in Somalia, this unit is a very secret Canadian version of the SAS. They
specialize in body guard work, arctic and mountain warfare and sniping. One
member of this unit holds the worlds record for a long range sniper shot of
2 + miles.
larry
At 07:03 PM 12/14/2003, you wrote:
>hmm, what's a JTF2 when it's at home?
>
>Dana
>
> >Its a significant portion of the active military. The Armed Forces are
> >around 50,00 to 75,000 (cannot remember specifically). Given that they are
> >still upholding their other NATO commitments, their commitments in the
> >Balkans, and their UN peacekeeping commitments, its no surprise that they
> >are stretched very thin. The militia (the equivalent of the national guard
> >and reserves) have stepped in and filled in some of the gap, but there is
> >no where near enough soldiers to fulfill all of its missions.
> >
> >So far the commitments with the war on terrorism include Afghanistan,
> >several ships in the Indian Ocean and the Gulf, the entire JTF2 on standby
> >deployment, as well as the airborne tasked regiments.
> >
> >larry
> >
> >At 03:20 PM 12/14/2003, you wrote:
> >>ah, ok. Canada helped, just not in Iraq. That explains the apparent
> >>contradiction. I still find his position rather juvenile, and no incentive
> >>for any ally to help the US in future.
> >>
> >>Out of curiosity 2000 soldiers is what sort of commitment for a small
> >>country with no draft? Do you know what the size of the Canadian Army is?
> >>
> >> >Dana,
> >> >
> >> >Canada did not send any troops to Iraq. Instead it upped its
> >> >commitment to Afghanistan to 2000 soldiers. Then Prime Minister Jean
> >> >Chretien said it was a stupid affair that Canada would not become
> >> >involved. he was pretty smart about the whole thing.
> >> >
> >> >larry.
> >> >
> >> >>the question in my mind is this - if Larry is corrct about the 300
> >> >>million -and I believe it did send troops -- then why is Bush saying
> >> >>Canada did not help? Because it said unilateral invasion was a bad
> >> >>idea?
> >> >>
> >> >>I know I was being sarcastic earlier, but this one sincerely puzzles me.
> >> >>
> >> >>Dana
> >> >>
> >> >>> Larry,
> >> >>>
> >> >>> That is a diffferent pile of money.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> My understanding is: that money is open to bids by almost anyone.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> It is only the US grants administered through the Pentagon that are
> >> >>> subject to this restriction.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Jerry Johnson
> >> >>>
> >> >>> >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 12/11/03 02:03PM >>>
> >> >>> At the same time John, these countries have pledged a lot of
> money for
> >> >>>
> >> >>> rebuilding. For instance Canada has earmarked over 300 million for
> >> >>> Iraq. So
> >> >>> if Canada is willing to pay to help shouldn't it get some of its
> >> >>> largess
> >> >>> back in contracts? Why should all of that money go to enrich the
> >> >>> pockets of
> >> >>> Shrub's friends.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> larry
> >> >>>
> >> >>> At 10:32 AM 12/11/2003, you wrote:
> >> >>> >The countries in question can still do business with Iraq, they just
> >> >>> cant
> >> >>> >bid on the contracts that the US taxpayers are paying for. They can
> >> >>> be hired
> >> >>> >as subcontractors for the contracts as well. I dont see why this is
> >> >>> such a
> >> >>> >huge deal? Why should the US taxpayers pay french companies to
> >> >>> rebuild Iraq
> >> >>> >when they werent willing to support the US efforts in the first
> >> >>> place?
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >-----Original Message-----
> >> >>> >From: Kevin Graeme [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> >>> >Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 10:28 AM
> >> >>> >To: CF-Community
> >> >>> >Subject: Bush gives the finger to the world again
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >Former top U.S. officials are blasting the Bush administration for
> >> >>> reopening
> >> >>> >a rift with Europe by excluding critics of the war from prime
> >> >>> contracts for
> >> >>> >Iraq's reconstruction.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> ><http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,105433,00.html>http://www.
> >> >>> foxnews.com/story/0,2933,105433,00.html
> >> >>> ><http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,105433,00.html>
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >"I thought we were in the process of acquiring support rather than
> >> >>> >alienating it," former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright
> (search)
> >> >>> said.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >So let me get this straight.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >1. Economy is bad.
> >> >>> >2. Find a patsy country and accuse them of something unfounded.
> >> >>> >3. Get called on it by other countries.
> >> >>> >4. Attack anyway
> >> >>> >5. Deny reconstruction contracts to countries that wouldn't help in
> >> >>> an
> >> >>> >illegal war.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >And people are complaining? I don't get it. It looks like a perfect
> >> >>> plan to
> >> >>> >boost the economy by giving local companies big contracts.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >-Kevin
> >> >>> > _____
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >----------
> >> >>> >[
> >> >>
> >> >>[
> >>
> >>----------
> >>[
>
>----------
>[
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
