Monday, January 14, 2008

No consensus between Karzai and the Grits

So it seems that President Karzai was trying to be polite to his two guests, but he is still adamant about Canada's need to maintain the combat role - Diplomatic niceties aside, Karzai utterly rejects Liberal Afghan policy:

...a statement from Karzai's office in Kabul said that while the president welcomed the visit and praised Canada's contributions, he "also emphasized the need to maintain the momentum that has been created in the south, in particular in Kandahar, to solidify the gains and provide consistency and continuity for the population as well as the government."

Karzai added: "The events of Sept. 11 serves us well in reminding ourselves that not fighting terrorism head-on can have disastrous consequences for Afghanistan, the region and the world at large."
( . . . )

...Granatstein said Karzai had to couch his opposition to the Liberal policy in diplomatic niceties because he is keenly aware the current Conservative government faces stiff resistance from all three opposition parties. Prime Minister Stephen Harper has pledged to allow the House of Commons to vote on the future of the deployment, which could come as early as next month.

"They're not going to come out and hit the Liberals over they head. They can't afford to do that because they might be the government in a few months," said Granatstein...

The sad thing is that the Canadian public seems to be buying into this notion that the opposition parties are pushing - that we have done enough of the heavy-lifting. The Liberals and the NDP want us to be in peace-keeping roles instead.

All well and good, but if terrorists are allowed to regain a strong foothold in Afghanistan, there won't be any peacekeeping and construction to do. It will be too dangerous.

And the danger will follow us home.

* * * *
Related: Daimnation!: The incoherent and ignorant M. Dion.

CTV - Afghans taking on more of a combat role: Nato. You can interpret this one in many ways as you'll see from the comments. However I think the main point is that timing is everything. If we withdraw support too soon, then we may as well not have bothered to go there in the first place.

Tuesday Update: Envoy warns Dion on combat role - Star.

14 comments:

Anonymous said...

Shouldn't we be a little concerned and embarrassed as a nation that we have our opposition parties talking with our allies about opposing views with respect to our military involvement in Afghanistan?
During a visit to Ottawa Laytom tells Karzi that most Canadians want out of Afghanistan and then Dion goes over there to tell him that most Canadians want to stop fighting after 2009.
Who the f**k is speaking for Canada!!
Last time I looked we only had one elected government and that's the only one that should be talking with Afghanistan at any time!
We can have political dissent here in Canada but it should remain within our borders! Do we really need Dion acting as the head of a 'government-in-waiting' spouting 'future' foreign policy changes as though they were gospel? It's friggin' embarrassing!
Dion has done this nation a huge disservice. His visit should have been nothing more than a morale booster for our troops but he's turned it into a partisan attack on the Conservative government, the only legitimate voice of the Government of Canada regarding foreign affairs, especially during a conflict such as this one!!
Did the opposition parties run off to Korea to give a dissenting point of view during the fifties or during World War II??
One other thing, Murray Oliver did an interview with Graham Richardson on MDL today (a meeting of the twits) in which he said that he sensed a weariness on the part of Canadian soldiers that maybe Dion had picked up on. What he was referring to was the long hours of boredom and apprehension as they sat in vehicles while travelling from point A to point B, hoping they wouldn't be blown to smithereens by a roadside bomb. The military has long called for helicopters to move troops in order to avoid roadside bombs but a previous Liberal government saw to it that that wouldn't happen anytime soon.
NeilD

hunter said...

I bet Karzi, was going, "What is that guy saying?"

Good catch on the article. The Liberals need to understand that they only have the media wrapped up in Canada, so when they go abroad, like Ruby did, the media might not be so biased. They might even give the real picture.

Roy Eappen said...

Did dion and iggy even see a single Canadian troop?

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Neil, you've made some excellent points. I thought that too about Dion. What is he doing delivering his version of Canada's policy on Afghanistan? Have we already had that vote? Was he named the message-bearer? I thought he was only supposed to be there to see what was really going on.

You're right. He was absolutely out of order on that one.

One other thing, Murray Oliver did an interview with Graham Richardson on MDL today (a meeting of the twits) in which he said that he sensed a weariness on the part of Canadian soldiers that maybe Dion had picked up on.

Thanks for mentioning that. I saw that too and was wondering if it was a thinly-veiled attempt on the part of CTV to sway the electorate into thinking that the troops were weary of the war and the mission.

In any case, really good point about the helicopters and the Liberals' role in jeopardizing the safety of our troops.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

The Liberals need to understand that they only have the media wrapped up in Canada, so when they go abroad, like Ruby did, the media might not be so biased. They might even give the real picture.

Bingo!

Red Tory said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Joanne (True Blue) said...

Sorry Red. I promised Florence and a few others I wouldn't let you comment here again.

Glad to see you're still kicking though.

Anonymous said...

Let's put partisan aside just for once. Do you really expect Karzai to agree when he's raking in OUR money and being protected by OUR soldiers?

This is not Karzai's decision folks - it's our decision what we will or will not do.

Karzai would have to clean up his corrupt act before I'd listen to the man.

Dr. Roy - the twit, says did Dion even talk to the soldiers - duh - he did and played ball hockey with them and got a hat trick.

Jeff Davidson said...

freedom of speech is good of enough for ezra but not red tory?

anyhow, since when did the leader of a foreign nation dictate foreign policy to canadians... i mean, apart from george bush?

Joanne (True Blue) said...

freedom of speech is good of enough for ezra but not red tory?

If Red Tory wished to reprint the Danish cartoons on his blog, he has my blessings.

Jeff Davidson said...

If Red Tory wished to reprint the Danish cartoons on his blog, he has my blessings.

but if he offers a perspective that may challenge you or your readers, suddenly the blessing is revoked.

joanne, are you controlling the message?

Joanne (True Blue) said...

joanne, are you controlling the message?

Only as much as a newspaper or magazine does by not publishing every letter to the editor that it receives. And if a particular letter-written has a propensity for vile language, then one may decide not to publish that particular reader's comments again ever.

That is the difference. I can't control what Red Tory publishes on his own blog (nor should I be allowed to), but I have the right not to allow his comments here. There are a few others who are also in that category.

This is called 'freedom' my friend.

Jeff Davidson said...

newspapers regularily publish letters to the editor with contrary positions to the editorial staff. (with the notable exception of the toronto sun).

don't you owe it to your readers to allow some different views through the filters? one might accuse you of running an echo chamber otherwise.

propaganda is not the sole domain of commies afterall, just look at the bush administration.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

I'm allowing your comments, Jeff, which are always a differing POV.