I recently read a quote in Harpers magazine about the purpose of the military that I think sums up the crux of the problem for Canadian troops in Afghanistan; and for any troops, for that matter, that are placed in the role of both soldier and policeman. The gist of it was thus:

"The army is an autocratic, socialistic and undemocratic organization, whose purpose is to defend a society against external threat by annihilating its opponents. It does not presume its opponents to be innocent until proven guilty by a court of law, for to place the same restrictions and limitations upon soldiers as those placed upon the police would put them at extreme risk when facing a determined and ruthless enemy."

That Canadian armed forces personnel are obliged to play the role of both soldier and policeman at the same time is to place them in unnecessary danger.

Let's hope that this 'New Government', as the Conservatives like to call themselves, will see that, following along behind the American war machine like a happy puppy, is a dangerous thing.

Case in point: In 1976-7, while traveling through both South America and Asia, the mere mention of my Canadian citizenship was always greeted warmly; and yet a good friend, Dave Bourdon, also a Canadian, received a very different reception while abroad since our military incursion into Afghanistan. We are definitely viewed now with the same contempt formerly meted out to our Southern neighbors.

While no one doubts the necessity of ridding ourselves of terrorists, we nonetheless should not be supplying the fertilizer for swelling their ranks. The actions of Western troops in Asia has done nothing but fulfilled the axiom of "we brought desolation and called it peace.."

If the purpose of invading Iraq and Afghanistan was to create terrorists to fulfill a need to live in fear and suspend constitutional protections for the individual, then we have been the best of gardeners.