news Canadian News
Good Evening Guest | login or register
  • Home
    • Canadian News
    • Popular News
    • News Voting Log
    • News Images
  • Forums
    • Recent Topics Scroll
    •  
    • Politics Forums
    • Sports Forums
    • Regional Forums
  • Content
    • Achievements
    • Canadian Content
    • Famous Canadians
    • Famous Quotes
    • Jokes
    • Canadian Maps
  • Photos
    • Picture Gallery
    • Wallpapers
    • Recent Activity
  • About
    • About
    • Contact
    • Link to Us
    • Points
    • Statistics
  • Shop
  • Register
    • Gold Membership
  • Archive
    • Canadian TV
    • Canadian Webcams
    • Groups
    • Links
    • Top 10's
    • Reviews
    • CKA Radio
    • Video
    • Weather

GG apologizes for Rwandan genocide inaction

Canadian Content
20696news upnews down
Link Related to Canada in some say

GG apologizes for Rwandan genocide inaction


World | 206957 hits | Apr 21 8:54 pm | Posted by: Hyack
32 Comment

Gov. Gen. Micha�lle Jean has apologized to Rwandan leaders for Canada's "inaction" during the 1994 genocide in the African country.

Comments

  1. by avatar TuavDan
    Thu Apr 22, 2010 1:52 pm
    Is she talking on behalf of Canada or herself. Anyway what gives her the right to say what she did...she should get her facts straight before making an apology for Canada.

  2. by avatar Robair
    Thu Apr 22, 2010 4:12 pm
    She ran it by the PM first.

    So, which facts should Harper have gotten straight?

  3. by avatar PublicAnimalNo9
    Thu Apr 22, 2010 4:22 pm
    Apologize for what??? Not jumping into the middle of someone else's civil war??

  4. by avatar PublicAnimalNo9
    Thu Apr 22, 2010 5:40 pm
    And one other thing, Since 1992 we've had some 40,000 troops and military personnel go through Bosnia. On top of the other peace-keeping missions, where did she think we were going to get the troops for Rwanda?
    Here she is bad mouthing us(by way of apologizing for our "inaction") and yet, how many Canadians are aware of the fucking AWESOME job our troops did in Bosnia during the same time-frame??

  5. by avatar Alta_redneck
    Thu Apr 22, 2010 6:53 pm
    "Robair" said
    She ran it by the PM first.

    So, which facts should Harper have gotten straight?


    "I think we could have made a difference," she told reporters . "I think we could have prevented the magnitude of the horror that brought genocide here."


    Sounds to me she went off script and offered her personal opinion.

  6. by avatar sandorski
    Thu Apr 22, 2010 10:45 pm
    We couldn't really do anything, but on the other hand we should have. It was beyond our capacity to do so and really not our decision to make. In essence I think the apology is warranted, it's not just an apology for Canada's involvement(or lack of) though, but for the International Community at large.

  7. by avatar Bodah
    Thu Apr 22, 2010 11:19 pm
    From what I know we did what we were expected to do in the event of a massacre. That is inform UN HQ wait for permission to do something, we were told to stand down and basically let it happen.

    So if anyone failed Rawanda it wasn't Canada, It was the some desk jockey general at UNHQ in NYC.

  8. by avatar BartSimpson  Gold Member
    Thu Apr 22, 2010 11:37 pm
    There was nothing to apologize for. The Canadian troops had no mandate to do anything past what they were ordered to do and had General Dallaire ordered the troops to do something without approval he'd have been promptly cashiered along with every officer under his command.

    No offense, but knowing you people as I do I think it's fair to say that if Dallaire had prevented the genocide you all would've soundly condemned him for going off the reservation as a 'gung-ho cowboy' and the fact of nothing happening would've only served to hang the man.

  9. by avatar gonavy47
    Thu Apr 22, 2010 11:41 pm
    It's the bloody UN that should apologize. If Dallaire had taken things into his own hands with the limited resources available to him, the UN would have been first in line to punish him. Ineffective bastards. All talk and no action. But they have a great buffet at UN headquarters. You can see them all around the trough. The out-going GG should keep her un-educated opinions to herself.

  10. by avatar gonavy47
    Thu Apr 22, 2010 11:46 pm
    "BartSimpson" said
    There was nothing to apologize for. The Canadian troops had no mandate to do anything past what they were ordered to do and had General Dallaire ordered the troops to do something without approval he'd have been promptly cashiered along with every officer under his command.

    No offense, but knowing you people as I do I think it's fair to say that if Dallaire had prevented the genocide you all would've soundly condemned him for going off the reservation as a 'gung-ho cowboy' and the fact of nothing happening would've only served to hang the man.

    I think you don't know us as well as you think. I would have stood behind him 100% as would most of my colleagues, had he intervened in the conflict.

  11. by avatar sandorski
    Thu Apr 22, 2010 11:50 pm
    "gonavy47" said
    It's the bloody UN that should apologize. If Dallaire had taken things into his own hands with the limited resources available to him, the UN would have been first in line to punish him. Ineffective bastards. All talk and no action. But they have a great buffet at UN headquarters. You can see them all around the trough. The out-going GG should keep her un-educated opinions to herself.


    Members of the UN should apologize, because even the UN doesn't ultimately have the final say on such matters. Not unless you're willing to Fund a Standing UN Military who takes its' Orders from a Single Head of the UN whose sole purpose is to advance specific Principles and not the whims of Members of the Security Council.

    The UN can certainly apologize, but it's mostly symbolic just as this apology is symbolic.

  12. by avatar sandorski
    Thu Apr 22, 2010 11:53 pm
    "gonavy47" said
    There was nothing to apologize for. The Canadian troops had no mandate to do anything past what they were ordered to do and had General Dallaire ordered the troops to do something without approval he'd have been promptly cashiered along with every officer under his command.

    No offense, but knowing you people as I do I think it's fair to say that if Dallaire had prevented the genocide you all would've soundly condemned him for going off the reservation as a 'gung-ho cowboy' and the fact of nothing happening would've only served to hang the man.

    I think you don't know us as well as you think. I would have stood behind him 100% as would most of my colleagues, had he intervened in the conflict.

    Agreed. sounds like Bart is projecting a Stereotype. That being, that those who generally oppose War, always Oppose War no matter the circumstances. Sounds good on Fox News and to the FN Viewer, but doesn't really exist IRL.

  13. by avatar BartSimpson  Gold Member
    Fri Apr 23, 2010 12:00 am
    "gonavy47" said
    There was nothing to apologize for. The Canadian troops had no mandate to do anything past what they were ordered to do and had General Dallaire ordered the troops to do something without approval he'd have been promptly cashiered along with every officer under his command.

    No offense, but knowing you people as I do I think it's fair to say that if Dallaire had prevented the genocide you all would've soundly condemned him for going off the reservation as a 'gung-ho cowboy' and the fact of nothing happening would've only served to hang the man.

    I think you don't know us as well as you think. I would have stood behind him 100% as would most of my colleagues, had he intervened in the conflict.

    Sure, the CF guys would stand behind the man. But the common Canadian would be mortified that a Canadian soldier actually used force to protect innocent lives.

    And please understand, I am looking at this through the lens of the genocide being .

    I have seen too many good people toss away a career because they impolitely prevented someone from committing a wrong.

    See, when you prevent something from happening you then have no justification for your actions because nothing happened.

    Imagine an F-16 pilot shooting down the four airliners on 9/11 and thereby preventing what followed. The poor bastard would be put to death for murdering the airline passengers and crew regardless of the intention of the hijackers.

    It's just the way this crap works.

  14. by avatar BartSimpson  Gold Member
    Fri Apr 23, 2010 12:03 am
    "sandorski" said

    Agreed. sounds like Bart is projecting a Stereotype. That being, that those who generally oppose War, always Oppose War no matter the circumstances. Sounds good on Fox News and to the FN Viewer, but doesn't really exist IRL.


    No, I am not.

    Say I go out and shoot some guy and say he was about to blow up a busload of babies. I'd be stuck having to prove his intent and the whole thing would be on me.

    Same goes for Dallaire.

    I think the poor guy was damned no matter what he did. I'm really on his side here, okay?



view comments in forum
Page 1 2 3

You need to be a member of CKA and be logged into the site, to comment on news.

  • Login
  • Register (free)
 Share  Digg It Bookmark to del.icio.us Share on Facebook


Share on Facebook Submit page to Reddit
CKA About |  Legal |  Advertise |  Sitemap |  Contact   canadian mobile newsMobile

All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2025 by Canadaka.net