Leto

first, I think that you need to establish what a 'Fair Share' is. A definition would provide a meaningful argument as to whether the 27 countries in NATO are either above or below the bar. I suspect that the answer lies in the capabilities set. It would be ridiculous to expect a nation of 32 million to provide a huge standing army for peace keeping missions. On the other hand, if the capability lies in counter terrrorism, or rescue efforts, or high etchnology, then let's go. I know that Canadians are willing to pony up in these respects.

Often it's heavy lobbying in the US government that causes these initiatives to fail (Avro fiasco). But we have provided assistance in support and development in other arenas (Cruise missile testing, guidance systems, communications technology, robotics - where we are global leaders)

So what is the fair share? And how does this conflict/support the United Nations initiatives which are (in most peoples minds) more global in perspective than Nato's.

hard to argue against economies of scale. so I wont.

Canada has taken the lead. General Romero was in the thick of it when the rest of the world wasn't listening.

And it looks like we will be left holding the bag in Afghanistan, where incidentally it was the Taliban (not the Iraqis) who were the front linie in the war against terrorism.

link (http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Con...=1135119019320)



As British and Dutch stall, fears grow that Canadians will be left holding the fort
Dec. 21, 2005. 05:02 AM
BRUCE CAMPION-SMITH
OTTAWA BUREAU


OTTAWA—Canada could find itself isolated on the front line of a dangerous war as the United States withdraws troops from Afghanistan and doubts swirl about the military commitments from key NATO allies in the troubled country.

As Ottawa ramps up its military presence in southern Afghanistan and commanders warn of casualties, both Britain and The Netherlands have yet to confirm whether they'll be fighting alongside the Canadians.

On Monday, the Dutch cabinet again put off a decision to send an extra 1,100 to 1,300 troops to Afghanistan, adding to the 600 troops already there. It's expected to re-examine the issue tomorrow. And there's speculation the British government may send just half the fighting force that was originally discussed for the country.

The uncertainty about the Dutch and British commitments comes as the Pentagon has confirmed U.S. troop levels in Afghanistan will be reduced by about 3,500 — to 16,500 troops — by next spring.

"It can't be good for Canada to be left twisting in the wind," said David Rudd, of the Canadian Institute of Strategic Studies.

"If you look at some of the NATO countries, precious few of them have been willing to take a more assertive stance," Rudd said in an interview. "The commitment doesn't run as deeply or as broadly as we've been led to believe."

But Alain Pellerin, of the Ottawa-based Conference of Defence Associations, a group that advocates for an effective military, is more optimistic, saying he's confident that both the British and Dutch will join the mission.

"The aim of the exercise was always from the start for the allies to fill in various parts of the country so the Americans would be able to reduce their force," he said.

"I've been reassured that the Brits remain onboard... On defence and security issues, the Dutch are serious partners," said Pellerin, a retired colonel.

"That was my concern ... the Canadians are left holding the bag, which doesn't appear to be the case," Pellerin said. "That doesn't mean it's been an easy battle to get through NATO."

The uncertainty could spell big problems for Canada as it embarks on a major new mission in Kandahar, which promises to be its biggest combat operation since the Korean War.

Over the coming months, Canada will deploy almost 2,000 troops to the southern Afghan city, along with a brigade headquarters to take charge of a multinational force that was supposed to include British and Dutch troops.

Indeed, earlier this month, NATO foreign ministers proudly endorsed an expansion of NATO forces to Afghanistan's southern provinces and a boost in troops to 15,000 from 9,000. But behind the scenes, disagreements between NATO partners have delayed the commitment of troops and threatened to undercut the mission.

A divided Dutch coalition government has repeatedly put off the politically sensitive decision about a troop commitment largely because of concern about the growing violence in southern Afghanistan.

And the British government has put off is own decision about operations in the war-torn country, perhaps until early next year, because of the uncertainty about what other countries will do and its own commitment in Iraq.

It was originally thought that Britain would send 2,000 troops backed by Apache attack helicopters. But there's speculation in British newspapers that the Ministry of Defence will only send 1,000 troops with less capable Lynx choppers.

This has left some military experts wondering whether Canada could be left holding the fort at a time when insurgents are growing increasingly violent in southern Afghanistan, once a hot bed of Taliban resistance.

"I have sensed that most of the allies want to show a commitment but do not want to be put in a position where they would inflict or suffer major casualties," Rudd said.

That makes Canada unique, as its special forces soldiers are already engaged in combat operations — and getting hurt.

Rudd said if allies don't deploy in the numbers that had been expected, Canada could be forced to rethink its mission in Kandahar.

A spokesperson for Defence Minister Bill Graham said yesterday Canada's commitment remained unchanged.

"Afghanistan is at a critical juncture and the ongoing commitment of the international community is required. Canada remains committed," said Rene Filiatrault, spokesperson for Graham.

But the same domestic politics that have delayed a Dutch decision could be in play here in Canada if the Jan. 23 election produces another minority government, especially if the New Democrats are rewarded with a more influential role.

Already, NDP Leader Jack Layton has called for a halt to more troop deployments to Afghanistan beyond those already scheduled, saying Canada risks sliding "blindly" into war.

Meanwhile, the dangers troops face in Afghanistan were brought home yesterday by Edmonton-based soldiers recalling the day they were injured in Afghanistan. Private Ryan Crawford said his light-armoured vehicle (called a G-Wagon) was the reason he and Capt. Manuel Penchana-Moya weren't more seriously hurt in a bomb blast in Afghanistan Dec. 15.

Both men are now recovering in an Edmonton hospital.

__________________
You said you didn't give a fuck about hockey
And I never saw someone say that before
You held my hand and we walked home the long way
You were loosening my grip on Bobby Orr

http://dune.wikia.com/wiki/Leto_Atreides_I