Regardless of what they say for public consumption, the federal Liberals really do not like the military, especially the soldiers.

This is apparent in their efforts to mortify the Harper government over claims of torture and abuse of Taliban prisoners captured by the Canadians in Kandahar and turned over to the Afghans.

There's even the suggestion that our soldiers could be nailed for war crimes if abuses are committed against these prisoners by Afghans -- a concern echoed by Liberal allies in the private sector.

The ludicrous alternative is that Canada set up prison camps in Afghanistan to ensure Geneva Convention treatment of prisoners. This is so foolish as to be nonsensical, but the Liberals feel there's political mileage by flogging this theme.

VOTE DEFEATED

The Liberals demand that Harper withdraw the army from Afghanistan by 2009 was defeated in a Commons vote (150-134) when the NDP sided with the Tories.

(The NDP wants us out of Afghanistan now, not in 2009, presumably so our troops can go to Darfur -- a worse mess).

This is the same Liberal party that, in its fading days as the government, switched the army from a constabulary role in Kabul to a fighting role in Kandahar -- and now snipes at Harper for supporting the policy. (Since the Trudeau days, Liberals have subverted our military.)

As for Taliban prisoners being abused by Afghan captors, that depends on one's definition of abuse, harassment, intimidation, torture. Remember, this is Afghanistan and Canada is there to support the elected Afghan government and to help train its national army.

Afghanistan is not our country. In their daily life, Afghans treat one another roughly. Yet we're bound by Geneva rules, which in itself is crazy and archaic.

Prisoners unanimously say they are treated decently by Canadian soldiers before being turned over to the Afghan authorities. That's what should concern us.

In fact, Canada should -- as should the U.S. and Britain -- opt out of Geneva Convention agreements regarding treatment of prisoners. By definition, our troops should not, and generally do not, torture.

Geneva conventions are a two-way street and apply only to enemies that abide by certain rules -- wear a distinctive uniform, have an identifiable chain of command, carry weapons openly, treat prisoners humanely. That sort of thing. Alien concepts to the Taliban and al-Qaida.

The Geneva Convention was significant when we were at war with Germany and Italy, but has no application against future enemies we are likely to go to war against -- like international terrorists.

It's a given that we treat prisoners humanely, so there's no need for the Geneva Convention against enemies that violate its terms.

By all means, encourage our Afghan "allies" to practice basic decency to prisoners, but don't interfere to the point where we are running their country, their army or their justice system.

SHOOT THEM

Alternatively, if there's real concern about how prisoners we capture are treated, stop taking prisoners. Simply shoot them instead of accepting surrender. Would that please government critics?

Our troops have more support among the Afghan people than many at home realize. This has made our field missions more successful. We are beating the Taliban in the field, hence their reliance on roadside bombs. This is hard on our troops, exacerbated by the reality that Canadians are not unified in backing them.

And that's the Liberals ploy to make political mileage. It makes the soldiers' already tough job more difficult, but, traditionally, the Liberals don't give a damn for the army. They want power and political points. They have little in the way of shame.