No CDN ground troops in Iraq

[Pikache]

No ground troops in Iraq: McCallum
Special forces, ships, planes may still go to war


OTTAWA (CP) — Canada has ruled out sending ground troops to any war on Iraq.

Defence Minister John McCallum said Thursday that the government‘s recent commitment of peacekeeping soldiers to Afghanistan will prevent it from sending ground troops anywhere in the world for at least a year.

"Having made this substantial commitment to Afghanistan, we will not be in a position to send substantial ground troops for a year or more to any other country.

"This does not rule out a possible participation in Iraq, should there be a war and should the government wish to do so, but not through ground troops."

Canada could still contribute ships, planes and its commando group JTF-2.

McCallum announced this month that Canada will send a battlegroup and a brigade-level headquarters in August to take over command of the UN force in Afghanistan.

The commitment could involve as many as 2,800 troops on each of two six-month rotations.

***

I guess it makes sense, considering how thin our resources are stretched...

 

[Jackplumber]

I guess the first thing you have to do is take a close look at the party in power today. That’s why we are not having troops going to Iraq (land element)

 

[Armymedic]

WHAT! :fifty:
NOT SENDING TROOPS TO AN ACTUAL SHOOTING WAR!!! :mg:
YOU MUST BE JOKING!!!!!!!!!!! :rocket:

Our government has the nuts to send us into harms way... :evil: ....oh, right, getting us killed would make them look bad..

Chretien is looking for his Nobel prize...Just like Pearson...
And... how would they justify straggling us fiscally to near death over the last 10 years if they don‘t send us somewhere?

 

[Michael Dorosh]

If any of you idiots are really keen on going out and getting killed, I suggest you head south of the border and volunteer for the US forces; it‘s quite easy to get in. Though they probably wouldn‘t deploy you as quickly as you like.

You could also try joining the Iraqis; lots of opportunities for combat there, in very short order.

Be careful what you wish for.

 

[Jarnhamar]

I wonder if i could get a good field promotion in the iraq army.
I‘ve played enough war simulations on the computer and all those boring nights playing axis and allies.

Canadian soldiers in iraq would be as useful as putting the sea king up for the safest vehicle of the year award.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

Funny you should mention the Sea King, Ghost...

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Speaking of which, heard HMCS Iroquois‘ Sea King crashed on the deck. She turned around and headed back to Halifax after making it 200 miles out, oh yea, that was on sea trials. She wasn‘t even declared fit prior to the Cretin sending her off to the press and bugles. Needed a photo op showing us doing our part. Even heard a rumour she was back in port by midnight the day she left. I‘m not one for rumours mind, but these were too good, too fast and too discrete to pass by. Don‘t forget, they‘re only rumours!
($hit, had to edit to change my arm indicator( Don‘t feel bad Gunner!!))

Sorry, was out of the loop for awhile, missed the news and papers. guess it‘s not rumour after all.

 

[toms3]

I can‘t believe people were surprised by this announcement. Once the decision was made to send peacekeepers to Afghanistan the writing was on the wall. What I found really funny (and not funny haha) was that when they said we were going back to Afghanistan, they kept saying that it did not mean that we were not going to Iraq….what a joke!!

What ever happened to the sayings “lead from the front” and “say what you mean”.

Oh…and by the way….here is a reality check…. don’t think Afghanistan is going to be safe…I have got a bad feeling that it will be nastier than Balkans ever were….anyone agree???? You have a lot more players involved.

:sniper:

 

[Infanteer]

If any of you idiots are really keen on going out and getting killed, I suggest you head south of the border and volunteer for the US forces; it‘s quite easy to get in. Though they probably wouldn‘t deploy you as quickly as you like.

You could also try joining the Iraqis; lots of opportunities for combat there, in very short order.

Be careful what you wish for.

**** hath no fury like the non-combatant....

Hey Mr. Dorosh, why don‘t you get off your pedestal and drop the condecending additude. Just because you run around in vintage uniforms and read a few books doesn‘t make you the be all and end all of soldiering, nor does it give you the right to mock the motives of others.

I for one am embarressed with our Government‘s decision to shirk away and I know plenty of good soldiers who share this feeling a wouldn‘t hesitate to head over and fight. Not all of us joined the army to parade around in a fancy uniform you know....

 

[Recce41]

Hey Mike
I in a way agree with you. Infanteer have you seen a man blown to two, what its like to see burnt up bodies. Well buddy I have. I‘ve had three friend killed on tour, so slow down Gung Ho. You are one of the ones that sit at the bottom of a OP, and cry when it is shelled. We had a lot of you fellas on tour. Real ruff and tuff at home then pissing yourselves on tour. War is not OOO lets cam up on Friday and wash it off on Sunday.
GROW UP LIL BOY, and act like a man, you are what some stupid people look what a soldier is. Someone that wants to go kill something.

 

[SpinDoc]

I think having the backbone to resist the urge to be the "yes-man" to the US is nothing to be embarrassed about. Keep in mind that we aren‘t in the French and German camp. Polarizing the world is not a wise move in the long run, and our work (although not terribly fruitful so far) as mediators between the hawks and the doves takes guts of a different sort.

Don‘t forget that given enough resources, it is easy to rationalize decisions. Iraq may be dodgy, but we KNOW North Korea IS dodgy and have superior missile technology and is much further away from being disarmed than Iraq.

At the beginning of WWII, the Germans staged border incidents with Poland to justify their invasion. I‘m sure the average German citizen thought their government was justified in its military action -- because the Germans have a vast propaganda machine. Now I‘m not saying the Americans are evil (far from it), but they DO have a sophisticated propaganda machine plus a better moral record than Iraq.

So in defense of Mike, war shouldn‘t be trivialized. Many of us view gunboat diplomacy in history usually with a bit of disdain, but when our friends are doing it in the present and we don‘t go along with it we shouldn‘t be "embarrassed" about it. Also, keep in mind that ANYTHING related to war intentions most likely have a huge spin on it. Political agenda and secrecy usually accompany sabre rattling.

 

[Infanteer]

Recce 41,
It appears you are making a few assumptions here. First off, I am sensing a bit a antagonism to the reserves. I‘ve done a little more in the Militia than play weekend soldier, I‘ve got the little bobbles and trinkets too. Although my experience is reletively small compared to yours, I feel I have done a share and can wear the title "soldier" like you do.

Second off, I have expressed this same opinion with one of my SNCO‘s who has a resume very similar to yours. Rather than chastising me to grow up, he shared my view, maybe without the youthful enthusiasm, but I feel we had the same logic on the subject. I don‘t think M. Dorosh has the right to call either of us "idiots" just because we have a different outlook on things. As for how I would act. Again you are making assumptions. When all the little games are over and everything is for real, alot of guys act like you say, crying in the OP. However, many troops get the job done through the worst of conditions. How I will hold up, only time will tell I guess, but I don‘t think you can call me a cry-baby.

SpinDoc,
We are at war. It is not the kind of war we all learned to fight in training, but one that must be fought lest we have more skyscrapers collapsing. What embarasses me is the fact that our two biggest allies, our best friends, are preparing to fight this war and our government, seeking to avoid any political liability, is prepared to relegate us to a backseat role (just like 10 years ago). Canada took a step forward by deploying troops to Iraq, but to me it appears that we are now taking two steps back.

Anyways, I gotta fly, talk to you guys later.

 

[Recce41]

Infanteer
Going to Iraq will not stop Terrorism. Iraq was not behind 911, thats the US BS. That they have gaven the US people to think.
**** the US forgot about Iraq, until old Bushie boy got in. Now he has troops going after Phillipine Rebels (Muslim). A friend of mine, from Saudi, a soldier in the Army. Said to me, Muslims are starting to think they are the targets now. He was stopped by the US troopers at Detriot airport when he us flying to Saudi. He showed his ID, leave pass, and passport. But he still got the hard time. He had his wife and two kids, with him and they also got it too.
I feel he is right, many have that lets go CNN attitude.
Like Jean said, change Saddam, but to the US who is nexted. The US I feel wants all or nothing.
So going to Iraq, is not worth it for us. If we go we should go to make the peace, but not as the peacekeeper.
As for the Res, I am not anti res. But I have found its not like before, it now a social club. I have last my repect for them even more. When a soldier can pass a CLC after being charge twice for weapons or rewrite a test three time or a soldier that has 9 months in on a JNCO course is BS. When a Snr Nco cannot lead a veh ptl, thats BS.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

Some of the guys here were laughing at their reserve Junior Leader‘s course - apparently one troop showed up for parade one day without a hat, and nothing was said by anyone.

As for my idiots comment - it was directed at the "war is cool, let‘s go right now!" type of comments. Just because we have the ability to do something, it doesn‘t mean we have any reason to do that same thing.

As it turns out, we don‘t even have the ability to deploy to Iraq - and what could would 1000 men do among a 200,000 man international force?

I think our international reputation is served far better by going to Afghanistan. It frees up US troops so they are happy, and the Europeans remain happy, too. Win-win.

My earlier offer still stands - if anyone is so keen on entering combat just for the sake of being in action, what difference does it make who you fight for? Go join the Iraqis, they would love to have you.

But don‘t pretend you‘re salivating for combat with Canada‘s - not your own personal - best interests at heart. Canada has decided it‘s best interests don‘t include getting a bunch of guys wasted in Iraq.

 

[SpinDoc]

Infanteer,

The War Against Terrorism shouldn‘t really involve Iraq. It is just a convenient banner under which the President Bush‘s administration could justify hostilities. Given the chance, Al-Quada and their fundamentalist allies would want to change the Iraqi regime too if they had the resources to spare after terrorizing the West -- because the Iraqi regime is a secular regime that has been active in suppressing Islamic fundamentalists over the years as threats to Saddam‘s power. I suspect that President Bush‘s administration and spin doctors are capitalizing on the ignorance of the public and its inability to differentiate between secular Arabs and fundamentalist Islamic Arabs.

I stand by my criticism of being "Yes-men", even to our biggest ally. Also, since we are a democratic country and the fact that polls (although not binding in any way, but give at least some insight) indicate that a clear majority of Canadians (not 50%+1) oppose going to war without a mandate from the UN. Many of you believe the UN is weak, and I would be the first one to agree that it is inefficient -- but it also serves as a check and balance scheme. Also keep in mind that it‘s not just one Veto-holding country in the SC is opposed to US actions, but it‘s France, the PRC, and possibly the Russians (who is teeter-totering). Squandering diplomatic currency like there‘s no tomorrow MIGHT actually LEAD to there being no tomorrow.

Let‘s not kid ourselves -- US is trying to secure its source of petroleum... and not just Iraqi patroleum, but Saudi and Kuwaiti oil too. The US finds it cheaper and more convenient (and mentally and socially less taxing) to use might than the lovey-dovey diplomatic and cultural development that would bring the Arab world closer to the US and secure oil that way. And indirectly (and this is probably a weaker argument) this war business is to support Isreal by weakening its potential enemies.

The US is our friend, yes... but just because friends do something (morally, in a sense) questionable doesn‘t mean we should help him do it. Thin line between friend and collaborator.

 

[RoyalHighlander]

A soldier is the one who prays for peace the hardest...

 

[gate_guard]

There are some valid points made by all. Any military contribution that Canada could make would be token at best so I say go big or go home. In this case Canada should just stay at home militarily if we can‘t commit something along the lines of a Brigade (sorry Infanteer!).
That aside, I don‘t agree with the US wanting petroleum as the reason for invading Iraq. Iraq accounts for 9% of the US‘ total for imported oil. They have threatened (if they haven‘t already done it) to cut this supply due to the impending war. Saudi Arabia being the only OPEC nation with significant production capacity has stated that it will fill any void left by Iraq.
One can debate forever as to why the US wants to invade Iraq but the fact remains that Saddam is very dangerous now and will continue to get worse. I have personally talked to a former member of the Iraqi army who was fortunate enough to escape and come to Canada. After speaking with him, there is nobody on this board that can convince me that Saddam is a peace loving man. There is no doubt in my mind that Saddam should at the very least be ousted.
What‘s happening now is just another example of the Liberal government lacking the testicular fortitude to have an opinion and back it up. The US is looking for political support right now and its time for Canada to do a nut check and man up. Not doing so just because it would appear that we‘re being "yes-men" show‘s that we‘re just as gutless. The US should remove Saddam from office, by force if necessary.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Where do we draw the line though? Saddam is an evil man so he should be ousted. If we "got rid" of all the evil people in the world who would be left in charge of all these countries? I guess thats not a very positive outlook but its a true one. People don‘t get in power by promoting peace or being honest. In my opinion people in power either got there through force or lying in some form or another. Bill Clintons approval rating went up after he lied to the american people about his affair. Look at how much the liberals keep stepping on their di*ks but they keep getting voted in.
People say we have to kick saddam out because hes bad, well using this line of thinking were going to be at war for a long long time. After were done with saddam should we go to war with north korea for developing weapons? After that we should attack china because of their human rights abuse. After were done with china we should sweep through iseral and kick both leaders out of there for doing bad things. After that we should land troops in northern ireland and get into it with the IRA because the british haven‘t taken care of that problem yet and the ira poses a threat to us on one level or another.
I know thats taking it to the extreme and it sounds a little silly but thats the direction it seems to be going. IF were going to attack someone before they attack us thats great. "Do unto others before they do unto you".
Acting like were doing this for the good of mankind and were on some kind of goodness crusade is a little crazy.

 

[gate_guard]

That‘s exactly why we should attack Saddam first. To do unto others before they do unto us. Basic human concern aside, I could give a f*** about the Iraqi people. If they choose to live under a dictatorship that‘s their problem (yes choose, it‘s called a revolution). My main concern is Saddam down the road a few years and what he can get up to. Building a conventional army hasn‘t worked for him so use your imagination as to what he‘ll go for next. Whether he has wpns of mass destruction now or not, he will in the future (France sold them a nuclear reactor years ago, funny how France is giving them support now). And no I‘m not saying that you can go after everybody who pisses you off, that‘s not realistic. I look at it this way, the US is the world‘s police force; everybody hates them but imagine the world without them, they don‘t catch all the bad guys and sometimes they f*** up but not supporting them when they do go after a bad guy seems pretty stupid no matter what their reasons. No, the US can‘t just roll into North Korea or China but they CAN take care of Iraq. Ghost it sounds like you have a case of "why bother?"
Like I said, Canada needs to do a nut check and at the VERY least pick a side (at least France and Germany did that) instead of riding the fence as is so typical of our political past.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

You‘re so brave gate_guard, yet you live under a dictatorship and you haven‘t had the balls to revolt.

Come on, seriously - do you like what the current government has done to the military?

How are you any different or less cowardly than the average Iraqi civilian?