Canada’s place in the world these days has become defined in one word: Afghanistan. The coming Throne Speech, many believe, will further reinforce this as the Harper government states clearly there will be no withdrawal of combat troops, as planned, in February of 2009. This will undoubtedly be one issue upon which the coming federal election is fought.
But the Afghan people are not the only ones who are troubled and seeking international support. Those in Burma have been rising up once again against a totalitarian regime, and doing so in a country so repressed even reporters and cameras are illegal.
Some MPs worry we are fighting a problematic war with the Taliban while ignoring others. One of them is Larry Bagnall, MP for the Yukon, who has taken a leading role in trying to muster support for the monks of Burma.
MPtv had the chance of interviewing him in the last few days, along with Tin Maung Htoo, Executive Director of Canadian Friends of Burma. Here are their thoughts on how we might help.
To view the video, click here.
127 comments ↓
I think much depends on your vision for Canada…if you are like Mr. Harper and you want to see the military built up to be some kind of prestige factor in this world, you might have a very different view from someone who would like to see the role of Canada’s military revert back to a peacekeeping force. I think before we decide whether we should be anywhere in the world, we need to decide that issue.
Interesting that we are trying to help people who don’t seem willing to fight for their own freedom and ignoring those that are fighting hard for their freedom and not getting help.
If I’m not mistaken, part of Paul Martin’s agreement to fight in Afghanistan was that there would be troops to help in Darfur – not the same plans and mission at all as that of Harper.
The West and our standard of living have come under attack as never before. By an enemy that is not easily identifiable and using methods never seen before. I believe it would behoove us to bolster our armed forces in personnel and weaponry and to start to get involved in these areas where democracy is under such attack.
The ‘bleeding hearts’ will scream that we should not be a fighting army, nor should we get involved. However, their screaming will be of a much higher pitch if we let these subversive actions go unchallenged.
I believe our Foreign Minister, Bernier, made quite an impassioned appeal at the United Nations last week with respect to Burma.
There are high level meetings being held, Canada included, to find some multi-lateral solutions to this travesty.
Just because you don’t read about it in the newspapers does not mean nothing is happening. As you know, diplomacy and diplomatic talks MUST be held in private and proper negotiations are NEVER done through the media of to score political points on something this serious.
Reg, there are other forms of government additional to democracies. Do we go in with troops everywhere there are governments that are not democratic? Should we send our troops to China, Russia and hundreds of other places in the world who have govenments different from ours?
How big of an army do we need to police the world? Is it western countries responsibility to tell other countries what form of government they decide to have and force democratic governments on them before their infrastructure is strong enough to survive? Democracies require very strong support from its citizens and if the citizens aren’t ready for that responsibility, it is doomed to failure. Democracy cannot be imposed on peoples–by its nature, it has to be freely chosen by the people who live there.
War machine or peacekeeping. Fight or surrender. Kill or be killed. Military strength or weakness.
Is that the only choices we have? How about attacking the root causes with initiative instead of the people with bullets.
Poverty, hunger, lack of any economic ability to create change for the better.
If .01% of the global commerce was diverted to serve these purposes it would be enough to feed the worlds hungry. Bump it up to .02% and basic health care including Aids medicine is included. At .05% there would be enough to include education creating a global work force that would have the capability to move humanity ahead.
War war war, there are a great many of us that look back over our history and find no advantage, no solution in any idea that comes out of the barrel of a gun.
I’d agree to go and help those in Burma or Darfur if someone could show me a plan to do so effectively. We’ve never, ever, kept ‘peace’ in the world by going in unarmed. The only way to help the people of Burma would be to go in with full military hardware and get rid of the dictators. Sad, but true. Let’s not forget Rwanda. We’ve never been ‘peacekeepers’. We have however been unarmed and watched many a genocide take place.
Get your head out of the clouds folks, you really can’t breath at that altitude. Cheers! L
You know, Garth, there’s so much that we do not understand. In many countries, religion is at the very core of national existence, and how people relate to and act with one another. Here is a snippet from something that Canada does not have—a real newspaper.
“AS they marched through the streets of Myanmar’s cities last week leading the biggest antigovernment protests in two decades, some barefoot monks held their begging bowls before them. But instead of asking for their daily donations of food, they held the bowls upside down, the black lacquer surfaces reflecting the light.
“It was a shocking image in the devoutly Buddhist nation. The monks were refusing to receive alms from the military rulers and their families — effectively excommunicating them from the religion that is at the core of Burmese culture.
“That gesture is a key to understanding the power of the rebellion that shook Myanmar last week.
“The country — the former Burma — has roughly as many monks as soldiers. The military rules by force, but the monks retain ultimate moral authority. The lowliest soldier depends on them for spiritual approval, and even the highest generals have felt a need to honor the clerical establishment. They claim to rule in its name.
“Begging is a ritual that expresses a profound bond between the ordinary Buddhist and the monk. “The people are feeding the monks and the monks are helping the people make merit,†said Josef Silverstein, an expert on Myanmar at Rutgers University. “When you refuse to accept, you have broken the bond that has tied them for centuries together.â€
The full story is at http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/30/weekinreview/30mydans.html?ref=weekinreview
What’s happening in Burma/Myanmar now is not news.This has been going on for years.Consider the Dick Cheney Halibuton connection.
According to an Earth Rights report: ‘From 1992, until the present
(2000), thousands of villagers in Burma were forced to work in support
of these pipelines and related infrastructure. They lost their homes due
to forced relocation and were raped, tortured and killed by soldiers
hired by companies as security guards for the pipelines.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.impeach.bush/browse_thread/thread/51bef39c591c09cb.
As for Afghanistan.The situation there is as bad or worse than ever.And now talk of a 20,000 man Taliban offensive coming out of Pakistan.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/IJ05Df01.html
And for a look at daily life in Kabul see this link.
LA Times.
The war in Afghanistan is a political and military one-step-forward-two-steps-back exercise. The work there isn’t just unfinished, it is more dangerous and less certain than policymakers in Washington and talking heads in New York studios can imagine. Those suggesting otherwise are either naive or flacking a political agenda.
John Kiriakou and Richard Klein
September 13, 2007 LA Times.
The current government is being less than honest telling us about Afghanistan.
There are other ways to get this information.
Lorraine – I watched Bernier speak. Although his English is worse than Dion’s he did okay and it must have been hard being his first time, but when they panned the audience – the room was virtally empty.
Let’s not forget Rwanda
Rwanda was tribute to the [failures] of the UN Security Council and that inner circle’s indifference. 800,000 slaughtered with General Dallaire left high and dry … The UN refused to provide the critical aid he requested.
How many years has it taken to get the UN to REACT to the tragedy of Darfur?
Hillier wanted a war and he maneuvered until he got one.
http://www.macleans.ca/canada/national/article.jsp?content=20071004_162448_5120
Being a nation of Peacekeepers is not ‘bleeding hearts’ but rather it takes a better soldier to keep the peace than just to kill. That is why Canada has always been respected worldwide, until our war-mongering PM tried to turn Canada into a US clone and himself into a Bush me-too.
Canada better be very careful or else those “subversives” will come here to retaliate for us killing their “innocent citizens.”
Like many of the “words” that are thrown around today the term “democracy” has different meanings to different people.
Some see capitalism and democracy as the same thing. Capitalist democracy has been referred to for most of the last century as “liberal democracy” but that kind of democracy is often opposed by those who have adopted capitalism as a political as well as an economic concept.
The new form of capitalist democracy is sometimes called “the democracy of the marketplace.” This is where wealth is seen as entitling those who control it to control over the state. These people portray social democracy as no different from communism or marxism but there is a huge difference because the direction of the government is determined through democratic process.
We have to be aware that the use of the term “democracy” does not always mean what we might think it does.
Get your head out of the clouds folks, you really can’t breath at that altitude. Cheers! L
By Leasa on 10.06.07 1:21 pm
I appreciate your opinion, it would have been much more forceful without this last sentence.
Reg, above claims we are being attacked as never before and we need to arm ourselves. You are right, Reg. That attack on the West on September 11th. 2001 was an attack the likes of which we never saw before. There is ample evidence that the official report on what happened on 9/11 is false. More than half the American people do not accept the report. So Reg, what weapons do you suggest we acquire to defend against the guilty parties if they attack again?
War war war, there are a great many of us that look back over our history and find no advantage, no solution in any idea that comes out of the barrel of a gun.
By got rope? on 10.06.07 12:58 pm
It takes courage to find an alternative to war, something we seem to lack in our world.
Lorraine – I watched Bernier speak. Although his English is worse than Dion’s he did okay and it must have been hard being his first time, but when they panned the audience – the room was virtally empty.
By slg on 10.06.07 2:00 pm
Much the same as the House of Commons except at Question Period.
It takes courage to find an alternative to war, something we seem to lack in our world.
By pjw on 10.06.07 3:12 pm
Courage or motivation?
We have the alternatives but war is such an easy way to create an investment vehicle for the astronomical amount of cash drifting around the world. Big money owns MSM so all the presstituties report on is confrontation and not the alternatives or even the possibilities but only where big money wants to invest and war is a guaranteed investment.
War machine or peacekeeping. Fight or surrender. Kill or be killed. Military strength or weakness.
Is that the only choices we have? How about attacking the root causes with initiative instead of the people with bullets.
Poverty, hunger, lack of any economic ability to create change for the better.
If .01% of the global commerce was diverted to serve these purposes it would be enough to feed the worlds hungry. Bump it up to .02% and basic health care including Aids medicine is included. At .05% there would be enough to include education creating a global work force that would have the capability to move humanity ahead.
War war war, there are a great many of us that look back over our history and find no advantage, no solution in any idea that comes out of the barrel of a gun.
By got rope? on 10.06.07 12:58 pm
Amazingly I completely agree.
Now all we need to do is find a group that is incorruptible enough to handle all that money and put it where it belongs.
That, sadly, is the problem with such a maneuver. I find it sad that my view of this world has come to that, but what else can one get from it all?
This whole issue is complex, but simple in nature, NATO is a 26 member state with a mandate if one country is attacked all countries come to their aid. Simple eh, BUT, the US is key player and carries the biggest stick, so when the US administration calls on NATO to act to the benifit of the poor and unprotected for what ever reason countries are asked for their support. The US turned Afghanistan over to NATO while still maintaining control albeit as a back seat driver…y’all must agree on that. Karzai ansvers to President Bush and has been paraded to the world via the State of Union Address to the Nation, remember? of course you do. Second and it’s a big one, should NATO fail in Afghanistan and that is almost a given (it takes a 75-100 years to build a country into a safe state of Democracy as we know it) so when it does fail the US will place the blame squarely on the shoulders of NATO and say you failed as we supplied our best and contributed the most. Agree, again you betcha.
Now I will leave that house for a few words.
Neo Conservative thinkers believe in Democracy by force when required. Americans believe victory by force and massive fire power (return 5 rounds for ever one recieved) sounds good and should any enemy try to match them it would not only be a mistake it would be a deadly mistake. Underground and resitence warfare is not new, holly smokes “Beware of Greeks bearing Gifts” the “French Resistance” and yes even “Ronald Regan’s Freedom Fighters”. Every single animal an insect on the face of earth has some means of dealing with it’s foe, years ago here in Canada’s Artic, they wanted to kill off he wolves, so they decided in all their wisdom to hunt them down using aircraft shooting them as the run. The wolves started breeding not one or two in litter but several and soon the numbers become greater…Betcha many smart and educted reader know where I am going. Right.
The word insurgent (as are others) were invented by the White House (American Administration) so they need not use the term enemy therefore placing all who they deemed to be the enemy, enemies of not only the US/NATO but all who could not be identified as native to country they were defending or chose to “Nation Build” into a image of the Western Democracy. The fact the Talian and el Qaeda have names and is used only as identification of group to which they want to blame in Irag or Afghanistan.
Both the US & NATO have massive modern fire power they can call on at the snap of finger fuelled and funded by mass multi national arms companies, the enemy like the wolve knew they could never compete, so they used resitance type warfare taticts and added one to which no western nation can ever guard against, suicide bombers, (not new Japanees had similar ideas, remember? so the US made the most fatal mistake they could every be made, both politcally and militarily they went with fire power using 500/1000 lbs bombs, rockets, missels and showed the world just how destructive they could be, they felt politically if they lied and lied again to American people they would haved full support.
What went wrong, back to wolf, when you committ mass murder (reports range from 700,000 upwards of men women and children killed) you create more enemies, over 4 million have fled Iraq with no home and no means of support and have so much hatred for Americans ( now Canadians via our upscale envolment in Afghanistan) they are willing to line up not only to fight but to become a suicide bomber. What is even worst, all hosptials and medical care is all but gone, so once a trained soldier, that was on the goverment side of Iraq or Afghanistan gets injured and not longer of use, is on the street and has little or no choice but to become a suicide bomber for a few dollars so he can leave his family with some support.
Should the women bear children they will grow up seeking revenge coupled with hatred from stories of the ravages of the US & NATO that took their families. Do you think otherwise, O/K think if the tables were reversed!
Colin Powell told his boss and the world; “Mr. President you break it you own it” Iraq was broken the moment the first boots hit the ground in Baghdad and it was seen around the world when the looting sruct and I knew then it was over for the US. To-day there are over 3800 soldiers dead, over 1000 contractors, and over 50,000 wounded and they have spent almost 800 Billion and requre over 2 Trillion for worn out machinery and long term health care for the vets. AND THEY ARE NO WHERE NEAR A END, with no safe escape route. Couple this with foolish talk of attacking Iran and you must ask yourself why do we allow neo conservatives on the face of the earth.
FACT! 18 suiciders walked in to American and were given one way flying lessons and carried out the 9/11 terrorist attack. George W Bush, Dick Chaney, Donald Rumsfelt, Karl Rove, Richard Pearl and couple of bus boys, sat down evented the words: Aixis of evil, War on Terror and insurgents amoung others and are about to destroy the world as we know it and already have taken away rights and privaledges he took thousands of years to obtain. By escalating a fight to get the Taliban in Afghanistan supported by the world to attacking Iraq, for personal revenge (Saddem threats to his dad) and being able to play hero (Mission Accomplish) and yes OIL REVENUE THAT WOULD MORE THAN BAY THE BILL as stated by both Bush and Chaney, who was and is paid by Haliburtian.
In closing for those who do not know, Stephen Harper and his close friends are neo conservative minded and best pals of George “Dubya” Bush, for only reasons they know. May heaven help us if this man either get re-elected or worst should he get a majority.
Remember PMSH told you, “He would only extent the mission in Afghanistan after a debate and vote in parliment” and he if he should get his majority he will whip his caccus and make in a non confidence issue and hold a vote on behave of all Canadians. and why not, he just held a news conference and said he will hold every issue to a non confidence vote. Ladies and Gentlemen and the Press/Media if that is not “Dictatorship” under the blanket of neo con Democracy then tell me what is.
hope somewhere there is a one jouralist who has both the skills and the professional talent to stand up for Canada and ask our PM no pre scripted questions and dog him on the issues for the truth. If Canadians and the press want to be bullied then so be it, eithier way I have only one vote and history will write the ending. Dam I wish I was wrong, and I wake up and find out that the World really does love American and President Bush and his neo con pals. Wouldn’that be nice?
Bon Chance, good luck, Happy Thanksgiving
Is that the only choices we have? How about attacking the root causes with initiative instead of the people with bullets.
Poverty, hunger, lack of any economic ability to create change for the better.
By got rope? on 10.06.07 12:58 pm
Well said, Mr. Rope!
And Reg, look to the south, where Mr. Bush’s repsonse to anything that doesn’t fit in with his way of the world is to threaten military action. Yet, he hasn’t figured out that even with the best fighting force on the planet, he still doesn’t have the military resources to fight all his wars. First Afghanistan, then Iraq, followed by sabre rattling with Iran. Whose next? And will there be the troops available to fight?
There has to be more than war..as the saying goes, “War, what is it good for? Absolutely nothing” because it doesn’t resolve the underlying issues.
I think much depends on your vision for Canada…if you are like Mr. Harper and you want to see the military built up to be some kind of prestige factor in this world, you might have a very different view from someone who would like to see the role of Canada’s military revert back to a peacekeeping force. I think before we decide whether we should be anywhere in the world, we need to decide that issue.
By pjw on 10.06.07 11:25 am
Agree, pjw, and let not Canadians forget that it was PMSH who went to the US and chastised Chretien’s govt for not supporting the Iraqi war. And now, he and his neocon supporters are trying to use the same reasoning about staying in Afghan beyond 09 – democracy, women’s rights, etc.
Well, sure we’d all like to see a different Afghan. but change has to come from within – and most don’t want our form of democracy. Gosh, ours is eroding daily, yet these neocons are trying to force their so-called democracy on others.
China, India, and Russia are three major countries that continue to do business with the Burmese military regime. Pressure should be put on these countries to either stop dealing with the Burmese military junta, or else use their influence to persuade the generals to move the country toward democracy. If countries all over the world threaten to boycott the Beijing Olympics, China might start doing something useful in Burma.
War machine or peacekeeping. Fight or surrender. Kill or be killed. Military strength or weakness.
Is that the only choices we have? How about attacking the root causes with initiative instead of the people with bullets.
Poverty, hunger, lack of any economic ability to create change for the better.
If .01% of the global commerce was diverted to serve these purposes it would be enough to feed the worlds hungry. Bump it up to .02% and basic health care including Aids medicine is included. At .05% there would be enough to include education creating a global work force that would have the capability to move humanity ahead.
War war war, there are a great many of us that look back over our history and find no advantage, no solution in any idea that comes out of the barrel of a gun.
By got rope? on 10.06.07 12:58 pm
Though I don’t often agree with you Rope, I think your right on that we have to look at the causes.
Mr. Bush’s repsonse to anything that doesn’t fit in with his way of the world is to threaten military action.
There has to be more than war..as the saying goes, “War, what is it good for? Absolutely nothing†because it doesn’t resolve the underlying issues.
By James- Chatham on 10.06.07 3:59 pm
Thx James, you made some interesting points yourself.
Unless there is a viable alternative to war I don`t see the US as having any other position it can take and just as a point of interest the Democrats engaged in more military action than the Republicans.
Unless there is a viable alternative investment for all the idle a bored money sitting around war will be the outcome of any massive failures such as globalization. If it comes apart at the seams money will move rapidly to armaments.
I`ve suggested an individual vehicle mag lift propulsion global transportation system as a long term viable and profitable alternative to armaments.
China, India, and Russia are three major countries that continue to do business with the Burmese military regime. Pressure should be put on these countries to either stop dealing with the Burmese military junta
By Natural on 10.06.07 5:09 pm
No need to go that far. The regimes primary source of income are Rubies. The world population only need boycott Rubies world wide and the Monks will be legally back in the streets.
Lots of talk about Canada a world leader, are we or are we not?
“Canada better be very careful or else those “subversives†will come here to retaliate for us killing their “innocent citizens.â€
By Emilie on 10.06.07 2:28 pm ”
I think this statement pretty much sums up the anti war movement.
As long as they don’t attack us we are fine.
We should have told Europe that in WWI and WWII. Let them fight their own battles.
Fact is people, we didn’t attack anyone. They attacked us, as in 9/11.
Oh, that was the states. Let those war mongers take care of it themselves.
Indian terrorist attacked us on Air India flight. Remember? What did we do about it? Had an inquiry. Haven’t been attacked since. That seemed to work. Lets have inquiries maybe all violence will disappear. Forget about the innocent victims and their families. Whats a few hundred here or there.
Lets follow Garths liberal demands. Lets leave Afganistan. Lets let the Taliban take over. Lets let them start their terrorist schools again. Lets see how long it will be before another 9/11 occurs. As long as it somewhere else, like the states, we’re ok. They deserve it anyway. Those thousands of men and women who got up that morning to go to work just to feed the family. To live in peace. To see their children grow up. To see their grandchildren. They deserve what they got.
I know, lets have an anti american rally just to show them bastards what we think of them. Oh, but tell them not to do anything like increased border security. It might affect our economy with our largest trading partner. Can’t be having that now, can we. Let’s make Garth the grand marshall of the rally. He can lead us in chanting slogans against the neighbour whose military protection we coveted for 40 years during the cold war. Lets tell them in mass numbers how much we despise them. That’ll work. Islamic terrorists will like us for it and will leave us alone.
How about that plan for world peace. Lets vote on it.
It is always disturbing to see conscious misrepresentations made, since it lowers the quality of debate, hardens positions and kills logic. So, your assertion, “Lets follow Garths liberal demands. Lets leave Afganistan. Lets let the Taliban take over,” is unfortunate because it’s wrong. And you know it. The Liberal position is to have our NATO allies rotate combat troops into Kandahar, so our guys can move on and do more humanitarian and reconstruction work. Nobody here is suggesting abandoning the country and letting the Taliban take over. It looks like Mr. Karzai may be accomplishing that all on his own. — Garth
After Iraq was invaded on the pretense that there were terrorists, and when that was disproven, WMDs, and when that was disproven, a “bad dictator”, the Iraqis weren’t that much better off. In the case of Burma, reports indicate ppl begging for help from outside. I’m not very impressed by this double standard, and I think the blame goes out to the US-type nations who only go after oil on one hand, and to China and Russia-like nations who just continue business as usual because they can’t fight something they inherently support. If the UN veto powers had some guts and actually implemented proper sanctions, maybe the Myanmar ppl would get the change in government they are requesting, and that without sending a big fighting force.
I prefer Alaska — after all, Israel controls Amerika, Amerika has lots of space and there is the match made in hell!
http://canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5iYltBIbC3y30cBjtu0YI0VFZLTLA
We must all hope that some day mankind will find another way to build true “Nationhood other than by War” but I fear it will never happen until every human being is gone from this planet. Because somewhere deep inside mankind is a driving passion to become king of the hill and gain power even over his best friends. Goverments have the greatest tool….fear…
Of course the people don’t want war…that is understood. But voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country. — Hermann Goering
Remember those words, “Rather fight em over there than here” I wrote dozens of posts stating, “They have no army, no navy, no air force and no marines. How are they going to get here “Majic Carpets” …and when here who’s going to feed, cloth, house and supply ammo? never heard it again. Hell America has 20 million illegal immigrants and they now want to give em drivers licences to use as ID’s the same as 18 others had on 9/11…..
Oh yea another good one “We will not cut and run” hello Tony Blair, Rumsfelt, Wolfowitz, Libby, Perle and yes Almad Chalaba have all cut and run to live the good life making millions upon millions. And soon both Bush & Chaney will cut and run to billions perhaps and spin and play the blame game.
Here’s another bone to bite on;
The system of institutions is still grander and more computerized, but it seems to have lost its morale. The baronial corporations are making immense amounts of money and are more openly and heavily subsidized by the monarch in Washington. The processing of the young is extended for longer years and its tempo speeded up. More capital and management are exported, interlocking within international capital and more of the world (including Canada) is brought under American control. When necessary, remarkable military technology is brought to bear. At home, there is no political check, for no matter what the currents of opinion, by and large the dominant system wreaks its will, managing the parliamentary machinery to look like consensus.
Paul Goodman, The Empty Society, Massy Lectures 1966!
Just to shake your mind being rich to-day is to have 100 million or more.
Just think President Bush now wants 190 Billion for the next paycheck to rich and powerful.
Do not look for an end because the US will not leave until they get control of that oil to pay for the bills.
Should they loose it will be the end of them as a world power for their dollar will be worth very little and the military will have been disgraced by loosing to an invisible army or insurgents, who can fight, kill at will while having no tanks, no army, no navy, no marines and no gernerals with a chest full of medal ribbions. Think, indeed a Quagmire, no way out. Oh did I mention the US is selling Iraq one billion dollars worth of weaponds for their police force and Iraq is buying them with money given to them by American. Police Force, (full of insurgents).
In the meantime Follow the money, to Dubai..Haliburtian new headquaters for starters……
Hey Garth:
More layoffs in New Brunswick and the auto industry due to our high dollar. Do you think Mr. know it Flaherty has a plan to save us. Shopping across the border is good and gas sales here are good with 3 plus hrs line ups. How long can we last?
Freedom of speech — there is hope yet!
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003653334
I believe that the CBC, hosted by Avi (sp?) Lewis is presenting a week long evening series on Democracy. There was an hour long preview of the Directors of these docs this am. I’m looking forward to seeing it.
So much for e-voting in Ireland — it’s toast! Never has worked, never will.
Always bear in mind, though — NEVER SAY NEVER!!
http://www.linux.com/articles/35779
“Fact is people, we didn’t attack anyone. They attacked us, as in 9/11.”
By Jim…
Who are they?
Speaking of STUPID STUPID tactics during a war. Denis Coderre told everyone andf every camera and media outlet he could find that HE was going to Afghanistan!! He may as well have painted a target on his back and those of the people he is going to meet.
In his media tirades he bemoaned the fact that Bernier was going this week and did not invite him!
Why not just send a telegram directly to the Taliban Ignoramus Coderre.
Bernier and Oda and other officials are there now and the entire trip was completely hush hush for security reasons. So Coderre plays his stupid political one upmanship games and VOILA!! there is a suicide bomber on the Kabul airport road 1/2 hour before Bernier’s entourage was to be on that very road.
Now Coderre is phoning all the media from Afghan to give “updates” on his “fact finding ” mission.
And THIS is a former cabinet minister and the Liberal Defence critic?????
Flabergastic stupidity and a man who does not live in the real world.All that Adcam money and the power it brought him over the years has cocooned this dolt from the reality of consequences forstupidity in the real world.
By jim on 10.06.07 6:19 pm
What a bunch of BS.
Let’s cut the crap. The Taliban, for how rotten a regime they were, were no worse than any number of other regimes that exist, and continue to exist elsewhere in the world. Do I agree with them? Do I like it? Hell no. In fact, I thought the Taliban were trouble back in ‘98 when they blew up that World Heritage site (the standing Buddha’s). But to imply that they were intimately involved in 9/11 is pure BS. They were as involved as the Saudi Government – but we didn’t go in there and blow the place up, did we? Is the Saudi government any LESS repressive to women? Any less anti-american? But wait, they sell us oil…
Afganistan is a mistake because the people there never wanted us in there in the first place. The Afgan people did not rise up agianst the Taliban, and asked for our help, we went in and forced them out. And now we are fighting the population. It’s the same as Iraq. For how evil Saddam was, the people did not invite the US in. They went in, uninvited.
At least in Myanmar, the population is fighting against the government. If we go in, we are helping the locals. We are NOT forcing our ideals on them, unlike in Afganistan and Iraq. There is a huge difference. And that is why “winning” in Afganistan is going to take a long time.
PJW,
what you propose in your 11:25 AM – an a priori decision on whether we maintain general-purpose or peacekeeping military forces – is a false dichotomy and puts the cart before the horse.
Military forces should be developed not in accordance with preconceived ideas, but to meet the threat(s) to a nation anticipated on reasonable and prudent grounds. While intentions can change overnight, military capabilities do not. Therefore, plan and prepare for the greatest likely threat/level of conflict to handle a come-as-you-are war, and cover lesser contingencies and requirements at the same time.
The great challenge with this simple strategic concept is to let your planning be guided by what you know and what you do not know, vice the inevitable extraneous considerations of political expediency (what politicians can sell or not, what will bring or cost votes) and the institutional imperatives of military forces (what they would like to have and do.)
The proof is in the pudding, so here’s the pudding!
http://www.starnewsonline.com/article/20071005/NEWS/71005013/0/State
And this from the mother of all idiots who told the world about Sadaam’s “nooqular” WMD. Are his family serving in Iraq?
Didn’t think so.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/we-have-no-plans-to-attack-iran-bush/2007/10/06/1191091420245.html
The ‘bleeding hearts’ will scream that we should not be a fighting army, nor should we get involved. However, their screaming will be of a much higher pitch if we let these subversive actions go unchallenged.
By Reg on 10.06.07 12:17 pm
Would the opposite of a “bleeding heart” be a “warmonger”?
James Travers
Toronto Star
OTTAWA
In opposition, Stephen Harper was Preston Manning. In power, he’s Jean Chrétien.
Of the two comparisons, the second is the greater compliment. That shouldn’t belittle Manning’s underappreciated contribution. As well as preaching for the same democratic reforms Harper now finds inconvenient, Manning pressed hard for economic discipline and the tough love that later became the Liberal sovereignty strategy.
But these are partisan times and no recent prime minister is more admired than Chrétien for a singular fixation on winning.-James Travers The Star
I’m getting sick of being right….it’s ok for Chretien not for Harper….and oh btw Garth did you read above…
“Manning pressed hard for economic discipline and the tough love that later became the Liberal sovereignty strategy”….and who wrote the Clarity Act…..Stephen Harper…like I said I’m tired of always being proven Right……
I apologize Jim, it was Reg’s quote not yours!
If anyone has any interest in, or knowledge of the Gnostic faith, this is an interesting article.
From what I recall, the Gnostics were the first to break away from Christianity, in the first or second century — not too sure.
Unfortunately, everything in the lower psychic regions runs its course, and this is no different.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/06/opinion/06deutsch.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin
Garth Said,…
“The Liberal position is to have our NATO allies rotate combat troops into Kandahar, so our guys can move on and do more humanitarian and reconstruction work.”
Sorry if I am being dense here Garth, but it is very difficult at times to hear the truth over the howling the CPC Harper-bots caterwauling. Is this really the offical Liberal Party position? Is this Mr. Dion’s position? Is this the position you support as well?
Thanks,
Zorph.
Yes. — Garth
Hi Garth, That was a really interesting MPTV. One thing that got me thinking was when Larry Bagnall was briefly talking of having economic sanctions imposed on Myanmar. Do economic sanctions work? I would think that these sanctions would hurt some of the poorest residents of Myanmar and be highly unfair to those people who are obviously not the intended targets of the sanctions. The Junta would probably be relatively unscathed by the sanctions in my opinion as they probably have supplies hoarded away in case these were ever brought against them. I believe Libya had economic sanctions imposed and Gadhafi is still around. What are the intentions of economic sanctions and who are the targets of such?
Though I don’t often agree with you Rope, I think your right on that we have to look at the causes.
By KPN on 10.06.07 5:47 pm
Of all things we disagree on, well everything else, I think this is the most important issue we can agree on. I think our agreeing should send the message the whole world will also agree so lets move forward. Lets hope the`re listening.
It is worthy of hoping for.
Thanks Garth for finally articualting the Liberal position. This in fact is the first time that anyone from the Liberal party that I am aware actually come out and stated their position very clearly which is to cease our combat role in Afghanistan in 2009 but remain there and do humanitarian and training etc but our military will not leave Afghanistan but rather just change roles once again.
I can agree with a policy such as this. Why didn’t the Liberal party come right out and say so in the first place? I think even Harper stated a very similar policy about a month ago although it appears the he is considering a continuation of our combat role.
The 64 million dollar question is do we abandon our current role in 2009 if the job isn’t done and if there is no one willing to step up and take our place?
Personally I don’t see our current government or even a Liberal government doing such a thing if past history is an indicator.
Thanks.
Well, I said the ‘bleeding hearts’ would come out in force and they have. While I see a lot of postings about war not being the answer, I have not seen one concrete suggestion for an effective alternative.
There will not be peace without war and sacrifice.
As for those who posted about the enemy coming here to reap their havoc… remember 9/11 ? They’re hear.
And for you people who have a hard time dealing in that reality and think 9/11 is a huge conspiracy, you should try talking with the 1,000’s of people who have been forever affected by the tragic loss of their loved ones.
To the poster who said we should not help because the people in those countries aren’t helping themselves, I say you are an absolute coward and sniveling mouse. Thousands of Afghans have died right alongside out men and women. They are laying their lives on the line. As well, what about the 1,000’s of unarmed monks who are standing up to the regime? Somehow I can’t see that you’d be of the same character. Shame on you for such a suggestion!
For Lorraine:
As you know, diplomacy and diplomatic talks MUST be held in private and proper negotiations are NEVER done through the media of to score political points on something this serious.
By Lorraine on 10.06.07 12:49 pm
Bernier, Oda say life better for Afghans
Canadian government officials make unannounced trip to Afghanistan shortly after U.S. soldier, 4 civilians killed in suicide bomb attack.
KABUL, Afghanistan – Two newly shuffled Canadian cabinet ministers arrived in the Afghan capital just 30 minutes after another deadly suicide bomb attack Saturday, but that didn’t daunt their persistent pitch that life is getting better for ordinary Afghans
Oct 06, 2007 06:17 PM
http://www.thestar.com/News/article/264295
To me that sounds like a shameless pitch . Right from the PMs desk.Too bad the truth happens 30 minutes before their speech.
One of the cabinet ministers visiting Afghanistan to meet with that country’s leadership and Canadian troops says that roadside and suicide bombings in Kabul indicate that the situation is improving in the country.
Ministers pitch successful side of Afghan mission
Updated Sat. Oct. 6 2007 6:30 PM ET
CTV.ca News Staff
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20071006/afghan_bernier_071006/20071006?hub=TopStories
Oct 05, 2007 04:30 AM
Chantal Hébert
Toronto Star
Ottawa
As opportunistic as it may be, there is a fundamental logic to Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s election ultimatum to the opposition parties. It makes little sense for his Conservative government to survive a vote on its agenda later this month only to then have its core policies defeated on a piecemeal basis over the two remaining years in the life of the minority Parliament.
That amounts to saying that Canadians would be better served by a paralyzed government and a prolonged parliamentary blockade than by an inconvenient return trip to the polls. On the face of it, that is an unsustainable proposition.
Thanks for looking out for the good of the country PM Harper …God knows the Liberals won’t….
Thank you Garth for the straight foward answer to my questions. You have just given me another reason to support the Liberals. I have many friends and family who have severed or who are currently serving and from this small sample I can honestly say that this is their position as well.
The best way to defeat an idea is a better idea,… in this case it showing the people of Afghanistan how to live a better life through education, economic reform and improving their lives. This type of mission is the toughest to achieve, it is the hardest and most frustrating work,… Yet if you succeed, the fruits of that labour will continue to grow.
Now judging from the Harper’s desire to buy more front line military equipment, remote control drone aircraft and tanks,… me thinks he wants to play bang-bang. Unless one of Harper’s supporters can point me to clear cut answer about Mission in Afghanistan that says otherwise.
Are posters here serious? Did they really not hear the Liberal position on Afghanistan?
Is there a communication breakdown or do people simply not listen? The Liberal position has been clear since they introduced the resolution in the House of Commons on the issue that was defeated by the combined vote of the Conservatives and the NDP. The BQ voted with the Liberals.
One of the Conservative economic policies is to build a military defence industry. It is difficult to justify that policy without engaging in active combat. I think you will find that it is those who hope to gain financially from arms production that are the biggest hawks.
As official Defence Critic for the opposition Coderre should have been allowed to go.
It would not have made the headlines-the Cons would not look petty and partisan.
What exactly are the Cons and Mr. Karzai trying to hide by not allowing opposition critics to visit the country?
All I have seen from AFghanistan is the handing out of pencil cases to selected children.
Where are the live pictures of the new schools, the new hospitals, the new roads, the new businesses?
We have military photographers and reporters don’t we?
Why do the Cons insist that all the media coverage is negative?
Is it because there is no significant reconstruction being done?
For Reg.
A concrete suggestion.
Read Dr. David Ray Griffin.
Read Dr. Paul Craig Roberts.
Discover who really attacked on 9/11.
Expose and punish the criminals.
We only see one, two Canadian soldiers killed; it is when the taliban become so sophisticated with getting their weaponry from others like Iran and we begin to see Canadians killed by the dozen at a time, only then will direction be changed. That time is coming soon, and many minds will be changed at that point.
Are posters here serious? Did they really not hear the Liberal position on Afghanistan?
By C. B. Innes on 10.06.07 9:20 pm
C.B, those posters you talk about are just narrow-minded trolls that cannot comprehend what is actually written. They have been so brain washed that they can’t even think clearly for themselves.They interpret any news item to suit their own believes regardless of how much proof there is that validates the truth. They turn everything around to suit their own beliefs & have the nerve to attack experts in their field by insults & name calling. Those sorry bunches of individuals would never have the nerve to spew their insults to Garth or Mr. Dion if they ever came face to face with them. One can feel sorry for them as this shows them up as being ignorant bitter individuals.
Regards & have a wonderful Thanksgiving.
Irene
Paul Martin drove the federal Liberals to their lowest share of the popular vote in Quebec since Confederation. Martin fans would insist it was Jean Chrétien who did the driving, but whatever. The fact is that support for the Liberals is consistently lower in Quebec under Stéphane Dion than it was on election day in 2006.
Many are baffled by this. I have long maintained, and still do, that Dion is closer to the mystical Quebec consensus on defence, foreign affairs, the environment and a bunch of other issues than the Harper government.
But if he can’t make that case to Quebecers, he’s not just in trouble, he’s in trouble he deserves.
“Would the opposite of a “bleeding heart†be a “warmongerâ€?” –By pjw on 10.06.07 7:09 pm
Whoever controls the definitions wins the debate. Yet, in all honesty, I think that the person who used the term “bleeding hearts” no doubt means it in terms of people whose hearts bleed for the criminal, sometimes as much or more than for the victim of crime, or for the terrorist’s rights as equal to a nations’ right to defend itself when provoked by subversive forces.
The opposite of “bleeding hearts,” in its true sense, would be one who believes that his nation’s values are worth defending against subversive and destructive forces that want to impose a way of life on all of us which is devoid of freedom and respect for the equal value of every human life.
I think this statement pretty much sums up the anti war movement.
As long as they don’t attack us we are fine.
We should have told Europe that in WWI and WWII. Let them fight their own battles.
Fact is people, we didn’t attack anyone. They attacked us, as in 9/11.
By jim on 10.06.07 6:19 pm
We have no business being in another country destroying it. We originally went to Afghanistan to rebuild, reconstruction and train the police and military. Instead Stevie has pushed Canada into a war where they go and hunt to kill and the people’s lives, villages and infrastructure has been/is destroyed with no one helping to rebuild the country. We did not go to Afghanistan to destroy but to help build what the US and the Taliban destroyed.
We went into WW1 and WW2 as British subjects. There was no intent to destroy counties and it’s people. We also spent many years in Peacekeeping roles that made a great deal of difference to so many.
We were not attacked in 9/11. The fact that Canadians were in the vicinity and killed does not constitute claims that “we†were attacked. Neither were we attacked by the Air India bombing. This was an attack by Indian factions against their own people.
Never yet has there been an attack against Canada but with Harpercrite attitude it won’t take long for extremists to retaliate for the loss of their innocent civilians and the destruction of their county.
Most of the aid money to Afghanistan is going into war machinery with very little to nothing being used to help the population with a hand up.
Jim, do you really think that the Taliban stand a chance against reconstruction? The population would welcome the help if it were forthcoming and they would put the run on the Taliban. Instead the Taliban take advantage of the “war mentality†from this present government.
dubya is a cross between a frog, a toad, a lesbian-queer, a broken down set of traffic lights and a complete psychopath who has fallen way off the deep end!
This is for the Thanksgiving Day barrel of laughs!
http://bodypolitik.org/2007/10/05/iraq-redux-bush-thinks-god-is-telling-him-to-invade-iran/
I suppose this means that the NAU is now unofficially official. Did I word that correctly?
http://www.vivelecanada.ca/article.php/2007100518125732
“One of the Conservative economic policies is to build a military defence industry. I think you will find that it is those who hope to gain financially from arms production that are the biggest hawks.”
By C. B. Innes on 10.06.07 9:20 pm
You`re right about the hawks but if the Liberals were in power they would be doing the same thing. All sides know the odds of the doom and gloom scenario that keeps getting legs. Historically the Democrats have used US troops more than the Republicans. If they get a Democratic President the hawks will fill the sky while were off following the vulture to our death.
Lets bump this conversation up a notch.
It really is noticeable how your posts portrays a negative view of the right of center. You`ve crafted quite a story on ideologies and how they influence by accepted definition and occasionally with a twist. One that stands out is how the right is using a combination of ideologies while still not a true left. I`m not sure exactly how we don`t know a sheep in wolfs clothing so I have to say if they act left, they are, if they act right, then they are. Personally I don`t see any difference.
Did Trudeau create programs like you would expect a marxist to do? Yes Did he underfunded or not fund many of these programs that your description of a right winger would do? Yes.
So I have to agree an ideology to a politician is just a theory as you`ve said before. Whether the`re good or bad when on either side of the fence matters not yet it gets all the press. The real question remains, whether cross dressed or not what has our elected federal government done right in the last 40 years.
If everyone can just climb out of that pit of denial and say something like `we the people reject the throne speech if it doesn`t contain (fill in the blank here)`.
I know you might not consider teaming up with the other half of Cdns for ideological reasons. Hey we`re not so bad. You`ve raised an issue several times. Allow me to express my view, perhaps, anything can happen.
You rightly expressed a prominent view that folks looked at democracy and capitalism in different ways. You`re right, there is some nervousness that capitalism is attacking democracy. Capitalism in it`s profound form is commerce which was on the scene many thousands of years before democracy. Commerce on the NA continent started thousands of years ahead of democracy.
In many parts of the trading world and from available history it was quite a brutal business where the law was your own to decide and to defend. One story says nations were born to protect the ever expanding trade routes generated by the expanding commerce.
The Greeks had a great idea when they decided the fate of the majority should be left up to the majority. The health of the nation as determined by commerce the foundation to society, no longer would be held in a single pair of hands. It all started with commerce while democracy is simply a way of protecting commerce, the peoples most valuable resource, the principle factor in the health of most nations of that time.
Since then we have added other things such as our publicly funded health care that is here because of democracy and because of commerce.
While I am a Populous because I`m firm on the state owning the infrastructure I am quite comfortable in a business situation. Commerce is still the key to any society so put your fears aside.
Capitalism, the art of commerce, is the defender of democracy.
CB
Up another notch.
“Capitalism, the art of commerce, is the defender of democracy.”
Capitalism will also fund armaments, commerce you know wouldn`t be anything without profit.
With negative events happening almost on a daily basis it`s not hard to imagine how serious international disputes could occur if global commerce were threatened for whatever reason.
All the turmoil in the world during a time of globalisation is not a positive, many advocate protectionism. Most indicators show globalisation is running low on gas. All the advances made by, in some cases the majority of the population, world wide need to be sustained. Many are not seeing the future advancement the`ve been wanting. Perhaps I`m just not being optimistic enough but I see only two possibilities. One of the many serious threats to global stability will occur or we gas up globalisation.
Don`t dive back into the pit of denial, we`re not there yet.
With hundreds of trillions of dollars at risk and many more trillions in commerce money will move to armaments, no question. Unless there is a viable option. There is a possibility, the concept transportation system I`ve mentioned. War or do we take a serious enough look that the trillions of dollars will retool the armament factories into production of the huge amount of products needed.
The first step is to hold a university competition which will require $50m in seed money from Parliament.
If Parliament can`t find the $50m there must be a few wealthy individuals that would appreciate the honour.
Run out of oil, no cars, war or a robust sustainable global economy, seems an easy choice to me.
John G… and who wrote the Clarity Act…
I thought we cleared this up last week or whenever it last came up.
Stephan Harper wrote bill C-341, a private members bill, that did not pass first reading.
Stephane Dion took that bill and expanded it. He first wrote three open letters to Lucien Bouchard and Jacques Brassard challenging the Quebec sovereignist assertions and legal validity of the 1995 Quebec referendum question.
Next Stephane Dion submitted three questions to the Supreme Court of Canada, “Reference re Secession of Quebec”, an opinion regarding the legality, under both Canadian and international law, of a unilateral secession of Quebec from Canada.
On August 20, 1998, the Supreme Court answered, concluding that Quebec does not have the right to secede unilaterally under Canadian or international law. However, the federal government would have to enter into negotiations with the Quebec government if Quebeckers expressed a clear will to secede. It confirmed that the Canadian Parliament had the power to determine whether or not a referendum question was clear enough to trigger such negotiations. [...]
The Clarity Act, Bill C-20, was later drafted and presented to the House of Commons on December 13, 1999.
Clarity Act:
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/C-31.8/text.html
Harper’s Quebec Contingency Act (Summary):
“This enactment allows the Government of Canada to determine whether a referendum question in Quebec is clear and unambiguous.
If an affirmative answer is given to a clear question, the enactment authorizes the negotiation of separation, subject to the approval of the rest of Canada by referendum.
It affirms that a unilateral declaration of independence is ineffective with respect to Canadian law and does not affect the functioning of the Canadian Parliament, Government and courts with respect to Quebec.”
http://www2.parl.gc.ca/content/hoc/Bills/352/Private/C-341/C-341_1/C-341_1.pdf
Ok, John G, have you got it now? The difference between Harper’s Quebec Contingency Act and Dion’s Clarity Act? Two entirely different puppies.
Call Harper’s the QC Act if you want but please strive for accuracy, Dion wrote the Clarity Act, not Stevo. Sheesh
G’nite Geo
–Wallace Black Elk, LAKOTA
Who really gives us our life? Who really gives us our food and nurturing? Who really allows us to be born? We are born through our parents who act as the vehicle of life for the Creator and Mother Earth. Our parents take care of us for a little while and when we are ready we must leave them and be faithful to our true Father, the Creator, and our true Mother, the Earth. Then we need to be of service to the Creator and be respectful to Mother Earth.
As mentioned by many who now know and understand the high profits that can be gained by putting the “War Machines” into action also know that Neo Conservatives profit most while liberal minded persons are fed fear causing hatred in others to back their ultimate goal of power to control rather than lead.
So as posted how important is it?
Happly Thanksgiving. I am off for a nice Saturday Breakfast in Halifax. Yesterday was a trip to Annapolis Valley and fall colours in Nova Scotia are beautiful, especially banked in shinny waters of the Bay of Fundy. I touched the earth, and now can only hope many others will be able to do the same after the next election rather than make neo conservative war plans.
And for you people who have a hard time dealing in that reality and think 9/11 is a huge conspiracy, you should try talking with the 1,000’s of people who have been forever affected by the tragic loss of their loved ones.
By Reg….
I would think anyone who has loast a loved one under any circumstance would be grieving…to take their grief and use it for a political point to prove or disprove who was or is the quilty party is irrelavent. This will still be forever affected by their loss.
By Herb on 10.06.07 7:04 pm
Are there not any countries in the world who remain neutral or have only peace keeping forces?
Garth…
I think that completing our mission until Feb 2009 is our commitment and we should honour that. At that point, I think we should change course and have our military prepared to face any challenge to our sovereign territory and change our mission to one of peacekeeping outside of our borders. I think that would fly well with the majority of Canadians and would be welcomed on any platform in the next general election.
…A LESSON IN ‘MERICN FURRIN’ PLICY:
YOU DOESN’T SAY
‘You know, the President — it is no secret — sometimes makes grammatical errors.’
White House Press Secretary Dana Perino, on Mr. Bush’s recent comment, during a speech about education, that ‘childrens do learn when standards [are***] high’
Shoulda said [is***]
Lawsy, it’s shor diffucult not to udmir his stratege[R]y
http://images.theglobeandmail.com/archives/RTGAM/images/20071005/wverbatim1005/danaperino.jpg
Stephen Harper, to his dubious credit, is in lockstep with that guy known as The Dubya.
We should have told Europe that in WWI and WWII. Let them fight their own battles.
Fact is people, we didn’t attack anyone. They attacked us, as in 9/11.
By jim on 10.06.07 6:19 pm
Here’s the point about war not solving the underlying issues.
Why did WWII occur? The Allies may have won WWI, but the underlying problems in Germany still existed and were ripe for the Third Reich.
What was the result of WWII, the allies won when the Americans entered the war, which they did only after being attacked by the Japanesse.
But I digress. What happened to Yugoslavia? It was formed by putting together peoples of different ethnic backgrounds, which exploded.
The same can be said of India and Pakistan, arbitarily divided.
Then we have Afghanistan. Cold war thinking led to our current mess. The legal government of Afghanistan asked the USSR to assist them with the rebels (we call them terrorists or Talibhan). The US, not wanting communism to so read assisted the Talibhan and Bin Laden. And then we have the subversive elements of the US war machine. Overtly they may not have attacked anyone, but subvertly….who knows? When it comes to the roor causes of 9/11, its not as clear as you make out.
The same story is true of Iraq and Iran. The US. were friendly with the Shah of Iran. When he was overthrown, the Ayotola (Sp?) was totally anti-american. So who did the US. support? Iraq namely Saddam! Guess why the US. was saying he had WMD’s? Because they gave them to him!
Point being the war machine is just one big dance, were countries change partners to suit their needs.
I like Rope’s idea of a global mag lev. Probably would cost less than all the arms being manufactured, would employ just as many people in its construction, and would bring peoples closer together. Maybe then, they could stop their paternalistic governments from sabre rattling and going to war.
Judy,
Oh there is significant reconstruction going on and has been for quite awhile.
The reason there are no pictures is that to take pictures and display them would be to invite the taliban to conduct their own PR campaign by trying to destroy those same projects and to splash pictures of them around the media as their response.
But if you do some checking at certain sites (there are many) where soldiers blog, you’ll see the results.
Ed the Hun
The Prime Minister owes Ontarians 10 MORE SEATS in the redistribution. All Ontarians should join with Premier Dalton McGuinty to have Bill C-56 amended. Harper would love to deprive Ontario of its collective voice. Get on board and send an e-mail to your MP.
http://www.premier.gov.on.ca/news/Product.asp?ProductID=1702
Ed: You really think the Taliban do not know what construction is going on in their own country?
Is it a secret that there may be new schools and hospitals being built?
We keep hearing about all this new construction-let’s see it!
PJW,
except for Iceland, I know of no country that does not maintain armed forces of some kind (even Iceland has an armed Coast Guard.)
I know of no country that maintains military forces solely for peacekeeping, although there are countries that do good business by providing peaceleeping forces to the UN. The UN pays a lot more for a soldier than a soldier costs a poor country, and it pays in hard US currency. Hence the questionable capability and competence of some peacekeeping forces farmed out to the UN.
I think I know what you’d like to see, PJW, but it’s not out there in the real world. Better to be realistic and pragmatic, because you reduce the risk to yourself and do less damage.
Lorraine – nice try, but really give your partisan head a shake. Coderre, whether you think he’s politiking or not requested to go over to Afghanistan – no response and by golly at “Thanksgiving” Bernier and Oda are there – they could have taken Coderre and why “Thanksgiving”? Because they are doing some very crass politiking. How petty of the PM’s office.
Coderre has every right as representative of the official opposition, has every right to be protected and it could have been done if our twisted PM was so partisan and negative and hateful.
I hope to hell nothing happens to Coderre – if so, Harper is responsible. Coderre could have gone with Bernier and Oda.
“We were not attacked in 9/11. The fact that Canadians were in the vicinity and killed does not constitute claims that “we†were attacked. Neither were we attacked by the Air India bombing. This was an attack by Indian factions against their own people.By Emilie on 10.07.07 12:10 am”
Garth, is that the official liberal line? Do you say these people on Air India were not Canadians? Do you say an attack on north american soil does not constitute and attack against Canadians as well as Americans?
Lets have a comment on that Garth. Whats the official liberal spin? You are very silent.
Who’s Emilie? Is she the new Liberal leader? — Garth
For everyone who would like a excellent read of the Coderre Afghanistan trip saga, I suggest you run over to the Galloping Beaver (the link below). Just for a little back ground, Dave is ex-military and now does Maritime Safety Training with the Military and Canadian Coastguard. He is exceptionally knowledgeable and well written.
And to the trolls here, if you go over there, I suggest you be polite cause Dave will rip you new a-hole in short order.
Call Harper’s the QC Act if you want but please strive for accuracy, Dion wrote the Clarity Act, not Stevo. Sheesh
G’nite Geo
By Georgine on 10.07.07 4:53 am
Wow Georgine! I’m impressed…well done. To me it’s the vision that counts…on that Harper was once again way ahead of anyone….still kudo’s for your research..
Defence critic out in the cold in Kandahar
Don Martin, National Post
Published: Friday, October 05, 2007
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/canada/story.html?id=3231ef8c-a19c-4ecc-a2b3-823a8790e45b
“But Mr. Coderre suspects — probably correctly — that he’s being shunted aside for political reasons lest his trek be wrapped up in time to launch an informed attack on the government. As proof the government is being selective in helping MPs, he points out that Foreign Affairs offered to assist him during a side trip to Pakistan.
Sure, it’s an organizational headache. But officers tell me Cabinet ministers are the mother of all migraines. In the case of former defence minister Gordon O’Connor, officers confide his final visit ended with his flacks ripping into military brass for failing to set up suitable camera backgrounds for media scrums. The Taliban would crack up if they knew how petty things can get in Canadian politics.
Mr. Coderre says he will piggyback on charitable and humanitarian groups to ensure he sees the wilds of Kandahar up close. If it’s done safely, he may well leave with a greater appreciation of the situation than any cocooned minister or parliamentary secretary. Being confined to the airfield gives you no more insight into southern Afghanistan reality than studying the situation from Bay Street.
But it will be very dangerous outside the base and the optics of Mr. Coderre getting hurt or worse for the want of a military babysitter would make the partisan protectionism of the Conservatives appear unforgivably petty.
Lest we forget, Canada’s enemy in Afghanistan are extremists trying to stifle free speech and deny women basic human rights — not Liberals trying to have an informed debate.”
IIRC, many Dems in the US were allowed and provided security to visit Iraq & Afgan over the years. So yeah SLG I agree that if anything happens to Coderre, I’ll definitely blame Stevie.
Garth, is that the official liberal line? Do you say these people on Air India were not Canadians? Do you say an attack on north american soil does not constitute and attack against Canadians as well as Americans?
Lets have a comment on that Garth. Whats the official liberal spin? You are very silent.
Who’s Emilie? Is she the new Liberal leader? — Garth
By jim on 10.07.07 11:41 am
Jim – These 2 tragedies were not against Canada. In the case of the Air India bombing it was against one group of Indians against another group of Indians who happened to live in Canada. Nothing whatsoever against Canada, our country. In the case of 9/11 it was against US foreign policy, not Canadians who happened to be working in NY. But, Jim, you are like all the neocon sheeple who try to twist the facts to suit your agenda.
By Herb on 10.07.07 10:28 am
Maybe I didn’t make myself clear Herb and if so i apologize for that. What I am advocating is an arm force for the protection of the terrtory of the sovereign nation of Canada. Once we have estabished that, then a force to be utilized in the world at large in only a peacekeeping role, not a combat role. Further to that, we need to assess our own foreign policy world wide and be very careful who we align ourselves with in this matter. For example, PM Chretien, whatever his reason may have been, political or otherwise, in my opinion made the right call on Iraq. If we are choosing sides based on the foreign policy of another nation, in this case, the United States, and their policy of removing a ruthless dictator, then I would suggest we have not chosen wisely. I would prefer we have made in Canada decisions and that we intervene outside of Canada only as a peacekeeper.
I am at a loss to understand why we cannot take this direction but I am open to hear your position.
For Reg.
http://www.perdana4peace.org/2007/14_news2007.php
Some want to know who attacked the towers and Pentagon.
Investigate; do not cover-up.
The opposite of “bleeding hearts,†in its true sense, would be one who believes that his nation’s values are worth defending against subversive and destructive forces that want to impose a way of life on all of us which is devoid of freedom and respect for the equal value of every human life.
By Ike on 10.06.07 11:59 pm
So Ike, does that justify the actions of the Taliban killing NATO troops in Afghanistan? Would they not see the US and others as trying to impose our way of life on them?
For everyone who would like a excellent read of the Coderre Afghanistan trip saga, I suggest you run over to the Galloping Beaver (the link below). Just for a little back ground, Dave is ex-military and now does Maritime Safety Training with the Military and Canadian Coastguard. He is exceptionally knowledgeable and well written.
And to the trolls here, if you go over there, I suggest you be polite cause Dave will rip you new a-hole in short order.
By Zorpheous on 10.07.07 11:45 am
A real unbiased look at the situation. There is more lieberal spin on that site than in a washing machine.
And to the trolls here, if you go over there, I suggest you be polite cause Dave will rip you new a-hole in short order.
By Zorpheous on 10.07.07 11:45 am
I didn’t get to check out RT’s site before I posted above. I enjoy RT’s site though the con trolls can get a bit much. But, atleast he allows them to post, contrary to many of the Blogging Tory sites.
Leasa
You right we have to get rid off DICTATORS Our own country is runner by a Dictator lets get rid off him before we in real trouble not with a gun election the sooner the better
would employ just as many people in its construction, and would bring peoples closer together. Maybe then, they could stop their paternalistic governments from sabre rattling and going to war.
By James- Chatham on 10.07.07 8:04 am
While the environment benefits are enormous you`ve singled out the most important benefit. Jobs. It appears we`ve reached a plateau as far as expanding global commerce and the job creation that would lead to a further expansion. If this remains true to historical boom and bust then we can expect the typical bust and the problems that are associated with it. The anomaly lays in the amount of cash looking for an investment. The historically high amount is more likely to lead to increased investment along the same lines as subprime. Subprime came about as normal consumer credit loaded up with debt so the money moved to more risk. Without an alternative the next move will be to armaments. In poker it`s called a continuation bet. The pot is so big it`s bound to get an all in raise and we need to call with more jobs globally than workers.
The best course of action is to present a global approach to a sustainable economy. I have several reasons for suggesting a global university competition for the best design. It will start as a feasibility study, I have ever reason to believe this will result in convincing the trillions of dollars there is an option. From there a global design will emerge.
We need $50m to fund our Cdn universities to engage in this program 100%. The time is right and the current global situation says it`s now.
In a discussion with CB I noted varying ideologies often overlaps with right acting left and left acting right. Regardless of ideology the state owns the TT infrastructure while the rest is completely open to commerce. I noted that Paul Martin had Marxist leaning yet government from the right. In all ideologies commerce comes first so there`s no reason for any government to oppose the global expansion of commerce.
Matter of fact I see no reason Paul Martin should or would hesitate in moving CSL to supply the $50M. A fully active global program would supply decades of international container traffic hauling the `stuff` needed for construction, expansion and eventually, upgrades.
What about Paul old buddy, are you onboard with a check?
SLG,
Actually, Coderre has no ‘right’ to visit Afghanistan, no matter what his position.
The decision to allow for visitors is made by the Comd on the ground, and is based upon the current operations, the amount of resources required to ‘protect’ a visitor, etc, etc.
Before I left theatre, the Commander was begging ISAF to turn off the tap of visitors since ongoing operations were being strained by the resources required to provide protection.
What did Coderre ask to see? A hospital? A new school? What? Because to allow a ‘visitor’ to go on a sight-seeing tour only does/results in one thing!
Putting soldiers’ lives at risk who have to chaperone the visitor. Any Commander worth any salt wouldn’t allow the soldiers under his/her command to be put at risk just to support a sight-seeing tour.
Ed the Hun
Rope,
“Capitalism, the art of commerce, is the defender of democracy.”
I disagree. When capitalism first begin to take hold in the 1700s and early 1800s there was virtually no democracy. Democracy developed in order to control capitalism because of the social unrest that resulted from unregulated capitalism. In traditional society those who held the wealth had certain responsibilites toward those that did not. The system was anything but perfect because many wealth holders did not take their responsibilities seriously.
Capitalism did away with those responsibilites in exchange for what we now call “free markets”. It did not take long before many people begin to realize that the system did not work without some form of checks and balances because greed led to all kinds of injustice. Social unrest escalated and many in the establishment feared violent revolution.
Liberal or capitalist democracy was a relatively peaceful revolution that eventually opened government involvement to far more people. In countries such as Britain, Canada, France, and to a lesser extent the United States this led to social programs and the creation of a social safety net for those marginalized by the capitalist system.
Democracy was most effective in maintaining social order (I don’t just mean law and order but social security) when Marxism was an ideological alternative. That ended with the fall of the Solviet Bloc.
Since then liberal democracy has come into disrepute. In fact, some on the right (I believe Harper was one of them) have come out strongly against the concept of liberal democracy.
Political parties have become one of the main factors in destroying democracy by centralizing power in a small elite. The general membership serves three functions: (1) selecting the dictator; (2) raising money; (3) volunteering in campaigns. This system is easy to co-opt because of the increasing amounts of money required to achieve the leadership of a party.
With increasing inequality and corporations with financial assets larger than many countries there is no incentive for many commercial interests to support democracy. In fact the reverse is true because it is far easier to exploit the resources and workers in a country that does not have a strong democracy. This is why China is doing so well.
“I can agree with a policy such as this. Why didn’t the Liberal party come right out and say so in the first place? I think even Harper stated a very similar policy about a month ago although it appears the he is considering a continuation of our combat role.”
By Van….
I knew about this Liberal policy “if that is what it is” for months now, I can remember it being articulated in the House around the time O’Connor was having all the problems with the detainee issue and the Liberals were responding to accusactions of being more concerned about terrorists than our troops. For sure, they wanted to live up to the commitment until Feb 2009, and the mission to provide reconstruction aid was mentioned at the same time. It was the NDP that wanted to come home hell or high water.
In fact, some on the right (I believe Harper was one of them) have come out strongly against the concept of liberal democracy.
C. B. Innes on 10.07.07 2:36 pm
With both say democracy brought about stability to commerce so what we disagree on are trivial items.
Your research on democracy has a time line fault, the King of England turned power over to the people with a parliament some 700 years ago, not in 1700.
This is a puzzling statement.
“some on the right (I believe Harper was one of them) have come out strongly against the concept of liberal democracy.”
Trudeau was the one that turned our democratic rights and freedoms over to a handful of unelected unaccountable lawyers. That to me is coming out strongly against liberal democracy.
What words or actions has Harper used that would be even a little comparably to the actions of Trudeau?
“is far easier to exploit the resources and workers in a country that does not have a strong democracy. This is why China is doing so well.”
China has generated a middle class that`s equal in size to the US and will soon pass the entire NA continent. I can`t fathom how you conclude that`s exploitation.
All this talk about “WAR”! What does war mean to you? For me it is being taken out of a warm bed to a deep dark hole in the ground for safety. It felt more like being buried alive than being safe. It is being afraid of turning on a light before all the blackout curtains were pulled across the windows. It is taking your life in your hands everytime you went out whether it was to stand in line for the meager food ratiion or going to school.It is the constant bombardment day and night, the sirens that to this day still bring goose bumps on my flesh. It’s an on going fear of low flying aeroplanes, if you could read their numbers they were way too low. It is not knowing for six years if our father would come home alive or be physicallly or psychologically maimed. It is people being turned out of their homes with only what they could carry going where? No one knew when they would eat again or where they would sleep. It is being shuffled from place to place living with strangers.
War leaves scars that are still with us sixty years on, the fear of loud noises, low flying planes, sirens these are my scars.
And after the war seeing cities being rebuilt only to be destroyed in the next.
War is a stupid solution to a never ending problem it makes money for the arms merchants and spends our youth needlessly.
“The opposite of ‘bleeding hearts,’ in its true sense, would be one who believes that his nation’s values are worth defending against subversive and destructive forces that want to impose a way of life on all of us which is devoid of freedom and respect for the equal value of every human life.”
–By Ike on 10.06.07 11:59 pm
“So Ike, does that justify the actions of the Taliban killing NATO troops in Afghanistan? Would they not see the US and others as trying to impose our way of life on them?” –By pjw on 10.07.07
12:26 pm
pjw, you miss the point completely.
First of all, the Taliban do not represent the majority of Afghan people who have invited the NATO forces to defend their freedoms.
Second,I stated clearly that the type of values that are worth defending are values of freedom and the respect for the equal value of every human life.
How do the Taliban come even close to standing up for values that believe in the equality of every human life?
It is comments like this which make one wonder if people like you make any moral distinction between the values of fascists like the Taliban and the democratic values of the NATO forces.
“If firefighters fight fire, and crimefighters fight crime, what do freedom fighters fight? They don’t tell you about that part, do they?” – George Carlin.
Canada was called in to Afghanistan to mop up after the US decided they couldn’t find Bin Laden there, and besides, Afghanistan didn’t have any oil – although it has MUCHO opium poppies.
Who’s kidding whom? Canadian soldiers are dying in Afghanistan to satisfy Harpo’s need to play at war. Why don’t we have Harpo walk point on a night mission or two over there? He gets shot at a few times, I’m sure he’ll appreciate what far too many Canadian mothers, wives and families are going through right now.
WE DO NOT NEED TO BE THERE! PERIOD! If someone pipes up, “But if we pull out, they’ll follow us home!”, has it NOT occurred to you that “they” ALREADY know how to find us? Hell, we WELCOME the terrorists 24/7 at every customs point now as it is. A few months back, I saw Bin Laden at the back of the bus as I was headed into work. He looked a little lost, but then he was about to disembark at the most dangerous place in the city – the Surrey Central Skytrain Station. If he could survive THAT, why should he worry about Harpo and Dubya tracking him down?
“If mothers ran the world, there would be no damned war!” – Sally Field.
Maybe that’s what the Harpo’s and Dubya’s of the world fear most – getting caught by their mothers.
Is the waging of war really about castration issues? If the Harpo’s and the Dubya’s DON’T go to war, does that mean that Mommy caught them and cut them off?
Oh, dear, we mustn’t let on that Golda Meir and Margaret Thatcher had bigger ones than any of today’s leaders, now, must we?
The question has gone past, “Why are we there?” It should now be, “When the *bleep* do we take the hint, and get the *bleep* out?”
When leaders stop leading with their heat-seeking missiles, maybe we can start taking them seriously. Till then, it’s just a case of “Oh, yeah? MINE’S BIGGER!”
My name is Alex Thomas. I am Canadian.
It is comments like this which make one wonder if people like you make any moral distinction between the values of fascists like the Taliban and the democratic values of the NATO forces.
By Ike on 10.07.07 3:32 pm
Sorry Ike, i didn’t say I supported their values or anything of the like, what I did say, was from their perspective, is it any different?
And to follow your point, we better get a ton load of soldiers lined up if we are going into every country that doesn’t meet our standards as you laid them out…and aside from that, it might be an idea to have that kind of respect for our own, the poor, the disadvantaged, the aboriginals, and on and on…before we become moral cop for the world.
ope,
While there is an emerging class of wealthy entrepreneurs in China there is an increasing class of poor primarily in rural China.
When we talk about things like lead contaminated toys we are focusing only on North American children but not on the workers in the factories which are being exposed on a long term basis to the same toxic substance.
Since China’s capitalist society is not democratic it is difficult to get data but it is estimated that almost 12 per cent of children aged 10 to 14 are employed in some economic activity. One of the main areas of child labour is in factories that manufacture toys.
You are correct in saying that there is a “middle class” that is growing in China just as there was in Britain during the industrial revolution when there were heavy costs in the physical well being of workers and in environmental degradation. China is developing as a non-democratic capitalist society and as such people do not have the freedom to speak out or oppose what is happening to them.
We are only told about the magnificent economic growth but the societal costs are largely hidden.
PJW,
re. your 12:19, you’ll get no argument from me on a made-in-Canada foreign policy, and I do love Chretien for having kept us out of Iraq II.
The problem is that foreign and defence polies have to be realistic. If you want to defend the sovereignty and territory of Canada, you have to consider who is threatening it. Right now, I dare say nobody. The current flavourfull “International Terrorism” and “Global War on Terror” are American propaganda constructs for domestic and international consumption, with both uses wearing thin. While the flap over the North could entail some gunboat diplomacy, it should be resolvable through international negotiations – except if the USA wants the North-West passage.
And in the future? Well, our southern neighbours have a history of taking what they want, so if they need our oil or water at some point, they will come and take them, arranging a suitable subterfuge, of course. Given their military capability, direct defence will be impracticable and international law and treaties will mean little. Hard to face that, but I would treat it as fact. So we could turn peacenik, or put up a good front and prepare for lesser (and less likely) threats.
As I suggested earlier, it makes no sense to prepare armed forces solely for peacekeeping. They can keep – or make – peace if they are capable of battle, but if the sides to the peace do not play nice, they are out of business if they either cannot or are not allowed to fight. Look at Somalia, Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia as examples.
The long and the short of it is, that, if you want to be part of a military alliance or help out anywhere else where military forces might be required, you better have those forces capable and ready, and be a known quantity. You need equipment and expertise that can’t be developed overnight. Theoretically, you could raise a couple of battalions of RCMP and employ them on very light peacekeeping, but their utility would be limited.
The practical alternatives are to disarm and make that clear, or to maintain full bore military forces. The prudent choice is the latter, in which case you have to decide on the size of the forces you maintain, and when, how and where they are going to be used when your foreign policy requires the deployment of military forces. Consider that we went into Afghanistan as a matter of foreign policy, not because Canada was attacked or the USA couldn’t handle the threat all by themselves. Of course, you could restrict the CF to peacekeeping missions, but it’s a mission-by-mission call, and there are not that many genuine peacekeeping missions in the world. We pulled out of Cyprus after 30 years with the two sides as far apart as ever, and the real peace still being kept by the Turkish Corps that landed there in 1974 to ensure it.
By Herb on 10.07.07 5:01 pm
Thanks for that Herb, I appreciate you taking the time, I am not sure I agree with you but my knowledge in this field (among others) is rather limited. I guess I just don’t see the point in wars, they never seem to resolve any problems and maybe I am frustrated by the fact that no one seems to exert as much energy in finding peaceful solutions as they do to building up armies and weaponry designed to take lives. Guess there is no money in that!
C. B. Innes. Marxism did not die when the Soviet Union underwent economic woes.
Marx died before he could complete his hypotheses and it was left to Engels to fill in the blanks. What Marx postulated was ‘conflict arises where there are large disparencies between classes’.
Hadn’t that happened throughout history…the French revolution produced Karl. America’s attempt to introduce their Independence from Britain was part of class struggle. Conflict now exists between Globalists and workers around the world and Marx is as relevant today as when he postulated his theories
Samples of oppressed groups…any minority group that lacks power: workers without unions, women, voters whose needs are suppressed by the politicians they elect.
Paper that talks about his ideas
Marx is as relevant today as when he postulated his theories.
Marx was a philosopher. His broad thinking were not ideologues–they came after him.
in China there is an increasing class of poor primarily in rural China.
We are only told about the magnificent economic growth but the societal costs are largely hidden.
By C. B. Innes on 10.07.07 4:36 pm
“in China there is an increasing class of poor primarily in rural China”
It`s not increasing but the farmers are certainly not advancing at the same rate.
” magnificent economic growth but the societal costs are largely hidden.”
You mean cutting down all the forests, polluting major water ways with pulp mill effluents, herbicides and green manure, damming rivers exterminating fish, coal fired generating stations, oops, sry that is Canada.
Sry CB but you`re going to have to do better to convince me capitalists want to destroy democracy especially after we both agree democracy, in my words, stabilize commerce, and your words, end unregulated capitalism which is the same thing.
The last thing capitalists would want is to go back to an unregulated, unstably economy.
PJW,
at the risk of repeating myself, I do appreciate your sentiments, but we both have to deal with the world we live in. Greed is a factor in human beings as well as nations, so conflict is hard-wired into personal as well as international relations. About the only peace mechanism that has worked so far is deterrence. As a wise general once said, “No one fights a war in which there are no prizes.” Considered objectively, no war has ever been worth its cost in treasure, lives and misery, but we don’t look at wars in terms of human or material cost, only in terms of the moral marketing of propaganda and rationalization.
Thus endeth the lesson.
Peter MacKay, the former Foreign Affairs Minister and now the Minister of Defence, when running for the leader of the PC Party stated his foreign policy position. That position was quite simple: to follow the United States and other allies whether you agreed with them or not. Harper has advocated the same position when he referred to his position as a moral stand: “This moral stand should not just give the right to stand with our allies, but the duty to do so and the responsibility to put ‘hard power’ behind our international commitments.” Harper has made it clear that sees war as some kind of moral imperative.
This is a simple foreign policy that everyone can understand: we will follow the United States wherever it will lead. The question is whether it is the best foreign policy for Canada.
I do not believe it is. Following the United States into the Iraq War, as Harper advocated, would have put us in a similar mess to what the United States is facing today with massive deficits and an escalating debt. What will Harper do if the Bush Administration decides to take another step in its “pre-emptive war” policy and attack Iran?
Leasa
You right we have to get rid off DICTATORS Our own country is runner by a Dictator lets get rid off him before we in real trouble not with a gun election the sooner the better
By ann d on 10.07.07 12:31 pm
Ann, anyone who would think Mr. Harper a dictator doesn’t know squat about this world. The only thing that comes to mind when I read an accusation like this is: God, what a shit for brains.
Sorry, if you are offended by that.
Get stuffed yet? Happy Thanksgiving!
By John G on 10.07.07 11:53 am
Thanks, But not so much. Were you not around in ‘95? or not paying attention? Too young maybe?
A lot of discussion went into the “question” regarding separation. Not just Harper, Manning and Dion were thinking about it. It was talked about in pubs and over peoples fences too. Everyone was talking about it. So far as vision was concerned Steve just tried to get something out as fast as possible. Not truly thought out, which is why it probably died at first reading.
Dion thought it through, completely. He framed the arguments and took it to the Bloc, and all they could do was sputter in indignation. They knew he was right. The same as when he took it to the SCoC,
they concurred with their questions and now the country is much more secure because of it.
This will also apply should the “West”, were I live, should decide to separate. Funny, I hear nothing about separation anywhere I go in BC.
I believe there is an animosity to Dion in Quebec because of the Clarity Act and for his staunch federalism. He believes in Canada, unlike Harper who has shown clearly that he does not.
Harper has continually told Quebec that they are more special than the rest of us by money and by deed; nation in a nation BS. And what next? Anything goes with Harper.
But you tell me….you are the one that is always right. Right?
Geo
ps: how old are you?
Hi Lease
First off all i had a wonderful thanksgiving dinner and I’m thankful every day .I’m not offended by that you said because that has nothing to do with me that you who you are Be thank full every day and every day thanksgiving .I lost my husband 2 month ago and I’m thankful he doest have to suffer any more lease be positive take care
“Funny, I hear nothing about separation anywhere I go in BC.”
Georgine on 10.07.07 8:53 pm
ah Geo, I`m really hurt, you come here, I`m in BC and I talk about it, what am I, old hambuger meat.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1123588600678_121/?hub=Canada
Western provinces consider separation: poll
Updated Tue. Aug. 9 2005 2:23 PM ET
CTV.ca News Staff
The magazine’s survey found that 35.6 per cent of respondents from Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia agreed that “Western Canadians should begin to explore the idea of forming their own country.”
separatist sentiment appeared to run highest among young people — 37 per cent of respondents between the ages of 18 and 29 were open to the notion of breaking away from Canada.
Support was lowest — 33.7 per cent — among the baby boom generation aged between 45 and 64.
Geo, as you brought it up, remember I`m rooting for at least a Liberal minority.
Garth I`ve got some very interesting things on the Conservatives concerning what I believe to be the Liberals election plan. I might be able to squeeze my schedule enough to work part time for the LPC.
http://www.uofaweb.ualberta.ca/govrel/news.cfm?story=51140
(Oct 2, 2006) –
38 per cent of respondents specifically citing the Liberal sponsorship scandal and the manner in which former prime minister Paul Martin
PROV – Happy now?: Think the federal Liberals’ defeat ended talk of Western secessionism? Think again. Our second annual Western separation survey finds a region still uneasy about the federation and still less than thrilled with Ottawa
“You mean cutting down all the forests, polluting major water ways with pulp mill effluents, herbicides and green manure, damming rivers exterminating fish, coal fired generating stations, oops, sry that is Canada.”
Exactly. Why do you think that some of the same capitalist operations that were responsible for the above are now moving to China and parts of South America, etc.? They are afraid that as a democratic country, at the public becomes more aware of the environmental problems this causes that regulations will prevent them in the future from continuing on that path.
“Sry CB but you`re going to have to do better to convince me capitalists want to destroy democracy especially after we both agree democracy, in my words, stabilize commerce, and your words, end unregulated capitalism which is the same thing.”
I would agree that not all capitalists are bad citizens but many of them are. Large multi-national corporations do not have the same incentives to be good citizens as nationally owned companies. They have no reason to be stewards of the environment.
“The last thing capitalists would want is to go back to an unregulated, unstably economy.”
Sorry, rope that is not the way things are. Take for example the large Canadian multi-national oil company that built an oil pipeline in a small South American country slashing down the rain forest and contaminating the water sources of the local residents. They then sold the development to another large company at a considerable profit and left. What incentive did they have to be stewards of the environment?
Corporate globalization allows this to happen around the world just as it was allowed to happen here. Governments are now afraid to try to stop this kind of exploitation because places like China will allow it. There is no democracy to protect the Chinese and their environment.
We still have some ability to fight the establishment although it is getting more difficult all the time. The corporations and monied interests are the ones with the ear of government while the ordinary citizen gets shut out from access.
C. B. Innes on 10.07.07 10:28 pm
There are many truths in your post.
“They are afraid that as a democratic country, at the public becomes more aware of the environmental problems becomes more aware of the environmental problems this causes that regulations will prevent them in the future”
We have a government that is supposed to act in the best interest of Cdns yet they don`t engage till the public does. How true.
“Large multi-national corporations do not have the same incentives to be good citizens as nationally owned companies.”
Muli-nationals like Conrad Black is still untouched by Cdn law. I recall a convention centre the Liberals set up for an international conference in Alberta. The lodge was wired for high speed at a cost of as I recall of $50m, all the while they were being investigated by the Alberta Securities Commission. I agree that nationals have more incentive than international, Nortel at least is still under investigation. I don`t see our law investigating any international companies. Not having enough incentive leads to corruption which I`ve said for years is rampant in Canada.
The issue of corruption answers the rest of your post, the rule of law for corporations or anyone in authority is non-existent. Couldn`t agree with your synopsis more but it`s not commerce that`s destroying democracy, it`s corruption all the way to the UN oil for food scam and other atrocities.
Leesa, there are a growing number of us voters,that believe Harper is a dictator.I truly hope for the sake of Canada,come election time he gets “STUFFED” If ever there was a Turkey,he’s it!
By ann d on 10.07.07 9:50 pm
I am very sorry for your loss. I know that these are changes that seem insurmountable. Been there.
However, it is distressing to see Canadians so easily using terms like ‘dictator’, ‘racist’, bigot etc. ect. If we use those words constantly, especially when referring to our own government and public servants, they will eventually lose the meaning and impact of what it really means to be those things.
Hitler, Stalin, Hussein etc. were dictators that killed their own and caused unimaginable suffering, without empathy or guilt. A true dictator has psychopathic qualities. Ask any European senior what a dictator is.
L
Fact: We don’t have enough troops in our military to deploy troops in Afghanistan and Dafur or even Burma for that matter.
Fact: We have not tasked on a peace keeping mission since 1989. Peace making yes Peace keeping No. Daffur is just or more dangerous then Afghanistan. 12 so called peace keepers was murdered just last week in Dafur.
Fact: you must have peace before your can keep the peace. Dafur is not at peace.
Wp wrote:
“there are a growing number of us voters,that believe Harper is a dictator”
Then there are a growing number of voters who have no idea what the trem dictator means.
The fact of the matter is that Harper is no dictator and no where near it. Those who think he is, are allowing their political bias to get in the way of their common sense.
“However, it is distressing to see Canadians so easily using terms like ‘dictator’, ‘racist’, bigot etc. ect. If we use those words constantly, especially when referring to our own government and public servants, they will eventually lose the meaning and impact of what it really means to be those things.”
I agree we shouldn’t be refering to Mr. Harper as a dictator in the same way as we use it for those you mentioned, but he has those tendencies, not of Hitler, but of wanting everything his way or the highway. He tends to try to govern with a minority like he has a majority. But even that being said, the thing that is most off putting is the person he is, or at least the person he presents in the House. He could have had many mnay more supporters if he had been a little more accomodating and decided to govern rather than campaign 24/7. He leaves me with the impression he is a very dangerous man.
Fact: you must have peace before your can keep the peace. Dafur is not at peace.
By Van on 10.08.07 9:29 am
Then, what are peacekeepers doing there, I agree there must be peace before you keep it…but who send in the peacekeepers into a war zone? Makes no sense to me.
I agree we shouldn’t be refering to Mr. Harper as a dictator in the same way as we use it for those you mentioned, By pjw on 10.08.07 9:35 am
There is no other way to use those terms. See what I mean by losing the impact, the essence and depth of the words? It diminishes greatly the history of the world and the acts of those mentioned. Mr. Harper is by no means a dictator. A strong leader working in a democracy yes. He just doesn’t bend to lose track of his campaign promises and Canadians did not elect a left leaning government. L
He just doesn’t bend to lose track of his campaign promises and Canadians did not elect a left leaning government. L
By Leasa on 10.08.07 11:09 am
Leasa, that is just absolute spin, he has broken many campaign promises and you know it, he does not bend only because of his hatred for Liberals, that is his motivation. I won’t list the broken promises because you know them as well as I do, if not better.
As far as the dictator bit, you have a point there and I am willing to concede that calling him such could diminish the atrocities of the past. But as you are fond of saying here, “Give your head a shake, girl”, this man lies with the best of them and, at times, with a mean spirit! He loves to adopt politics of personal destruction.
Ann D,
you used to be a regular, but dropped out of sight several months ago. I gather that the explanation is contained in your 9:50 last night.
My sympathies – and admiration for your spirit.
He just doesn’t bend to lose track of his campaign promises and Canadians did not elect a left leaning government. L
So, you admit Harper will bend over? Good, because most Canadians are tired from doing it. LOL
The term that should be used to describe Stephen Harper is either an authoritarian or autocrat. Both terms can describe his type of leadership.
It is a patriarchical type of leadership that assumes the leader knows everything and what is best for the organization. It also implies the inferiority of his subordinates (e.g. they are ignorant, not to be trusted, lazy, lack ambition, prefer to be led).
Regarding Burma, it’s always about the oil stupid, that’s why only sanctions. China and India supply the junta with weapons and here’s why.
http://www.shwe.org/news/archieve-1/2007/
PJW wrote.
>…but who send in the peacekeepers into a >war zone? Makes no sense to me.
The UN and it makes no sense to me either.
Thank you herb on .
Wen i listen to the people you know who is a con server they mix up politic with religion You listen to lib they have open-mind and every body has a right to live for the way they are Not with con Harper mix it all up We can see that in the world Religion created wars I was a con for long time not any more i go for the libs live and learn and be thankful And i don’t like bullies and that Wat Harper is you don’t want to call him dictator that up to you to me he is We need a leader who except all kinds off people not a bully They can never work together my way or the hi way
There is no other way to use those terms. See what I mean by losing the impact, the essence and depth of the words?
Leasa
My, how sexual that sounds. Tell us you are not still looking for an orgy L? LOL
About like Bush’s Foreign Policy ‘This will not be another Viet Nam! This time we are going to go All The Way!’
Ah to live, dream and hope in a bubble. Sorry to pop it, but the LIB dream for Canada’s future involvement in Afghanistan has a couple of fatal flaws. First, of the military elements we currently have committed to Kandahar, the Provincial Reconstruction Team is responsible for doing what the LIBs envision as our future sole military mission. At present PRT operations are limited to those areas (Districts) where the Battle Group has created and is maintaining a secure environment. Under the LIB plan, this Battle Group will be from another country. Our PRT operations and their priority will therefore not be ours to set, but rather this other NATO country, if one every steps up, will decide where and when we can move. Second, each PRT element that moves outside of its compound is escorted by a large combat infantry platoon. These PRT elements, like all other coalition elements are subject to attack by improvised explosive devices (big land mines buried into the roads) and direct-fire attacks by insurgents using machineguns and rocket-propelled grenades.
If the LIBs expect that this will no longer happen to us, then this policy really is a dream. If the LIBs think that this policy will result in fewer or even no casualties, then they are very much miss informed. The Dutch initially went into Uruzgan, just north of Kandahar with the idea that they would not have to stop the insurgents, just deliver aid and reconstruction. They were proven wrong, and have only had success with their PRT when they forced the insurgents out of the Districts. In the end, it will be the Afghan people that put an end to the Taliban. But only once they see and believe that we are committed to helping them and are determined to stay the course during the long years it will take them to slowly rebuild their shattered country.
Many on this site talk of dealing with the root causes of conflict. Kandahar Afghanistan is a place to start. Nothing worth doing is ever easy. Why should helping the Afghan people be any different?