Yesterday, driving home from the office i hear on the radio that some two-thirds of Canadians want Canadian troops out of Afghanistan by 2009 even if the mission is not completed. The poll was conducted by Decima Research. Here is an excerpt from the 570 News website:

The vast majority of Canadians want this country's military mission in Afghanistan to end as scheduled in 2009, according to a new poll.

The survey by Decima Research, released Monday to The Canadian Press, found that two-thirds of respondents want Canadian troops to come home when the current mandate from Parliament expires in February 2009. Only 26 per cent of respondents believed the military mission should be extended "if that is necessary to complete our goals there."

What the???? Why not pull the troops out now and save the lives of our soldiers if the point is to show some token committment rather than to remove the Taliban and dampen islamic fundamentalism in the region ? Why wouldn't the Taliban simply go to ground and wait til 2009 to make a comeback if our committment is a political time line? Why stay at all? If we have a purpose in being there, and I for one (or one third) believe we do, then we must see it through. Otherwise, get the troops out now and we can contnue whistling past the graveyard, attempting to green the nation, while the struggle of our time washes us up on whatever shore it may.

Via The Toronto Star:

SPIN BOLDAK, Afghanistan – A Taliban video of a 12-year-old boy beheading a man accused of spying has angered many Afghans, drawing condemnation from tribal and religious leaders.

NPR reports:

One former Taliban official and Afghan author on the group says the Taliban's goal at this stage is not to take over Afghanistan — which they neither have the manpower nor popular support for — but to force the ouster of Western troops from Afghanistan.

(via: Gen X At 40)

CBC Reports: MPs to vote on motion to take troops from Afghanistan by 2009

A Liberal motion that would ensure Canada end its combat operations in southern Afghanistan by February 2009 is slated to be voted on in the House of Commons Tuesday, but it is not expected to pass.

The NDP is expected to join the Conservatives in defeating the motion, which was introduced by Liberal defence critic Denis Coderre on April 19.

The motion calls on the government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper to serve notice immediately to NATO that Canada will withdraw its troops from Afghanistan in February 2009

Shame on the Liberal Party for their motion to remove Canadian troops by 2009. Playing politics in this realm is dangerous. What will the Taliban take from the vote? If they hang on for a couple of years they will have another run at contoling the country. My question for Dion is what information does he have that the situation will be such as to allow for the safe withdrawl of the troops in 2009. How does he know that the allied forces will not be on the cusp of victory and that a withdrawl will be a set back? How does he know that the troops won't be in the middle of an offensive, from one side or the other and leaving will put our allies in greater danger. How does he know that there will be someone their to take our place ( of course the evil Americans will be there and we know that regardless of the President that they will jump in to pick up our slack)? This cowardice for political gain is sickening.

Guys getting killed is the NDP military policy. Layton et al get to make hay when the sun stops shining over some poor kid who was killed in doing his duty. That the Canadian military is stretched to limit in Afghanistan is not a secret. The Government is looking to put in more money to the effort:

The government is seeking Parliament's approval to spend nearly $1 billion to sustain Canada's military through the rest of this fiscal year, including hundreds of millions of dollars to support the mission in Afghanistan and to buy new equipment.

What is the NDP response? To hell with the soldiers:

NDP Treasury Board critic Paul Dewar said one concern is that it's not clear from the estimates how much of the funding for the Afghanistan mission is going toward redevelopment.

Mark Steyn rightly calls Canada a "superwimp pussy -nation", while singing the praises of the Canadian troops:

And that, Mr. Binn, is why Canadian soldiers don't get the credit they deserve. Not because they're nancy boys but because the Canadian state is deeply invested in the idea of Canada as the nancy-boy nation. That's why in April 2002 the politicians, media and large swathes of the public preferred their Princess Pats as victims rather than as killers. Look at the words of almost every prominent "official" Canadian--Chr‚tien, Martin, Axworthy, Ralston Saul--in the first four-and-a-half years after 9/11. The underlying message is: this isn't our fight. Canada, in the peerless formulation of the great Christie Blatchford, mistook the sidelines for the moral high ground, and, in a great civilizational struggle being waged in a media age, it's not enough to have great fighting men when every other force in your society is communicating 24/7 that you're the superwimp pussy-nation.