why does canada have military forces in afghanistan?
596266
We'll never know the real story right now because:\n\n1) Its Afghanistan and its a very very complicated place.\n2) In war, truth is always hard to find.  (in part because of the chaos of war but also on purpose because controlling information is an important part of military tactics)\n3) Even if our decision makers knew the real truth of what is going on, which is doubtful, they still wouldn't tell us.\n4) There are more than one or two story-lines happening at the same time.\n\nSo if you want a long factual based answer, you're not going to get one no matter who responds to your question.\n\nIf you want opinions, there's lots to go around.\n\nIf you want the truth, go there yourself and keep searching but even there it will be hard to find.\n\nIf you want my opinion, its simply because the Taliban were very very bad people and some of us nice Canadians are willing to risk our necks to help people get out from under their boot prints.
881628
Russia always wanted to have access to warm oceans since its coastlines are frozen most of the year. This would increase its economic and military power. also by getting in Afghanistan it thought it could infulence pakistan and iran better. this invasion would also give better control over world's energy source areas.\ncold war did not start with that. i think it started with the building berlin wall? it eventually ended with the collapse of the same wall symbolically.\n\nif you are asking about war on afghanistan, russia withdrew its forces accepting defeat.\n\nI recommend Zbigniew Brzezinsky's "The Grand Chessboard" book for reading.
877701
yes they do and there army is equipped with material that is state of the art.  They mostly operated in coordination with the Belgium army  ( Korea, SFOR,IFOR, etc) .  For the moment they do have troops in Afghanistan and I belief also in Lebanon
936505
Obviously you have never been to Afhganistan. I'm currently deployed in Afghanistan. The mountains are bigger and Higher than the Rocky Mountains with only about 1/100th of the roads that the Rockies haven and you can't drive more that 25 miles per hour because the roads suck. The insurgents have been hiding and defending the same towns, roads, mountains for thousands of years. Russia invaded with 4 times the soldiers we came with and we are doing 10 times a better job than they did. Even though our goals are different. If you are so bright join up come on over and find him. But you can't go into Pakistan where he probably is anyway.
1052229
Hello, Canada!  Have you forgotten all the troops we prematurely pulled out of Afghanistan and sent into Iraq? Tell you what. Why don't some of you nice Canadian boys step up and take some of the load in Iraq, and then we can send some of our guys back into Afghanistan to finish that little job, or haven't you heard? Since we had to cover two fronts without much help from our northern buddies, we kind of let the Taliban regroup, so now we've got to go back and knock 'em back down again.  Who knows? Maybe second time's a charm and we'll get old bin Ladin this go round, eh?\n\nUpdate:  For those of you apparently residing on a different planet, here's a link to yesterday's news out of Afghanistan (excuse me, this ABC report was filed on June 20.) This is the ABC Blog site.\n\nhttp://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/06/us_back_at_full.html
2589
During WWII, Canadians and Americans joined the British Air Force to fight against the Nazis before their own countries were at war.  That is a good example of fighting for another country against a tyrant dictator.
463142
to add to the above answers, the UK also has a major training base in Canada (CFB Suffield), and in Kenya
194020
I did some searching and found some sites that might be useful to you. \n\nhttp://www.nato.int/ims/2001/win/canada.htm\nhttp://www.geocities.com/Wellesley/3321/win10c.htm\nhttp://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com\n(On the third one, put in "Women in the military" in the search bar and a whole list will pop up). \nHope these help.
956247
There are several reasons why we are out there.\n\nFirst, there is the NATO commitment.  We were there originally in 2002 to support the Americans.  Now, we are there under NATO for the Provincial Reconstructions Teams and the International Security Assistance Force.  None of that OEF stuff.  That is the American mission, primarily in the East of Afghanistan.\n\nSecond, we are there because President Hamid Karzai is asking us to stick it out.  We're helping out in the South, even if it might not look like it to the untrained, uninformed eyes of civilians.  There is one reason that the illegal armed factions have stepped up their attacks against the Canadians: we are winning, and scaring the living daylights out of them.  I mean, when they start digging in for a conventional war, you know that an insurgency is one the rocks.\n\nThird, we can't pull out until the job is done.  We are committed at least to 2009, possibly even longer.  But our desired end-state is that Afghanistan will be a secure, self-governing country free from warlords, drug kingpins, Taliban extremists and safe for everyone to live in.  That can't happen until the armed factions are either disarmed or routed in battle.  \n\nAnd you, jim22pb, get your head out of where the sun is not shining.  I have seen these videos, and they are doing pretty good in those firefights.  Small unit combat is nothing like Hollywood, make no mistake.  It's simple, it's brutal, and it works.  If anything, they are dealing with the enemy in a professional, methodical manner.  Yes, they duck a lot, but here is something for you.  It's not because they are under light fire that it's not accurate fire.  And a head sticking out over a wall is a pretty easy target if it won't move.  If it bobs up and down randomly and each time sending a few bullets your way, you'll keep down too.
193921
Canada is a country occupying the northern portion of North America, and is the world's second largest country in total area.\n\nOriginally inhabited exclusively by aboriginal peoples, Canada was founded as a union of British colonies, some of which had earlier been French colonies. A federal dominion of ten provinces with three territories, Canada peacefully obtained sovereignty from its last colonial possessor, the United Kingdom, in a process beginning in 1867 with its formation and ending in 1982 when Canada gained the authority to amend its own constitution.\n\nCanada is a parliamentary democracy and constitutional monarchy. Canada's head of state is its monarch, who is represented in Canada by the Governor General. The head of government is the Prime Minister.\n\nCanada defines itself as a bilingual and multicultural nation. Both English and French are official languages. In the early 1970s, Canada began to adopt policies based on the concepts of cultural diversity and multiculturalism. Many Canadians now view this as one of the country's key attributes.\n\nA technologically advanced and industrialized nation, Canada is a net exporter of energy because of its large fossil fuel deposits, nuclear energy generation, and hydroelectric power capacity. Its diversified economy relies heavily on an abundance of natural resources and trade, particularly with the United States, with which Canada has had a long and complex relationship, one which can be described as the strongest trade partnership in history.\n\nCapital Ottawa\n45°24′ N 75°40′ W \nLargest city Toronto \nOfficial language(s) English and French \nGovernment \n\n\nPopulation 32.4 million (37th)
312681
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan
660904
It goes way back to the invasion of Afghanistan by the Soviets. When Afghanistan was invaded hard-line Fundamentalist moved to Pakistan. They effectively took over the civil government and the military. They are not as extreme as the Taliban who took over Afghanistan when the Soviets withdrew, but they were sufficiently radicalized that they brought a certain amount of fear to the population. Those who could, did get out. They moved to the UK, Canada, and the US. Pakistan, while not exactly up there with India in opportunity, is not as poor as imagined, the migration was primarily to leave Pakistan for a safer place to live. As you know, Pakistan is now a nuclear nation, so there is some validity to the concern.
818528
well, that might be a good idea, if canada and america worked together with the military, to protect the bourders, not really thinking so much of immigrants but more of terrorist , sneaking in that way
626115
Well, if I had the choice... I would use the US Airforce to napalm the Canadians. Then we have a better view of the North Pole!!!
709921
If I was a soldier before I would go back to Iraq I would shoot myself in the foot or go away to Canada or Mexico or some place.Those people are severe.  Why are they over there anyway?  They are not keeping the peace.
520230
What a load of old nonsense. The British Army is one of the smallest in the world and they consistently perform magnificently.\n\nYou are correct, we are not gung ho but that doesnt have much to do with being very very good.\n\nThe province you refer to is Helmand not Kelmand, and it is very dangerous but our guys will be up to the job don't you worry.\n\nAs for being beaten 100 years ago by the Afghans I don't really see how that is relevant as I don't belive that we are going to send any 100 year old soldiers over there.\n\nAnd by the way, when the Taleban revolted in that prison in Mazar Al Sarif and took the CIA guys hostage it was 6 British SBS special forces soldiers who led the force which defeated over 600 of them.\n\nWe kicked ass in the Falklands, Malaya, Borneo, Oman, Kosovo, Gulf War one (where most of our casualties came as a result of friendly fire from the U.S air force), Sierra Leone etc etc and with the exception of the gulf wars we did it alone and outgunned.
552756
You might want to consider whether it would be a workable solution in the United States given that the armed forces there is somethig like 30 times the size.\n\nThere have been significant issues with morale over the past 40 years with the unification of the Canadian Forces.  About a decade ago, this was reflected in a symbolic move that saw each of the three armed services (our Coast Guard is not considered to be an armed service) being given their own distinctive uniforms.  I don't think it has any effect on camraderie one way or the other - there has always been is is still a significant rivalry between branches.  As well, I'm not sure about any savings - like the US, we have frequent budgets over-runs and other observations from the Auditor -General.\n\nIt has long been my opinion that for Canada's size, it would make sense to more strongly integrate the services, making them something like the US Marine Corps.  But I don't know whether this carries over to the US integrating all of its services.\n\nThat being said, there seem to be elements of the various services in the US that could be combined as they seem repetitive - e.g., various intelligence, legal and similar support branches.