For too many years the Chief of The Defence Staff of Canadian Forces have been little more than bureaucrats with no real soldiering ability. The Last Canadian fighting general we had was Lew MacKenzie, who commanded the UN forces in Bosnia in 1993. He was passed over for Chief of Defense Staff because he was a soldier's soldier. Now we have in General Rick Hillier a soldier's soldier. His words were music to my ears:
CANADA'S TOP SOLDIER ANNOUNCES MISSION TO ROOT OUT MUDERERS IN AFGHANISTAN
By DANIEL LEBLANC The Globe and MailFriday, July 15, 2005
OTTAWA -- Canada's elite JTF2 soldiers are heading to Afghanistan as part of a 2,000-troop deployment that will target the "detestable murderers and scumbags" behind the rise in international terrorism, General Rick Hillier said yesterday.In a blunt briefing that signalled a new aggressiveness at the top of the Canadian Forces, the Chief of the Defence Staff said the impending operations are risky but necessary in light of last week's bombings in the British public-transit system.
"The London attack actually tells us once more: We can't let up," Gen. Hillier told reporters.He said terrorists are ready to target Canada as much as any other Western country and that Canadians have to be aware that their soldiers are in for some "risky business" as they head out to Afghanistan.It was the first time Gen. Hillier has confirmed that members of the Joint Task Force 2 -- the country's secretive commando team -- will be involved in combat missions against the remnants of the former Taliban regime and supporters of al-Qaeda.
"These are detestable murderers and scumbags, I'll tell you that right up front. They detest our freedoms, they detest our society, they detest our liberties," Gen. Hillier said. He stressed the new face of the Canadian Forces, which he said are now focused on the first job at hand: protecting Canadian interests at home and abroad.
"We're not the public service of Canada, we're not just another department. We are the Canadian Forces, and our job is to be able to kill people."
Previous Canadian missions in Afghanistan have provided security in Kabul, the capital. But the next three missions, involving 2,000 troops, will be heavily centred in the southern mountains, where soldiers will be called upon to hunt down and fight the insurgents.Gen. Hillier said Canada is already in the crosshairs of the terrorists, and he does not believe it becomes a bigger target by participating in military operations that give hope to the Afghans.
"We're not going to let those radical murderers and killers rob from others and certainly we're not going to let them rob from Canada," he said.He pointed out that during the Second World War, Canadian soldiers did not shy away from fighting the Nazis."Did they say, 'No we might be attacked over here if we actually stand up against those despicable murderers and bastards?' No, they did not," Gen. Hillier said.
The native of Newfoundland has been the top soldier in Canada for five months. Bolstered by a growing budget, he is promising a "radical transformation" of the forces to make them more effective in their daily operations.With his straight-talking style, Gen. Hillier has already effected a major change at the top of the military hierarchy in comparison with his blander predecessor, General Ray Henault.
Gen. Hillier is a popular figure among the troops, and he has impressed his political bosses with his vision for the forces.His goal now is to rally Canadians behind the military and convince young talent to join the expanding forces.He would not speak about the number of potential casualties among Canadian troops in Afghanistan, while stating there is no such thing as a safe mission."You can't reduce the risk to zero," he said.
The recent Canadian rotations in Afghanistan have been centred at Camp Julien in Kabul. Gen. Hillier said that the coming missions will "shift the centre of gravity to Kandahar," the area of southern Afghanistan that saw the rise of the Taliban.The goal is to bring stability and democracy to the area, he said, adding that this is "the exact opposite of what people like Osama bin Laden, Mullah Omar and those others want.
"Later this month, 250 Edmonton-based soldiers will head out to southern Afghanistan to form what is known as a Provincial Reconstruction Team.The soldiers will be accompanied by officials from the RCMP and the Canadian International Development Agency, the federal aid agency, to develop ties with local officials and help with the reconstruction of the war-torn area.In addition, 700 soldiers from Petawawa, Ont., are heading to Kabul to help the Afghan authority conduct a general election, planned for September.
After the vote, a large portion of the forces will move down south to join the PRT and prepare for the arrival of the biggest deployment in Kandahar.In February of next year, about 1,100 soldiers will set up a new camp in the area, heading up a new multinational brigade that will eventually operate under the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, alongside American troops already in the area.
Gen. Hillier also said the army is sending at least 100 armoured vehicles to Sudan. The Grizzlys are military surplus and several will be sent later this month, with the remainder to follow, he said.
Canada's role in AfghanistanThe Canadian Forces are entering a new stage in their operations as part of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan in coming months, with a renewed focus on the more volatile southern region of the country.Three distinct deployments involving more than 2,000 soldiers are in the works, culminating with the presence early next year of a combat force in Kandahar, the birthplace of the terrorist-supporting Taliban regime.
WHAT'S COMING UP
Late July and early August:250 soldiers leave Edmonton to join a Provincial Reconstruction Team (PRT) in Kandahar. The goal is to patrol the area in armoured G-Wagons and forge ties with local officials during the six-month mission.
Late July and early August:700 soldiers from Petawawa, Ont., head out for Kabul to provide security for the general election, scheduled for September.
Late 2005: After the vote, a number of them will join the PRT and prepare for the arrival of a Canadian-led multinational brigade in Kandahar.
January-February, 2006:1,100 soldiers from Edmonton head out to Kandahar, which will be the home-base for the Canadian-led multinational brigade. Canada will ensure leadership of the brigade for nine months, but the Canadian Forces will provide troops for a full year.
In addition to patrolling streets in G-Wagons, the Canadian Forces will use larger armoured vehicles to hunt terrorists and Taliban supporters.
Tuesday, July 19, 2005
Monday, July 11, 2005
Will the British Learn From This?
Some of the things I'm reading suggest that, while all the right words are being said; "They will Fail" "They will not destroy the British Way of Life" etc. ,seem to be empty rhetoric. I'm concerned that the British Way of Life has so morphed under multiculturalism and liberal political correctness that the definition of the British Way of Life has become mushy.
The situation is the same here in Canada even though, now Muslim clerics are starting to speak out against these attacks, the suspicion lingers that these are half hearted if not mere dissembling remarks. Where are the Muslim clerics who demand the capture and trial of these vermon.
England has nearly 2 million Muslims living there. A large percentage of them don't consider themselves British, but rather Muslims living in Britain who have nothing but contempt for the British Way of Life. I believe Britain is going to have to suffer more such tragic events before the Liberal blinkers come off. Currently these liberals prohibit racial profiling. When the IRA were bombing the British mainland it didn't take long to figure out where they were coming from. How much more will it take for Britain to wake up to the enemy in their midst?
What follows is a commentary by Cal Follows that spells out my concerns.
=======================
Horrific reminder . . . with prelude
By Cal ThomasJuly 11, 2005
PORTSTEWART, Northern Ireland.
The words heard most often by political leaders, commentators and citizens after the London terrorist bombings were "shocked, but not surprised."
No one should have been surprised because Britain, like the United States, has created a welcoming atmosphere for terrorists and allowed them the fertile soil they need to grow and carry out their murderous acts among us. Just as a lifelong smoker should not be surprised when diagnosed with lung cancer, neither should Britain and America be surprised when people who refuse to adopt Western notions of pluralism, tolerance and individual liberty kill and maim innocent people they and their religious masters label "Zionists and crusaders."
In Britain, proposed "hate crimes" laws have sought to forbid even the few clergy still worth hearing from saying homosexuality is a sin. No such laws have been proposed to stop radical Islamic Imams from preaching hatred of Jews, Christians and Western values.
Leftist lawyers eagerly defend the radicals. They are more concerned about the treatment of killers at Guantanamo Bay and the "atrocities" performed on Abu Ghraib prisoners, who would kill us if they had the chance, than the seething masses eager to strap a bomb to their bodies and end their worthless lives while killing "infidels."
The pattern should be familiar by now. A terrorist act is committed. Western leaders condemn it in the "strongest possible terms." Pledges are made that the killers will not achieve their goals and our way of life will continue. Muslim leaders issue statements condemning the killing of "innocents." To them, though, innocents are people who are not "Zionists and crusaders," so the condemnation's sincerity is suspect.
The Times interviewed two young Muslim men in East London, a neighborhood with a large Muslim population. Nineteen-year-old Kadar Duale said he doesn't believe the London bombings were carried out by al Qaeda, but "by someone more powerful, like the Israelis." Such thinking is not isolated among a few radicals.
Amir Taheri, an Iranian commentator on Middle Eastern Affairs, wrote a column for the Times of London on July 8, in which he demonstrated the kind of clear thinking that seems to have eluded muddleheaded politicians and other self-deluded people who yammer for the TV camera: "You are dealing with an enemy that does not want anything specific, and cannot be talked back into reason through anger management or roundtable discussions. Or, rather, this enemy does want something specific: to take full control of your lives, dictate every single move you make round the clock and, if you dare resist, he will feel it is his divine duty to kill you."
A Sunday Times survey taken just after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States found 4 in 10 British Muslims (there are as many as 2 million) believed Osama bin Laden justified in his war against America. A similar number said Britons who choose to fight with the Taliban are right to do so. Another opinion poll for the Asian radio station Sunrise found 98 percent of London Muslims under 45 said they would not fight for Britain; 48 percent said they would take up arms for bin Laden [ed note: Times of London, Nov. 4, 2001].
In view of these beliefs and repeated acts of terror, the incitements against all things Western, Jewish and Christian in who knows how many mosques in Britain and the U.S., the teaching of seditious ideas in radical Islamic schools funded by our "friends" the Saudis, and the refusal of most Muslim communities to assimilate and learn the language, history and practices of their host countries, why do Britain and the United States continue to allow such things within their borders?
Unless we are prepared to accept continued terrorist attacks as "normal" because of some sick understanding of tolerance and pluralism, we had better do whatever is necessary to root out these people and forbid any more from entering our countries.
Shortly after September 11, 2001, Mohammed Abdullah, a 22-year-old accountant from Luton was quoted in the Times: "We don't perceive ourselves as British Muslims. We are Muslims who live in Britain. All Muslims in Britain view supporting the jihad as a religious duty."
In the face of such comments and actions like the latest terrorist bombing, Britain and America should consider what Mark Steyn wrote in a Daily Telegraph column July 8 (and in his column in today's edition of this newspaper): "If the governing class goes about business as usual, that's not a stiff upper lip, but a death wish."
Cal Thomas is a nationally syndicated columnist.
The situation is the same here in Canada even though, now Muslim clerics are starting to speak out against these attacks, the suspicion lingers that these are half hearted if not mere dissembling remarks. Where are the Muslim clerics who demand the capture and trial of these vermon.
England has nearly 2 million Muslims living there. A large percentage of them don't consider themselves British, but rather Muslims living in Britain who have nothing but contempt for the British Way of Life. I believe Britain is going to have to suffer more such tragic events before the Liberal blinkers come off. Currently these liberals prohibit racial profiling. When the IRA were bombing the British mainland it didn't take long to figure out where they were coming from. How much more will it take for Britain to wake up to the enemy in their midst?
What follows is a commentary by Cal Follows that spells out my concerns.
=======================
Horrific reminder . . . with prelude
By Cal ThomasJuly 11, 2005
PORTSTEWART, Northern Ireland.
The words heard most often by political leaders, commentators and citizens after the London terrorist bombings were "shocked, but not surprised."
No one should have been surprised because Britain, like the United States, has created a welcoming atmosphere for terrorists and allowed them the fertile soil they need to grow and carry out their murderous acts among us. Just as a lifelong smoker should not be surprised when diagnosed with lung cancer, neither should Britain and America be surprised when people who refuse to adopt Western notions of pluralism, tolerance and individual liberty kill and maim innocent people they and their religious masters label "Zionists and crusaders."
In Britain, proposed "hate crimes" laws have sought to forbid even the few clergy still worth hearing from saying homosexuality is a sin. No such laws have been proposed to stop radical Islamic Imams from preaching hatred of Jews, Christians and Western values.
Leftist lawyers eagerly defend the radicals. They are more concerned about the treatment of killers at Guantanamo Bay and the "atrocities" performed on Abu Ghraib prisoners, who would kill us if they had the chance, than the seething masses eager to strap a bomb to their bodies and end their worthless lives while killing "infidels."
The pattern should be familiar by now. A terrorist act is committed. Western leaders condemn it in the "strongest possible terms." Pledges are made that the killers will not achieve their goals and our way of life will continue. Muslim leaders issue statements condemning the killing of "innocents." To them, though, innocents are people who are not "Zionists and crusaders," so the condemnation's sincerity is suspect.
The Times interviewed two young Muslim men in East London, a neighborhood with a large Muslim population. Nineteen-year-old Kadar Duale said he doesn't believe the London bombings were carried out by al Qaeda, but "by someone more powerful, like the Israelis." Such thinking is not isolated among a few radicals.
Amir Taheri, an Iranian commentator on Middle Eastern Affairs, wrote a column for the Times of London on July 8, in which he demonstrated the kind of clear thinking that seems to have eluded muddleheaded politicians and other self-deluded people who yammer for the TV camera: "You are dealing with an enemy that does not want anything specific, and cannot be talked back into reason through anger management or roundtable discussions. Or, rather, this enemy does want something specific: to take full control of your lives, dictate every single move you make round the clock and, if you dare resist, he will feel it is his divine duty to kill you."
A Sunday Times survey taken just after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States found 4 in 10 British Muslims (there are as many as 2 million) believed Osama bin Laden justified in his war against America. A similar number said Britons who choose to fight with the Taliban are right to do so. Another opinion poll for the Asian radio station Sunrise found 98 percent of London Muslims under 45 said they would not fight for Britain; 48 percent said they would take up arms for bin Laden [ed note: Times of London, Nov. 4, 2001].
In view of these beliefs and repeated acts of terror, the incitements against all things Western, Jewish and Christian in who knows how many mosques in Britain and the U.S., the teaching of seditious ideas in radical Islamic schools funded by our "friends" the Saudis, and the refusal of most Muslim communities to assimilate and learn the language, history and practices of their host countries, why do Britain and the United States continue to allow such things within their borders?
Unless we are prepared to accept continued terrorist attacks as "normal" because of some sick understanding of tolerance and pluralism, we had better do whatever is necessary to root out these people and forbid any more from entering our countries.
Shortly after September 11, 2001, Mohammed Abdullah, a 22-year-old accountant from Luton was quoted in the Times: "We don't perceive ourselves as British Muslims. We are Muslims who live in Britain. All Muslims in Britain view supporting the jihad as a religious duty."
In the face of such comments and actions like the latest terrorist bombing, Britain and America should consider what Mark Steyn wrote in a Daily Telegraph column July 8 (and in his column in today's edition of this newspaper): "If the governing class goes about business as usual, that's not a stiff upper lip, but a death wish."
Cal Thomas is a nationally syndicated columnist.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
