Soldiers will die in Training mission so the CCPA says why bother?

In a shocking partisan development the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives and the Rideau Institute says soldiers are likely to be killed or injured attempting a task that will ultimately fail.

Its good to know that as soldiers our lives are expendable and that in the end the missions we try to accomplish will eventually lead to failure.

One has to remember that when it comes to training the Afghan Army and the police we are trying to teach someone to be a helicopter repairman that reads at a grade 3 level.  Does this mean we simply don't bother teaching him or do we help them even if it costs lives and even if its costs our own lives.

HERAT, Afghanistan (10 September) – After 14 weeks of training, 450 policemen graduated from Adraskan’s NATO Training Centre. The course comprised elements of Law, Shooting, Topography, Anti-riot and Check-point techniques, Counter-IED, Driving and Combat skills. Isafmedia photo.

Canada's plan to extend the Afghanistan mission by three years in a training support role carries high risks and a low chance of success, says a report released Monday.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced last November that Canadian Forces would act in a safer non-combat training role until 2014.

But the report by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives and the Rideau Institute says soldiers are likely to be killed or injured attempting a task that will ultimately fail.

According to analysts Michael Byers and Stewart Webb, military training always poses risks, and the Taliban have increasingly targeted training facilities while infiltrating the Afghan army and police.

The report cites dozens of incidents in which personnel with the NATO International Security Assistance Force have been attacked and killed by infiltrators among the Afghan army and police.

In the past six months:

The report says that widespread illiteracy and high desertion rates among Afghan soldiers and police and worsening security in the country as a whole doom the effort to failure.

Even if training efforts succeed to some extent, the eventual implosion of "the increasingly corrupt and ineffective Karzai government" leaves open the question of what sort of regime those soldiers and police would serve, the report says.

"Although they won't admit it, most Western governments have already given up on the country," said the report's co-author Byers. "The training mission is clearly an exit strategy that will cost more Canadians their lives."

The decision to extend the Afghan mission beyond 2011 was made without a debate in Parliament, with the consent of the Liberal Opposition. Harper argued that for an extension of the mission in a non-combat role, no parliamentary vote was needed.

"When we're talking simply about technical or training missions, I think that is something the executive can do on its own," Harper said.

Inside the wire:
Captain Paul Comeau, a member of the 2 Nova Scotia Highlanders 2NSH(CB), keeps an eye on recruit soldiers from the Afghan National Army (ANA) as they execute practical weapons training at the Afghan National Training Center in Kabul, Afghanistan.

Photo: Sgt John Clevett, Formation Imaging Services Halifax

Canadian trainers will stay "inside the wire," at their bases, Harper said, but the report suggests that the need to provide training in the field and security for the bases will inevitably result in "mission creep" and the need to engage in combat with insurgents.

The report contends that attempts to train the Afghan army and police to take over security are a facade designed to ease an exit "with honour."

"Which raises the question," the report says. "Why should Canada's soldiers suffer more casualties in an extended 'training' mission, if the decision to abandon Afghanistan to its fate has already been made?"

The report's authors fear public discussion about the Afghan mission has been sidelined by the election.

"Canadians need to be made aware of the risks of this mission," Webb said.

The Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives describes itself as an independent, non-partisan research institute concerned with issues of social, economic and environmental justice."




Historically this is something they have been saying for a while.   When Canada deployed its troops to Kanadhar for the second time in 2005 PM Martin and the government was saying the exact same thing.


"CTV.ca News Staff

Date: Sat. Jul. 30 2005 8:14 AM ET

Prime Minister Paul Martin responded to criticism Friday that sending troops to Afghanistan will endanger Canada, saying fighting terrorism is the government's responsibility.  He made his comments during a trip to Timmins, Ont., and also said fighting terrorism was the right thing to do.  His comments follow reports that a jihadist website mentioned Canada's mission to Afghanistan, alerting al Qaeda fighters to their presence.

Canada is helping Afghanistan by sending 250 troops to the violent Kandahar region, as part of a provincial reconstruction team to help bring stability to the area. They will encourage diplomacy and development, and also provide security for communities trying to rebuild.

Some troops will be arriving today, but the majority touched down Thursday.

The soldiers will get two days of rest before they accompany U.S. forces, who recently had four soldiers killed in a suicide bomb attack.

The Taliban's influence is especially strong in Kandahar, where troops continue to fight with insurgents.

Gen. Rick Hillier said last week that Canadian troops will likely encounter Taliban fighters and their al Qaeda allies.  Joint Task Force 2 -- Canada's secretive, elite special forces unit -- has been deployed for combat operations there.

The majority of Canadian soldiers are from Edmonton.

Most of 1 Canadian Mechanized Brigade Group is made up of soldiers from Edmonton Garrison's 1 Combat Engineer Regiment, 3 Battalion, Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry and 1 Service Battalion, reports The Canadian Press.  Critics of the mission say it will raise Canada's profile as a potential target for terrorists.

Eric Margolis, a seasoned war correspondent and author of a book on conflict in Afghanistan, War at the Top of the World, believes the mission could increase chances of a terrorist attack on Canadian soil.

He also believes Canadians might be unprepared for the possibility of troops suffering casualties.

"You cannot go into a war and expect you're not going to get shot at. It's foolish and it's illusory to do so, so Canadians have to be prepared," he told CTV.ca on Saturday.

"If they want to send troops to go and kill Afghans, Afghans are going to come and kill Canadians."