60% of U.S. Military Deaths in Afghanistan Have Occurred Since Obama Was Inaugurated in 2009

[Casper in Dallas]

Yes and we might be done there had ush not put Afganistan on hold so he could go invade Iraq, which had Nothing to do with the war on terror. At least Obama is fighting the war on terror, hopefully we will be out of there in the near future.
Casper

[GTOlover]

Canada has sacrificed a disproportionate number of lives to the war in Afghanistan compared to other NATO and coalition countries, including the U.S. itself, both on the basis of lives lost per domestic capita and on the basis of casualty rate of troops in Afghanistan.

By as early as the end of summer 2006, Canadians were bearing the brunt of coalition casualties in Afghanistan.

A study by defence researchers found that:

Canadians accounted for 43% of all coalition military deaths from February to September 2006 (not including 5 deaths from accidents).

Canada had suffered more deaths from hostile action in Afghanistan than any other U.S. ally, with two in five of the non-U.S. deaths.

A Canadian soldier in Kandahar was three times more likely to be killed in hostile action than a British soldier in Afghanistan.

A Canadian soldier in Kandahar was 4.5 times more likely to be killed in hostile action than an American soldier in Afghanistan.

In September 2006, UK statistician Sheila M. Bird, vice-president of Britain's Royal Statistical Society and author of a similar risk assessment study, noted that Canadian soldiers were facing twice possibly four times the risk of death that British soldiers faced in the 2003 invasion of Iraq. She emphasized that the risk Canadians face in Kandahar is "absolutely" riskier than what Americans face in Iraq and stated that what the Canadians are confronting is "as dangerous as what the Russians were facing 20 years ago." The Russians left Afghanistan in defeat in 1989 after a nine-year campaign.

A study by Professor Marc W. Herold of the University of New Hampshire stated that the lower level of lethality for U.S. troops in Afghanistan than in Iraq, as well as its decline between 2005 and 2006, were primarily because the United States had a troop draw down to compelete the troop surge in Iraq. so NATO member countries (especially Canada and Britain) in a effort to help the US out and fill the gap. decided to increasingly bear the brunt of the combat in southern Afghanistan, experiencing far greater lethality ratios."

Table: Lethality ratios in Afghanistan, 2006 (soldiers killed in-theater / 1,000 troop level in-theater)

This is why Canada and the US are allies because based on country population size and military size Canada we put alot into the NATO ISAF mission and when cr@p hits the we will stand besides you no matter what.

Notice the three same 3 allied countries that stormed the beachs of normandy on D-day and were than main fighting forces for the westren allies in pushing back the germans in WW2 still do the brunt of the fighting today.

[GTOlover]

‪Canadian Forces Tribute-Duo!‬‏ - YouTube
Dedicated to our brothers and sisters at arms. All the US, UK, CAN military personnel overseas plz be safe and THANK YOU! . Special Thanks to Canadian Forces Combat Camera, for supplying the images.

One think is for sure American, British and Canadian forces all know the costs of being there are not worth it. We tried though but it looks like there is no real defined way to "WIN" the war over there.
I think after we got Osama that was the perfect time to pull out and leave on a least a bit of a high note.