Let’s rotate some politicians into Kandahar
There’s a standing order that one shall not criticize the soldier who is in harm’s way. Let’s put a screen over in that corner of the room, and while the contingent of the enlisted are away, let’s turn and look at those responsible; those who wish they had a screen, but don’t; the politicians.
Without the eighteen billion dollars that we budget each fiscal period for a military presence, we wouldn’t have 2,500 soldiers out of a total 68,000 serving on rotation in Afghanistan. When budgets are tight, we’ve shown great restraint in the numbers we put into a given theatre; one need only reference the Romeo Dallaire story, Shake Hands With The Devil, to see how great men can do a lot with very little. Now that we’ve got the focus on the political talking heads, let’s examine what they’ve told us about the level of success we’ve had in the war zone, as recently as this week.
The current defense minister, Peter MacKay, stated on the radio this morning that “we’ve built schools”. Unfortunately, that’s all he bothered to mention. After more than six years (compare that to World War II as an example of how quickly time passes when you’re busy), we’ve built schools. Somehow, I’m less than impressed. If we ever learn how many, these may turn out to be some of the most expensive classrooms in the history of mankind.
Something is wrong with our role, and I’m not blaming the soldier. Instead, let’s round up about 2,500 politicians and their oh-so-necessary-aides and rotate them in to Kandahar. Maybe we can move beyond schools and get into something important. Wait; politicians and their aides. Wrong gang to pick, I guess, although criticism will be so much easier to justify.
