No, it's the difference in the assigned mission from NATO, now much more dangerous on the front lines than it was previously.
Cdn. casualties in Afghanistan, pre and post Harper PM
from a source that would hardly publish info. showing harper in a bad light
Death toll in Afghanistan
and an alternate site
Canadian Death Toll in Afghanistan
cdn. soldiers deployed into Afghanistan since early 2002
Harper sworn in as PM Feb. 6, 2006
pre harper PM (almost 4 years) cdn. casualties
9
post harper PM (about 1.5 years) cdn. casualites
57
that's an increase of over 500% in less than 1/2 the time
THAT'S the difference between peace keeping and "peace making"
Death toll in Afghanistan
and an alternate site
Canadian Death Toll in Afghanistan
cdn. soldiers deployed into Afghanistan since early 2002
Harper sworn in as PM Feb. 6, 2006
pre harper PM (almost 4 years) cdn. casualties
9
post harper PM (about 1.5 years) cdn. casualites
57
that's an increase of over 500% in less than 1/2 the time
THAT'S the difference between peace keeping and "peace making"
1 - 20 of 52 Posts
The British stats are almost identical and they had no change in government:
- 5 dead from April 2002 until February 2006
- 59 dead from March 2006 till present
Had the Liberals won, Paul Martin wouldn't have dragged us into a longer and deadlier warThe British stats are almost identical and they had no change in government:
As Sinc says, the front lines have become far more dangerous for a number of reasons. Had the Liberals won I doubt we'd see any difference here.
- 5 dead from April 2002 until February 2006
- 59 dead from March 2006 till present
the cons and Liberals like Michael Ignatieff (wanna be neo con) are to blame
Do you actually believe that so conclusively? Not that you're a Martinite, but you certainly sound like one of those devoted naive persons. Funny thing about them is that it was always about what would be "if" and how bad everyone else was. I was actually optimistic about Martin as a PM, until he proved to be, well, not so great. Only the Martinites continued to consider him as a respectable PM and they loved to tell their "what if" tales.Had the Liberals won, Paul Martin wouldn't have dragged us into a longer and deadlier war
It is so sad to see you lose your ability to think straight.Had the Liberals won, Paul Martin wouldn't have dragged us into a longer and deadlier war
the cons and Liberals like Michael Ignatieff (wanna be neo con) are to blame
Martin would have responded to the NATO call just like the Canadian parliament, not Harper did.
There is no one to blame in Canada. The mission changed, and became more deadly with predictable results.
The vote was very very important to Martin. He did not show up.
I did not like the way Harper pushed the vote, but the opportunity was there to stand up against it.
I did not like the way Harper pushed the vote, but the opportunity was there to stand up against it.
Are you suggesting the ability was there to begin with?It is so sad to see you lose your ability to think straight..
this is incredibly irresponsible to post. you're just tossing meaningless stats out there trying to make a point with them when in reality, aside from the lives lost, it means nothing.from a source that would hardly publish info. showing harper in a bad light
Death toll in Afghanistan
and an alternate site
Canadian Death Toll in Afghanistan
cdn. soldiers deployed into Afghanistan since early 2002
Harper sworn in as PM Feb. 6, 2006
pre harper PM (almost 4 years) cdn. casualties
9
post harper PM (about 1.5 years) cdn. casualites
57
that's an increase of over 500% in less than 1/2 the time
THAT'S the difference between peace keeping and "peace making"
it wouldn't have mattered which PM was in control - our mission has gotten bigger and therefore, more dangerous. Plus, the Taliban are striking back more often and with larger IDEs. So maybe if you're going to tout stats, find some research on the # of enemy attacks before and after.
Also, if i remember correctly, Canada is the largest Nato force there. Other countries like Italy are there, but they do sfa from what i'm told. we're leading the mission is my understanding.
Cheers,
Keebler
completely irresponsible is keeping our brave fighting men and women there to die for stupid reasons in a country that in no way affects the security of Canadathis is incredibly irresponsible to post. you're just tossing meaningless stats out there trying to make a point with them when in reality, aside from the lives lost, it means nothing.
it wouldn't have mattered which PM was in control - our mission has gotten bigger and therefore, more dangerous. Plus, the Taliban are striking back more often and with larger IDEs. So maybe if you're going to tout stats, find some research on the # of enemy attacks before and after.
Also, if i remember correctly, Canada is the largest Nato force there. Other countries like Italy are there, but they do sfa from what i'm told. we're leading the mission is my understanding.
Cheers,
Keebler
and in a country where one of its citizens committed the high crime of converting to a religion other than Islam and the BEST solution the supreme court (supposedly the best legal and sober minds in the country) could come up with was to exile the citizen
poppy production is above levels during Taliban control
it's a crying shame to send our soldiers to fight and die somewhere only to appease certain elements in a big white building in washington, d.c.
dying to defend our country is something i can accept
dying to curry favor is something i cannot accept - THAT'S IRRESPONSIBLE
I stopped at countries with less than 1,000 troops in country, but the list is longerTuesday, November 21, 2006
In Afghanistan: Troop levels:
Country Troops
U.S. 11,250
Britain 5,200
Germany 2,750
Canada 2,300
Netherlands 2,100
Italy 1,800
France 1,000
Nov. 21 2006 troop levels in Afghanistan
Feb. 13 2007 troop levelsOut of the 35,460 soldiers serving in the country, 14,000 are from the United States, 5,200 from Britain, 3,000 from Germany, 2,500 from Canada, 2,200 from the Netherlands and 1,950 from Italy.
and more very sad statistics
International forces see surge in Afghan deaths June 24 2007NATO and U.S. forces have killed more than 200 Afghan civilians this year while battling insurgents, surpassing 178 killed in attacks by militants.
I know this is a tough one for your to grasp Michael, so I will type this very slowly.it's a crying shame to send our soldiers to fight and die somewhere only to appease certain elements in a big white building in washington, d.c.
It . . . is . . . a . . . NATO . . . mission.
Not . . . led . . . by . . . the . . . US.
and I see that the fact that NATO forces have killed more civilians than the bad guys seems to have just slipped by those "journalistic lenses"I know this is a tough one for your to grasp Michael, so I will type this very slowly.
It . . . is . . . a . . . NATO . . . mission.
Not . . . led . . . by . . . the . . . US.
fact: NATO forces kill more civilians than militants
SINC/Sun report: It's not a U.S. mission
nice, very nice
Bill Kristol would be very proud
As I recall, Parliment voted to extend the mission in Afghanistan shortly after Harper took office. Since the Conservatives have a minority, it was the other parties that kept the mission going.
Macspectrum is just out to lunch on the political realities of this war. Maybe Harper himself is going over there and personally causing the deaths of those soldiers.
Oh, and BTW, 57 soldiers have died in the past couple of years? 45,300 Canadian soldiers died in World War II. Maybe we should have pulled out of there a lot sooner.
Macspectrum is just out to lunch on the political realities of this war. Maybe Harper himself is going over there and personally causing the deaths of those soldiers.
Oh, and BTW, 57 soldiers have died in the past couple of years? 45,300 Canadian soldiers died in World War II. Maybe we should have pulled out of there a lot sooner.
As I recall, Parliment voted to extend the mission in Afghanistan shortly after Harper took office. Since the Conservatives have a minority, it was the other parties that kept the mission going.
Macspectrum is just out to lunch on the political realities of this war. Maybe Harper himself is going over there and personally causing the deaths of those soldiers.
Oh, and BTW, 57 soldiers have died in the past couple of years? 45,300 Canadian soldiers died in World War II. Maybe we should have pulled out of there a lot sooner.
Comparing Afghanistan to WWII is stupid and you know it. WWII was an existential conflict. Afghanistan doesn't and never has threatened our very existence. This is completely disingenuous. This makes me sick. Next you'll be comparing the Falklands conflict with WWII. Shame on you!
tptptptp
What just might be considered even more stupid is to make a false statement about gt.Comparing Afghanistan to Iraq is stupid and you know it.
He never mentioned Iraq.
There was a humorous political cartoon I saw a couple of weeks ago with a caption that read: "Jack Layton on Juno Beach, 1944: 'It's not working...Let's go home!' " :lmao:Oh, and BTW, 57 soldiers have died in the past couple of years? 45,300 Canadian soldiers died in World War II. Maybe we should have pulled out of there a lot sooner.
I wish I had a print of it.
My bad simple error. You are correct and I am now editing this to go with my real intent. Thanks for the heads up SINC.What just might be considered even more stupid is to make a false statement about gt.
He never mentioned Iraq.
macspectrum, you are obviously speaking more on emotion than anything, which btw, there is nothing wrong in doing. we are all entitled to our opinions.completely irresponsible is keeping our brave fighting men and women there to die for stupid reasons in a country that in no way affects the security of Canada
and in a country where one of its citizens committed the high crime of converting to a religion other than Islam and the BEST solution the supreme court (supposedly the best legal and sober minds in the country) could come up with was to exile the citizen
poppy production is above levels during Taliban control
it's a crying shame to send our soldiers to fight and die somewhere only to appease certain elements in a big white building in washington, d.c.
dying to defend our country is something i can accept
dying to curry favor is something i cannot accept - THAT'S IRRESPONSIBLE
I stopped at countries with less than 1,000 troops in country, but the list is longer
Nov. 21 2006 troop levels in Afghanistan
Feb. 13 2007 troop levels
and more very sad statistics
International forces see surge in Afghan deaths June 24 2007
But my post was a response to your stats...not whether or not we should or shouldn't be there. your original post was blaming harper and again - not debating the presence of our troops there. there is an entire thread on that very subject.
cheers,
keebler
The Conservative minorty government under Harper extended and changed the nature of the mission after our committment, after our "misssion accomplished" was completed. His party and 30 odd Liberals who voted to extend the mission are the decision makers responsible for every Canadian death in Afghanistan after february of 2007.
And to say this is not a US Lead mission is bollocks. If the US wasn't there (ie: leading the way) we wouldn't be there.
Harper's failed leadership on the war in Afghanistan has result in far more Canadian deaths in much much shorter timespan than his predecessor. This is fact.
They are disturbing statistics.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/afghanistan/casualties/total.html
And to say this is not a US Lead mission is bollocks. If the US wasn't there (ie: leading the way) we wouldn't be there.
Harper's failed leadership on the war in Afghanistan has result in far more Canadian deaths in much much shorter timespan than his predecessor. This is fact.
They are disturbing statistics.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/afghanistan/casualties/total.html
1 - 20 of 52 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Canadian Mac Forums at ehMac
A forum community dedicated to Canadian Mac owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about collections, iOS, models, styles, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!
Full Forum Listing
