[EyeBrock]

Curtman isn't in the business of suggesting solutions, he is just about scoring partisan points against the tories.
If it's on the back of our guys in combat, he doesn't care.

[Curtman]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

So who should we hand them over to?

We should figure that out pretty quick if we're leaving in a year and a half. Seems like a huge waste if after 10 years of war all we do is replace one abusive regime with another.

We've completed our NATO obligations, we should pack up and go home and let the U.S. sort out their own messes for a while. That's pretty much how I feel about it.

[PENATRATOR]

Curtman Curtman:

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

So who should we hand them over to?

we should pack up and go home and let the U.S. sort out their own messes for a while. That's pretty much how I feel about it.

Good plan, a regime that sponsored terrorism and allowed them to roam free like Buffalo, needed to go, we helped, they are still a problem, fuck it! Lets go, let the Americans protect the world, there must be a skirmish in an eastern Euro country we can put our Blue hats on to attend to. END SARCASM

[EyeBrock]

Curtman Curtman:

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

So who should we hand them over to?

We should figure that out pretty quick if we're leaving in a year and a half. Seems like a huge waste if after 10 years of war all we do is replace one abusive regime with another.

We've completed our NATO obligations, we should pack up and go home and let the U.S. sort out their own messes for a while. That's pretty much how I feel about it.

Yes, we know you have a limited grasp on the big picture. We read your posts.

[Curtman]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

Yes, we know you have a limited grasp on the big picture. We read your posts.

So what is the big picture as far as you see it? We remain there forever and ever babysitting a country? Or maybe in another 10 years we'll have civilized the universe.

[ASLplease]

10 year commitments in not uncommon for initiatives like this.

[Lemmy]

ASLplease ASLplease:

10 year commitments in not uncommon for initiatives like this.

We've already been there nearly 10 years. How many countries are signed to the UN Charter? What are their populations? GDPs? Military strengths? We've done our part. Is Afghanistan a UN mission that should be continued? I say no, but I understand the counter-argument. If it is a mission that should be sustained, however, then it's time for the other 180-or-so UN nations do do their share. Sure as shit Afghanistan will still be a prehistoric, fundamentalist, tribal cesspool 500 years from now. So it'll be our turn to send Canadian troops back there in 2500. But as of 2010, our share of the burden has been borne for this half-millenium.

[Regina]

Lemmy Lemmy:

ASLplease ASLplease:

10 year commitments in not uncommon for initiatives like this.

We've already been there nearly 10 years. How many countries are signed to the UN Charter? What are their populations? GDPs? Military strengths? We've done our part. Is Afghanistan a UN mission that should be continued? I say no, but I understand the counter-argument. If it is a mission that should be sustained, however, then it's time for the other 180-or-so UN nations do do their share. Sure as shit Afghanistan will still be a prehistoric, fundamentalist, tribal cesspool 500 years from now. So it'll be our turn to send Canadian troops back there in 2500. But as of 2010, our share of the burden has been borne for this half-millenium.

How long have we been in Cyprus? That's been going one since 1964.

[Lemmy]

Regina Regina:

How long have we been in Cyprus? That's been going one since 1964.

We're not sending dead kids home from Cyprus though, are we? It's not the same burden. But if we've been there 50 years then maybe it's time for another of the 180 UN members to give us a break there too.

[Regina]

Lemmy Lemmy:

Regina Regina:

How long have we been in Cyprus? That's been going one since 1964.

We're not sending dead kids home from Cyprus though, are we? It's not the same burden. But if we've been there 50 years then maybe it's time for another of the 180 UN members to give us a break there too.

Did we not incur deaths in Cyprus?

The UNMIBH – 1995-Present UN Mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina is a little more recent though.
I agree that others are not pulling on the same rope though.

[Lemmy]

Regina Regina:

Did we not incur deaths in Cyprus?

Sure. 28, according to Veterans' Affairs. But what else occurred in Cyprus? How about "success"? I have no problem supporting a mission, even a dangerous one with high casualties, if it has a chance of succeeding. Afghanistan is a lose-lose scenario. But regardless of my opinions on the usefulness of the Afghan mission, there are 180+ UN members. We've done more our share.

Regina Regina:

The UNMIBH – 1995-Present UN Mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina is a little more recent though.
I agree that others are not pulling on the same rope though.

[ridenrain]

I'm still confused why the lefties are presuming to tell Afghans how to deal with Afghans. What an odd day to forget all that relative morality.
The NDP brought this up before when Martin was in power and I don't recall the CPC jumping on the bandwagon then. That was when the forces were handing the prisoners to the US so they changed it to giving them back to the Afghans. Dion even had the great idea of bringing the prisoners here to Canada.

It's all just petty politics.

[Scape]

MacKay may be indefensible, but his job is safe

$1:

First, Afghan detainees, even innocent ones, are not sympathetic people. And this government's popularity hasn't suffered even though there is compelling evidence that our mission in Afghanistan is a failure - for all the bravery of our troops, there were too few of them to secure their sector from Taliban infiltration, which is why the Americans now plan to flood that sector with their own forces.

Most voters appear to have concluded that the effort was noble, even if the results have been disappointing. Detainee abuse is not, and never will be, a ballot question.

Second, the timing is starting to work in the government's favour. Parliament rises for its Christmas break at the end of the week, and doesn't return until late January. Some convenient votes in the House short-circuited the efforts of a parliamentary committee to grill Mr. MacKay along with Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon. The opposition majority may be able to keep the committee functioning, but the truth is the holiday season and the January break are the government's best friends right now.

Third, and most important, Peter MacKay is a partner in the Conservative coalition. Don't forget that this government is in office only because Mr. MacKay agreed to merge his Progressive Conservatives with Mr. Harper's Canadian Alliance back in 2003. Firing Mr. MacKay would split the party. And with his deep Atlantic roots, the Conservatives wouldn't have a safe seat in Atlantic Canada if the member for Central Nova were forced out of cabinet.


...


Objectively, the abuse of Afghan detainees is hugely important. Canadian soldiers and officials might have been complicit in violating the Geneva Conventions. Their political masters were cavalier, at best, or negligent, at worst, in how they handled the matter. Heads should roll.

Calling for pete's head is understandable but that road goes nowhere. It is really sad that he attacked Colvin when the CDS Natynczyk had to do a mea culpa saying he was right. For that he should get a serious reality adjustment at least.

[Akhenaten]

For the life of me I don't know why Day is still in there. The party would do better without him.

[ridenrain]

Scape Scape:

$1:

Third, and most important, Peter MacKay is a partner in the Conservative coalition. Don't forget that this government is in office only because Mr. MacKay agreed to merge his Progressive Conservatives with Mr. Harper's Canadian Alliance back in 2003. Firing Mr. MacKay would split the party. And with his deep Atlantic roots, the Conservatives wouldn't have a safe seat in Atlantic Canada if the member for Central Nova were forced out of cabinet.

Objectively, the abuse of Afghan detainees is hugely important. Canadian soldiers and officials might have been complicit in violating the Geneva Conventions. Their political masters were cavalier, at best, or negligent, at worst, in how they handled the matter. Heads should roll.

Calling for pete's head is understandable but that road goes nowhere. It is really sad that he attacked Colvin when the CDS Natynczyk had to do a mea culpa saying he was right. For that he should get a serious reality adjustment at least.

I read that and it's false. As much as the NDP and the desperate Liberals want, MacKay isn't going to splinter the party if he gets fired. He simply dosen't have that following nor do I think he's such a petty man as that. I think this is just Liberal party factions painting their troubles on the Conservatives.