count as they were in effect already there in the Canal Zone.

BroonAle