• suffered per capita casualties well beyond those of any other country
  

• have many soldiers with multiple tours...some will have four and five [by 2011] 
  

• bulk of the battle group's strength...fewer than 5,000 deployable soldiers
  

• By 2011, that [The Mission] will have been longer than the two world wars combined.
  

• I doubt very much we will be asked to extend a combat task they [U.S.A.] know we would find exceedingly difficult to do.
  

All excellent reasons to stick to the exit time-line, if not accelerate it, yet Lewis MacKenzie maintains, when the deadline rears, Canada will not be moved, saying;

"As far as Canada's abandoning Afghanistan in 2011, even without reading between the lines, you can bet this won't happen. Afghanistan is the largest recipient of our foreign aid, with a number of signature projects that will continue. An ever-growing civilian presence assisting with governance and other aspects of nation-building also will continue.

"The very effective Provincial Reconstruction Team and its protection element will no doubt stay, along with an increased number of mentors to help train the Afghan army and national police. The United States will probably lobby for retention of our outstanding medical facility at Kandahar airfield, along with the recently deployed helicopters and perhaps our artillery unit. The latter two will be controversial and lead to heated parliamentary debate because of their association with that dreaded term “combat.”"

So, logic and political promises aside, the prime minister will somehow worm out of his word, abetted by a compliant if "heated" parliament, keeping the killing going despite the Nervous Nellies at home that would have Canada's part in this multi-generational colonial combat project stopped; the sooner, the better.

The number of Canadians wanting an end to this has, since 2002, consistently polled above the 50 percent mark, and now hovers near 70. Yet former major-general MacKenzie isn't breaking a sweat about the future expansion of his alma mater. "Devil take the sleeping masses and pass us the ammunition" he may say.

Canadians are not alone in their displeasure among the nations of the coalition currently occupying Afghanistan. Britons too are asking difficult questions, as sombre final parades of flag draped coffins are lately near daily occurrences on British television. They want to know what this mission is all about, and why it's worth the billions of pounds spent and nearly two hundred English lives lost?

A poll released recently by The Independent newspaper cites 58 percent of its respondents say; "the war in Afghanistan is unwinnable," and more than half of them want British troops withdrawn "immediately." According to Lewis MacKenzie's opposite number across the pond, that's unlikely to happen.  

General Sir David Richards, former commander of troops in Afghanistan, and the man now tapped to take over as Chief of the General Staff, sees a long future for the British Army in Afghanistan. He was recently quoted saying the nation-building mission may take, "as long as 30 to 40 years." Another great reason for disengaging from this folly now, but Sir David doesn't say so. Britain's next number one military man intimated, Britain will be staying, but not alone, saying;

"[T]here is absolutely no chance of NATO pulling out.”

The general may be onto something there. In the U.S., Defense Secretary Robert Gates was heard to wonder if there may not be another infusion of fresh soldiers to follow the 21,000 the Obama administration recently sent.

 

Meanwhile, Dan de Luce reports for Agence France Presse the rumours coming out of Belgium, noting;

"[I]ntense speculation that the top US and NATO commander in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal, is preparing to make a case for more troops in the fight against the Taliban and allied insurgents."

In Canada, Britain, the United States, and all the western democracies contributing to this nearly eight year nightmare for Afghanistan, the majority of the citizenry oppose continuing along this course of war and occupation charted by George W. Bush. Many opposed it before the bombing began, questioning the spurious connections to the 9/11 attacks ultimately used to legitimize the invasion.

 

But all that doesn't matter. The Generals, the MacKenzie's and David's and McChrystal's run the show now, and while your Lilliputian input is appreciated, it's not required.

The war and occupation will be continued to 2011 and beyond, into another dark decade.