A good read in the National Post by Lorne Gunter on Jack Layton, who said the following about Gen. Hillier’s terrorist “scumbag” comments last July while he was still propping up Paul Martin’s Liberals;
�Controlled anger, given what’s happened, is an appropriate response,� NDP Leader Jack Layton said. �We have a very committed, level-headed head of our armed forces, who isn’t afraid to express the passion that underlies the mission that front-line personnel are going to be taking on.
�A bit of strong language in the circumstances, I don’t find that to be wrong.�’
I guess I’m in a bit of a grumpy mood this AM because I just don’t get what is news these days.Thus,please excuse my cynicism.
So Jack Layton has said one thing and now apparently changes his stance.
What is the big deal?
Find me any politician with any party that has not done the same.THIS would be a news item.
And that,my friends,is what our current political system has morphed into.It is now just a game,quick,choose a side to root for and above all don’t let anyone tell you the other side has any redeeming qualities whatsoever.
We are most definately at war. Have been for a while, and will continue to be for a long time. Whether people like it or not. Whether a lot of people believe it or not.
Maybe, for some, the “first shot” was not airplanes crashing into buildings – but an axe blow to the head of someone extending the hand of friendship…
Dragging these societies into the 21st century will not be quick or easy, but we have no choice but to do, or, sooner or later, die.
I don’t like it. But I don’t see an easy way out.
Jack had better get his head around this, or get the hell out of the way.
This blog has ALWAYS supported our troops overseas. The present Conservative government have ALWAYS supported the military pillar of the government of Canada. Canadian Observer your claimed cynicism is arrogant and retorical. You must like the uncolor, puke grey.
Our military is fighting FOR us, they are not in the buisness of rounding us up to put us in gulags. Our lives depend on their courage. Please support them.
Canadian Observer: I agree with you too, that’s a sad state of affairs. What I just do not understand is it was the Liberal’s in May of last year that approved the deployment of troops. During the same time Jackie was trying to beef up his party at the same time by supporting the Liberal’s. Our we responsible for fighting terror? Abosulutely. If we stick our heads into the sand and carry on like everything is wonderful we will be in for a rude wake up call. Do I like war? No. It is a fact of the world, sometimes we have to stand up to protect our freedom. We also need our troops to know that every Canadian is proud of them. CBC and CTV could stop their negetive reporting in this area too. There should not be one military person overseas that should ever have to question their country’s loyality to the job that they are doing. We need to hope that things start to settle down, once our forces take a stronger hold
in the area.
Jema54,take a pill for chrissake!
If you will reread my previous entry (and get your thinking cap on)maybe you can manage to understand my point.
Our current political system is completely adversarial and with the MSM’s current method of pigeonholing by sound bite politicians cannot even dare speak frankly.Their statements are measured strictly for how they play on the political field.
Now,(pay attention closely jema54)the point I was making is that even if JL supports our troops,HE IS ON THE OTHER SIDE and will not admit it.
Finally,how you managed to somehow tag me as anti-Canadian troops,well,I guess you must be the arrogant one.They deserve support from all Canadians,no matter where they sit on the political playing field.
Hope this clears things up.
It drives me around the bend when people state that we are ‘peacekeepers’ when in most places we have been there is no ‘peace’ to keep! It has always been war–peacekeepers is a Liberal euphamism that too many have bought into. Now, when it really is war our men and women are sent in with outdated equipment(WW11 sidearms) and ‘tanks’ that roll over when hit by a taxi. That is a big boon to the Taliban–they don’t need explosives or suicide bombers anymore–they can just use taxis. And our men take off their helmets and lay down their guns to talk in a war zone! For heaven’s sakes when do we leave the boy scout troop and get real?
I don’t believe our men and women should be there but since they are, let’s understand what this is all about before more body bags come home!
Jack’s head has been mentioned. Jack Layton’s head exploded some years ago. Jack’s having an “introspective discussion” with his ego; ergo, Jack’s ego wins again. +
Gendercide Watch: The Montreal Massacre
“Until Montr�al, most of the discussion was introspective,” Layton recalled in … My head exploded that year. ‘What must it be like for women?’ I thought. …
http://www.gendercide.org/case_montreal.html – 23k –
George:
“I don’t believe our men and women should be there”
I think you’re wrong about that. We can fight these murderous thugs over there…Or eventually fight them here. Either way, the war is on, and it is wise of us to pick the battlefield while we still can. “We” meaning all the free democracies.
The world has gotten a lot smaller in the last century, and this cancer has to be dealt with, not ignored.
War is horrible. War is stupid. We all agree on that. It doesn’t change the fact that we better win this war.
Maybe the military both here and elsewhere know something I don’t. What we have here is a war on terrorists who are spread all over the world. Afganistan was a major training ground but no more. Now they train in Iraq. So we are going to train the terrorists real time in Afganistan too. When I wonder did any army succeed in Afganistan?????
It is a good training ground for our G.I. Joe types if thats where you get your kicks but lets not pretend there will be any victory now or in ten years. It is well known that insurgents and terrorists cannot function without support of the population. We had a graphic display of that in the horrific axe incident.
So yes it will be long and bloody. Hundreds will be killed and maimed. In the end we will cut and run just as the Americans will in Iraq. Will we still have terrorists spread out all over the world? Probably.
By the way, they did go over with state of the art materiel didn’t they. Was that “tippy” vehicle that caused two deaths state of the art? If not, why don’t we ACTUALLY support our troops instead of just a lot of rah-rah. State of the art trained and supplied troops should be the only kind leaving for duty.
One thing I would make clear is any taxi or vehicle coming within 100 feet of any Canadian LAV would be turned into swiss cheese. They seem to be using them to force these vehicles to take evasive action when they know they are slightly unstable.
Canadian Observer,
You lump all politians into the same dough – I have OBSEVED politicians who have ALWAYS been known to back the military and I challange you to state when the PM, Stockwell Day, Cheryl Gallant, Monte Solberg, Elsie Wayne, Darryl Stinson, Myron Thompson, Betty Hinton…..Almost every Conservative that is or has ever been elected has backed funding and support for the military. You are relating the old PCs to the Conservative Party and the Conservatives are NOT the Progressive Conservatives!! Get your head out of the sand.
Jema54,you are so engrossed in playing our national right/left game you just can’t think clearly.
1.NOWHERE in my original statement did I even refer to the topic of our troops.
2.My comments on ALL politicians being haunted
by past statements on various subjects
is indisputable.It’s an integral part of the game
3.Nowhere did I state that ANY politician did not support our troops.I even said JL probably does.MY POINT BEING,CAN HE ADMIT IT?
4.THE ELECTION IS OVER.You can take your partisan head out of your ass now,maybe then you can read more clearly.
Jack Layton wants a debate in commons about our role in Afganistan. I thought our role was settled when the Liberals sent our troops in. We are supposed to be their to help the folks try to get back to a more normal life. If it takes fighting the terrorists then I guess that role comes first. It is a terrible thing that we will lose our men and women in this foreign land, but war is a terrible thing. We have a military. Why? You cannot call peacekeepers a military. No, our military was trained well to fight, now, all they need is the proper equipment and a few kudos from the citizens of this country. We will hear the Canadian population roar when the body bags are counted and sent back home. During WW2, they didn’t even send the bodies home, they were buried on the spot. Can you imagine this bunch of Canadians supporting our troops during that war. Thank God we had a strong generation back then or we would all be speaking German. We must stand behind our troops and support them through this whole duration. We cannot keep publishing all this negative stuff about our role in that country. It just feeds into the terrorists resolve. Why do our men and women go into the military in the first place. Is it not to protect their home countries. If so, then it’s time that the babies in this country grow up and face the fact that the war is better fought in some foreign land than here at home.
Strange that the CanWest poll mentioned that alot of Canadians thought the troops should be pulled yet Layton really has like, what, 17% of the popular vote?
Coincidentally, I made a little photoshop comic strip about Layton being in command of our military. It was done before this past election. Scroll down the page to see it. I could use the traffic!
Steve D.:
“Maybe the military both here and elsewhere know something I don’t” – ya think?
Is there any fight worth fighting to you? I only ask, because I would think that if any people needed help in throwing off the yoke of oppression it would be the Afghans. This was a group of bastards who had only contempt for humanity and subscribed to the most morally depraved form of fascism to show its face on this earth (in my humble opinion).
Do you suppose that the fact that Afghanistan is no longer a ‘major training ground’ for terrorism has anything to with our presence?
I wonder what you think a G.I. Joes type is? I am suspecting that you will never be confused with such a type. To my way of thinking, the Canadian army is gaining very valuable experience in fighting a dispersed enemy playing from the jihadist playbook. Maybe I am a pessimist, but I suspect that such experience is going to prove valuable as we reject this stain on humanity in the coming years.
“In the end we will cut and run” – ata boy! Do you do motivational speaking? You are probably a hoot at parties. We are facing down people who would have us live in subjection and make no secret about the fact that, god willing, they will wipe us off the face of the earth. We will not lose because that is not an option open to us. Finally,
We can end on a point of agreement (although I suspect that this was something of an empty statement on your behalf), our troops need our real support. They need not facile words and platitudes offered for public consumption as they make sneering references to our army at the coffee house. There is a segment of our society that identifies itself in its ability to spot the evil American influence any situation. They compete to be the most enlightened self-flagellator. Well, it is time to grow up, guys, we have grown up problems and we need everyone’s help.
We can only send the army we have, we cannot sit on our hands until everything is as we would like it before engaging the enemy, they will not wait for us, we will return the favor. I support a much deeper investment in our military; we owe it to our soldiers to give them every advantage in the field that can be attained.
Sorry for the long post
Jeff P, well said!
Jack Layton may prefer to wait for the terrorists to come here before fighting them, but let’s hope the majority of Canadians think this through for a minute and realize that it’s better to fight the terrorists and their supporters where they live. Soldiers do that sort of thing and they do it a lot better than your average subway car full of regular people.
Dave, thanks
Infidel, I hear this comment a lot “fight them there so we don’t have to fight them here” and I think it should be used much less, it makes people arguing the case a hostage to fortune, as soon as they show up here, people will retort that “we were supposed to be fighting them there”… I prefer to say that we will fight these bastards wherever we find them.
These people are not going to be defeated by an army. If you find them they run. They wait until they are ready and you are not and then they attack quickly and with as much force as possible and then disappear again. They have the support of enough of the population to effectively last forever. Afganistan has always been a disaster for any army occupying their land. Many superpowers have tried to occupy and defeat them but to no avail. If you know history then you won’t repeat it. Our ignorance will cost us many lives needlessly because there is nothing they will do in Afganistan that will make us safe here.
Terrorists are embedded all over the world. Playing guerilla tag in Afganistan will be fun for some of the young bucks for a while but then eventually after bleeding us for a number of years we WILL cut and run. You see they live there so they arent going anywhere.
It would be a lot more intelligent to seek and destroy using special forces whenever we find small groups of them training or meeting. Meanwhile we need to be developing intelligence networks within North America to detect threats and neutralize them before they occur.
Were it still in the hands of the “lefties”, the liberals would provide gratuitous funding for the resurection of the Ross Rifle, Maude Barlow and Yappy Jack would be making and equipping our forces with them, and Shapiro would investigate and find nothing wrong! In a properly functioning world, the accounts would be audited to see how much money stuck to liberal fingers, Maude’s head would be surgically removed from her ass, Yappy Jack would be issued a Ross Rifle and put on the front lines, and Shapiro would be investigated by the NEW Ethics Commish.
Excerpts from a good piece by David Bercuson in the Toronto Star (?!), March 7: “Public hasn’t grasped reality of war” Afghanistan far from peacekeeping; Canadians, army speak two languages”:
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_PrintFriendly&c=Article&cid=1141685411769
‘The recent spate of attacks on Canadian soldiers in southern Afghanistan should remind Canadians that the core mission of all armies is not to wear blue helmets and “peace keep,” but to fight wars and to prepare to fight wars � and that the word “peacekeeper” is not a synonym for “soldier.”..
Canadians and their NATO partners are there [in Afstan] against the opposition of the previous rulers of Afghanistan, the Taliban. The Taliban will do whatever they can to kill our soldiers, wound them, demoralize them, and intimidate the Canadian people to pull them out. The Taliban want Afghanistan back…
…[a] wide gulf…exists today between Canadians and the men and women who go in harm’s way to protect them, to serve their interests and to uphold their national honour.
That gulf is one that Canadians seem to tolerate and indeed nurture. As long as it exists, Canadians and their military will continue to speak two entirely different languages.’
Mark
Ottawa
I’m about to offend a lot of people ,but I ‘ve been reading a lot crap written by people. Who have’nt the faintest idea of what they are talking about.
One the Browning pistol is an excellent piece of kit .The problems with these ones can be attributed to they badly worn and need to be replaced or rebuilt.
There are thousands of these pistols still in storage that have not been touched since the day they were manufactured. Whitch means in this case they areas good as they were the day they were manufactured.
The troops should have issued pistols out war reserve stocks.
As to LAV III yes it has a high silloutte And for a variety of reason not the vehicle I would have chosen for the forces.In point of fact it was not the vehicle the army wanted either.
But it is also not a “rolling death trap” either! you have no idea what civilian traffic is like over there. According to troops I talked to, who have returned well……… Most afgan drivers do’nt think the laws of physics apply to them much less any traffic laws.
one last thought
1st rule of warfare: “You go to war with the army you have not, the one you want!”
And a message just sent to Mike Duffy:
‘Canadians in combat at Kandahar: take two
Dear Mr Duffy,
Why is it that most of our politicians and media seem to have forgotten the first Canadian mission in Afghanistan, the combat Operation APOLLO at Kandahar from February to July 2002?
http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/newsroom/view_news_e.asp?id=1703
Just today both Jeffrey Simpson in his Globe column, and Jack Layton in an interview on CBC Newsworld (sorry about that), claimed that our mission at Kabul (Operation ATHENA) that began in 2003 was Canada’s first military mission in Afghanistan.
And then to claim that our second Kandahar mission (Operation ARCHER) is our first combat role when it simply is not. This omitting of the first Kandahar mission enables people to make a big play about how we are moving from “peacekeeping” to combat and thus there should be a great debate about the change. All our Forces are doing in fact is returning to what they did when they first went to Afghanistan–with some added peacekeeping activities included (PRTs).’
Mark
Ottawa