The Liberal motion on Afstan

A somewhat edited version is here. Rather clever, I think; would fully permit the CF to take the initiative in "combat" operations as I read it.

Update: Denis (he really is a thug) Coderre, Liberal national defence critic, wants our battle group to stand down. That would mean that, in addition to the new 1,000 strong NATO battle group required by the Manley panel, NATO would have to find yet another battle group to meet the Manley conditions for our staying at Kandahar. Good freaking luck. Coderre gives true meaning to the phrase "loose cannon"--if he knows what a cannon is. Thank goodness he appears to have been speaking only for himself. So far:

...
Yesterday, Mr. Coderre said the difference is that the Conservatives want reinforcements to conduct "business as usual," while the Liberals want replacements so Canadians can do a different type of mission.

When asked whether the Canadian battle group would stay in Kandahar under the Liberal proposal, he said: "No. Not in my book."

"If you really want to have a rotation, it's not to take all the troops and put them in one place, it's to make sure that we will have some that we will be able to recuperate."

He suggested the Liberal position would require at least 800 more NATO troops to take on the tasks of the battle group, separate from the 1,000 reinforcements that John Manley's panel on Afghanistan recommended.

The Canadian Forces' battle group in Kandahar, about 1,200 troops, is the main operations unit for Canada's effort in securing the province.

Removing them, or the 800 infantry soldiers to whom Mr. Coderre referred, would mean slashing the Canadian mission, and the Conservatives would be unlikely to accept that condition.

There about 2,500 Canadian Forces troops in Afghanistan, but many are in command, support and training units, and about 300 provide security for the provincial reconstruction team, or PRT, in Kandahar.

Mr. Coderre was vague when asked whether he meant that the battle group's numbers would be redeployed within Afghanistan or sent home, but said he expects it would be a combination of both.

"The battle group, should we put them to PRTs and to training? I think that we need to recuperate, too, so we'll have to refocus about what does it mean in the status of our troops regarding the mission."

Other Liberals disagreed.

Liberal MP Keith Martin, who was deeply involved in caucus discussions on the Liberal position, said the party is not suggesting the battle group be withdrawn.

"That's not what Mr. Dion is saying at all," he said. "The battle group is involved, and is doing an excellent job of training the Afghan police and army and providing security for development projects, and assistance to our allies."..