The reason that Canadian government complacency is so scandalous is two-fold: a. Canada officially supports the government that is carrying out these atrocities and b. we also provide them with large quantities of prisoners, who more often than not are completely innocent or useless for intelligence purposes and thus set free.

So far, amid calls for public inquiries, the PMO's reaction has been to attack the character and credibility of Colvin, who, unfortunately for his accusers, has a spotless record and has been upwardly mobile through difficult offices in Sri Lanka, the Palestinian Territories and later Afghanistan. Also, Colvin's testimony is only a small part of what is turning into a flood of allegations of rape and torture in Afghan prisons.

Revelations about detainee abuses were mainstream news-worthy in 2007, but the Red Cross and other human rights groups have been warning about how normal it is to torture or be tortured in Afghanistan for the past few decades. In a country run by warlords, the ability to kidnap and torture people is political currency. Only rhetoricians or naive 'let's save the world' warmongers could think that Afghan security forces aren't abusing detainees.

And yet, here we are, the true north strong and free, committed to getting shot at and blown up in the 21st century's longest running quagmire:

Pledged to protect the government of a corrupt president who won a UN-certified rigged election. Karzai is most likely closely linked to the drug-trade and various rag-tag warlords, but he's our guy so we risk life and limb to protect him.

In full support of a government that recently re-awarded the right of Afghan husbands to rape their wives. As if the plight of women's rights in Afghanistan wasn't already something to be proud of since the 2001 invasion.

Sworn an oath to be target practice for all manner of ambush, sniper, and explosive attacks, whether suicide or otherwise. If it's not the Taliban, it is probably some communication mix-up between American officers hopped up on amphetamines. These days, it's more likely the Taliban to blame because they are, as escalating violence indicates, as strong as ever since the initial invasion. Eight years of fighting is average for them.

After taking all of this into account, I cannot see how anyone would want our soldiers to stay in a war zone such as this for another month, let alone until the 2011 deadline the Conservatives have committed to. And we needn't feel bad about failing, for we are in good company throughout history.

The Soviet Union was stuck in Afghanistan for almost a decade, and they didn't wear the human rights kiddy-gloves. They levelled whole towns and villages. Soviet tanks and helicopters unapologetically ravaged the country side as civilian deaths shot towards the 1 million mark. All of this in the name of breaking the back of a Mujahideen insurgency that wouldn't go away. Their tactics, though seemingly effective (and what some people wish our Western coalition troops would adopt), eventually got the Soviets nowhere against clever guerrilla opponents in the rugged terrain of Afghanistan.

The British Empire tried to take Afghanistan at least three times prior to the Soviets, and they ultimately failed despite being famous for their relatively successful colonies. If you wish to go back even further in history, Alexander the Great had to keep backtracking, burning crops and villages as his insurgent opponents kept resurfacing despite harsh measures of an ancient warfare variety. Those mountain rebels threw spears rather than Stinger missiles, but the parallels are didactic.

And yet here we are, the normally-humble Canadian Armed Forces, with trivial military support from the Americans for the last 6 years, trying to accomplish what some of the greatest military powers in world history have not. I think we should get an E for Effort, a full 10 marks for participation, but ultimately we should have dropped this course.