[Wada]

I'm not sure why being a "peace keeper" is in anyway inferior to being a "soldier". It takes one hell of a soldier to stand tall enough between warring sides and to insist on peace. We have always seen these sorts as heros. What's the problem now?

[Canadian_Mind]

I said it before, it's not the people on the ground, nor their ethics or morals, that i have a problem with.

Its just that the traditional view of peacekeeping, as you described it, isn't actually what it is anymore. most fo the time nowadays the demi-conflicts in which their is peacekeeping are usually one sided conflicts, like soon-to-be genocides/ethnic cleansing, right after genocideds/ethnic cleansing, and the like. There hasn't been much opportunity recently for peacekeeping where we are actually keeping two armies apart, and on the rare occasion that there were, we didn't do anything about it.

[Delwin]

Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:

Very vauge connection to the current topic. But I agree. More co-operation from Pakistan would be a great help.

Your right, was just on my mind and was closest thread to express it.

To stay more on topic, there must be peace before one can peacekeep, and conflicts must be resolved, either diplomaticly or militarily before we can have peace.

In instances where a diplomatic solution can't be found, why should a leading nation like Canada be excempt from Military action? I believe it is a moral obligation.

[Canadian_Mind]

Peacemaking? On a small scale it worked in Bosnia. But on a larger scale, like what should have happened in Rwanda, in could turn into all-out warfare.

[ShepherdsDog]

Wada Wada:

I'm not sure why being a "peace keeper" is in anyway inferior to being a "soldier". It takes one hell of a soldier to stand tall enough between warring sides and to insist on peace. We have always seen these sorts as heros. What's the problem now?

But there are plenty of situations when that soldier can insist on peace until he is blue in the helmet(Rwanda) and the opposing factions still go at it. Peacekeepers need to be well armed, so well armed that if anyone violates the peace, the response can be so swift and severe no one would dare try it again. Pax Romana worked well for almost a thousand years.

[saturn_656]

Wada Wada:

I'm not sure why being a "peace keeper" is in anyway inferior to being a "soldier". It takes one hell of a soldier to stand tall enough between warring sides and to insist on peace. We have always seen these sorts as heros. What's the problem now?

Peacekeeping is used as an excuse to advocate mothballing or shortchanging the military. That is one of my primary problems with it.

Peacekeeping is like the military's part time weekend job... its full time job is the defence of Canadian sovereignty, interests, and our allies.

Some seem to have lost sight of that.

[stokes]

We did peacekeeping for so long because after WWII there was a period of relative stability, not all wars were prevented (just the ones in Europe). Since 1990 there has been alot of fighting along religous/ ethnic lines where sometimes no uniform is worn and we cant tell who the enemy is.

Canada should defend herself not only at home but abroad. The UN / NATO is no longer functional as an organization

[Wada]

Shep I agree with you TOTALLY. To me it simply stands to reason that our boys and girls should be outfitted with the best equipment, and YES get the job done and if they are called upon to do a job give them the ability to complete the task ASAP.

I detest war but even more I loath playing at war.

[Canadian_Mind]

stokes stokes:

We did peacekeeping for so long because after WWII there was a period of relative stability, not all wars were prevented (just the ones in Europe). Since 1990 there has been alot of fighting along religous/ ethnic lines where sometimes no uniform is worn and we cant tell who the enemy is.

Canada should defend herself not only at home but abroad. The UN / NATO is no longer functional as an organization

I agree with the first part of your post, you are stating fact. I have a problem with your second part. NATO is a military alliance with a few members who are too shy to swim in the deep end, the UN is a beaurocratic mess. As for NATO's shy members, I still have every confidence that should we ever truely need them in a world crisis, they will stand by our side as we have stood by theirs for 60 years.

[Gunnair]

kenmore kenmore:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Troops as peacekeepers. Yeah. Seems that someone needs to explain to the Canadian public the difference between soldiers and cops.

well unlike the US Canadians are not war mongers.... and harper wont be getting the military vote... lol..

What would you base that massive assumption on?

[Canadian_Mind]

Good question.

He's got my vote.

[herbie]

Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:

Very vauge connection to the current topic. But I agree. More co-operation from Pakistan would be a great help.

A great HELP???

Delwin just repeated the only way there CAN be a "win", if we hunt them down in Pakistan or Pakistan suddenly decides to actually DO something! Neither of which is gonna happen.
Otherwise we're pissing around providing the Taliban targets and yet more white skinned foreigners to rally the locals against.

Someone in Harper's camp must've noticed the polls, the word "exit strategy" is finally mouthed by a Tory. Notice those polls: 61% want us out and gaining with every poll.
Bang the drum, blow the bugle, wave the flag. tout the glory of war all you want. Almost no one is listening!

Oh and you forgot Croatia, like everyone does. Peacekeepers shoot back if you don't handcuff them.

[sandorski]

Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:

sandorski sandorski:

Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:

I find the concept of being regarded as a peacekeeper embarrasing. All I have to do is look back at Rwanda and feel shame. But their is more to it then that.

Peacekeeping, as it is now, is a joke. I don't look forward to the day I'm off in some pisspot nation watching women get raped and their kids murdered in some of the most gruesome forms imaginable (think being strangles by your own intestines so some warlord can prove a point), while the ignorant millions back home think that i am making a difference in the world and bettering the Canadian image. Maybe sometimes it works, but I have yet to talk to a Canadian former-peacekeeper who doesn't have some horrible or gruesome story to tell about their peacekeeping days, if they are willing or able to talk about it without being brought to tears.

What's embarrassing about preventing conflict?

Look at the next sentance.

I am fully aware that there was nothing anyone there could do, and it was no fault on their part. They did what they could. But Rwanda has been engrained into my mind as what a useless concept peacekeeping is in its resent form, and I find the participation in the beurocratic, disfigured, self-handcapped mess that peacekeeping is embarrasing.

I also think I would be far more than embarrassed if I was ever limited by my SOPs to simply watch as a woman is raped and her kids killed, probably begging me to help in a language I don't understand. I also find the concept of people wanting their military to be all about participting in what I just described above to be nationally embarrasing; because of the ignorance of the people of what really happens much of the time, because fo what happened much of the time, and because the military is regarded, as Bart describes, as glorified cops.

I joined to be a part of this nations defense, not some warlords babysitter (observer) as he lines a bunch of kids up behind a school and fills them, and the wall, with bullet holes.

If peacekeeping actually worked, it would be something to be damn proud of, like what Pearson did in 1956. What he fostered in Suez was a fucking miracle.

travior travior:

I'm thinking that he means that even by being there he was unable to prevent the violence that was still occuring. Might not have been an external conflict but was damn sure an internal one. And when you are not allowed to interfere because you are "keeping the peace" it kinda makes you want to drag the politicians over and force them to watch the "peace" first-hand.

explained what i wanted to say in not nearly as many words.

Even in outright War there are Orders to follow. Peace Keeping is no different. Sure, it must have sucked to just sit their, as Dallaire himself has vented about many times. However, when Command makes a decision a Soldier obeys. Rwanda was an aberration, many other Peace Keeping missions have gone very well.

[Public_Domain]

[ridenrain]

sandorski sandorski:

Rwanda was an aberration, many other Peace Keeping missions have gone very well.

Bullshit.
Did we stop genicide in Bosnia?
If we went into Darfur, could we stop it?
No.

You don't understand what a soldier does.
Send reporters instead if you just want someone to watch.