Republicans for Ignatieff

[jdobbin]

Did he say peacekeepers? Becuase as almost anyone who understands international politics knows you can't send peacekeepers in with out a peace treaty.

There are already troops there. Our equipment is there for their use. Layton was going to send troops there. Period. There was a peace agreement.

It doesn't mean it wasn't going to be very dangerous. Just ask the AU troops.

Edited July 16, 2009 by jdobbin

[punked]

No. There is nothing in international law to that effect. There was no peace treaty between Israel and Egypt when Canada had blue berets in the Gaza..no peace treaty between Israel and Syria when they were in the Golan....or Cyprus.....or FYR...or Kosovo...

In fact, if there is a peace treay, the need for peacekeepers vanishes.

Nope but a Ceasefire was established. Sometimes like in the case of Korea peace treaties aren't ever signed however ceasefires are, fact is peacekeepers can't declare war they have to be accepted by both sides.

[jdobbin]

Nope but a Ceasefire was established. Sometimes like in the case of Korea peace treaties aren't ever signed however ceasefires are, fact is peacekeepers can't declare war they have to be accepted by both sides.

There was a peace treaty when Layton made the promise. He still intends to send troops to Darfur the last I heard.

[punked]

There are already troops there. Our equipment is there for their use. Layton was going to send troops there. Period. There was a peace agreement.

Just like Iggy wanted too. What does "Any means necessary mean?" So what you are saying it is ok for Iggy to send in Troops to get man by "Any means necessary" but if Layton says Canada should lead a peace mission you are against that? I thought it would take the Liberals a lot longer to become war lovers under Iggy but the transformation is complete.

[punked]

There was a peace treaty when Layton made the promise. He still intends to send troops to Darfur the last I heard.

And apparently has the support of Iggy as long as they can get al-Bashir together right?

Edited July 16, 2009 by punked

[Jerry J. Fortin]

He wants to avoid another Rwanda, good on him, so do I.

[jdobbin]

Just like Iggy wanted too. What does "Any means necessary mean?" So what you are saying it is ok for Iggy to send in Troops to get man by "Any means necessary" but if Layton says Canada should lead a peace mission you are against that? I thought it would take the Liberals a lot longer to become war lovers under Iggy but the transformation is complete.

Layton wants Canadian troops in Darfur just when it looks like the fight is about to get hot.

[punked]

Layton wants Canadian troops in Darfur just when it looks like the fight is about to get hot.

I think you are getting Layton's name mixed up with Ignatieffs.

[jdobbin]

I think you are getting Layton's name mixed up with Ignatieffs.

Ignatieff didn't commit all of the forces in Afghanistan to the fight in Darfur.

[M.Dancer]

Nope but a Ceasefire was established. Sometimes like in the case of Korea peace treaties aren't ever signed however ceasefires are, fact is peacekeepers can't declare war they have to be accepted by both sides.

An armistice isn't a peace treaty.

Sometimes like in the case of Korea peace treaties aren't ever signed however ceasefires are, fact is peacekeepers can't declare war they have to be accepted by both sides.

Korea doesn't have peacekeepers there.

[punked]

Korea doesn't have peacekeepers there.

It did for quite a while in fact it was one of the first places too, some might say it was a prototype.

[punked]

Ignatieff didn't commit all of the forces in Afghanistan to the fight in Darfur.

HAHHAHA now you are avoiding. Fact is your leader also supported troops in Darfur the same thing you are ATTACKING and lying about for Layton. Fact is your leader has supported troops in Darfur.

"I have believed for some time and said publicly for some time that if the African Union-UN force needs Canadian help, we should provide it."-Iggy

Edited July 16, 2009 by punked

[jdobbin]

HAHHAHA now you are avoiding. Fact is your leader also supported troops in Darfur the same thing you are ATTACKING and lying about for Layton. Fact is your leader has supported troops in Darfur.

"I have believed for some time and said publicly for some time that if the African Union-UN force needs Canadian help, we should provide it."-Iggy

He did not say troops. He has not been saying troops.

[M.Dancer]

It did for quite a while in fact it was one of the first places too, some might say it was a prototype.

You're joking right? That wasn't a peacekeeping mission, it was a military armistice commision stationed with it's guns pointed north to ensure that the North Koreans didn't break the ceasefire. You can hardly have a co-belligerent as a peacekeeping force....crossing the DMZ to talk to officers on both sides to ensure there are no misunderstandings....What would have happened? Capt Charlie Mcleod trots off north to hear the compliants of the North Koreans and then trots back south to chat with the RCR commander of D Coy?

The first peacekeepers were in the sinai after the suez crisis.

[punked]

You're joking right? That wasn't a peacekeeping mission, it was a military armistice commision stationed with it's guns pointed north to ensure that the North Koreans didn't break the ceasefire. You can hardly have a co-belligerent as a peacekeeping force....crossing the DMZ to talk to officers on both sides to ensure there are no misunderstandings....What would have happened? Capt Charlie Mcleod trots off north to hear the compliants of the North Koreans and then trots back south to chat with the RCR commander of D Coy?

The first peacekeepers were in the sinai after the suez crisis.

I am just going by the UN peacekeeping site, I would agree it was not traditional peacekeeping, but I would also at that time the template for the term and how it was done was evolving. Now a days you need some sort of treaty for the UN to put Peacekeepers in these areas. That is just how it is.

http://www.unac.org/peacekeeping/en/un-pea...ekeepinga-chro/

[Keepitsimple]

It did for quite a while in fact it was one of the first places too, some might say it was a prototype.

AW....you were doing pretty good on Ignatieff at the beginning because they were - all his own words and nothing else.....but then Dobbin got you to change the channel to Layton and you kind of fell for it. Dobbin was getting a little frustrated for awhile but then he turned the tide and now he's chuckling because you've lost the initiative. That clever Dobbin.....he oils his body quite Liberally so at the last moment, he slips right out of your hands.

[punked]

AW....you were doing pretty good on Ignatieff at the beginning because they were - all his own words and nothing else.....but then Dobbin got you to change the channel to Layton and you kind of fell for it. Dobbin was getting a little frustrated for awhile but then he turned the tide and now he's chuckling because you've lost the initiative. That clever Dobbin.....he oils his body quite Liberally so at the last moment, he slips right out of your hands.

Yah I kept trying to bring it back but I am terrible at the spin,I actually tried to point out Iggy basically has been saying the same as Layton just before he was the head of the Liberals but it doesn't make the same point as this really isn't an attack eh? I always take the bait. I need to learn how to stay on topic or direct back to the topic at hand. Funny thing is this is what he does no matter what we could be talking about health care and Dobbin would go "but Layton wants to Declare war on Darfur." Then we are on that topic.

[jdobbin]

AW....you were doing pretty good on Ignatieff at the beginning because they were - all his own words and nothing else.....but then Dobbin got you to change the channel to Layton and you kind of fell for it. Dobbin was getting a little frustrated for awhile but then he turned the tide and now he's chuckling because you've lost the initiative. That clever Dobbin.....he oils his body quite Liberally so at the last moment, he slips right out of your hands.

Think I've pointed out that this site is run by shy Conservatives who think they are too smart by half. There are a few in the media looking for a direct connection to a living, breathing Conservative party member. It will just emphasize again that the Tories are more interested in attacking rather governing.

As far as Tories and NDP who call these truth ads, I think many know that what the intent is.

[jdobbin]

Yah I kept trying to bring it back but I am terrible at the spin,I actually tried to point out Iggy basically has been saying the same as Layton just before he was the head of the Liberals but it doesn't make the same point as this really isn't an attack eh? I always take the bait. I need to learn how to stay on topic or direct back to the topic at hand. Funny thing is this is what he does no matter what we could be talking about health care and Dobbin would go "but Layton wants to Declare war on Darfur." Then we are on that topic.

Ignatieff hasn't said anything of the kind.

Show me where he says troops should be sent. Link, please.

Layton said troops must be sent.

Edited July 16, 2009 by jdobbin

[punked]

Think I've pointed out that this site is run by shy Conservatives who think they are too smart by half. There are a few in the media looking for a direct connection to a living, breathing Conservative party member. It will just emphasize again that the Tories are more interested in attacking rather governing.

As far as Tories and NDP who call these truth ads, I think many know that what the intent is.

The intent is to show left Leaning Liberals what Iggy thinks and turn them off. Yes that is what it is but it isn't an attack. Even if they find a connection to the Conservatives it isn't an attack it is a site that shows and has clips of Iggy supporting Republican positions through his own quotes, clips, and articles. They aren't lies, or hypotheticals they are his words.

Fact is he supported Bush:

On Iraq

Torture

Intervention

These things turn left leaning Liberals off it is just a creative way to open peoples eyes to those things. Most these statements he has never even walked back.

[Keepitsimple]

Think I've pointed out that this site is run by shy Conservatives who think they are too smart by half. There are a few in the media looking for a direct connection to a living, breathing Conservative party member. It will just emphasize again that the Tories are more interested in attacking rather governing.

As far as Tories and NDP who call these truth ads, I think many know that what the intent is.

I know exactly what the intent is - to make Mr. Ignatieff look as bad as possible by damning him with his own words. There is no argument that the video is partisan, nor that it is almost certainly put there by Conservative supporters, if not the Party itself......but having said all that, I don't consider them attack ads nor would I personally call then "truth" ads. They simply are what they are - Mr. Ignatieff's own words - and not portrayed out of context.

[jdobbin]

I know exactly what the intent is - to make Mr. Ignatieff look as bad as possible by damning him with his own words. There is no argument that the video is partisan, nor that it is almost certainly put there by Conservative supporters, if not the Party itself......but having said all that, I don't consider them attack ads nor would I personally call then "truth" ads. They simply are what they are - Mr. Ignatieff's own words - and not portrayed out of context.

Now, it would be nice if Tories would own up to it.

I certainly hope the site is up if an election is held. Elections Canada could count it as a party ad.

[jdobbin]

These things turn left leaning Liberals off it is just a creative way to open peoples eyes to those things. Most these statements he has never even walked back.

And Layton wants Canadian troops in Darfur. I'm sure the public will want to know about this in the next election.

[punked]

Ignatieff hasn't said anything of the kind.

Show me where he says troops should be sent. Link, please.

Layton said troops must be sent.

"I have believed for some time and said publicly for some time that if the African Union-UN force needs Canadian help, we should provide it."-Ignatieff

He has also said if he was PM he would go after the leader of the Sudan "By any means necessary"

Where are your Layton quotes again?

[jdobbin]

"I have believed for some time and said publicly for some time that if the African Union-UN force needs Canadian help, we should provide it."-Ignatieff

He has also said if he was PM he would go after the leader of the Sudan "By any means necessary"

He also cautioned about using the military.

From your own link:

But I would rather err on the side of caution here given that the use of military force often turns out badly.

However your guy wants to go in regardless.

Where are your Layton quotes again?

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...60507/20060508/

The federal New Democrats want Canada to take a lead role in any UN mission to stop the bloodshed in Sudan's Darfur province, even if that means scaling back its commitment in Afghanistan.

NDP Leader Jack Layton pointed to a weekend poll that suggested public support for Canada's Afghan mission is wavering.

A majority of those polled opposed Canada's effort there, compared with a similar poll in March that found only about 40 per cent against the mission.

Layton said a major Canadian commitment to a UN mission in Darfur, where at least 180,000 people have died and millions are refugees because of a bitter civil war, would likely get much broader public backing.

"Our view is that this is exactly the kind of peacekeeping role that Canadians have always supported,'' Layton said Sunday. "Canada invented the concept of UN-led peacekeeping forces under (then diplomat Lester) Pearson'' in the 1950s.

That is a troop commitment right there. Troops out of Afghanistan to Darfur.

Edited July 16, 2009 by jdobbin