I took a cab to the Dieppe ceremony at the cenotaph in Ottawa recently. The immigrant cab driver was fairly mocking when I told him what the fuss was all about - the phrase "soldiers with their little guns" was used.

Multiculturalism has made it clear to our immigrants - they are not Canadians. They are merely extending the land base of their Original Homeland into the geographic territory called Canada.

They are not expected to assimilate and become Canadian. They are expected to repeat and repeat the beliefs and behaviour of their Original Homeland.

Fight for Canada? Since they represent an Other country - then, that thought doesn't even occur to them. They aren't Canadians; they are members of various ethnic, religious, linguistic peoples - who are simply extending themselves, geographically and spatially, into the space called Canada.

Nothing to do with Being Canadian. Multiculturalism insists that they are not; they are re-presenting their Original Identity. Therefore, what they will 'fight' for - is political recognition and financial support from the Canadian gov't - to re-present this Original Identity. That's multiculturalism. It's in our Charter of 'Rights'.

The fact is 'new Canadians' from the third world aren't really Canadians. They're here because of the economy and don't give a s**t about the nation. We can thank the Liberals for this wave of non-patriotic economic migrants.

Yes, but I do notice that certain groups are real quick to call for the Canadian military to go bail out their sorry ass family's lives when the shit hits the fan in these 3rd world hellholes.

NEW DIRECTIVE: ONLY CANADIAN FORCES PERSONNEL WITH CULTURAL LINKS TO A REGION WILL BE DEPLOYED TO THAT REGION WHEN TASKED WITH HUMANITARIAN AID MISSIONS

In other words, if that was a real directive, we would only be serving in Europe. Pathetic!

We can also thank Brian Mulroney for this, he bought into multiculturalism's political advantages big time.

Worked with some ME immigrants on a construction site in Vancouver a few years back. Their hatred of the Jews was appalling, and when I mentioned they could leave their wars back home, we don't want it over here, they called me what I assumed was an uncomplimentary name in their language, laughed, and wouldn't talk to me anymore.

I gathered, from their coffee break conversation, that if hostilities arose between our countries, they sure as hell wouldn't have fought for Canada.

Idea. Have taliban jack and bombardion form up the new "multiculti brigade". We can equip them with flowers, guitars and doves. They can prance around the globe, saving humanity from all of the bad people out there. I am sure that they would be well received by the majority of tin pots and mad mullahs.

Kate - I never thought you would put up an anti-war message! Way to go!

The solution for the political correctoes is obvious -- a multi-culti draft!

The ignorant POS that wrote this article needs an education.

As Fenris would say what would you expect from heteronormative Vimy Ridge Canadians.

"Why are all the Canadian soldiers being killed in Afghanistan white?"

It's because the demographics of the Forces is mostly white. Or would you prefer the CAF to have an employment equity program where a certain percentage of military members have to be women, black, asian, native, or handicapped?

Change the laws for gaining cdn citizenship. Must be drafted into a combat unit for 3 yrs and serve overseas in the country you illegally gained entry to canada from. Multiculturism must be stopped. No more refugees allowed from any ME country. Ban islam from Canada. No more korans, if bibles can't be in hotels or given out in schools, neither can korans be distributed anywhere.

Relax amigos. It is not like Afghanistan is a real war. We are rolling around in tanks and LAVs and whatnots, while the Taliban are scampering on their motorbikes and pickup trucks.

Lighten up. Don't be such constipated blowhards, or you will all turn into Senator Larry Craig of Idaho.

It is a curious question. The Sikhs form a large and visible minority in Canada, and they have a long and glorious history of military service with the forces of the British Empire. Unlike Hindus, they are the opposite of pacifists. With a little encouragement, I would expect some excellent Sikh soldiers in Canadian units.

Again, quite a few First Nations people have in the past served with the Canadian forces, and some of our best snipers were of First Nations origin.
Iroquois, especially Mohawk, served with the American forces in Vietnam and are probably serving with them now in Iraq. They also have no truck with pacifist traditions. The Canadian forces need to do some work to recruit people such as these, with a martial tradition, who value the skills and the work of the soldier.

Landed immigrants often see soldiers as the people that oppressed them in their home countries and as tools of a corrupt and undemocratic govt. This kind of mentality also exists in places like Germany or Russia and almost all Asian countries.

As most immigrants in Canada came after the 1960s, I would think it's a generational thing. I'd recommend making citizenship tougher to obtain by imposing a tour of duty (ie. Hispanics in the US military example) with an exception of course for people who are better used in a lab (doctors, scientists, etc.)

The thing is, many people who immigrate to Canada do so to get AWAY from violence. Ditto goes for their children, who are raised and told about their parents troubles and horrors in their home countries.

Question - how many of the posters here have served in the military? I know some of you have, but exactly how many?

My point exactly.

To Mr. Stalins henchman,

Read the link. An ethnic newspaper from BC, the Asia-Pacific Post says that " new Canadiams...must permeate and be present in all aspects of Canada, that includes the Candaian Forces"

So this is not about wanting quotas or affirmative action, or any of that ilk. I think you would find most readers of this blog to be totally opposed to said quota's. The question is why are the new canadians referred to in the article not joining in numbers representative of their population?

Kate's headline, for lack of a better term, is just an attention grabbing spin on that question.

"It's because the demographics of the Forces is mostly white. Or would you prefer the CAF to have an employment equity program where a certain percentage of military members have to be women, black, asian, native, or handicapped?"

No, the preference is to have immigrants assume on their own without coercion some of the responsibilities that come with citizenship.

No one wants equity programs ... except the NDP and other similar goofballs.

Seems that Kate wants to see more Canadian soldiers killed, especially the immigrant soldiers.

At least we now know where you truly stand. I'll be sending this story to several people I know.

White males are dying in Afghanistan because they are clinging to those old passe cultural values that one's country is worth fighting for.

How silly. They should stay home drink beer and act as stupid as they are portrayed on so many sit-coms where bitchy women, spoiled brat kids, and intellectual faggots make them look even stupider.

Indeed, multiculturalism, feminism and permissiveness all brought to us by the Left, are the ruination and downfall of our once great culture. I am as sad as I am angry.

Our politicians are entirely to blame since they have the power to change this, but will not. Their pandering to the imports for votes means more to them than the survival of Western values. Their own children will one day, piss on their graves.

When I was a soldier back in the 80’s there was a good number of Asians both in the Ranks and Officers mess. They made excellent soldiers. For most immigrants the military is considered a “low caste” job based on their homeland experiences. The concept of duty to your country above and beyond your self, family, tribe or clan can be foreign to them.

However a lack of commitment to your new homeland is a serious symptom of a deeper problem that will cause serious social issues down the road. Canada exists because the people that came here wanted to make it a better place and made sacrifices to do so. If the people you allow in have no stake in our future, we will be cutting our own throats.

I personally like the idea of encouraging Gurkha’s to serve with our armed forces to win citizenship and immigration for their families.

The CF is pretty white, but 64 of 66 is not representative - sometimes luck or chance plays a role. I would also say that the Reserves are a lot more diverse than the Regs. In Vancouver we had folks with Korean, Chinese, Filipino, Japanese and Egyptian backgrounds. Toronto units tended to have a fair number of blacks. Most of these guys were 2nd or their generation, and in the case of the Asians (except Koreans) their parents were genally horrified/mystified at their choice to join the Army (so were mine - nice Jewish boys don't do that). I personally know that some of these guys have served overseas, either in FRY or Afstan.

All that said, there has been a grit-washing of Canada's miliatry history - and why would any smart immigrant want to join something he "knows" is a joke? Multi-culti has also played its part, though I would say that it retards integration/assimilation, but doesn't kill it all together, at least among some groups. Oh, and the guy from Egypt was so f**ked when it came to winter warfare.

"I'll be sending this story to several people I know."

No, JohnnyRingo, No!!!!

Where's your humanity? Don't ... send ... it ... to ... people ... you ... know!

Um, so you agree with Kate that more non-white Canadian soldiers should be dying in Afghanistan, Matt?

Colin. I served in the eighties as well, and I remember people of Japanese descent, that was about it. And yes, quite a few natives, and both groups were excellent soldiers. I think it is time for the children of the latest waves of immigration to stand up. My father came from Italy in the 50's, and his greatest pride was that all 3 of his sons joined the military. Time to pony up, multicultists.

OMMAG:
"The ignorant POS that wrote this article needs an education."

Why don't you read the whole goddamned article before commenting? The author was LAMENTING the fact that more immigrants do not enter the armed forces. He says among other things "If we as new Canadians do not hesitate to fight for equal rights, we must also not hesitate to defend those rights. Our strength as new Canadians must not only be measured in economic terms.
We must permeate and be present in all aspects of Canada. That includes the Canadian Forces." Who's the ignorant one now OMMAG?

No, what you wrote was "Seems that Kate wants to see more Canadian soldiers killed, especially the immigrant soldiers."

That is a lie.

Did you send that lie off to your friends?

@ johnnyringo...

Would that be Taliban Jack, Johnny? Or some sniveling turds at CBC or CTV? You pathetic leftard you.

I would also say that the Reserves are a lot more diverse than the Regs.

That is definitely true. It seems that for most immigrants a career in the CF is not desirable, but for some serving their new country still is. The Reserve provides a good avenue for this. I think also that the Navy has a much higher percentage of visible minorities than the Army.

Even so, their enrollment in the military is not representative of the population as a whole. Many come to Canada with strong anti-military feelings based on experiences and perceptions in their native land. We don't help change this attitude with our widespread anti-military sentiment in the media and among certain politicians.

Even white Canadians aren't exactly knocking down the doors at recruiting centres. The CF is having a hell of a time trying to increase its numbers.

Give them time, the ethnic gangs'll twig on soon enough that sending some of their members for a military stint will vastly improve the quality of their violence.

"They don't see the writing on the wall with regards to demographic change in the country. Basically, if you just keep recruiting white males, you're going to run out of qualified people."

Is that what you do, Jeffy? Copy content from other blogs and post it at your own normally-ignored site?

That is the ultimate in lazy.

Matt, do you think that more immigrant soldiers should be getting killed in Afghanistan?

*
kate's link just guzzled their server.

Internal Server Error
The server encountered an internal error
or misconfiguration and was unable to
complete your request.

the power of sda

*

I think we've all made this observation a long time ago. We're still waiting for the immigrant population to love this country enough to serve it. I fear that with the climate in Canada these past twenty years, it may be a long time in coming.

I wonder what kind of nation we would be if we had mandatory service after high school, similar to Israel or South Korea? I think we would have a markedly different outlook on our country and the world. We might even value our country and its rights and privileges more.

*
"matt said... Is that what you do, Jeffy? Copy content from
other blogs and post it at your own normally-ignored site?"

what'cha talkin about... jeffy's had 13 hits today alone.

*

Jeff and Lavrenti Beria,

Well, you just may be that ignorant but I still find it hard to believe that it is not an act.

It is not a matter of just recruiting white males. Since we are an all volunteer army, we take from what is offered. Non-whites need to apply. If they do not, the question is why not and where is there loyalty to Canada?

Lavrenti, I suggest RTFA.

At last years Rememberance Day ceremony there was a parade of Cadets. Overwhelmingly it too was white. My wife and I noticed and commented on it back then.
enough

*
"JohnnyRingo mumbled... Um, so you agree with Kate that
more non-white Canadian soldiers should be dying in
Afghanistan"

is this what passes for logical discourse over at rabble.ca?

lord love a duck.

*

My youngest son went from the citizenship ceremony straight to the recruiting office and will join the Canadian forces in 2008. My daughter will follow a year later. We became Canadians after having lived and worked in Canada for 14 years. We are Canadians now and proud of it. I am too old to join the Canadian military, but I served in the military of the country of my birth for several years. I and my family believe that freedom is not free but comes at a cost, we are willing to do our part to keep our country (Canada) free. We came here to make a better life for ourselves and we did well. I know that those on the left will sneer at that, but we don't care. Since we are white it doesn't matter anyway what we say or do.

Never mind race, I find it interesting the MSM made a certain point of troops leaving from Quebec all the while Albertans are the ones sholdering the heaviest burden...

Paul Martin's favourite slogan was 'We're a country of minorities.'

Except when it comes to defending the country and sacrificing your life.

"Seems that Kate wants to see more Canadian soldiers killed, especially the immigrant soldiers.

At least we now know where you truly stand. I'll be sending this story to several people I know."

- Johnny Ringo

Rather than your question to Kate, obviously you prefer to see only white males killed?

And, oh no, now he's got us, he's sending his ill-thought out, illogical conclusion to everybody he knows! We're doomed!

Another example of a peanut brained leftard. Do humanity a favour and don't procreate.

lberia: "Or would you prefer the CAF to have an employment equity program where a certain percentage of military members have to be women, black, asian, native, or handicapped?"

The Canadian public service, the cops, and many corporations already have gender/race quotas favouring women and minorites, lberia, so I don't think it is unreasonable to place the onus on you to explain why we make an exception to the status quo of quotas when it comes to staffing the Canadian military.

Enough, I worked with Air Cadets in BC. I can tell you a significant percentage, even half, especially from Vancouver area, were of Chinese and Indian descent. Their parents saw this as an excellent opportunity for discipline, teamwork, citizenship and physical fitness for their kids. I know this doesn't necessarily translate into regular or reserve force recruiting, but awareness of the Canadian military is also a stated goal of the Cadet Cadre.

Notwithstanding ET's comments re: multiculturalism, perhaps part of the skewed demographics is cultural. When your parents, grandparents, and indeed you, came from a country where the military was an agent of repression, corrupt and cruel, a military career might not be considered an attractive alternative.

Just in opinion, of course.

Note also that all who have died for Queen and Country in Afghanistan are men.

sheesh - lberia. What kind of an explanation is that? The question was - why is the Canadian military primarily 'white'. And you answered - because 'they are white'. Quite the tautology.

Try examining WHY it is only 'white' people who volunteer and join the military. OK?

johnny ringo - heck you are even more illogical than lberia.

You claim that IF you are a soldier, THEN you will be killed.
That's false. Did you know that there are more deaths from violence in one city, Toronto, in one year - than over the four years in Afghanistan?
Using your illogical assumption, one has to say
IF you live in Toronto, THEN you will be killed.
Equally false.

Your next claim is that the military exists only To Be Killed. Modern warfare, johnny ringo, isn't the same as the movies.

Your next assumption is that there shouldn't be any military - because IF you are a soldier, THEN you'll be killed. OK - that means that you promote being taken over by military dictators and thugs. No fighting back. Allow Hitler, Stalin, Hussein, Bin Laden - to rule over you.

And you next - equally illogical and fallacious assumption is that anyone who wants immigrants to feel strongly enough about Canada to want to defends its beliefs and role in the world - merely wants them killed off. That's illogical - because all your other assumptions are FALSE.

Try again. This time, check for logical connections.

Holy cow JohnnyRingo - talk about spin...

Seems that Kate wants to see more Canadian soldiers killed, especially the immigrant soldiers.
At least we now know where you truly stand. I'll be sending this story to several people I know.

WOW - just...wow!!
Please back up your knowledge of the truth with where you learned a source please. I have read this post and nowhere do i see her state what you suggest she does. As a matter of fact, all i see is a simple reply to a story in the AsiaPacificPost where she states...

Indeed. Read the rest.
Via Mark Collins

Fairly harmless sentiment i believe... Not for some apparently:

Um, so you agree with Kate that more non-white Canadian soldiers should be dying in Afghanistan, Matt?

Speechless
A less intelligent internet comment i have never seen...
Your world must be very difficult to deal with on a daily basis - good luck with it all.

JohnnyRingo ... I guess that's easier to type than JohnnyNotTooBright.

Listen, JR, you are a liar. That much is clear. Send that to "several people you know."

Then go back to the story at the end of the link and re-read, this time without using your finger to follow along, without moving your lips, and see if you can understand it this time.

Roy: that is patently not true. Capt. Nichola Goddard was killed in a firefight in May 2006.

Want minorities in the military then bring back conscription right across the colour line.

Is this a joke? hmmm.. maybe there's more whites in the military? like there's more whites in the Canadian population? no no. it must be that the brown people hate Canada and aren't "freedom lovers".

isn't that why minorities are called minorities?

If you read enough internet posts by Canadian lefties it becomes obvious they are pleased when Canadian soldiers are killed. Even the dumbest among them (and that's really dumb) knows they can't come right out and say it, but it does become obvious.

My mother took note of this quite awhile back. In the World War, they had conscription in Canada to force the French to sign up and serve because they weren't; even then they weren't forced to fight. Maybe it is time for conscription again. The truth of the matter is, Canada is a free-ride for a lot of people, but defend it, nada.

You should compare the numbers of minorities killed in Iraq with the US armed services.

"http://icasualties.org/oif/ETHNICITY.aspx"

There seems to be a lot more minorities in the US forces then the Canadian forces. That leads to the question of why? What's the fundamental difference between our two countries?

John West at 11:07 AM:
Great rant! Especially the last paragraph.

Hear hear hear hear hear. Thanks for posting that Kate.

Multiculturalism = hypocrisy = "I want all the benefits that your country has to offer without offering anything in return"

Kate never said more non-white soldiers should be killed in Afghanistan - only a Leftard could obviously twist words and their meaning so substandardly. The number of soldiers killed in Afghanistan should depict, percentage wise, the allocation of the different races serving in the military - is this so bloody hard to figure out.

I can never understand men who have a problem with women not fighting in a war - you all must be girlie-men to think this way.

All young men should spend their first year after high school graduation training for the military, and those who can't stay in school until they graduate, should be scrubbing the toilets of those who have graduated until they become 18 and can then train for the military for a year - if women want to participate, they can.

JohnnyRingo says "Seems that Kate wants to see more Canadian soldiers killed, especially the immigrant soldiers."

Nice try. What BS.

Truth hurts doesn't it JohnnyRingo?

"Look at the queue of soldiers heading into a Hercules transport bound for Afghanistan - it is overwhelmingly white and male."

Since women of all colors make up about 50% of our nation's population,maybe some people here are missing the even much larger misrepresentation of demographics.
Seems to me feminists DEMAND equality of the sexes in almost every other niche of our society.

We do accept women in the army now....don't we?

I have a strong suspicion that by the second generation, we will start to see a lot more variety in the Canadian military.
Once the kids learn about what our military has done and what it stands for (if the schools teach it which is another thread altogether), and once they see how lucky they are to be here, they will start to join.
I think another big reason, is that the majority of the minority population lives in the major centres, which are, for the most part, spoiled, self-centred, leftist, lazy and deluded. (have at that one).

Craig,
There are more minorities being killed in the US forces because there are greater amounts of minorities in the US forces.

In the US the armed forces is seen as a viable career alternative. There are also benefits such as medical, university tuition etc.

The US has made the armed forces a social program in itself. there are jobs and benefits that make it worthwhile. Canada has tried to starve the military. Very few young people would consider a career in the military. Even fewer Canadians see the military as a social program.
enough

How are you going to encourage military service among the children, when my kid's principal told us after he was brutally kicked by some muslim kid and restrained the purp, that I was speaking military language to her and she would not allow that? That Canada was a peaceful country and no military language was allowed? Our youth is being indoctrinated from school age that flowers are good, rifles are bad and people in camo uniforms are bad as well. I am talking about 75% ethnic neighborhood... WAKE UP, CANADA! The commies are not at the gate - they are within the walls!

How many Canadian right-wing bloggers have been killed in combat over there? My understanding is that they're badly under-represented because they don't love their country. They're not real Canadians, of course. I guess we can thank the internet for this pathetic generation of unpatriotic ingrates.

It just makes me sick.

*Posted by: JWestphal at August 29, 2007 11:27 AM*

You're right I should have read the article Kate linked to!
I ASSUmed that this was a reference to the same (plagiarized?) article that appeared in the Georgia Straight where they used the story to imply that the CF was a racist exclusionary organization and that the fact that the soldiers dying in Afghanistan was proof of that.

Since I ASSumed without checking Mea Culpa!

However ... for those who were trying to make that BS case against our military... my first comment stands.

NorthBayTrappist: "I think another big reason is that the majority of the minority population lives in the major centres which are, for the most part, spoiled, self-centred, leftist, lazy and deluded."

Yes, of course. Or in other cases educated, motivated, hard-working (and paying their taxes!), politically somewhere near the centre, following promising career paths, and keeping their respective heads screwed on straight.

Nobody like that will be heading over to Afghanistan any time soon either. Wouldn't you say?

Given that there are only 65,000 in the entire Forces from Hillier down to the lowest pot washer, and given that soldiering is one more despised than whoring among the urban liberal population, it is no surprise that mostly old fashioned, non-urban types from places other than Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal. White people, in other words.

Given that those three cities is where 90% of immigrants live, and given that you can go for an entire year or more without even seeing a CF vehicle or soldier in uniform in those cities, it is no surprise that immigrants and their born-in-Canada kids don't sign up. Why would they? Their Canadian neighbors don't. Probably would never even occur to them.

Thank you Pierre Turd-eau, AND Brian Moron-ey, AND Jean Cretin/Paul Martoon.

How can the children of immigrants understand Canadian history when it is being taught to them (for the most part) by teachers who don't support our past military history, because they were taught by professors who (again for the most part) have no understanding of it themselves.
The battle between the surviving members of the RCAF and the historians at the War Museum is a good example. One idiot disqualified the position of the ex-bomber crew members because they weren't 'historians'. And the snot-nosed 'kid' at the Museum said they will take into consideration the wording recommended by the ex-RCAF, but the final decision will be their's and their's alone. Haven't seen anyone look down their nose like that in a long time, but if I'd been there, I'd have slapped the pumped-up little twerp across his face.
Immigrants shouldn't have to pass a test - teachers and professors should.
Also, immigrants have the Charter of Rights (and lawyers) to save them from all life's ills. As far as they're concerned, I expect they find the military redundant.

enough - your analysis is very good.

The US has made the military an honourable and desirable career. Its members are esteemed, praised, looked up to. The benefits of schooling, education, and 'membership in a close, emotional and supportive community - is obvious and open.
Furthermore, the US military has a great focus on research; it wants you - not just as a physical thing, a 'grunt' but it wants you as a 'mind' and 'heart'. There is a tremendous focus on research in the US military - not merely on machines, but medical, environmental, psychological.

It is considered a highly desirable and honourable profession. In Canada - Pearson turned the military into agents of the UN - policement or security guards. All the other attributes of a profession - such as education, research, a community - were lost. Trudeau and Chretien further demotied this 'Security Guards' to nothing, denying them equipment, training, facilities.

The war in Afghanistan and Harper's committment to it - is changing the face and nature of the Canadian military - bringing it slowly, back to its former pre-Liberal stature. It will take time, but it's thanks to Harper that the change is finally happening.

Now- to get rid of multiculturalism.

No, no, diversity is just something you use to put more gay couples on "Trading Spaces" or to shame the "non-victim" majority of Canadians into shutting up about this type of discrepancy . It's not something you actually expect to work both ways and result in seeing new Canadians actually give to their country as much as they receive !

ET - All the other attributes of a profession - such as education, research, a community - were lost.

No, that's not true. The CF mirrors the US military very closely in all of these areas. Unification did have a deleterious effect on the sense of community and comradeship in the services, but the need for professional development was never lost. And notwithstanding uninformed media reports to the contrary, the CF has always understood that its primary mission is combat. The vast majority of its resources and training were always dedicated to NATO and NORAD missions.

The real damage done by Pearson and his successors was to starve the CF of resources and support. Only international obligations kept them from eliminating the CF completely, or turning it into the sort of glorified Boy Scout troop ET describes. Chretien almost tripped over himself in his eagerness to disband the Airborne Regiment when the opportunity presented itself. All he needed was an excuse.

Yes, I accept and see your point, belisarius - I think that the CF self-view and the politician's view of them are quite different.

As you note - they were grossly starved of equipment and resources - for essentially a full generation. That's not something you can overcome in a few years. But the notion of the military as a 'think tank' is more of a US than Canadian notion. A LOT of research goes on in the US military - as I'm sure you know.

However, Harper has started the forward trend, and I hope that Canadians acknowledge and appreciate this - and give him a majority!

These sort of articles and 'questions' come up in pretty much any recent war/conflict/operation. I used to remember during the NATO air strikes in Kosovo we had some idiotic reporters on occasion asking the General giving the press conference/briefing why weren't there any female pilots over there flying CF-18s. Never mind that joining the military is voluntary and that the mission is dangerous, why aren't a certain amount of people of a certain race or religion or other minority?

The only positive thing I can think of with these type of stories is that it's a slow news day and there isn't something else to bitch about.

So Roy. Where were you Capt Nichola Goddard gave her life in a firefight for this country? If you are going to take shots at women,at least get the facts right! FYI...way back in '79, I served with a gal who remustered OUT of the Air Force into the infantry. She loved it but failed. Why? She kicked the supreme living s**t out of her biased a**hole hand-to-hand instructor!!! Can't have that now,can we? Tell you what Roy. Pick between a PO'd guy with gun, and a righteous PO'd female defending herself. I know which one I want at my back!

iberia says....
Why are all the Canadian soldiers being killed in Afghanistan white?"

It's because the demographics of the Forces is mostly white. Or would you prefer the CAF to have an employment equity program where a certain percentage of military members have to be women, black, asian, native, or handicapped?

well iberia i guess you have'nt looked at tv lately or have tried to apply for a gov. job. those multicultural edicts are being foisted on whitey all the time. then theres the immigrants of convienience. in my opnion there should be a draft 2-3 years because the way things are going we are going to need the resources.

I would guess that over 99% of the 100,000+ Canadian war dead were white. We were once, until very recently, a virtually all-white nation.

WTF! I've just read the comments here and I realize the major problem with today's society is reading comprehension. I mean the number of leftards... errr people who write "Kate said" when she only cut & pasted a portion of the article and gave the link.

As a former serving member of the forces, I can agree with the writer of the article. For whatever reason a tour or career in the military is or has not been a path to follow. Multiculturalism may be playing a part in that new immigrants are not coming here (in Canada) to become Canadians but rather hyphenated citizens that are just carrying on their old ways in a new location.

As a staunch, rabid, froathing, multicultural, leftist, I want to state, categorically, that I support conscription. Furthermore, I believe that, aside from medical reasons, there should be no exemptions whatsoever - not race, religion, or college. Marriage should be the only cause for exemption.

That way, all Canadians, not just poor, luckless white guys from Nova Scotia, can go and fight. Think of how wonderful it will be for our national morale, when Stephen Harper's children become old enough to serve, and are sent off to difuse IED's in Afghanistan. I'm sure he'll be weeping with joy.

If you think Stephen Harper, and Mark Steyn, and David Frum understand civilizational survival now, imagine how much they appreciate and understand it, when their children come home missing an arm or a leg.

Yup, I agree, if we want people to truly appreciate the importance of participating in democratic societies, then we ought to be forced to defend it.

people don't come here to be canadian. they come here for money. very few of todays immigrants will go to war or fight in any way to keep my canada, the canada that was a christian nation, as it was. they just don't give a shit.

How many Canadian right-wing bloggers have been killed in combat over there? My understanding is that they're badly under-represented because they don't love their country.Posted by: Crabgrass

Yes, where are those chairborne, chickenhawk Blogging Tories?? Ah well, scratch a conservative, find a hypocrite.

You mean it's not safe to assume that enthusiastic conscription-positive commenters here can back their lusty demands with their own service records? I had no idea.

Oh my god I feel so duped.

A few observations to add, from the perspective of almost twenty years in uniform.

Being in the military tends to be something that runs in the family. Therefore, given the demographics of this country its not surprising that most soldiers are white. I don't think that this is a problem, but it will be if this is still the case twenty years from now.

The Canadian military used to be used as a social program. I don't know if this is still the case. The different regions of the country had different quotas for recruits. This is why the maritimes are over represented. Maritimers are also well represented due to the family ties issue.

Women in the military. I have known quite a few. Most of them were competent, but they suffered from the "racism of low expectations". this tended to mean, in my experience, that the merely competent were considered outstanding.

Being in the military is a young persons business, but when I was in, the recruitment and career management systems meant that as an organization we were basically geriatric. I recall seeing something when I was in that said the average age of someone in the forces was 36. It should be about 23.

I was in the army during Gulf War 1, I didn't go, and all my peers who also didn't go were very disappointed. I was young and single at the time. With a wife and two children, I wouldn't want to go now. This is one reason why it is a business for the young.

There are lots of opportunities for education in the military. In the branch I was in many guys got all expenses paid post grad degrees. Even the non-commissioned members (I HATE that term, it sounds like a form of erectile dysfunction!) can get sent to university under several different programs.

If I ran the army I would try and recruit lots of young guys who would stay for a few years and move on. If I was young again I would graduate from high school, join the army, do one stint save up my money and then get out and get an education. Thats the way it works in large part in the US. Here once you join the expectation is that you will stay for twenty years or until you're 55.

I met a few ethnic minority soldiers during my service, but they invariable had family ties in Canada for generations.

Ah yes, the 'if you like the military so much, why don't you join it' talking point. I suppose that some people would like to support the military for defending their rights and not have to be forced into service if they don't want to. I mean, free country and all. But yes, make it easier for the left to dominate politics by having all the conservatives sent away and be ignored. Solves two problems with one sweeping generalization!

Yeah, you only wish it were that easy.

White North American males quitely signing up without an identifiable group peep.
Freakin unbelievable!
Not one article in the Star identifying the inequity!
Well the Taliban are not white.
Obviously.
Makes it easier for our guys to identify targets , ...great!
Now lets hurry this thing along.
If you're not white male North American, we'll consider your advice according to your commitment.

Europe is a write off, Isreal is probably the exception, but does anyone really think or expect anyone other than white males from North America to fix anything of importance, anywhere in the world anymore?

We suck it up, and get er done.
We are the only unbeatable force on earth, for a reason.

If anyone wonders why immigrants aren't represented in our forces, just have a look at the criteria that are used. See for example: http://www.immigrate.net/law/en/VisasLaws/PointSystem.asp.

In other words, highly educated and skilled immigrants in their mid to late 20s aren't likely to find the military a very attractive career option.

Whereas Canadian high school grads (or like Ricky in Trailer Park Boys, who is striving for his grade 10) may find the military a more interesting way to get ahead.

And people from countries like South Korea, which has an army of ~500,000 may have already done their military service and don't want more. Anybody wonder why Chinese immigrants aren't attracted to the military?

I have to share this comment from commentor "Gayle" at "Red Tory"

"Do you know anyone who has joined the army? I know several - the vast majority reformed street kids who had no other real options"

Liberal.

Thinks the vast majority of the "army" (sic) are "street kids".

Wow.

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=9132732&postID=5025721505346175017

I'm surprised more of you are not on board with the conscription idea. If this is truly a battle for civilization, should we not use every available resource to defeat the enemy?

"But yes, make it easier for the left to dominate politics by having all the conservatives sent away and be ignored. Solves two problems with one sweeping generalization!"

I think you're misunderstanding my post. You see, I want people of all political stripes conscripted: liberals, tories, greends, NDPers. Rich, poor, middle class. I make no distinction. As I said, the only exemption would be for medical disabilities and people already married.

Now granted, this may cause some issues of morale, but nothing that couldn't be corrected with responsible management training for officers, and the correct explanation of the dangers of Islam to western civilization, which the Toronto Star ignores.

Also, would a blogger respond to the comments, regarding immigrants who come from country's where the army is a repressive force, and where military service may carry a negative stigma. Some immigrants have been traumatized by abuse at the hands of military and security forces. Do you expect them to serve faithfully in some one else's army, having just fled from oppression?

I especially love the idea of having immigrants serve in order to get their citizenship. Outsourcing our army to third world refugees: that would make a great campaign slogan.

"Seems to me feminists DEMAND equality of the sexes in almost every other niche of our society.

We do accept women in the army now....don't we?"

Posted by: Canadian Observer

Yah, and when feminists get what they demand, then maybe feminists will think a little harder about signing up. Just remember, not all women are feminists, but all women should get equal pay for equal work.

I just figured it out - immigrants do not speak English very well. Why do you think the French as sent together at the same time?

"How many Canadian right-wing bloggers have been killed in combat over there?" by Crabgrass

Yah, and how many left-wing bloggers have been killed in combat over there. A little birdie tells me that you're about as likely to see a Leftard fighting for the freedom of others as you would be to see President Mahmoud Amadnutjob kissing Jews.

"Yah, and how many left-wing bloggers have been killed in combat over there. A little birdie tells me that you're about as likely to see a Leftard fighting for the freedom of others as you would be to see President Mahmoud Amadnutjob kissing Jews."

I think you're missing the point. You see, us left-wing bloggers, are all freedom hating, feminist loving multiculturalist who wants to see the end of western civilization. Having said that, why would I fight in a war, that would prevent the aforementioned from happening. According to the right, western civilization is on the cusp of falling into the dark ages. Why, if as a freedom hating leftist, would I want to prevent that from happening?

Now, right wingers, who love freedom (presumably, as long as it's not for feminists and multiculturalists), have much to lose in the downfall of western civilization. It behoves you to fight for it, does it not?

So, the question stands: how many LGFers, SDAers, or other assorted right-wing blog posters have been killed in Afghanistan, or Iraqi, or anywhere?

I think I might be a shade off the post but as a fifteen year Vet of the RCAF,(before Trudeau kicked our Rs) I would like to have someone explain the structure of the early NATO service to me. I personally met socialy and at work, a total of 4 blacks,(all from the Maritimes), one from Japan, (a good friend who's name was the same as my wifes, except hers was O'Hara, and his was Ohara. and one Chinese. This was in fifteen years. One thing that completely confused me was a hockey tournement in Winipeg that I played in, (The RCAF won), The Navy team was almost totally from the Prairies, the Army team was at least 75% from Quebec, and on our team I was the only player not from the Maritimes. The only predominately non Canadian Majority"s I met were from Britain. I guess I must have been an anomoly.

"So, the question stands: how many LGFers, SDAers, or other assorted right-wing blog posters have been killed in Afghanistan, or Iraqi, or anywhere?"

The same amount of right-wing politicians, salesmen, farmers, clerks, lawyers, and other people who have different jobs have been killed. Unless a soldier puts up a right-wing blog and really becomes a frequent poster (you know, in between dealing with operations and doing research into politics? Yeah, that person has THAT much time to be blogging), it's not likely going to happen. Because, surprise, the military is not for everyone. It's a tough career to be sure, and not everyone is going to fit in, regardless of political affiliation. Those who do join know what they are getting into, and are fighting so that down the line, the rest of us don't have to.

"Why, if as a freedom hating leftist, would I want to prevent that from happening?"

Indeed. So until you demonstrate a willingness to strap on a suicide belt for "the cause", you're really out of line expressing an opinion at all.

Chickendove.

A lot of soldiers come from depressed ares of Canada. Mostly WASP areas. Areas with high unemployment. Not many Chinese are unemployed. That is a fact.

Crabgrass - Why do you hate Canada?

Seems like the lefty posters point of view is that military forces are simply ne'er do well types that simply have no other option in life but to join the armed forces.

That would seem to be a justification of their own point of view rather than a reflection of reality.

To acknowledge that individuals join for reasons such as a sense of duty and honor would undermine their most basic arguements.

So to justify their own reactionary positions, and self validate their specious arguements, they impose false realities that do far more harm than good.

Nothing wrong with good debate but none of the leftys posting here have advanced positions beyond what can at best be summed up as "no it's not" as rebutal.

It is undeniable that for some reason, in Canada, whites seem to be more willing to step up an join the forces (and die) than non whites.

It is also, perhaps, the ultimate in racism to bunch all whites together as a group based on their skin color.

Someone lefty ought to step up and explain to (eg.)Germans why they are just like Scotsman since they share the same external color, or by the same rationale why Iranians are the same as Egyptians.

I worked with an American who had served in the Army. He never was in combat, but he still considered the Army a good start to his career.

I remember him telling me about an exercise when they were woken up at 4:00 AM, and ordered to take out all their beds and lockers from their barracks, and reassemble them on the quad exactly as they were in the barracks. They had one hour to do this. Puzzled, I asked him the point of this. He said simply "It teaches you to work as a team".

I saw a Bison vehicle at the Toronto auto show. It was crammed with equipment that requires more training and education than shooting a rifle. Jet pilots are not exactly stupid. My co-worker told me that they spent at least half their time in a classroom, and that was in the 80's when microprocessors were just beginning to be deployed. I suspect the class training is even more intense now.

A lot of blacks and hispanics join the US military because it's one organization where they experience very little discrimination. I've been told that many employers consider service to be extremely important on a resume. You put in a few years' service, get training, and when you leave, you're much more employable. As minuteman pointed out, the CAF model is you're there for most of you working life. My cousin was in the CAF, and he got moved about 5 times. I think most people want more stability than that.

Before you question others, I suggest you join up yourself. Nothing like a chickenhawk.

Firstly, let me say that this is the funniest message board I have ever seen. I really ought to move to Saskatchewan. Corner Gas has nothing on this place.

'"Why, if as a freedom hating leftist, would I want to prevent that from happening?"

Indeed. So until you demonstrate a willingness to strap on a suicide belt for "the cause", you're really out of line expressing an opinion at all.

Chickendove.'

This is really funny. It really is. Let me see if I follow your logic: you would have more respect for myself if I strapped on a suicide belt, and blew up Canadian soldiers? Did I read that comment correctly?

And isn't the term 'chickendove' a little bit contradictory? If I am a pacifist, and don't want to fight (which I am not), and genuinely believe in non-violence as a tactical option, then isn't calling me a chicken a little bit silly, since, by definition, it is not cowardice, but moral principle that is the basis of my decision? Maybe chickenmullah, or chickenselfloathingmulticulturalist would be appropriate.

"This is really funny. It really is. Let me see if I follow your logic: you would have more respect for myself if I strapped on a suicide belt, and blew up Canadian soldiers? Did I read that comment correctly?"

No, you didn't. I wouldn't have any respect for you either way.

"And isn't the term 'chickendove' a little bit contradictory? If I am a pacifist, and don't want to fight (which I am not)

Chickendoves aren't pacifists, they're cowardly hypocrites.

You stated you were a "freedom hating leftist". Then you state you're not a pacifist. What's your point?

So, my question stands - remember it's only a logical twist on your own. Why haven't you strapped on a suicide belt to go "die in Afghanistan" with your fellow lefty bloggers?

You talk the talk, so walk it.

My brothers and I did over 50 years service. We have 4 degrees between us. We turned down many high paying jobs to do so. It is simple to bigotry to say that all military types are one type. And finally, the military is the LEAST discriminatory workplace in Canada. Basic training ensures that all soldiers are brought to the same level, and then trained up from there, as a unit, as a troop, as a team.

It is simple bigotry...........sorry

Kingstonlad, it's one of the ironies of this site that its critics float terms like "chickenhawk" at a readership that includes a significant number of former and current members of the armed forces.

There must be a degree program for stupidity like that.

Actually Kate, my original post was advocating conscription for all unmarried Canadians, of both genders. If you feel that this war is so important, then why not go and fight it yourself?

As I mentioned, there is no onus on me to do anything, since I don't support the military action over there. And incidentally, if I went to Afghanistan, who would I fight with? The Taliban? The Taliban itself, are a loosely knit collection of various tribes, many of whom are only bounded together by tactical alliances, and don't necessarily adhere to strict Islamic fundamentalism.

And incidentally, why, if I did go over there, would I use a suicide belt? Suicide bombing is a tactical option, firstly and foremostly. Most of the time, it is a weapon of last resort for people who are fighting a militarily superior force, and face almost certain defeat (see the Kamikazee and Russian "Death Brigades" for historical context). If I can hasten the downfall of western civilization by simply sitting here in my nice home in Toronto, drinking martinis, doing Yoga, implementing a new NEP, and voting for Jack Layton, why would I simply not do that?

No wonder western civilization is falling. It's defenders are not winning the battle for "Hearts and Minds". Perhaps you may consider taking a Pilates class? Or perhaps my conscription option?

Why are you still here? You want to set the rules for whom can support the war, then lead by example.

If you feel that this war is so important, then why not go and fight it yourself?

She is fighting it. The only way we will lose in Afghanistan is if idiots such as Taliban Jack can convince the public that we must leave. The Taliban will never prevail on the battlefield. A blog such as Kate's is critical to the Canadian effort in Afghanistan because it provides a much-needed balance to the ill-informed nitwits who comprise so much of our media and the opposition parties.

There is Kate. Liberal Arts BA at any Canadian university.

I note many of the Leftard weenies here just loooove conscription. Can't stand the idea of somebody freely choosing to go defend their neighbors and families, they feel they must force everyone to suffer equally, at gunpoint.

This is the hallmark of modern socialists. The bone-deep fear that somebody, somewhere may be enjoying themselves.

The dribble of sickness about Harper's little kids is just the icing on the cake. As a former member of the CF Reserves, let me advise you to never say that where a soldier can hear you. It would be safer to stick your head in a sausage machine.

"Why are you still here? You want to set the rules for whom can support the war, then lead by example."

Why am I still here? I told you, this place is hilarious! The inside of a right-wing mind is such a wonderful, magical place. Like Willy Wonka's chocolate factory... but on acid.

And, I am leading by example. I don't support the war, so, I am enjoying some nice martini's, voting for Jack Layton, and feeling guilty for being a white male heterosexual. I might hit a gay bar or two if I have time. I'll send them your love (figurately, not literally).

"She is fighting it. The only way we will lose in Afghanistan is if idiots such as Taliban Jack can convince the public that we must leave. The Taliban will never prevail on the battlefield. "

HAHAHAHAAA!!!! OMG, that is so funny. Kate is fighting the Taliban. How many IED's did you disable today?

I can understand why so many of you would be opposed to conscription. If white-middle class, soccer moms found out that little Johnny or Janey were going to go to Afghanistan to teach democracy to Pashtun tribesmen, we would be out of there faster than you can say "Grant Devine."

"This is the hallmark of modern socialists. The bone-deep fear that somebody, somewhere may be enjoying themselves."

Actually, I am thoroughly enjoying myself. You, on the other hand, sound somewhat depressed. Perhaps we could go to the spa together?

As far as Afghanistan is concerned, a good friend of mine is a member of the Afghani royal family. We worked together to help get rid of the commies. A majority of the people of Afghanistan are not "tribesmen", but regular people who want peace and security. I think you should maybe leave your little leftard cocoon, travel to Afghani, and talk to the regular folks. You may be shocked moonbat.

"We worked together to help get rid of the commies"

So, I assume that you were aiding the Islamic fundamentalists who were fighting the Soviets? Excellent! I assume that you and I will be on the same side once the caliphite is established.

Sorry. Your average latte sipping trawna moonbat would not have the balls to travel to a war zone to get his/her facts firsthand. Silly me.

Hey idiot. You said it yourself earlier. It had nothing to do with islamofascism, and everything to do with ridding the country of the puppet soviet regime. And as far as the caliphate is concerned, I will not shoot the islamonutjobs until they are done beheading the moonbats. Promise!

Since you mentioned it, I have a long time friend and former employee who's serving in Afghanistan right now, on a team designated to search out and neutralize IED's.

You know, my only regret is that when there are successful terror attacks on Western soil, that it's the "latte sipping" left wing apologists like you who are never around to volunteer as expendible.

"I will not shoot the islamonutjobs until they are done beheading the moonbats."

This statement is very instructive. It shows what lies at the heart of a right-winger. Fundamentally, what motivates you is not a struggle against Islam. It's your hatred of the left that motivates you.

What makes you think that islamonutjobs are only going to cut of our heads? Why won't they go for yours? If we are the ones that are opposing them, why won't they attack you first? The reason is simple: you don't actually believe any of the crap about civilization falling, or Europe being lost, or any of that. This is about your hatred of domestic political opponents. That's why you secretly love islamic fundamentalists: because they have the guts to do what you are too cowardly to do. That's why you worship the armed forces. It's nothing to do with patriotism, or a desire to protect the country from terrorists. You're all just weak little cowards, who are projecting your own fear and hatred onto others.

Anyways, this has been a real slice. However, there's so much to do in Toronto. Such a wonderful, multicultural city, you know. And plus, that oil in Alberta isn't going to ship itself out here. I must get back to being a sissy, leftard, moonbat from the greatest city in the world!

Have fun fighting terrorists from your keyboards!

"Beheading the moonbats"

Given the obvious size of the 'The Self-Loathing Multiculturalist's' cranium, presumably it would be performed with a pocket knife.

If i am not in Afghanistan, does that mean you are proud of me, Self-Loathing?
There are many many "right-wing" bloggers in war torn areas right now - even as i write this. May i suggest a visit to milblogging(dot)com? Go ask any of them how many have died.
If and when you get your wish and Western Civilization "ends", how many shops will be selling the vodka/gin for those Martini's you so much enjoy? Somehow i think your glamorous days at the spa or visits to the local gay bars will end with Western Civilization.
Be careful what you wish for...

Vancouver is 30% chinese and now over 50% asian.

They don't have to win a war to take over Canada. We are giving it to them.

The answer is to stop all immigration-unless the immigrant can speak english, has a profession , trade, or money. Also to stop multiculturalism.

How many SDA readers have asked their MP's to do this?

"I can understand why so many of you would be opposed to conscription. If white-middle class, soccer moms found out that little Johnny or Janey were going to go to Afghanistan to teach democracy to Pashtun tribesmen, we would be out of there faster than you can say "Grant Devine."

Not only a pervert, a slow learner too! As we have been discussing, pretty much the only people IN Afghanistan are the products of White middle class homes outside Toronto. Nobody else give a sh*t, apparently.

"Actually, I am thoroughly enjoying myself. You, on the other hand, sound somewhat depressed. Perhaps we could go to the spa together?"

High school will back next week, you won't have time.

Neil,

What difference does it make if Vancouver is mostly Chinese, besides the obvious driving stereotype compounded with socialized insurance, Vancouver is actually a pretty awesome place to live.

I live in the west end, my neighbours are mostly gay and I work as an engineer in renewable resources. I don't see anything wrong with that, unless of course you're a bigot.

A return of the country to the 1950s would not solve any problems. Hopefully you have a reason to dislike the Chinese other than Bigotry.

"The answer is to stop all immigration-unless the immigrant can speak english, has a profession , trade, or money. Also to stop multiculturalism.

How many SDA readers have asked their MP's to do this?"

I encourage, in the strongest possible terms, for all SDA readers, to send notes to their MP, identifying themselves, and this blog, and state, that Canada to only allow english speaking immigrants with money and to stop multiculturalism. Perhaps, you could send a press release to that effect. Also, to call for the imprisonment and beheading of moonbats.

"In the meantime, this sort of dissent reminds me of trolls attempting to direct the editorial policy of my blog and, failing to do so, accusing me of disregarding their "freedom of speech".

- Ghost of a flea

TSLM, kindly get your facts straight. The Taliban, by definition, are Muslim fundamentalists. They are also only 20% of the Afghan population. They seized power with help of much more numerous Taliban in Pakistan.

Why is it OK to leave the Afghan people to these usurpers? As long as Dubya isn't involved, it seems for some that any atrocity is AOK.

Oh, no that would be fighting Bush's war for oil, right? You said you vote for Jack Layton. Do you support his call for troops in Darfur to head off human rights catastrophe? It seems inconsistent that you don't seem to care about the human rights abuses of foreign-installed minority in Afghanistan, but want to take on the government of Sudan?

Good point about Darfur, Shamrock. Layton and the NDP don't seem to realize that intervention in the Sudan will lead to exactly the same sort of fighting as we are currently experiencing in Afghanistan. Bin Laden has openly called for Jihadis to go to Darfur and fight the "infidels". Darfur is not an isolated case, but forms part of the worldwide rise of extremist Islam.

"Layton and the NDP don't seem to realize that intervention in the Sudan will lead to exactly the same sort of fighting as we are currently experiencing in Afghanistan."

Layton's take on Afghanistan is rather oversimplistic, to put it politely. However, there is truth in his foolishness. If the conflict is a internal civil war, over which, we have little control, and where both sides are committing atrocities, how does intervention help the situation?

The question of whether or not to use arms in a conflict is an academic one. In the real world, one has to make a fairly serious justification for using arms to force a settlement. The rule ought to be: first do no harm. Yes, not as manly and heterosexual as killing an entire wedding party with cluster bombs, but, as a logical conservative, surely you'd agree that whatever intervention is done, it should be done, firstly and foremostly, with the idea, that we should not make the situation worse for the local inhabitants. The war is, obviously, for them, and not for us, is it not?

surely you'd agree that whatever intervention is done, it should be done, firstly and foremostly, with the idea, that we should not make the situation worse for the local inhabitants. The war is, obviously, for them, and not for us, is it not?

I do not agree. Protecting innocent civilians must always be a concern, but it is not the primary consideration in war. If a war must be fought, the first concern must always be to win it.

The war in Afghanistan was launched as a result of the 9/11 attacks, not as an effort to help the local population. The Taliban had allowed al-Qaeda to set up terrorist training camps through which thousands of jihadis passed. The attacks in New York and Washington (and numerous previous terrorist attacks) were conceived and launched from Afghanistan. When the Taliban refused to dismantle the camps or hand over Bin Laden, war was the only remaining option.

The situation since then has been one of supporting the new Afghan government, rebuilding the country and preventing the Taliban/al Qaeda from returning. Abandoning the security element of this process would make reconstruction and political stability impossible.

SLM, how are we making the situation worse for Afghans? Please explain.

BTW, you tend to ramble on and your arguments are hard to understand; that is what you are actually arguing (not whether or not I or anyone else agrees). The ones that are understandable seem to be rather simplistic/reductionist, using obscure examples such as:
"The rule ought to be: first do no harm. Yes, not as manly and heterosexual as killing an entire wedding party with cluster bombs, but, as a logical conservative, surely you'd agree that whatever intervention is done, it should be done, firstly and foremostly, with the idea, that we should not make the situation worse for the local inhabitants."

Again, I ask, how are we making things worse in Afghanistan? Quality of life indicators (infant mortality, literacy for example) are all showing a steady rise; or is that some western idea. of "not making things worse."

Now before you say, we didn't go there for human rights (and I agree with you), we went to eliminate a terrorist threat, doesn't creating conditions where Afghans can decide their own affairs and we honour their wish for self-determination, shouldn't we be willing to help, and as a minimum, finish the job we promised to do?

"The war is, obviously, for them, and not for us, is it not?"

No. Its not. Obviously.

Your grasp of the situation is amazing, Mr. Loathing. Taliban Jack is a master of foreign relations in comparison.

We are there because NATO is there (and because Paul Martin wanted a photo-op in front of soldiers). If we want to stay in NATO, we need to stay in Afghanistan.

NATO is there because the 9/11 attacks on NATO member USA were launched from there, with the aid and comfort of the Taliban.

The Taliban are still active, so NATO is still there. We are there to destroy the Taliban and deny their aid to Al Qaeda.

If not for Al Qaeda and their atrocities nobody would care about the place, and the Taliban would still be shooting farmers for not putting underwear on their sheep.

We are not there to help the Afghan people. This is not some kind of Meals On Wheels International thing. The war is for us, not them.

The NATO mission is to destroy the Taliban/Al Qaeda and make sure they don't come back. The best way to do that is get the locals on our side. Building roads, schools etc. is a strategy to get that done, it is not the mission.

Taliban Jack knows this. He just doesn't want the other parties to look good, and he knows his base is a bunch of chickendove wankers. So he proposes pulling out of Afghanistan because its the "moral" thing to do. Chickendove wankers don't see a war in Darfur as helping the USA, so that's OK and Taliban Jack is all over it.

This is because at base Taliban Jack is an amoral opportunistic partisan, and to the extent he has any convictions at all he's a central planning socialist in the Stalinist tradition.

Thank God I left Toronto.

"We are not there to help the Afghan people. This is not some kind of Meals On Wheels International thing. The war is for us, not them."

Kingstonlad, are you reading this? This kind of language is most definitely not going to convince any Afghan Canadians to enlist, is it? For shame...

So anyhoo Phantom, are the NATO members that don't have "boots on the ground" allowed to stay in NATO? When do they get kicked out?

Yeah, Jack Layton is so amoral that his party is calling on Harper to guarantee the jobs of reservists that fight overseas. He's so...evil.

It's a darn good thing that Harper, Mr. Morality himself, is always above board...except, of course, when it comes to breaking Elections Canada laws by donating over the legal limit: http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20061226/conservatives_donations_061226?s_name=&no_ads=

I love when conservatives try to preach morality at the rest of us Canadians; it fails every time. Keep it up!

I love it when JohnnyRingo types take a legal spat and use it to prove "conservative" are just as corrupt and incompetent as the LPC. They love to "change the channel." Sorry, JR, you can't get away with that anymore, the Liberal sycophants in the media can't distort the message with previous effectiveness. I can't wait for them to try in next election, though; that will be a lot of fun to watch.

BTW, when has Jack Layton stood up in the house, or included in his platform, any legislation to guarantee jobs for reservists who deploy. JR, can't you see posturing for what it is

WTF has your link have to do with our discussion, or do you just "love when conservatives try to preach morality at the rest of us Canadians?"

Quite breathtaking hypocrisy, really.

A man like Ringo has got a great big hole, right in the middle of himself. And he can never steal enough, or kill enough, or cause enough pain to fill it up. And so he walks the earth, forever seeking retribution...

Are you my huckleberry?

In Vino Veritas.

Age Quod Agis.

So Shamrock, are you fine with Stephen Harper and other MPs breaking Elections Canada laws? Is that morally acceptable to you? I'll just bet it is.

I was quite happy to see Martin booted out of office, and I've spoken up when politicians I like - including Jack Layton - have uttered stupid things I disagree with. I get upset when the politicians I support make mistakes - and then I do something about it. Unlike you guys, who will always "turn the channel" when bad news about your man Harpo hits the airwaves.

See, the problem I have with conservatives like you is that you're so blind to reality that you refuse to be honest with yourselves. That, my friend, is what's going to lead to Harper's downfall. When all his supporters turn our to be a flock of Yes Men, he's going to crash and burn. As I said before, keep it up.

Like I said JR, just change the channel.

Oh, by the way, a "legal spat" often occurs when one side breaks the law. But I see that doesn't concern Shamrock, who supports politicians who break the law. I see why you want to change the channel - it's not a good show, is it?

JR,
I actually agreed with some of your points regarding many conservatives(or libs or dippers,for that matter)playing partisan politics like it's a team sport....but then I noticed the following excerpt from your post....

"....when politicians I like - including Jack Layton..."

That's when I realized I was wasting my time taking you seriously.

Taliban Jack
Jack bin Layton

He didn't just stumble across these nicknames,you know....he earned them fair and square through his dispicably selfish undermining of our participation in an internationally important,UN sanctioned mission.
Taliban Jack bin Layton is simply a traitor to our troops by willfully further endangering them with his demands we publicly tell the Taliban exactly when we plan to cut and run.All for no more reason than to politically posture himself.

I may have some misgivings about Harper's job as PM.....but I think Layton is an opportunistic and dangerous fool.

Since you refuse to see that then you have zero credibility with your hypocritical accusations of'blind'partisanship aimed at the regulars here.

Canadian Observer, I think you missed the point. Sure, I like Layton, and many of the policies he's put forward in his time as NDP leader, but I was extremely upset with comments regarding the Taliban. I disagree that he is a traitor to our troops - if anything, I think he was trying to end the troop casualties, albeit in a rather boneheaded way - but I was definitely pissed that he made those comments. I was in communication with my NDP MP, and several members of the party brass and riding association, and through various other channels. If I support someone else come a leadership review (and I'll give Layton the rest of his tenure to see if he can fix the damage he caused with those comments before fully deciding against him), his comments on the Canadian Forces would be a big part of that move. And - god forbid - if there is not someone I feel comfortable with as leader, I will move to another party, should there be one with policies and a leader I am morally comfortable with.

Tell me, how is this an example of "blind partisanship," when I've freely acknowledged the shortcomings of a politician I like - even going so far as to admit that I might support a potential challenger to his leadership because of his mistakes as leader? That's pretty far removed, I'd say, from the ideologues on this site, who, when confronted with Conservative lawbreaking, cover their ears and close their eyes and shriek the same old tired lines about Libranos, socialists, moonbats and leftards, all the while willfully overlooking lawbreaking at the very highest levels of their own party, and our government.

Funny thing about Harper: on election night, I actually felt good. I felt good that Martin and the old gang had been swept out. I felt good that a westerner (by way of Toronto, but what the heck) was PM. I felt good that, while I might disagree with Harper's stance on several issues, at least he was in a minority government, and at least he pledged to do things differently.

When he showed up at Rideau Hall with Michael Fortier, his unelected senator/minister, and his floor crossing former Liberal industry minister Emerson, that all changed. I realized that Harper, for all his talk and for all his electioneering, was no different from any of the old guard politician. He's pure Chretien, as far as tactics go.

However, from that day forward, every conservative has bent over backwards to apologize for Liberal tactics that Harper once rightly condemned. It's a shame, because if the party faithful could deviate from their talking points, they could apply some pressure to him and demand some real accountability - and not the rehashed Liberal power plays that are going to sink your party.

Why JohnnyRingo, at least you have good taste in movies, if not in politicians.

JR - every conservative has bent over backwards to apologize for Liberal tactics that Harper once rightly condemned

No, plenty of conservatives have expressed their dissatisfaction with some of the government's actions and roundly condemned them here and elsewhere. The complete mishandling of income trusts and failure to stand up to the opposition's despicable attack on Shane Doan spring to mind.

Harper and his government have made some serious mistakes, but on the whole I will still take them any day over the current alternatives.

Hmmm, it sounds like Johnny has become a moonbat, dhimmi, islamofascistcommiefeminazi.

Queue reference to beheading in three, two, one...

Stoning in this case.

Who cares what color they are?
The fact is there are Canadians dieing.
I was here less than 2 weeks and 3 Canadians died and 9 injured.

Black, white, grey, green, that is not important.

Mr. Ringo, I've noticed this tendency among your ilk. When faced with an undeniable truth you change the subject and re-double your attack.

In answer to your deflection question Little Johnny, pretty much all the NATO Alliance countries have more men in harm's way than we do, between Afghanistan and Iraq.

We looked like JERKS when Chretien refused to help in Iraq (token though it would have been), Martin had no choice but to send the Army to the next available NATO mission. Even at that he sent them in the wrong color uniforms with no proper vehicles, no heavy weapons and in some cases no food. Give Martin his due though, he did look smashing as he reviewed the troops before they left. It says a lot about his riding that he still has a seat.

Harper has picked up the ball and is running with it rather than continuing the destruction of Canada's military and our international reputation. No doubt that is a catastrophe for the NDP. I feel your pain.

I see Mr. Loathing has been reduced to the other favorite troll habit of flinging poo from the sidelines, having had his assinine argument shot out from under him.

Me, you seem to be missing the point. The color of who is getting killed is not at issue. Its the color of who's volunteering to go that is of interest. We seem to be having a problem with that.

There's your people who identify themselves as Canadian and sign up to fight, then there's everybody else who doesn't. Leaving us with a division between Canadians and people who just live here. Like Johnny Ringo and Mr. Loathing.

Mr. Loathing's answer was conscription, in the hope that White people would refuse to let their precious darlings off the apron strings to fight in Harper/Bushitler's oil war. [subtext fairly screaming to be heard, Mr. Loathing]

Since the whole thread is about the fact that only White people are fighting now, it would seem Mr. Loathing suffers from poor reading comprehension and possibly a disabling brain injury as well.

In the interest of silencing any PINHEADS who take the above as some kind of racist statement,

-yes I know there are other-than-white soldiers in the Forces,
-yes I know they volunteered too,
-yes I know they are in the 'Stan fighting too.

I know there's damn few of them and we could use a bunch more. Step up or shut up.

"I see Mr. Loathing has been reduced to the other favorite troll habit of flinging poo from the sidelines, having had his assinine argument shot out from under him."

I haven't had any arguments shot out from under me. My argument was that we should conscript all people in Canada who under between 18-35, and unmarried and without physical disability. Why are you opposed to this?

"Leaving us with a division between Canadians and people who just live here. Like Johnny Ringo and Mr. Loathing."

And yourself, I might add.

I ask the question again: why are you opposed to conscription? Is this not a grave threat to our civilization?

A related question: would you have been opposed to conscription in WW2?

The key two understand right-wingers nowadays, particularly the Mark Steyn, civilization is dying, type, is to recall the famous axiom: all politics is local.

When President Ahmawhatisface of Iran talks about Israel disappearing from the earth, he isn't saying that because he thinks the Jews will get scared and move to Long Island or Florida.

When George Bush says,"Bring em on", he isn't asking for insurgents to attack U.S. troops. He's appealing to his political constituency which prefers less thought, more action.

And so it is with this group. There is no struggle for civilization. The Muslims aren't taking over the world. Europe is not "lost". Multiculturalism does not breed self-loathing or "cultural suicide". So what is it that holds this group together? A few things: hatred of abortion, homophobia, thinly veiled racism, an obsession with the sexual prowess of non-whites, and a general feeling of helplessness brought on by the attacks of 9/11.

When they talk about a struggle against barbarism, even the most lunatic right-winger doesn't seriously think that Osama bin Laden will show up in Regina and start molesting the Roughriders Cheerleaders. Their struggle is against domestic people that they don't like: gays, minorities, immigrants, abortion, critical thinking, publicly funded healthcare. What do all those things have in common: they are destroying civilization as they like it?

The interesting thing is, the Muslims and the right-wingers see eye to eye on a lot of things. They regard our culture as depraved and decadant. They oppose rights for gays and women. The both want a culturally authoritarian society.

That is why the posters here make the occasional reference to beheading: because that is what they secretly want to do to people like me. But they don't have the honesty to admit their own motives to themselves. So they live out their fantasy's through Islamic snuff videos. Laughing about "moonbats" getting beheaded. However, they don't have the guts to do anything about it, and never will. Hence their feeling of impotence.

And that is where the anger and fascination with Islamic fundamentalism comes from. The Muslims hate the same things that they do, but the Muslims are dealing with it in a way that they only wish they could. Hell, you can't even bring yourself to call for a conscript army. If you believe that civilization is worth fighting for, then why the half-measure? Why not fight it the way we did in WW2?

And that, my friends, is what a right-winger is: a scared, impotent little child, playing out their fantasy's on the web world, defending civilization with each keystroke. But that is all they will ever do.

I already told you, Loathly.

//www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/006930.html#c191446

Still having problems with the reading comprehension eh? Conscription is a tool of socialism. I'm not a socialist. Is this clear to you yet?

I see no need to expend further energy educating you. I'd have more luck teaching a pig to talk, and pigs have better manners.

Very nicely put, Self Loathing. Couldn't agree more.

Phantom,

Actually, much as I personally dislike the former Prime Minister, I must say that it says a lot about you and your values that Martin still won his seat, and that the Liberals and NDP won as many seats, and votes, as they did in the last election.

Feeling the squeeze yet? You should.

5.3 million Canadians voted for the Conservative Party. A full 9.2 million Canadians voted for the alternatives. So tell me about those Canadians who are really Canadians, and those who just live here.

Outnumbered again, Phantom.

"Conscription is a tool of socialism. I'm not a socialist. Is this clear to you yet?"

So FDR, LBJ, Nixon, Churchill and Mackenzie King were all socialists?

I'm sure that would be news to their biographers.

So are you suggesting that you would not use conscription, even if it would save western civilization? Are you not then, by definition, aiding in western civilization's demise?

Thanks for the kind words, Johnny.

Further to your point about Martin, it says much about how Harper and the conservatives are perceived, that they were only able to win a majority, and only on the second try.

It's quite remarkable, that a political party that ran a multi-million dollar money laundering operation was allowed to maintain power. In most countries, they would have been utterly defeated. Fortunately, Harper could be counted on to run an idiotic campaign. Fortunately FOR Harper, the NDP was kind enough to expose a potential leak from the finance department and call for a RCMP investigation during the campaign. If you study the tracking polls from the campaign, most people switched their vote at that particular moment.

Back to the topic: Phantom's reckless use of the word socialist aside, he does raise a valid point about the professionalization of the army. It is a bit of a pickle, especially for those such as right-wing bloggers, who want to win without fighting.

Both conscript army's and professional, all volunteer forces, both have their advantages and draw backs. It largely depends on the context. Conscript army's, for example, are not useful in guerilla style engagements. One needs to look at the American experience in Vietnam, where the army was near total collapse by 1973. The French, by contrast, only used the Foreign Legion professionals in Indochina, though the outcome was the same.

Conscription tends to work best in one of three conditions:
(1) fascist societies that are highly regimented (USSR, Nazi Germany).
(2) Democratic societies that have near hysterical levels of nationalism about them (United States, England during World War 1).
(3) Army's that are used purely for national defense (such as the Swiss).

Canada meets none of those conditions. That is why, as an opponent of the war, I strongly support conscription. Overall, Canadian opinion on the war is split about 50/50 (slightly more opposed in Quebec). For most Canadians, the war doesn't mean, and will never mean, anything other than watching coffin's go down the "Highway of Heros", and Don Cherry chastize Ron McLean for his lack of patriotism. Thusly, a Canadian can be for the war because, hey, if a couple of Afghan's get their wedding reception blown up, well, that's too bad, but it doesn't really affect me. If, on the other hand, they see their children, or themselves, have to ship off over to Afghanistan, they will very quickly become opposed.

Why are you an opponent of the war, SLM? Is it just the Canadian involvement or the UN and NATO as well? Surely you can see how disastrous it would be to see the Taliban and al-Qaeda return to power. A lot of people pooh-poohed the terrorist threat prior to 9/11, greatly underestimating both the determination and skill of the jihadists. The Taliban/al-Qaeda would see any withdraw as a military victory and vindication of what they see as their divine mission.

Make no mistake, they would continue their efforts to attack the west and establish their ultimate goal of an Islamic caliphate. Sound ridiculous? Maybe from the perspective of a summer's evening at a peaceful Toronto terrace, but make no mistake, these guys are very serious. Their determination shouldn't be underestimated.

I agree that civilian casualties are a terrible thing, and that every effort should be made to avoid them. NATO forces have made some serious errors in use of force against the Taliban, which they are now correcting. Effective counter-insurgency doctrine calls for the use of absolute minimum force, as anything else only increases support for the insurgents.

I have no problem with critical examination of how the war in Afghanistan is prosecuted, but any withdrawl of military support for the government there would be a huge mistake. Layton's call for withdrawl followed by negotiations is ridiculous in the extreme. Dion is