Sunday, April 17, 2011

Another reminder: We're winning in Afghanistan

In case you've forgotten, we're winning in Afghanistan and have been since 2007 at least.
Canada is winning the war in Afghanistan and is making significant progress in rebuilding that South Asian country, says the general who commands the Canadian Forces mission in Kandahar.

But Lt.-Gen. Michel Gauthier, who heads the Canadian Expeditionary Force Command in Ottawa, warns that because Afghan insurgents are losing ground, they likely will resort to increasing the number of roadside bombs and suicide attacks in an attempt to inflict more casualties on troops.

“From a military perspective in the south of Afghanistan, in Kandahar specifically, we are winning,” Lt.-Gen. Gauthier said in an interview with CanWest News Service. “We are winning where it matters most, where the people live. Where 90 per cent of the population is, we have a strong security influence in concert with our Afghan partners.”
That was over three years ago people, so you can only imagine how much we're winning now! We've been winning since we got there in 2001 and we're still winning now in 2011:

Violence in Afghanistan will rise this year from the record levels seen in 2010, the top U.S. military officer said on Wednesday.

The prediction by Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, signals an escalation in the nearly decade-old conflict even as the United States prepares to start withdrawing troops in July.

"We expect the violence coming in 2011 to be greater than last year," Mullen said in a statement submitted to the House of Representatives Armed Services Committee, without saying whether this implied a rise in U.S. military casualties.

"The fighting will be tough and often costly, but it is necessary to sustain and even increase the pressure we have been placing on the insurgent groups."

Win, WIN, WIN! You know when you repeat a word so often it becomes meaningless and funny-sounding? This is one of those times.

Support the troops!

Campbell believes the new lump-sum payments and income replacement pale in comparison to the practice after the Second World War of granting lifetime pensions.

He said the changes announced last fall are akin to putting patches on a leaky tire. The $250,000 he received wouldn't be enough to pay for one day in his shoes, he suggested.

"Why are we saying people who sacrificed limbs in the service of their country should be subjected to a 25 per cent reduction in their families' means of living? It's ridiculous," he said.

"I didn't end up this way just so I could earn 25 per cent less than I did before I lost my legs."

When I was reading up about how the harpercons were trying to use the psychiatric records of Veterans Ombudsman Pat Strogan and wounded veteran activist Sean Bruyea (who have both suffered from PTSD as a result of their service overseas), in a sleazy attempt to discredit them, I read an article which I can't find now, where a Veterans Affairs spokesperson said that the new compensation plan was an attempt to reduce costs which had exploded in recent years.

I could only think to myself; "No shit Sherlock! When you willingly subject thousands of Canadian soldiers to combat for almost a decade, some of them are going to get killed or wounded."

What sort of a culture do we have where all the militarists, the "support the troops" braying donkeys, vote for a government that tries to cheap-out on providing for assistance for the soldiers wounded in their doomed, disgusting imperialist exercises?

I don't want to be able to get inside the heads of people who process reality so shittily. I'm afraid of the irreparable damage that might occur.

6 comments:

pogge said...

The article that had me shaking my head was the one reporting the government's admission that Veterans Affairs "wasn’t ready for the influx of wounded soldiers from Afghanistan." What did they think was going to happen when they sent troops into a shooting war?

thwap said...

Thanks pogge. The article I read had some specific figure, like $2 billion increase or something.

But the brain-dead stuff that article writes about was the gist of their argument.

It boggles the mind that this is the sort of drivel we're capable of as a people 'eh?

Beijing York said...

Veterans have been screwed by Harper and I hope they make sure to vote against the CONservatives and for their best interests. Harper will take us down the US road where so many veterans are left with nothing and found living on the streets.

That's the Canada he envisions. Make everyone so poor and desperate that they sign up for war, make a nation think that their patriotic as they send pop stars overseas to entertain the troops, and completely abandon those wounded and no longer useful.

And his one little budget perk for veterans, "Helmets to Hardhats", is a direct rip-off of a US Defense Department program.

Anonymous said...

http://youtu.be/8lslENJYc-Q

thwap said...

Beijing York,

Agreed, and I don't know how the Repugs or the harpercons can pull the scam so successfully, year-in, year-out.

I don't know why a draft-dodger like bush II got lauded as a "war president" when he was such a dunce.

I can understand that if you join the military full-time, you might want to actually do the job you're trained for, and therefore, there'll be support for "missions" (at least at the beginning).

But what I can't see is how after the mission has turned out to be a farce, and the soldiers are getting killed, maimed, and then they and their families are getting screwed-over, there's still support for the war-monger party.

Anonymous,

I have no idea why you provided that link.

Anonymous said...

Just showing the war monger Harpers planes.