jdobbin

I think the Conservative have already taken a big hit on this and it could grow to the point that they are defeated in the election. It may be a conceit on our part that we can solve Afghanistan's tribal system, it's grinding poverty, it's drug trade, it's distrust of outsiders and it's orthodox religion. I don't know that the media can be totally blamed for shaping the view of Canadians. I think people have slowly learned the history of these people from a variety of sources. Many Canadians don't want to repeat the mistakes of past militaries that moved into the area.

I'm saying the insurgency might not be defeated so long as Pakistan cannot or will not stop the al Qaeda and Taliban from taking shelter across the border. I also think that the drug industry is something even ordinary Afghans are involved in because they are dirt poor. I think some Canadians are well aware of this and have been hesitant to give a blank check to the government to solve problems beyond their mission parameters. We may be the fuel of the insurgencies fire. The strategy could be to leave, maintain a smaller NATO force nearby and strike any attempt to set up future al Qaeda training camps. We let the Afghan people find solutions themselves. Hardly cut and run but better than villagers shooting at us because the Taliban pays better.

A sop to the 800,000 Cubans in Florida before the election.

It's an interesting way of thinking. I don't know that it could work except on a small level. Perhaps a province or municipality could try it. Many policy changes come only in increments. It would be hard to introduce something on this scale.

I'm not that familiar with the B.C. cases. Negotiations are taking place now?

That's true that Cerilli might run. We'll have to see. What is sad is that five council seats might not have any opposition.

Pollock is under investigation by the Law Society. Don't know what that's all abiyt but he is a paralegal so think it might involve on infringing on what lawyers do. Hasselriis is not well known but might take some of the opposition vote to Katz, especially in regards to the hob plant.

The Black Rod gives some insight to what is happening in the media but it is definitely sure of itself. There are two announced candidates. They are Kaj Hasselriis and Ron Pollock. Hasselriis is former CBC producer who has worked for both NDP and Progessive Conservative campaigns. Ron Pollock is the brother of perennial candidate Natalie Pollck.

I don't think you'll get a response. Saga's been banned.

The Conservatives ignore the polls at their peril. Canadians might not so much vote for the Liberals as vore for the Tories. Right now, they are losing support in provinces they need for their majority.

Saga has been banned from the forum for abuse.

I think that might have been the attiude in Vietnam as well. The U.S. eventually became part of of the problem. Something similar might be happening in Iraq where the U.S. might be part of the problem in a country that it itching to fight a civil war. Today, the Generals told Congress that a civil war might be a few months away. There was talk about a quick pull out if that is the case. Cut and run? No. Common sense. Afghanistan's situation is growing worse. If Canada can't attack one of the largest sources of the insurgency in Pakistan, it might not be able to win this fight. And that's not heartless. That's a reality check.

Kim Campbell was already dealing with the Titantic. The captain and most of the crew had abandoned ship and she took it down to the bottom. As far as 2 female NDP leaders, they both came from the least populated areas of the country. I don't know that Findlay will win in the leadership. What she has done is win herself a place on the front bench.

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=2266192&page=1 The things you can do with Google.

I see your point. I was arguing that Canada was a sovereign nation. You've done a much better job in that regard. I think the Six Nations have been negotiating with Ottawa since 1995. It is a lot of documents that they have to sift through but I think that the Canadian government have argued that they have no claim to the land. http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/nr/prs/j-a2006/snjsbk_e.html

I think that River meant was that there was an amending formula in place to do such a thing if it was decided in Canada's interests.

But not without causing a constitutional crisis. My point all along here is to assert that the prime minister and the cabinet (with the confidence of Parliament) are who natives should be negotiating with.

This is more city politics... Same Katz has announced he will be running for mayor again this October. http://cjob.com/news/index.aspx?src=loc&am...l&rem=44482

So you are appealing to Britain in your case?

But as you said, she doesn't act except on the advice of her ministers. I can't think of an example in recent years where she has personally used Prerogative on something.

And de facto head of state. My point in the discussion is that the Queen does not have negotiating authority on Native issues and that if she tried to assert Royal Prerogative, it wouldn't apply to any aspect of Canadian government. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Prerogative

Until the meeting called with Peter McKay, I don't know that Canadians have heard much from Liberals, Bloq or NDP. I can't remember the last time I saw Jack Layton on TV. Ignatieff only made a comment this weekend in the Globe. The Bloq had a few line message from Duceppe's home in France. The media has been all over it like they are with most conflicts. I think most people agree that Israel has a right to defend itself and disagreed about whether it was measured or not. In the end, most people are not convinced that Canada taking one side or the other helps the conflict in this case.

I'd like to see how well she does in the convention. I think a woman leader of the Liberals might go over well, especially if she brings something new to the table.

Since the vast majority of Canadians in the country have expressed neutrality on Israel/Lebanon/Palestine's conflict according to polls released this past week, I think the answer that has been that people feel that Canada won't make a difference in the fight one way or the other because they will *always* be fighting.

We'be been in support of U.N. actions in Afghanistan. Now, we are in supprt of the Afghan government that has invited use to help. I think that sometime in the next months, there will be a decision about whether we are actually a force for change there or a bunch of sitting ducks.