Maybe it IS a war; the French want no part...

I had the intention of using this space to tell my small world to stop calling what we're doing in Afghanistan a "war". That was before I read the results of that French poll quoted in the linked article. To whit:

In a speech in Britain last week, French President Nicolas Sarkozy pledged to bolster France's troop strength in Afghanistan, saying he would confirm the offer during the NATO meeting in Bucharest, which will take place April 2-4. Sarkozy did not specify a number, but news reports have said the plan would add 1,000 troop reinforcements.

But more than two-thirds of people questioned in a French poll published Tuesday say they oppose Sarkozy's plan to increase the number of French troops in Afghanistan.

Sixty-five per cent said that the United States and its allies are wrong to lead a war in Afghanistan against fighters linked to the former Taliban regime and members of al-Qaeda. Seventeen per cent said they support the effort.

Now I won't get into this CBC reporter's math (since when is 65% "more than two-thirds"?), but numbers like that are a good indication of general attitudes despite the manipulation that is possible, indeed likely on a question like this. Semantics about exactly what word is appropriate aside (I'd use "insurgency", myself), if you're not in favour of a war against the Taliban and al Qaeda, why even bother with an Army?

Again, I have no idea how this question was phrased, but I suppose "Are you in favour of Bush's imperial hegemonic war in Afghanistan against the freedom fighters of al Qaeda and the scholars of the Taliban?" is possible. Even if this (admittedly extreme) question wasn't exactly what was posed, the widespread association between Afghanistan and Iraq is troublesome.

Afghanistan was under an extremely unpleasant government which was actively assisting training and hosting a terrorist organization responsible for various bloody attacks against Western targets. Those targets were mostly American, but everyone should remember that the bad guys would get around to us lesser "Satans" eventually too.

That support is a casus belli by itself, and the Americans were 100% within their legal and moral rights to invade to knock them out of action. The fact that they (and we) are trying to put the place back together is a good thing.

Enough of that. I've been of the opinion for some time that NATO needs a purge, and this doesn't change my mind. Let France, Germany, Spain and Italy go their own way (since they aren't team players anyway) and bring the Poles and other more motivated countries in, and then at least we'd be able to make realistic plans knowing our allies were the real deal.

Reapeating myself, I know. I also appear to have been incorrect about Canada pulling out by 2009, but a lot of stuff can happen between now and then, so don't count my fearless predictions out yet.