What does 'Support the Troops' really mean?

[fellowtraveller]

Well, we'd just have to pick up the pace a little wouldn't we.

Speaking of the golden age of going to war issuing war bonds might be a good idea to revisit so those of you who wish to have hundreds of billions of dollars worth of hardware and troops sitting around on standby could invest in these to your heart's content.

so by 'pick up the pace' you would have us bypass Parliament?

Is your middle name Stalin?

[eyeball]

These points have already been presented to eyeball's eyeballs more than a few times. Still, he holds to his unworkable proposal. One has to give him points for tenacity (or is it stubbornness?).

I think most people would associate stubbornness with your it-can't-be-done attitude and tenacity with the opposite.

I'm sure you must be thrilled to know you have the full support of politicians and that nothing will ever change, just the way you like it. As for the troops it seems they prefer the politicians call all the shots too so...I really don't know what they have to complain about, it seems this issue of not supporting the troops is as old as war itself.

Why the public should be blamed for our politician's military failings is beyond me given how little the public has to do with anything.

[eyeball]

so by 'pick up the pace' you would have us bypass Parliament?

Is your middle name Stalin?

No, it would be Harper if I bypassed Parliament.

[g_bambino]

I think most people would associate stubbornness with your it-can't-be-done attitude...

Then you think most people are stupid (which makes one wonder why you'd put the case of going to war directly in their hands). "It can't be done" isn't synonymous with "nothing can change".

[GostHacked]

so by 'pick up the pace' you would have us bypass Parliament?

Is your middle name Stalin?

Parliament can be bypassed when going to war with another country (Libya) ... so what would be the harm in bypassing Parliament on this issue??

[Smallc]

Parliament can be bypassed when going to war with another country (Libya)

That's not part of Parliament's jurisdiction. I'm not getting your point.

[Signals.Cpl]

I think the idea of government-by-referendum for the everyday things it does is silly but not for something like sending troops abroad to kill other people. I don't think politicians have the moral or ethical background it takes to make such decisions on their own.

Then abolish parties and make the politicians directly responsible to the constituents. If politicians vote based on the wishes of the constituents or follow the belief system of their constituents then it is to be assumed that a vote for war, is backed by a clear majority of their constituents.

Where would the referendum stop? Would you have one before you send the troops out and then leave it to the politicians to decide when they are withdrawn? Or would you have a referendum every week/month/year to decide if the mission is to be extended?

[jacee]

our military is 100% volunteers. The terms and conditions of employment are not secret. But.... just like any workplace injury, ongoing physical or mental trauma suffered on te job should be covered, as it would for a workers comp[ensation case.

Agreed.

When I first read your post I thought ya, why not just use the existing bureaucracy for injured workers instead of Vets Afffairs re-creating something that already exists ... then I thought about the stories I've heard about people trying to get through the WSIB bureaucracy ...

It does make you wonder though why we need multiple bureaucracies for disabled workers/people. Every province has disability support programs.

There's no easy answer ...

And there's another issue I'd like to raise ... What about those whose PTSD surfaced while on 'peacekeeper' duty, and resulted in behaviour (addictions) that got them discharged 'less than honourably' ... and they can't work, can't cope, commit suicide, get buried in 'paupers' graves' maybe without even a marker?

They get NOTHING!

I read a story about someone tracking down WWII vets who ended up on the streets and were buried in municipal graves by strangers with minimal marker - no one to pay, sometimes nobody even knew their real name, just a street 'handle'.

I despise the corporate war machine that puts soldiers in harm's way for the private profit of a few - eg, clearing the way for the oil pipeline through Afghanistan.

However, if we're going to let our governments get away with participating in such travesties, we have to take responsibility for the damage it causes to soldiers' lives.

I'm leaning toward the idea of a referendum for any deployment of troops on foreign jurisdiction (not just declarations of war). It would make people take more notice, the media do more investigating - eg, what private interests benefit from the work of our soldiers - and could be overall very informative to Canadians about the private profit motives that our soldiers serve for the moneybags who fund our politicians.

It's a VERY sick system, and we all need to understand it better.

The f*#!@¥g moneybags should be paying the soldiers' salaries AND benefits!

Edited May 10, 2012 by jacee

[WWWTT]

No soldier should be sent abroad without a referendum that yields at least a 70% majority in all of Canada's provinces and territories.

Excellent idea!

I would amend this however.

If Canada was invaded then a referendum would not apply.

Keep in mind Canada was never invaded by any country(some conditions apply to my statement)!

WWWTT

[Signals.Cpl]

Excellent idea!

I would amend this however.

If Canada was invaded then a referendum would not apply.

Keep in mind Canada was never invaded by any country(some conditions apply to my statement)!

WWWTT

Never?1775,1812, 1866-1877?

[eyeball]

Then abolish parties and make the politicians directly responsible to the constituents. If politicians vote based on the wishes of the constituents or follow the belief system of their constituents then it is to be assumed that a vote for war, is backed by a clear majority of their constituents.

Sounds okay but I'd still like to see a super-majority and I fail to see why soldiers would settle for anything less.

Where would the referendum stop? Would you have one before you send the troops out and then leave it to the politicians to decide when they are withdrawn? Or would you have a referendum every week/month/year to decide if the mission is to be extended?

Good questions. I'd like to see a panel of experts discuss the nuts and bolts of how a referendum would work. I'm just throwing the idea out there. I think just one referendum at the outset would make most sense especially if the point of the exercise is to give some real teeth and unambiguous meaning to the term support the troops.

I'm not oblivious to the length of time and cost it normally takes to set up a referendum but I'm not willing to accept that in this day and age that it can't be done much more quickly or in an emergency. I'm not talking about voting to decide whether we should defend an imminent attack on our border, but whether we should send troops across other people's borders.

The bottom line for me is that I just don't trust the politicians and especially, like you, political parties on their own to make these sorts of call. I am convinced they just don't have the moral or ethical background for such a serious decision. As for our alliances, I see little reason why should I trust the politicians of a foreign country any more than I would my own.

[WWWTT]

Never?1775,1812, 1866-1877?

BNA did not happen until 1867.

Where was this invasion in 1877?

Aswell I threw in a little disclaimer too

WWWTT

Edited May 11, 2012 by WWWTT

[Topaz]

Almost everyday in the House the Tories praises themselves for "supporting the troops" but they don't. A report out says that the troops up in the North are lacking parkas,cold weather tents, lanterns and heaters. Why? If anyone of MP's go up there, they have everything they need but the military, no. They want out military in the north but they don't supply the equipment required to live there. Is Canada that hard up for money? Should we take a collection up? http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/canada/army-struggles-with-shortage-of-arctic-parkas-tents-heaters-transports-150996055.html

[WWWTT]

I guess the Conservatives don't care about Canadian sovereignty?

When the conservatives say "We support the troops" they must mean "We support the troops ability to destroy the enemy"

WWWTT

[Signals.Cpl]

I guess the Conservatives don't care about Canadian sovereignty?

When the conservatives say "We support the troops" they must mean "We support the troops ability to destroy the enemy"

WWWTT

Kinda hard to preserve your sovereignty if you aren't willing to destroy the enemy. The main function of any military force barring ceremonial units is to close with and destroy the enemy. And to be honest, the troops appreciate the ability to destroy the enemy rather then being send to missions with a mission to destroy the enemy but lacking the ability.

[WWWTT]

Kinda hard to preserve your sovereignty if you aren't willing to destroy the enemy. The main function of any military force barring ceremonial units is to close with and destroy the enemy. And to be honest, the troops appreciate the ability to destroy the enemy rather then being send to missions with a mission to destroy the enemy but lacking the ability.

Go back to comment #37 and reply to that one before furthering this debate.

WWWTT

[Signals.Cpl]

Almost everyday in the House the Tories praises themselves for "supporting the troops" but they don't. A report out says that the troops up in the North are lacking parkas,cold weather tents, lanterns and heaters. Why? If anyone of MP's go up there, they have everything they need but the military, no. They want out military in the north but they don't supply the equipment required to live there. Is Canada that hard up for money? Should we take a collection up? http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/canada/army-struggles-with-shortage-of-arctic-parkas-tents-heaters-transports-150996055.html

I have been in the arctic with 32 Brigade Arctic Response Company and I can tell you that even though there are some shortages, the abilities of the Army with regards to its Capabilities in the Arctic, they are a lot better then 10 years ago. Rebuilding the Military and its ability to project power in the Arctic while simultaneously fighting a war in Afghanistan takes time.

[Signals.Cpl]

BNA did not happen until 1867.

Where was this invasion in 1877?

Aswell I threw in a little disclaimer too

WWWTT

1877 was the last threat from the Fenian Invasion. And we didn't gain true independence until 1931 do we disregard all history before the period as well?

[-TSS-]

Do the Canadian soldiers returning from Afganistan get jeered by immigrants at home as the British soldiers do upon on their arrival at home?

[WWWTT]

1877 was the last threat from the Fenian Invasion. And we didn't gain true independence until 1931 do we disregard all history before the period as well?

So I am still correct.

Some may argue that Canada is still not a complete independent country,NATO being an example.

Another flaw in your line of argument is the fact that the English/American colonists invaded French Canada(Ontario,Quebec,Nova Scotia,New Brunswick,upstate New York,etc,etc) in order to annex.You ignore this fact so I can only conclude you mean Canada post English annex?

I drew the line at 1867.

WWWTT

[Smallc]

Some may argue that Canada is still not a complete independent country

And some would be wrong.

[Signals.Cpl]

Do the Canadian soldiers returning from Afganistan get jeered by immigrants at home as the British soldiers do upon on their arrival at home?

Reservists in Toronto get all kinds of abuse.

[capricorn]

Do the Canadian soldiers returning from Afganistan get jeered by immigrants at home as the British soldiers do upon on their arrival at home?

I've heard of nothing like that. What I am aware of is soldiers about to be deployed to Afghanistan receiving hate mail.

MONTREAL • As families on Canadian Forces Base Valcartier prepare for the departure beginning next month of 2,300 soldiers to Afghanistan, anti-war groups have sent letters to soldiers’ homes comparing Canada’s military activities to war crimes and urging them to refuse deployment.

The letters from a coalition of Quebec groups prompted angry reactions when they began arriving in mailboxes yesterday on the base outside Quebec City, home to the Royal 22nd Regiment, or Vandoos.

“I read the headlines and threw it in the trash,” said Master Corporal Pierre Calve, a father of three set to deploy to Afghanistan in August. “I believe in this mission. I have family here in Canada. This is a way to protect them, like our grandfathers did in the First and Second World Wars. It’s not to go and kill people but to protect the peace.”

The mailing, addressed simply to the occupant of homes on and around the army base, was paid for by anti-war groups based in Quebec City, Montreal and Gatineau. “Canada’s role in Afghanistan is a trap. It means on-the-ground Canadian soldiers become ‘cannon fodder’ for the illogical and unjust policies of generals and politicians,” the letter reads.

Participating in the mission equals “complicity with the civilian deaths and other activities — like the transfer of prisoners to potential torture and death — that are tantamount to war crimes,” it says.

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=da34601d-e96a-4755-a34d-b697517a0f37&k=0

edit to remove double text

Edited May 12, 2012 by capricorn

[Signals.Cpl]

I've heard of nothing like that. What I am aware of is soldiers about to be deployed to Afghanistan receiving hate mail.

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=da34601d-e96a-4755-a34d-b697517a0f37&k=0

And then there is this:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40364096/ns/world_news-americas/t/canada-military-families-receive-fake-death-calls/#.T62y6FETtaU

[bleeding heart]

I've heard of nothing like that. What I am aware of is soldiers about to be deployed to Afghanistan receiving hate mail.

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=da34601d-e96a-4755-a34d-b697517a0f37&k=0

edit to remove double text

Nothing you posted even faintly approaches "hate mail." Ye gods.