News   May 03, 2024
 963     1 
News   May 03, 2024
 594     0 
News   May 03, 2024
 284     0 

Afghanistan debate (Hillier, new troops)

PTSD has been there after every conflict. It's only today that we recognize what it is. They do have really good programs for re-integration. That's not to say everything will be perfect. I've had friends who never come back quite the same. But that's a risk we accept and take as part of our service. These programs are improving all the time. Ask the guys coming back from 'peacekeeping' in Bosnia what help they got. Their psychological injuries weren't even pensionable. Hillier was the first CDS to push for mandatory counselling as part of the re-integration process.
 
PTSD has been there after every conflict. It's only today that we recognize what it is. They do have really good programs for re-integration. That's not to say everything will be perfect. I've had friends who never come back quite the same. But that's a risk we accept and take as part of our service. These programs are improving all the time. Ask the guys coming back from 'peacekeeping' in Bosnia what help they got. Their psychological injuries weren't even pensionable. Hillier was the first CDS to push for mandatory counselling as part of the re-integration process.
The article I posted suggested otherwise and my heart goes out to the women who become the victims, they did not enlist for that.
 
It's great that your heart goes out to them. Now look up the Medak pocket and check out how the Liberal government of the day treayed those veterans. Forget counselling or a pension. They didn't even get a medal because Chretien refused to admit they were in combat. Some were even forced out of the military for their psychological problems. Hillier was the first CDS who rescinded mandatory release for those wounded in combat. He was the first CDS to require resources for family and spousal support for deployed personnel. And as I stated earlier the first CDS to make counselling mandatory. He did a hell of a lot more than any previous CDS and went to bat against both Conservative and Liberal govts that's why he's popular with the troops.

Could more be done? Sure. But compared to what was there before Hillier came along (the Liberal Chretien govt refused to make psychological wounds pensionable at all and no free treatment was provided at all) there's a big difference.

Here's a good book on what happened at Medak Pocket and the government's treatment of Canadian soldiers afterwards if you want to read up:

http://www.amazon.ca/Ghosts-Medak-Pocket-Canadas-Secret/dp/0679312943

And here's the link of them getting their medals....after a decade:

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2002/12/01/medak_medals021201.html
 
Last edited:
The House of Commons defence committee has recently recommended that more awareness about domestic violence associated with PTSD suffered by returning soldiers and the stigma towards mental illness that is largely negative and very destructive should be changed in the military culture. As for keeping mentally ill or injured soldiers enlisted, I say take care of them.
 
The House of Commons defence committee has recently recommended that more awareness about domestic violence associated with PTSD suffered by returning soldiers and the stigma towards mental illness that is largely negative and very destructive should be changed in the military culture.

As someone who is in the military and has observed that stigma first hand, I can say with confidence that the stigma is disappearing pretty fast. The House committee is rather late on the uptake. The problem has been successive governments (mostly Liberal, but to some extent the Conservatives as well) who have repeatedly refused to fund services to help heal these wounded warriors.

As for keeping mentally ill or injured soldiers enlisted, I say take care of them.

Prior to Hillier's reforms, if you suffered psychological trauma, you were deemed unfit for service (due to the universality of service clause) and released. And given the Liberal governments' unwillingness to label what you went through as combat, meant your injuries did not entitle you to a full medical pension. To add insult to injury, the Liberals also made it policy that those released from the service are not entitled to Employment Insurance (because you were 'released' not laid off) and there is no workmen's comp either (it being a provincial program). Essentially, if you suffered a psychological injury, the Liberal response was to make you unemployed and refuse to provide you treatment (because you didn't go through 'combat'...it was 'peacekeeping').

If you want a clue to why Hillier is popular, this reform is a big one. Keeping wounded service members in is one way of taking care of them. They are employed in non-operational posititons where they can do admin, staff work, etc. This way they get an income, get to keep in touch with friends and colleagues, can carry on with dignity, and get to continue their counselling and other treatments. That's far more compassionate than anything that was ever done before.

It's nice that the Star is paying attention to wounded soldiers now. Where were they for the past 15 years when service member after service member and the CF Surgeon-General made similar recommendations to various parliamentary committees? Or couldn't they be bothered to cover the story back then if it meant Liberal embarrassment? Where was their faux-outrage when guys coming back from Bosnia were all messed up and committing suicide? Or when veterans of 'peacekeeping' missions were being released from the service and ending up homeless from a lack of income? Apparently, that does not warrant coverage if the Liberals are in power. But if the Conservatives who are now providing pscyhiatric treatment, keeping service members in and provide medical pensions for those with PTSD don't achieve 100% it's a scandal?!?! Please. Crocodile tears. The Star's and yours.
 
Last edited:
I have not read Hillier's book but I will once the library has it available.

Interestingly I have read Hillier's response to the memos about the risk of torture and the torture of people handed over to the Afghani prison authorities. He appears initially to state that he was too busy fighting a war! He pleads ignorant like the rest of them.


Tory defence ministers plead ignorance on Afghan torture

OTTAWA: Two Conservative defence ministers -- one former and one current --say they did not know about more than one dozen internal reports warning that Canadian soldiers were handing Afghan captives to local authorities with the possibility that they faced torture.

Gordon O�Connor and Peter MacKay say they never heard about reports by Richard Colvin, a former senior diplomat who says he wrote and widely distributed his reports to top bureaucrats at Foreign Affairs and National Defence, as well as the senior military chain of command, beginning in May 2006, soon after he arrived in Afghanistan.

In his first of 19 reports, some formal and some not, he warned of "serious, imminent and alarming" concerns that detainees were being mistreated upon surrender to Afghan jails.

Mr. O�Connor, who was defence minister through most of Mr. Colvin�s posting in Afghanistan, repeatedly maintained through the spring of 2007 -- almost a full year later -- that he knew nothing about Afghan captives being maltreated after they were handed over by Canadian soldiers.

He was replaced in August 2007 by Mr. MacKay, who had been foreign affairs minister since the Conservatives came to power in January 2006.

Mr. O�Connor said yesterday that he firmly stands by his previous statements, which have been called into question after Mr. Colvin, in an affidavit released this week, revealed the existence of his reports, which he said he copied at the time to numerous senior officials in Ottawa and Afghanistan, including top military brass.

"I always tell the truth and I said it in Parliament, I said it in committees and I�ll say it today: I was never made aware of any allegations of prisoner abuse, period," Mr. O�Connor said in an interview with Global TV. "Nobody came to me and said, �Minister, there are prisoners being mistreated.� Nobody."

Mr. O�Connor had no explanation for why he might have been left out of the loop about the reports. "Maybe they were dealt with at the lower levels and found not to be credible," he said.

Mr. Colvin was posted in Afghanistan for 17 months in various senior roles from late April 2006 to early October 2007. At one point, he was in charge of all policy files relevant to Canada. He is now the deputy head of intelligence at the Canadian embassy in Washington.

The Conservative government is seeking to block Mr. Colvin and 21 others from testifying before the Military Police Complaints Commission, which is holding a public inquiry into whether military police knew, or had the means of knowing, that their captives would be abused or tortured under Afghan control.

Mr. Colvin sent an affidavit to the commission, which released it on Wednesday after the government screened it for national security purposes.

There is no evidence in Mr. Colvin�s affidavit that senior politicians in Ottawa knew of his reports, some of which were copied to dozens of people. Mr. MacKay, who as former foreign minister was Mr. Colvin�s boss through most of his stint in Afghanistan, also maintained yesterday he knew nothing of Mr. Colvin�s warnings.

"Absolutely not," Mr. Mac-Kay told Global TV in Moncton, N.B. "The first time I heard Mr. Colvin�s name was in regard to the Military Police Complaints Commission."

Both the NDP and the Liberals said yesterday that all-party House of Commons committees should examine the complaints of prisoner abuse.

The commission hearings were put on hold this week indefinitely. Chairman Peter Tinsley blamed the adjournment on the government�s failure to provide the relevant documents to help implicated military personnel mount their defence. The commission is also challenging a Federal Court ruling last month that narrowed the inquiry�s mandate to examining the role of military police, rather than delving into broader government policy.


more to follow......


"A little more is seeping out about who shared and read what with respect to memos a Canadian diplomat says he sent up the line alleging torture of detainees by Afghan authorities after being handed over by Canadians.

We’ve already heard anonymous sources saying these reports had reached then-Chief of Defence Staff Rick Hillier. While some media outlets awaited Hillier’s comments in response to this, it appears the Globe & Mail’s John Ibbitson actually found the appropriate passage in Hillier’s new book, “A Soldier First: Bullets, Bureaucrats and the Politics of War” – this, from the Globe:

By Spring 2006, as military operations in Kandahar province expanded, Canadian troops started taking an increasing number of prisoners. As previously agreed, the prisoners were transferred into Afghan custody. In Spring 2007, The Globe and Mail reported on allegations of abuse of detainees in Afghan prisons. Mr. Hillier acknowledged that was to be expected.

“Their judicial and prison systems were still somewhat nascent, and there was always some risk that abuse could occur,” he wrote.

The military decided to make frequent unannounced visits to Afghan prisons to monitor conditions, but the first visit raised sufficient alarms that “we lost confidence that basic, responsible measures were in place to ensure the humane treatment of prisoners.”

The book does not say when the first visit took place or how long the time lag was until the transfers were stopped in December, 2007. The Globe and Mail has reported that the first inspection visit was in May, 2007. Transfers resumed in early January, 2008.

Throughout the process, Mr. Hillier writes, the federal government was kept fully informed of the military’s handling of prisoners….

Here’s what the PM had to say last week on this, according to CBC.ca:

Speaking in Toronto, where he was making a funding announcement, Harper said he didn’t see the reports “at the time.”

Meanwhile, yesterday, in the House of Commons, Minister of National Defence Peter MacKay said neither he nor the deputy minister received these reports. Now, if the Globe & Mail quoted him correctly speaking outside the House, the Minister also had this to say:

“There are hundreds if not thousands of documents, reporters, memos, advice that come through all departments,” Mr. MacKay told reporters outside the House of Commons. “The fact that one report or a series of reports weren’t read by a minister or a deputy minister shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone.“

Compare this to what he said in the House on 19 Oct 09:

We receive hundreds, if not thousands, of reports annually through the Department of National Defence, as well as the Department of Foreign Affairs. That is why it did not make it to my desk …. I intend to hear from the Department of Defence, as well as foreign affairs, as to where this report stopped, because it did not make it to the deputy minister or my desk.

Am I the only one seeing a difference between “we didn’t GET the reports” and “we didn’t READ the reports”?

And the latest messaging? From the Minister in Tuesday’s Question Period Hansard here and here:

Two and a half years ago, on allegations that were circulating at the time, on thousands of reports that were circulating at the time, we acted to improve the transfer agreement that was left in place by the previous government. We then went about mentoring prison officials, went about mentoring police and went about improving the overall security situation …. We are co-operating with ongoing investigations. We are not pre-empting or prejudging those investigations. We are acting within the legislation, within the decisions that have been handed down by the Federal Court …. We are co-operating with investigations that are ongoing about what Afghans did to Afghans …. We will continue to work with officials to improve the human rights situation in Afghanistan.

UPDATE (1): The new title replaces the old one:

Hillier: I Told Prime Minister’s Office About Torture Allegations"
 
Last edited:
Promoting Somalia leader right: Hillier

David Pugliese, Canwest News Service Published: Monday, November 02, 2009


"Canada's former top soldier Rick Hillier says he is proud he was able to get approval for a controversial eight-year retroactive promotion and financial payout to the officer who led the ill-fated Somalia mission.

An inquiry found that Serge Labbe exercised poor leadership over the troops, who drew international condemnation in 1993 for torturing a teenager to death among other atrocities.

Defence Minister Peter MacKay quietly promoted Colonel Labbe in the summer of 2008 to brigadier general, making the new rank retroactive to July 2000.

Brig.-Gen. Labbe retired shortly after, prompting criticism from some retired military personnel that taxpayers were paying him for service he never performed.

But in his new book A Soldier First, Gen. Hillier spends three pages praising Brig.-Gen. Labbe, noting that "Serge did incredible work that would have caused the vast majority of officers who were superior in rank to him to cower."

"I'm proud of what happened because it was right," the retired general wrote of the retroactive promotion.

Brig.-Gen. Labbe had worked for Gen. Hillier in Afghanistan.

Citing privacy laws, the Defence Department will not release the actual amount taxpayers paid to Brig.-Gen. Labbe.

Using data provided by the department, the Ottawa Citizen determined the lump sum payment would be more than $148,000.

It is estimated his annual increase to his pension would be around $14,000.

Brig.-Gen. Labbe was considered a rising military star when he was selected to lead the 1992-93 mission to Somalia. During that deployment Canadian paratroopers tortured to death 16-year-old Shidane Arone, documenting the beating of the Somali with a series of photographs.

Also during the mission, two Somalis were shot in the back after they entered a Canadian camp. It was later revealed paratroopers put out food and water as "bait" and it was alleged by a military doctor that one of the Somalis was killed "execution-style" by a soldier.

In 1997, the Somalia inquiry concluded Brig.-Gen. Labbe exercised poor and inappropriate leadership by failing to ensure troops were adequately trained and tested on the Geneva Conventions and that he failed in his duty as a commander.

He was denied his promotion to brigadier general by a military review board but Gen. Hillier ordered a new review.

Mr. MacKay's spokesman, Jay Paxton, said in an email that the decision to promote Brig.-Gen. Labbe was based on findings of a selection board and Gen. Hillier's recommendation.

In his book, Gen. Hillier praises Mr. MacKay for making a decision on-the-spot to approve the promotion. He said that was a demonstration of Mr. MacKay's decisiveness and ability to "do what was right."


Sounds like taking care of your own and not doing the right thing to me.
 
LAME.


[sarcasm] Why don't we just stay for 10 more years? In fact, why not 20 more? [/sarcasm]

Canada's role in the world is getting worse and worse. Peacekeeping my ass.
 
That's cause peacekeeping as a role is dead. This is something Canadians have to get over. Peacekeeping these days involves policing ethnic or border disputes that have been around for centuries and have no end to them. Look at the missions we've been involved in, Kashmir, Cyprus and Lebanon for example. There's no end in sight for any of them. That's a waste of time for well paid Canadian troops. That's why you'll find that Bangladesh, Pakistan, India, Phillipines, etc are lining up to do the job. It brings in income for those countries. Not to mention the free equipment, training and bonus pay for their soldiers. They'd be mighty pissed if Canadians got back into peacekeeping.

As for Afghanistan, a big reason we are getting out in 2011 is because the Army is worn out. Afghanistan has been a lot tougher on them than even they anticipated. We've taken the highest per capita casualties in NATO. We've put a decade and half worth of use on our ground vehicles. Our specialist personnel (medics, engineers, intelligence operators) are even more burned out than the combat personnel (usually one engineer battalion for every three infantry battalions per brigade). And the Army has put off much needed transformation and recapitalization work to stay in the fight. The Air Force too is burning through its fleets' flying hours. The transport fleet is wearing out so fast, that the government advanced the purchase of new aircraft several years and was compelled to buy strategic airlifters as well. They'll need a break too.

Anyway, I have strong suspicion we'll end up staying in some form. The Provincial Reconstruction Team was a concept, Canada helped pioneer. It was well received by our allies and the Afghans. I am sure there's demand for these guys to stay. And it's feasible that even the Liberals will support that kind of mission in Afghanistan, especially if Obama decides to commit more troops to the mission (many of whom would end up in the South). But that's probably what it'll come down to....what Obama does.
 
Hillier has some explaining to do.
Interesting to watch Hillier today in front of the committee. The guy jokes in between speaking of detainees our military handed over without oversight to a brutal regime. Not exactly a proud moment for Canadians who entrust our military leaders to keep our troops out of harms way by respecting the rules of war.
 
Last edited:
Well, all I have to say is that the government behaviour the last few weeks has been abhorrent. As it stands, they are effectively in contempt of Parliament (and will be as soon as the conservatives stop boycotting the committee that will decide that). They have been caught in a web of lies, and it looks terrible.
 

Back
Top