Categories: Polls

How does the finding of fraud in Afghanistan's latest election affect your view of Canada's mission there?

…

by macleans.ca on Monday, October 19, 2009 5:17pm - 26 Comments

Inklings

I see I'm in the minority on this poll. I think we CAN do some good, and I think it would be a damned shame if we didn't. If we hadn't gone in I could see the case for not getting involved, but how do you turn your back on people that have come to look to you for help? Perhaps even trust that you will? How do you pull out now and leave people (women and children) to be slaughtered and oppressed? How can you defend that? We don't seem to have the stomach for the long haul and that's too bad. For us, and for the Afghan people. What would the outcome have been of the second world war if people had taken this "can't be done" attitude? I bet there were those who thought the invasion at Normandy couldn't be done, either. They were wrong.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

What use throwing good resources after bad if nothing will come of it? When it's the generals of the forces over there themselves who are suggesting that there is no good end in sight, perhaps we should start listening and redirect our resources to where they actually can make a difference. It's not like Afghanistan is the only place in this world that desperately needs highly trained and effective peace-keepers like the Canadian military.

lazygal

Any police officer who has ever responded to a domestic dispute will tell you it was a waste of time, – the wife may be beaten, but she'll stand by her man against all others, – the husband may have had a hard time, but he'll offer to fight the first person who blames his wife, – Afghanastan is a domestic dispute. Outsiders will never win!!

http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

"I bet there were those who thought the invasion at Normandy couldn't be done, either. They were wrong."

Aside from both Afghanistan and Nomandy involving guns, there's almost nothing else to compare between those two.

D-day was a clearly defined mission with a simple (and known) measure of success. The same, regrettably, cannot be said for the conditions in Afghanistan prior to our engagement, at this time, or for any realistic future projections I've seen.

I agree that we've taken on some responsibilities, whether or not we meant to, or want to. However, I think we risk being paternalistic, and quite possibly ethnocentric, if we assume that Afghanistan cannot possibly move forward without a strong Western presence.
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

"I bet there were those who thought the invasion at Normandy couldn't be done, either. They were wrong."

Aside from both Afghanistan and Nomandy involving guns, there's almost nothing else analogous in these cases.

D-day was a clearly defined mission with a simple (and known) measure of success. The same, regrettably, cannot be said for the conditions in Afghanistan prior to our engagement, at this time, or for any realistic future projections I've seen.

I agree that we've taken on some responsibilities, whether or not we meant to, or want to. However, I think we risk being paternalistic, and quite possibly ethnocentric, if we assume that Afghanistan cannot possibly move forward without a strong Western presence.

KenC

lived there for 2 years We need to get ut and let them live the way they have for the past 2000 years

mmm

you're unbelievable

JG1

I'd prefer if your survey gave the option of "it reminds me of how ashamed I am about what we're doing there".
We try to jam our model of government down the throats of a people who have little or no culture to support it and we show them that cheating is the way to get things done.
jarrid

What would Obama do?
Inklings

I find it puzzling that people talk of forcing "our model" on "their culture" as if human rights are not universal to all peoples in all countries. What I find "ethnocentric" is that Western countries think their peoples' lives are more valuable than the lives of ordinary (in this instance) Afghans. I think most people would say that if not for a Western presence, at least for the time being, the Taliban would return to power via brute force. Is that okay with you guys? Is it okay that we leave women to resume life under a burka, forbidden to work, and little girls to be sent home from school and married off to old men as soon as they are old enough to bear children? Afghanistan can only move forward when their security forces can take over the job… it would be unconscionable to leave before then. I agree it would help if all the countries involved actually had a plan and were prepared to see it through.

http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

"as if human rights are not universal to all peoples in all countries"

Who gets to define human rights? And why are they universal? Not that I fully disagree with you, but tossing such ideas about as though they were self-evident risks oversimplification.

Nobody much gave a crap about the women in Afghanistan before 9/11. There was more international outcry over the Taliban's destruction of ancient statues. The invasion was, and is, all about reducing the strength of Al Qaeda and the Taliban. To wrap ourselves in claims of spreading freedom now, represents a recasting of our involvement. And I'm not convinced that guns and bombs are the best way to spread freedom of any sort.

There's a long list of countries where human rights are limited or absent. Are we going to invade them all? And doesn't it represent a form of paternalism to assume that the peoples of certain regions are unable to chart their own course?

I'm not insensitive to the lot of women (in particular) under Taliban rule. But it's a heck of a lot more complex than just shooting some bad guys. And even if I thought it might work (I don't), I'm not comfortable with engaging in colonial style rule, at gunpoint. The best outcome of such an approach promises generations of strong armed Western control of Afghanistan, despite the fuzzy emotional hopes that freedom and democracy will, somehow, take root if we hang in there long enough.

Just to be clear, I'm not blind to human suffering. But we quite simply don't know what we're doing when we charge in with guns blazing, so far as social engineering is concerned. And if we focus on rights and freedoms, we ignore the true goals of this invasion. Which makes it all the more difficult to fairly assess its viability.
Darwin

Hello,

1. “How does the finding of fraud in Afghanistan’s latest election affect your view of Canada’s mission there?”

We didn’t send troops to the U.S. after fraudulent elections in 2000 and 2004.
If you still don’t know they were fraudulent, see American Blackout, or look up the congressional records on the Choicepoint Inc. hearings.

2. “Is it okay that we leave women to resume life under a burka, forbidden to work, and little girls to be sent home from school and married off to old men as soon as they are old enough to bear children?”

Of course it’s not okay. You are forgetting why we went to Afghanistan in the first place. It was not for those reasons. It was to support the US invasion after 9/11 – an event which is perhaps the greatest fraud in history. You have been sold a completely different package than the first one in 2001, because that one doesn’t work anymore.

It’s time for all of us to be smarter, more critical and much more courageous. Truth please.

W.
mmm

you're stoking the fire

daredevil_23

At least it wasn't hanging chads, electoral colleges, and the supreme court….
David B.

It does not change anything means 28% of us believed it was lost cause from the get go!
http://intensedebate.com/people/lgarvin lgarvin

Not a comment on the poll – I'm really not sure how I feel – just a request to edit that first option. "Reinforcmes" is jarring on the eye.
darkpool2

I voted #2, but read it carefully. I voted that we cant do much to HELP THE AFGHANS. That is NOT the same as saying we shouldnt be there to help OURSELVES. Anyone who thinks we went in there with a mission to just help the Afghans, is extremely naive !
shrilankalanka

We went to help George Bush and his fat friend, the VP.
I see no reason for the continuous loss of Canadian soldiers in a place that has nothing to offer to Canada.
We have taken in many terrorist Afghans and Pakistanis, whose purpose in life is to kill westerners. How good is this?
Abeskatch

I would put the life of one Canadian soldier ahead of the entire country of Afghanistan and all it's people . Three more centuries of evolution might change things there but I wouldn't hold my breath .
coast logger

So is fraud in Astan different than how junior won two elections in the US? We didn't break off relations with them just because junior had his daddy and brother rig the elections for him and look at the mess he made.
mmm

exactly
Mars

HOw many more countries must our military fight–for democracy?– A lot of them do not even want it– just want to be able to bread & butter on the table!!! Saw a documentary– awhile back– afgahn women were interviewed– on what their thoughts were on having our mitiary there– one woman said– send them home– we can deal with it on our own– if we want to kill each other– so be it!!! How can one help people with that mentality–leave them alone– it will take generations 2 change things–there are countries that one could help with education etc.– without having to use arms!!! Remember– how many muslims are now- living in CAnada– having the good life– but ancient beliefs–would kill one in an instant– if given the chance–we should put our mititary to use in our own country– hunt down all the would be terrorists—& not let anymore in!!!
Jiminee

Afghans have been breeding like rabbits for the last 30 years of foreign intervention—a 250% explosion of population. Are they hurting?? The different sects and tribes will always be murdering each other—no one will change that !! It was the Taliban's refusal to sign a contract for an oil-pipeline with Texas Oil. Bush's lies dubed the UN to war. Human rights has nothing to do with it. Bring the troops home NOW ! !
http://MySpace.com/ElectroPig1 ElectroPig™ Von FökkenGrüüven

We are not the United States, and we have no business helping the failing state to our immediate south in their international “Nation Building” excercises.

Every able-bodied Canadian soldier who is overseas fighting a war against a people who simply do not want us there is also drawn away from their stated goal of protecting Canada and it’s citizens. How is this a good thing?

We’re not wanted, and we don’t want to keep throwing away money for no good reason…but then, that’s what THE PEOPLE want, and we all know that what the people want is NOT something that the government needs to concern itself with until such time as we’re nearing full-scale revolution!

As the United States slips slowly under the bow of the Federal Reserve in preparation for being ground into paste by the International Monetary Fund and World Bank, we need to stop being sidetracked by foreign interests and start to be a little bit more concerned with our own interests for a change.

I have nothing against helping foreign countries when they NEED our help, or even when they ASK for our assistance, but first things first, folks…if we slip under the wheels of the train wreck happening to our southern neighbour, we won’t be in any positiojn to help ourselves, let alone anyone else when they need us.
touquer

Can one "reinformce" anything?
Bernard Duncan

Please tell me their is no "Fraud" in Canadian politics. The Afagan government is no different then any other government in this world. We see and hear it all the time in every newspaper in this country about the ripoff's by the government. Do not try to tell me that the HST in both Ontario and BC is not a ripoff of money from ordinary working people. Give me a break!!!!!
Billyd