With no disrespect for Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan, Chris Wattie's words were foolish, inaccurate, and little more than propaganda.
First, a fight involving "hundreds" of soldiers should never be called a "battle.” The use of the word "battle" simply misrepresents and exaggerates the importance of such events.
Second, calling the Taleban "not very good" shows no understanding and a hell of a lot of American-style arrogance.
Consider the facts of the match-up.
The Taleban face soldiers with Kevlar armor, late-model automatic weapons, sophisticated artillery support, jet-fighter support, armored vehicles, radios, computers, satellite guidance, and a host of other kit. They are well-fed and fit.
Oh, yes, they may have some dud grenades and a jammed piece of artillery here and there, but they are equipped with overwhelming superiority.
The Taleban themselves typically have weapons like AK-47s (a 60-year old weapon) and rifle grenades. They have no body armor, no armored vehicles, and no support. They are poor and not well-fed. They don’t even have boots.
If you consider the facts, rather than the comic-book notions of Mr. Wattie, the Taleban are, in fact, incredible soldiers. I'm afraid most Americans, and most Canadians, wouldn't even show up for battle if equipped as these fierce men are.
As for "saving" Afghanistan, well, you do have to ask, saved for whom?
The Taleban live there and represent a substantial portion of the population. We don't like their values, but the Northern Alliance warlords America has used and put into power are no different. We are serving the interests of armed occupiers, working for American interests even Americans do not understand.
Then we have to ask, what do you mean by "saved"?
The latest study done for Bush, suppressed during the election, calls the situation in Afghanistan "grim." Senior British officers have called the effort hopeless. Former head of MI5, Dame Rimmington, has called America's entire post 9/11 operations "over-reaction." No one else in NATO wants to send military support of substance to Afghanistan. If there were a meaningful purpose there, would anyone have to preach to these countries? Of course not.
The Potemkin-village schools that are opened by us can’t even be kept open. The teachers cannot be paid. There is no effective central government. Afghanistan is not even a country in the sense that we understand. The Northern Alliance running the provinces, while glad to get some money from us, have no more interest in changing the culture than the Taleban.
And we are to spend on the order of 18 billion dollars for this?
We would have done more good just dropping the money from planes on the people. Afghanistan needs decades of economic growth before the things we don’t like about it can possibly change. Just consider how long it has taken just to change the smoking habit in our country. How much longer their centuries-old habits and culture?
Last photo: Unchanging scene through most of Afghanistan.
