Moral clarity
Shorter Joe Jacobs: We should freeload, just because we can.
posted by Babbling Brooks at 9:48 a.m.
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
The Torch is a group weblog focusing on the Canadian military.
Contributors:
- Damian - Babbling Brooks
- Mark from Ottawa
- Paul Synnott - BBS
- The Monarchist
- The Phantom Observer
- Tony - Milnews.ca
Damian's Afghanistan Posts
- Welcome to the two-way range
- The winning percentage
- Tac Hel
- Compatriots
- On the boardwalk
- Patrol, pt.1 - headed to Double K
- Patrol, pt.2 - Dand District Centre
- Corrections: thankless and rewarding
- Canada/Afghanistan (and me)
- A little goes a long way
- Photo Album
The opinions expressed in each blog post at The Torch are those of the specific post's contributor, and should not be attributed to any other group, organization or individual with which any of the contributors is affiliated, including each other. Neither do others' comments to these posts represent the contributors' opinions. Furthermore, any links provided to other websites are for information purposes only, and don't imply any endorsement on the part of the contributors.
This website is not endorsed by the Department of National Defence, the Government of Canada, or any other group or organization.
LCol John McCrae
Maps
Afghanistan pol/topo
Afghanistan ethnolinguistic
SW Asia ethnolinguistic
Afghanistan ISAF RC & PRT
Kandahar districts
Previous Posts
- Quagmire update
- On the tarmac...
- Afstan: Three views
- Canadian Coast Guard: Government doing better that...
- The Royal Newfoundland Regiment
- Whack-A-Mole
- A reply to Haroon Siddiqui/French in Afstan
- Afstan: The "Q" word
- Consequences
- Taliban don't play by Dutch rules
5 Comments:
So the Evil BusHitler could invade and conquer Canada if he wanted. BUT the not-quite-so Evil BusHitler would save Canada's *** if it were attacked by anyone. That being the case, let America pick up ALL the defense tab, in treasure and in blood.
This "philosophy" is cowardice wrapped up in hate and moral sloth!
Excluding comment on the last posting....
I think there a couple of points worth salvaging out of the letter referenced....
It should be very clear that the current government is significantly more confrontational and more willing with respect to it's attitudes on conflict. I'm not personally sure if it all for the best. These attitudes are highly in line with some of the more extreme positions of the United States and I feel it does Canada a disservice to hold these opinions. We are more than sheep (aka the coalition of the willing) and we should encourage our politicians to ensure that the attitudes we espouse are proud Canadian ones. Canada, unfortunately, is complaining to no-avail about other NATO countries who are in effect freeloading in Afghanistan. We may have had more leverage here if the current government did not hitch this issue to its partisan political position.
Also, The Canadian Military is in lack of a clear mandate. A number of years ago there was a push to more highly mobile reactionary force now there seems to be a sudden shift to "beefing up" to be able to go toe to toe. The government needs to define a clear persistent mandate for the military and have the military equip around it. We then need the political presence of mind to stick to missions we are staffed and trained for. Given what I have seen I have no confidence that the mandate for the military will not change yet again in the next 2-3 years.
So aren't we supposed to support the UN, support multilateral missions ??
Afghanistan is a UN security council mandated mission. If the lefty moonbats and others of the anti -American ilk want to wallow in their self-loathing and hatred of all things USA, so be it.
They can't handle truth, so they replace it with simplistic delusions about the evil empire screwing Canada.
fred deriding people for being simplistic has utterly made my day.
Thank you fred.
First of all... I am not a moonbat; I am not a lefty; and I endeavor to be thoughtful and articulate. I don't have delusions. For some reason you would have me believe that your simplistic delusions about the altruistic, peace making intentions of the United States are more accurate than my opposing views.
Second I agree that we should be fully contributing members to the United Nations and efforts. That being said though, countries like the US (among others) use the UN selectively to promote their individual agendas while simply ignoring others which are not to their liking. For instance there have been a number Middle East related resolutions which have floundered because of US ambivalence (or pro-Israeli posturing).
That being said the UN (and all it’s failings) is likely the best system we currently have available to us for multilateral negotiations. With respect to the UN resolution for Afghanistan, I have always had a concern that NATO/ISAF is now running operations in Afghanistan. I think they are hamstrung by the internal bickering by the member nations in Afghanistan. It's turned into a patchwork of solutions and a mission which lacks end to end clarity. I’m not saying there is not value to the mission I am saying that there does not seem to be a coherent plan (currently) just a series of tactical decisions which may or may not be moving us towards the desired end
An interesting comment that I thought hit the mark http://politicsblog.ctv.ca/blog/_archives/2007/4/13/2877841.html
Post a Comment
<< Home