Layton and talks with the enemy

[Army Guy]

Here is what was said. Your facts are correct. Your opinion, open to discussion.

He starts off blaming the Neo-cons for most of our military adventures, what has got me confused is how is the NDP's decision to send troops into Sudan any different. he pionts out :

It's about the precise role, strategy and tactics tactics

, but fails to explain how the above is any different than what we have faced or now facing in Afganistan....And if both missions are similar in nature how could the NDP not be put in the same boat....as the Cons or Libs...are the NDP neo cons as well?

Or like much of NDP's decisions they have not done any homework, or risk assetments, they just like the fact that it's a UN mission, and not one under American rule....

[madmax]

Or like much of NDP's decisions they have not done any homework, or risk assetments, they just like the fact that it's a UN mission, and not one under American rule....

I don't know about that. You may or may not be correct. But the fact that the Ground Forces are initiating talks, and following the statements of Karzai, Layton, shows that the Army is not "Politically" motivated but practically motivated to achieve its objective. It would be the Lpc/CPC that did not agree with discussion as did many in the Armed Forces. That is no longer the case. 7 years on and something must be done to make practical gains.

There is significant information regarding homework and risk assessment.

Nothing to suggests the LPC or CPC did ANY of that prior to the commitment to Afghanistan, or more importantly the 1st extension and move to combat operations, infact, it has been posted in the Afghanistan thread, just how incompetent the LPC were in the beginning of the extension, how little they understood what they were signing on to, and then the CPC did the very same.

[Army Guy]

quote] But the fact that the Ground Forces are initiating talks, and following the statements of Karzai, Layton, shows that the Army is not "Politically" motivated but practically motivated to achieve its objective. It would be the Lpc/CPC that did not agree with discussion as did many in the Armed Forces. That is no longer the case. 7 years on and something must be done to make practical gains.

Nobody is dening that low level talks have been ongoing since the start of the Afgan mission, however those talks are not being done with those that are responsiable for terrorist attacks agian'st the Afgan people....those that have been identified as ordering, or carrying out terror attacks have been omitted to any talks ongoing...

As for practical gains, they are there just have to look for them, althu they are slow in coming, they are there.

There is significant information regarding homework and risk assessment.

Yes there is, but is the NDP heeding that , do they know how that translates into a military mission....

Most of the crimes being carried out in Darfur are under the orders of the current government, how do you stop them from killing there own,? UN has placed lightly armed UN troops into the area, but will not use them in dirrect confrontation....so other than asking the Sudan government to stop killing there own people, how does the UN plan to stop these crimes?....what is laytons plan other than to throw us into the middle of this mess....

Sudan does not want any western forces there, in fact they don't want UN there at all, and have used military force on serveral occasions again'st UN forces....This is a clear case where the host nation is hostile, does not care about santions or the UN .....If the NDP are serious about this mission then it must include an option of dirrect confrontation, which could lead to a regime change....That being the case then how different is this going to be from Afganistan....

Nothing to suggests the LPC or CPC did ANY of that prior to the commitment to Afghanistan, or more importantly the 1st extension and move to combat operations, infact, it has been posted in the Afghanistan thread, just how incompetent the LPC were in the beginning of the extension, how little they understood what they were signing on to, and then the CPC did the very same.

I agree, but making stupid mistakes does not make a Neo-con, or bush follower....it just makes for a bad government....the NDP is willing to follow down the same road ....while pionting the fingers and thumping thier chests screaming bad bad Neo-cons, you war mongers, have you no compassion....all governments are the same , first comes the votes then comes the paying for those votes.....and in this case payment will be in our soldiers blood....

[madmax]

I agree, but making stupid mistakes does not make a Neo-con, or bush follower....it just makes for a bad government....the NDP is willing to follow down the same road

Exactly, and don't let some of these guys wind you up

[jbg]

Bush has a 30% approval rating in the US. 70% of Americans OPPOSE Neo-Con policies. I am with the vast majority of Americans.

You are ANTI-American.

Exposing the manifestations of 8 years of insane Neo-Con policy is PRO-American. Exposing the Republican domination is PRO-American.

The purpose of an elected leader is to lead the country, not do what the pollsters tell him to do.

[jbg]

And that's being generous.

Sigh, another reasonable poster joins the boards...

That poster is gone.

[BubberMiley]

Bush has a 30% approval rating in the US.

Actually, it's more like the high 20s. Even the die-hard Republicans are starting to realize the terrible, terrible mistake they made.

[Oleg Bach]

Actually, it's more like the high 20s. Even the die-hard Republicans are starting to realize the terrible, terrible mistake they made.

Layton is not the sharpest tool in the shed.