Riley Hennessey (Riley's Political Rant) has requested that we bloggers all show our support of the Afghanistan mission by posting a special entry today.
According to CTV, "the New Democrats and Bloc Quebecois have decided not to support an extension of the mission, while the Liberals remain undecided."
So we all know that Jack Spratt can take no flack, and Gilles is at the mercy of Quebec popular opinion (apparently), so that leaves the Untrue Grits to do the right thing.
My take on this is that anything short of throwing full support behind this motion to extend the deployment would be a slap in the face to the families of the fifteen soldiers who have already paid the ultimate price. Can you imagine being in their position and listening to all the partisan platitudes and political posturing?
To commence planning withdrawal operations at this point would be like cutting out one cancerous tumour, but leaving the rest in because the doctors couldn't agree how to go about it.
The Liberals have the opportunity to show some intestinal fortitude and support our troops right now, instead of worrying about half-mast flags and photo-ops at repatriation ceremonies.
However, since it is a 'vote of conscience', I fear the worst. But they will be the ones to have to answer to the families and the rest of Canada at the time of the next election.
36 comments:
Nice....
:-)
Joanne you're AWESOME!
thanks so much!
Riley, you're the awesome one for starting this. Just ignore anyone with venomous rhetoric who opposes you. Think of them as her Majesty's loyal opposition.
Ok, mine's up.
Riley are you linking these posts to your's or something?
Heh... Liberals showing unanimous support for the Troops. Methinks thou dost dreamest Joanne.
Good post though.:)
Your blogs are linked now on my latest post. Let's hope this continues!!
Thanks again everyone!
The more I find the more I'll link.
I don't know, I have no clue why or what we are doing their. Mind you no matter why we are their I do support them everyday. My childcare blog is in part for their families too, they need help to childcare their own children but I'm a bleeding heart I don't want them over there anyways... but I will still support them. My next blog will be for their spouses and children left behind ok...doen't mean I like them there... no it don't and you can't make it (did you get the baby tone in my voice, my husband calls it whining!)
The Liberal position on the Afghanistan vote is a sound one. Harper has taken a leaf from the Bush Book, inspired by Frank Luntz and ghost-written by Karl Rove, and tried to set a trap for the opposition parties. Harper is trying to divide the MPs into two camps of his own choosing: those "for" the troops (meaning those who will give Harper a blank cheque by voting for the extension for 2 years without any discussion or any qualifications), and those who against Harper and therefore against the troops.
This dog won't hunt. Canadians understand politicians who try to pull fast ones like that, and expect their MPs to watch out for them and for their nation and its troops.
Bush has bungled the Iraq war and is bungling Afghanistan, because there was and is too little planning to "win the peace".
We need a proper debate on what Afghan needs from Canada, so that we can decide what peacekeeping steps to take in addition to what peacemaking steps we should take.
What are our objectives? The leader of our country should spell that out. What must we do, in the short term and long term?
Harper asks for a blank cheque, and frames the discussion as being for or against the troops. The troops are better served by a country which knows what it is asking them to risk their lives for, and to die for if necessary. Let us not put them in jeopardy because we could not spare more than six hours to discuss why they should risk all.
Let us take the time to have a full and proper discussion. And let us postpone the vote until that takes place.
Harper is playing politics and the matter is too serious for that to happen.
We have to ask ourselves, what is really our role there.
Personally, right now, I feel that we need to be there.
But signing onto Afghanistan until 2009 simply for the sake of signing on until 2009 makes no sense.
Yes, we need to tell our allies our expected duration, but the PM also needs to tell Canadians what are long-term goals are for the region.
The last thing we need is to be occupiers like the US in Iraq.
bush is bush harper is harper, get over it,,,
jeez you would think your arguments would be stronger than "oh no he's a bush wannabe". Wow my 10 year old daughter can do better than that..
The political game with our military was kicked off by the liberals. What was thrationale for the original deployment? What was their "exit strategy" then, whic Dosanj so earnestly calls for now? Iggy realizes that CFanadians are "being shot at"? How brilliant! Two PhD's and this is the level of insight about deploying armed troops into a foreign land? Feigning surprise that these Canadians are being shot at? Does the phrase "placing our troops in harm's way" mean nothing to the Liberals?
The Libs and the NDP have hollered for a debate and a vote for awhile now. Now that it's upon them, OOOOPS!!
Be careful what you ask for. You just might get it.
All of a sudden it's all a case of "Ooh, dearie me -- not enough time to prepare for this. We're not ready for that. Such short notice. So little time for posturing. Now we'll have to decide, and either put up or shut up. On CPAC and national television. And just how can we bring to bear our pathalogical hatred for the US, for Bush, for the Right, for the religious nutbars? Oh. Oh. OH!! Oh me O my! Whatever cand we do now? Let's lobby to send more troops to Darfur. Yes. Take our troops out of one country where Muslims are killing Muslims and send them to a different country where Muslims are committing crimes agains hmanity, who are mostly Muslims. Yeah, that makes sense. Damn that Bush-puppet Harper. Now, aren't we just the terriffic mental whizz-bangs!??!"
Are there no Muslim nations capable of handling these internal instances of madness?
Real military Canadians die real deaths all the time. And they're usually very young. I say we should deploy the wise forty to sixty year olds, and the politicians and the generals. There would be such a sudden outbreak of world-wide peace, your head wouldn't stop spinning for a month!
L.H.&K.
Curiositykilledthecat,
Why do you go around posting the same nonsense argument on several blogs? I've noticed you've done this a couple times on mine and Joanne's.... can you not come up with more than one rebuttle?
I agree with Sara on the Bush thing... its getting very lame.
wow Liberals, Conservative and a few NDP's agree with me,, that means I must always be right!!!
could someone please tell my husband that.
CKTC is a leftie spammer. The funny part is he spams every blog, not just left, right or indifferent. Chances are CKTC won't be back to discuss this drivel. The next sighting of CKTC will be his next spam-post.
Re: CKTC - Should I blow him away? What is the consensus?
I say thumbs up for CKTC.
Joanne, whats with the "blow people away" stuff all of a sudden.
Your blog's getting more exclusive than Studio 54.
Zac - Ha! Good one. I just don't like trolls. I'm taking a poll. What do you say? Deal or no deal?
I just hope we never have to face anything of the magnitude of 9/11. Imagine having to call on the Americans for help after all the hatred expressed against them in some quarters ...
That we should base our decision on staying or leaving Afghanistan on whether we're there because it started as an American undertaking, as the NDP has argued ...
That we should leave a mission high and dry (Afghanistan) to undertake an even more dangerous and poorly articulated one (Darfur) ...
That we should erase from our collective memories the pictures of those women shrouded in burkas, kneeling in a soccer stadium, waiting to be shot ...
Some Liberal sites may consider you a troll Joanne. As we all know you have much to contribute. Wouldn't make much sense cutting you off. Every troll, at least I hope, has something to contribute.
CKTC isn't swearing or insluting anyone.
Personally, I don't see the point of banning him.
My CKtC policy is I'll allow him to post on my site. But if I ever see the exact same cut and paste on my travels, I delete it off my site as spam.
So far it is a tie 1-1 delete vs. keep.
lol! I'll watch for cut & paste comments.
Back to the serious issue at hand: Very sad about the loss of Captain Nichola Kathleen Sarah Goddard today. Molar and Dust my Broom, among others, have tributes.
I salute the courage of our troops.
Gabby - Very profound words. How are things in Quebec? Is the support as soft as Duceppe seems to say?
Zac, this is the definition of a troll:
An Internet "troll" is a person who delights in sowing discord on the Internet. He (and it is usually he) tries to start arguments and upset people...For some reason, they don't "get" that they are hurting real people.
http://members.aol.com/intwg/trolls.htm#WIAT
I never try to deliberately hurt people. If I have ever acted like a "troll" on your site, I apologize.
true blue:
your blog. your rules. your edit. some jerk irks? hit "delete." your call. no arguments could hold water nor should they even be entertained. your blog is your castle. It's open to all comers I guess. But you (as do all other blog-site hosts) do retain the right to control what appears, if you so choose. That's all part and parcel of 'free speech" as well. I can say whatever I want, yes, but, as well, you can delete whatever you want, on your site.
L.H.&K.
"I never try to deliberately hurt people. If I have ever acted like a "troll" on your site, I apologize."
hmmm..perhaps, I have missed the definition of a troll. I just thought the "troll" label got applied to partisan's from other blogs who disagree.
My apologies.
Your place, your rules...you can delete and ban who you want if you like, but I never find CKTC annoying or malicious. As Riley said earlier, he comes around puts up one post and leaves. Unlike me who comes along, stirs the pot and makes the thread over 100.
Either way, you catch my drift.
According to some of the opinions I've heard on talk shows, there's the usual anti-American stance keeping many people from seeing the validity of the mission.
In a combination phone/internet survey on extending the mission, it was 20% FOR, 80% AGAINST. This was on an anglo TV station, so it's not necessarily a question of language groups.
I agree with the PM's analysis that some MPs voted against to embarrass the government rather than against the mission itself. I hope our soldiers in Afghanistan are not affected by some of the doublespeak ...
NEWSFLASH!! The Conservative lead vote to extend the Afghanistan campaign by two years passed in Parliment. Film at 11.
CKtC isn't so much a troll as a spammer as he (she?) doesn't really care about our reactions. He's just "selling" his blog and his opinions. My vote is DELETE!
Trolls stir the pot to provoke a reaction rather than to present an argument for partisan reasons.
Trolls feed on anger, just like that old Star Trek episode. Solution? Don't feed 'em. Laugh at 'em!!
Yah I've had trolls they are annoying but I agree with my site my rules. Now I'm not god but if someone comes on with severe hatred or something sick about kids I cut them off. I haven't yet though. Oh yah I have cut one of my own comments off lol..
For the most part trolls make me laugh.
If you are doing a census I say leave him so we can vent on him instead of each other. But its your site JO and no one will blame you if you delete him.
"I say leave him so we can vent on him instead of each other.."
I like your strategy, Sara! Actually, I think I'll let the comment stand (wow, I feel like the Speaker), because there is no personal attack involved. That is the litmus test for me.
My take on CKTC is and
My answer to your poll is:
Proverbs for today chapter 15 v 12 & 14
NIV (New International Version)
A mocker resents correction; he will not consult the wise.
The discerning heart seeks knowledge, but the mouth of a fool feeds on folly.
Thank you Debi. It's good to see someone without a clearly defined partisan bias make an informed decision. It gives me hope for the future.
This mission extends a bit beyond peacekeeping, but in fact it is peacekeeping in one sense, because if we don't carry on, the Taliban will just take over again, taking away womens' rights, and forcing women out of schools and breeding more terrorists.
Then we will never have peace in the Western world, because terrorists will just continue to infiltrate our countries.
debi, didn't you post the same comment over at Omar's?
"debi, didn't you post the same comment over at Omar's?"
Zac, is that illegal? Nobody told me!
Hey, gang, do you think that Jancis Andrews qualifies as a troll?
See comments on "Right to Choose - Marital Partners". Appparently she is an authority, and I am "wildly incorrect on all counts".
Hard to say... she's coming in like a lion, no doubt about that.
Post a Comment