Kandahar Dispatches

We need to slack off the "walk a mile in the grunts boots" rhetoric. There are many Journalists who beg to be allowed to be at the front where the action is. It is the military who denies these requests, and understandably so. They are a liability whether they see it that way or not. It has nothing to do with guts or lack of desire to spend 6 months outside the wire.

To Warren Stefanuk, support the troops, undoubtedly, support the war not necessarly. I say BULL S--T. As a retired Marine both officer and enlisted the BS started for me in Korea and went on to Viet Nam. All these reporters who file reports from the rear areas and influence the public about the war should be assigned to front line units. A truism worthy of note:DO NOT FEAR THE ENEMY, FOR THEY CAN ONLY TAKE YOUR LIFE. FEAR THE MEDIA FAR MORE, FOR THEY WILL DESTROY YOUR HONOR.

The way Canada used to provide combat service support has changed dramatically from the old self-sufficient Baden/Wainwright days where our support "tail" of logistics (food, medical, fuel, supplies, ammo etc) was larger than the "teeth" of the combat troops. The honest truth is that most country's forces cannot sustain themselves for more than 3 months in an austere hostile environment without a lead nation taking initial command and control of all support. Countries can't afford their own separate feeding/laundry/medical/fueling facilities so we share resources and contract out the ones we can. Today, when and where feasible (and it won't always happen depending on the location) contract support is investigated to be able to shrink the "support tail" to provide more front lines troops. Therefore it makes more sense to let NATO/UN find the contractors to be able to provide amalgamated food, fuel, power, water and laundry services rather than each country working against each other trying to provide their own support at far greater expense to the soldier's, their families and ultimately to the taxpayer. The aim is to provide the little things that soldiers require in the most efficient and effective manner possible to allow them to concentrate on the mission instead of wondering where their next clean underwear or hot meal is coming from. It's the least we can do.

Dear Readers,
Just a quick update to respond to a couple of the comments posted here. They are absolutely right that life at the Forward Operating Bases is not the same as it is at KAF. During my last tour, I spent nearly a week at FOB Wilson in the middle of Operation Medusa. I was at a couple other FOBS for shorter periods, but I certainly won't pretend for a moment that six days compares to six months. The point of this piece was merely to mention a few changes at KAF so that Canadians who have not been here can get a bit of a feel for the changes. These web postings contain the kind of details, you won't necessarily hear in a newscast or read in a news article on-line. Some of the soldiers I meet daily will spend their whole tour at KAF. Some are in and out of Forward Operating Bases. And many will spend much of their tour driving the dangerous roads from KAF to the FOBs and back. Each, along with the military and civilian support workers, plays a role in this operation. I hope before my time here is up, I will be able to bring you a glimpse of each group. A short observation piece will never tell the whole story of the people living it. I can only promise to try to bring you the details of the "big" things and the "little" things that are happening here.

Thanks for reading...I will be back as often as time (and technology) allows!

Carolyn

I support Marc's comment from Ottawa. Last year over 7 months I was in KAF only 5 times, most for ramp ceremonies, once to go on leave. Carolyn you might notice a bit of resentment to the KAF-erdites, and the life they live from those 'outside the wire'. Some of us got quite annoyed at the news reports reporting on Canadian "soldiers" from KAF...at Timmys, playing hockey with celebrities. Try and get the real stories Carolyn.

What's this about Carole? Another western report to make the nation of Afghanistan look like the victim of a natural disaster where NATO forces were sent to help restore normalcy, instead of taking ownership for the destruction of an innocent nation by overwhelming western military powers?

If you're going to claim that we're there to reconstruct the damage then you must report the other side and tell how NATO is also responsible for destroying Afghanistan.

If you haven't the courage to tell the whole story then at least start with the CIA using Afghanistan as human bait to trap Moscow into a Vietnam dead end situation. The people of Afghanistan paid dearly for that bit of US chess play.

Above all you should be telling Canadian readers that Canadian and American governments admit that they invaded innocent Afghanistan for different reasons. Ottawa still tries to hold onto the claim we're there to help the Afghan people (and our soldiers believe it!), but Washington has at least stated in bold face that it invaded Afghanistan for Washington's own national interest...whatever that may be....and your gas is as good as mine.

Plus ca change...

Just a quick little note- some of our soldiers will spend their entire tour (6 months) outside of KAF. They will not experience the small things that are common place in KAF.

As a former Canadian soldier, my perspective on this is not quite the same as the other former soldier. The correspondent needs to remember that most of the soldiers only see the comforts of KAF as they pass through on their way to field locations. KAF is "the rear ecehlon" - "candyland" - "tie country" (in my day - I don't think anyone wears a tie anymore). The "wogs" that live in candyland think they have it hard, and complain about cots in tents and institutional food.

The reporter needs to think about Ernie Pyle, and go live with the troops in contact. Stay there; do a complete tour with them. Then he can comment on the "little things" - but they won't be the same things he comments on here.

A well considered article. I'm sure that it's reassuring for most Canadians that our soldiers are not in "hellish" situations all of the time.

Support our troops - Undoubtedly.
Support the war - not necessarily

These issues are not mutually inclusive!

As a former soldier , I truly can relate to the little things.

Over my career I spent years on a cot, whether on foreign soils or deployed at home.

The one thing I remember that made the difference between a bearable tour or a miserable tour was the support teams that were deployed with us, be it civilian or military.

You could have the most challenging day of your life take place, however if you had a good hot meal to come back too, it made it bearable. On the other hand you could be deployed to paradise, and if the cooks were less than adequate, life was miserable.

When you say it's the little things, I agree. It's the little things that I keep with me and cherish, even years after of having served.