Canada says NO to the USA!

[Mr.Canada]

Harper and Clinton were talking birth control??

It's assumed they were talking about the war and about maternal health which includes birth control. They had a twenty minute conference behind closed doors so...

[Dave_ON]

I don't know if Baghdad is a quagmire anymore...

Hmmm what makes you think the US can succeed where the British, the Ottoman Turks and the Romans failed? The stability of Iraq is yet to be tested.

[Mr.Canada]

Hmmm what makes you think the US can succeed where the British, the Ottoman Turks and the Romans failed? The stability of Iraq is yet to be tested.

The problem is that they are trying to be nice about it instead of setting up a colonial situation. If the USA would just be the government in Iraq it would be very easy but are doomed to fail if they continue along the road they are on now.

[M.Dancer]

Hmmm what makes you think the US can succeed where the British, the Ottoman Turks and the Romans failed? The stability of Iraq is yet to be tested.

The Ottomans rules Iraq for 278 years...is that the measure of failure?

The romans did nothing to rule iraq, except for punitive excursions against the Parthians.

The British, after defeating the Turks, never intended to rule Iraq.

[Oleg Bach]

It was the Liberal Party and Jean Chretien who sent us to Afghanistan not The Conservatives.

Whats the difference..never heard the liberals or conservatives protest in an effective manner the issue of the loss of life for no good reason.

[Battletoads]

Now if only he could have said no to the dozen other more important issues...

[dizzy]

I'm assuming that he explained to Clinton precisely who was responsible for the pullout.

Harper and Clinton were talking birth control??

[dizzy]

AFAIK, contraception will not be excluded now.

Anyway, rumour has it, we're leaving to go somewhere else:

http://www.vancouversun.com/After+Afghanistan+Canadian+troops+provide+peacekeeping+Congo/2737731/story.html

Rumour also has it, the contribution could be large.

We spent years retooling the military from blue to green helmets after the failures in Bosnia. Now we're possibly going back.... ugh.

Still, this is the only explanation for Harper's stubborn stance on a full military withdrawal from afghanistan. He knows that many canadians identify with the notion of traditional peacekeeping and will use this as a way to attract votes from the center left.

[Dave_ON]

The Ottomans rules Iraq for 278 years...is that the measure of failure?

The romans did nothing to rule iraq, except for punitive excursions against the Parthians.

The British, after defeating the Turks, never intended to rule Iraq.

All are examples of foreign interference that exacerbated tensions in an already volatile region.

The Ottomans maintained power by dividing the various power factions within the region at the time. It was effective for maintaining rule while they were there, but when they left, the tensions escalated and we see the issue the British ran into with the Kurds, the Assyrians and the Shi’ites.

Again the British did precisely what the Americans are trying to do. They foisted their current system on a people that didn't set it up on their own. The Monarchy in Iraq was an abysmal failure.

As for the Romans, upon checking again you're correct, I had thought at its height in 200 AD the empire expanded into the Northern part of present day Iraq. It appears it stopped just short of the Syrian/Iraqi border.

Be that as it may my point remains the same. As you stated only the Ottomans were effectively able to rule the region, because they were willing to occupy it. The US is repeating the same mistakes as the British, you can clean the place up and leave but it won't be long before you have to clean it up again. Best to leave it be and stabilize on its own without further interference.

[Smallc]

We spent years retooling the military from blue to green helmets after the failures in Bosnia. Now we're possibly going back.... ugh.

I think the plan is actually different. I think the government may not stop spending the extra money that's spent on Afghanistan, and may instead use that money to continue their military rebuilding.

[dizzy]

I think the plan is actually different. I think the government may not stop spending the extra money that's spent on Afghanistan, and may instead use that money to continue their military rebuilding.

Unfortunately, that isn't going to make sitting in a coyote and recording genocide on a notepad without the power to intervene anymore palatable.

[Smallc]

Unfortunately, that isn't going to make sitting in a coyote and recording genocide on a notepad without the power to intervene anymore palatable.

Well, I'm not yet ready to say that's what we'll be doing. The words peace making were used in the article. This may be a very different kind of peacekeeping mission....at least, I hope. I also doubt that it will be our only mission.

[Dithers]

I don't get the opposition to our role in Afghanistan. We have honored our treaties with an ally that was attacked.

[August1991]

I don't get the opposition to our role in Afghanistan. We have honored our treaties with an ally that was attacked.

I agree Dithers.

Our military (and their families) have carried more than their share. Moreover, Canadian troops took on the very tough fight in southern Afghanistan.

It is time for other NATO countries to share this burden - a burden that our grandchildren and great-grandchildren will appreciate.

[Dithers]

I agree Dithers.

Our military (and their families) have carried more than their share. Moreover, Canadian troops took on the very tough fight in southern Afghanistan.

It is time for other NATO countries to share this burden - a burden that our grandchildren and great-grandchildren will appreciate.

All of this is valid. Our allies in NATO have no honored their end of the alliances, which makes me question the relevence of NATO as anything other than a potential firewall against an surging Russia. It is clear that Most of European NATO is unwilling to define interests beyond their Eastern frontier.

[Bonam]

I agree Dithers.

Our military (and their families) have carried more than their share. Moreover, Canadian troops took on the very tough fight in southern Afghanistan.

More than their share relative to what? What is their appropriate share? Why are we comparing their share to European militaries, and not to the US military, which has carried a heavier burden?

All of this is valid. Our allies in NATO have no honored their end of the alliances, which makes me question the relevence of NATO as anything other than a potential firewall against an surging Russia. It is clear that Most of European NATO is unwilling to define interests beyond their Eastern frontier.

Considering that defending against the Soviet Union was pretty much the whole reason behind the existence of NATO, that doesn't seem surprising.

[Dithers]

More than their share relative to what? What is their appropriate share? Why are we comparing their share to European militaries, and not to the US military, which has carried a heavier burden?

Considering that defending against the Soviet Union was pretty much the whole reason behind the existence of NATO, that doesn't seem surprising.

Granted, but the Soviets collapsed and NATO remained, with active European sponsorship. It only follows that they should be willing to defend their allies interests as well as their own. (Especially given the historical role said ally played in preserving their independence)

Edited April 2, 2010 by Dithers

[Bonam]

Granted, but they colapsed and NATO remained, with active European sponsorship. It only follows that they should be willing to defend their allies interests as well as their own. (Especially given the historical role said ally played in preserving their independence)

Many alliances end when the tension or war that necessitated their existence is over. We were allied with the Soviet Union to defeat an enemy during WWII, for example, and when that war ended that alliance was over. Perhaps the days of NATO are also numbered.

[Dithers]

Many alliances end when the tension or war that necessitated their existence is over. We were allied with the Soviet Union to defeat an enemy during WWII, for example, and when that war ended that alliance was over. Perhaps the days of NATO are also numbered.

I believe that may well be the case.

[August1991]

Why are we comparing their share to European militaries, and not to the US military, which has carried a heavier burden?

In Afghanistan, Kandahar, our troups assumed the open southern Baluchistan plain. The southern border between Pakistan and Afghanistan is 19th century British drawn, and arbitrary. This is where Canadian troops fought.

The Americans fought in the East, in the Hindu Kush, the famous Khyber Pass between Pakistan and Afghanistan, which provides a natural defense for all soldiers.

Our guys, very few in number, carried a tremendous weight.

[Dithers]

Did Arctic sovereignty come up at all? That is an issue we really do need to firm up on. The United States is doing their level best to undermine our territorial integrity.

[Peter F]

Yup. NATO was an alliance to counter the Warsaw Pact. That threat is gone and not likely to re-emerge anytime soon.

So I wonder what its use is now? Is it the Third world Police? or is it to be the servant of the USA or EU?

I think its time for us to pull the pin on the damn thing.

[Bonam]

In Afghanistan, Kandahar, our troups assumed the open southern Baluchistan plain. The southern border between Pakistan and Afghanistan is 19th century British drawn, and arbitrary. This is where Canadian troops fought.

The Americans fought in the East, in the Hindu Kush, the famous Khyber Pass between Pakistan and Afghanistan, which provides a natural defense for all soldiers.

Our guys, very few in number, carried a tremendous weight.

That may very well be. I am just going off casualty numbers.

[Dithers]

Yup. NATO was an alliance to counter the Warsaw Pact. That threat is gone and not likely to re-emerge anytime soon.

So I wonder what its use is now? Is it the Third world Police? or is it to be the servant of the USA or EU?

I think its time for us to pull the pin on the damn thing.

For one, do not discount a future Russian threat. While it will not equate to anything near the ominous threat the Soviets once generated, their energy extortion policies should have anybody concerned.

Ideally, in my opinion, NATO would have evolved to suit the needs of our times. I personally believe there are still enough shared values and interests between Europe and North America to maintain the treaty. But that only works if all parties are sincerely interested. It certainly appears as though the likes of France and Germany are not.

[Bonam]

Did Arctic sovereignty come up at all? That is an issue we really do need to firm up on. The United States is doing their level best to undermine our territorial integrity.

Can't really claim sovereignty over what you can't and don't use. We need to occupy the arctic regions that we assert claim to, rather than simply having vast uninhabited reaches of land. It's not an issue of other nations not respecting our sovereignty, its an issue of us not doing enough to assert our sovereignty.