Canada "ready to go to war against syria" press reports...

[waldo]

yawn... you need new material!

[Guest Derek L]

excellent! As your own provided reference was a CBC link, I acknowledge that you finally accept that both the government and DND issued direct orders to the military not to provide support to... and not to engage within... "Operation Iraqi Freedom". We went a long, long way for you to finally admit this - well done! As for you continuing to trumpet a single memo from wikileaks, I've already responded to the, "minimum level, the measly degree of qualification that suits you and your agenda":

Tell me, if the Forces in the Persian Gulf were not involved in the war in Iraq, what were they doing in the Persian Gulf? Aside from the already stated mission of interdicting terrorists/weapons, what were they escorting? To whom were they providing logistics?

Like this print of a Canadian Frigate conducting boarding operations in the Persian Gulf, your creditability is also heading off into the sunset:

[waldo]

Tell me, if the Forces in the Persian Gulf were not involved in the war in Iraq, what were they doing in the Persian Gulf? Aside from the already stated mission of interdicting terrorists/weapons, what were they escorting? To whom were they providing logistics?

how obtuse are you? Really? The whole premise of this discussion has been whether or not there was government support. You've now finally acknowledged the direct government and DND orders to the military not to provide support for... and not to engage in... 'Operation Iraqi Freedom'. You've scoffed at the suggestion of a 'rogue military'... you've scoffed at your own provided links discussion on the debate surrounding the degree/level of actual engagement in support of Operation Apollo (and TF 151) versus direct support for the illegal Iraq invasion/war.

you seem to want it both ways... why, in your own provided (Canadian Navy) Operation Apollo link do you find/read the word... Iraq? Well, do you? Quote it... if you can!!!

[Guest Derek L]

how obtuse are you? Really? The whole premise of this discussion has been whether or not there was government support. You've now finally acknowledged the direct government and DND orders to the military not to provide support for... and not to engage in... 'Operation Iraqi Freedom'. You've scoffed at the suggestion of a 'rogue military'... you've scoffed at your own provided links discussion on the debate surrounding the degree/level of actual engagement in support of Operation Apollo (and TF 151) versus direct support for the illegal Iraq invasion/war.

you seem to want it both ways... why, in your own provided (Canadian Navy) Operation Apollo link do you find/read the word... Iraq? Well, do you? Quote it... if you can!!!

Clearly there was Government Support Waldo, for the then Liberal Government sent them over there………Then left them there after the war started…..

[waldo]

Clearly there was Government Support Waldo, for the then Liberal Government sent them over there………Then left them there after the war started…..

now you're desperate... it was you that acknowledged Operation Apollo (2 years prior to the illegal Iraq invasion/war). Have you found the word "Iraq" in your provided Canadian Navy Operation Apollo link yet?

but hey now, I thought you stated you accepted the, as you called them, "facts", from your own provided link... you know, the link that states both the government and DND gave the military direct orders not to support... not to engage in... the illegal U.S./UK invasion/war in Iraq? Are you now back-peddling on that acceptance?

Edited June 17, 2013 by waldo

[GostHacked]

It's a little of both Derek and Waldo.

For Iraq:

Technically we did not go to war. However Canada provided much logistical assistance. Our military actions were in complete opposite of what the rhetoric was from our government. So yes we were a part of it, and the only thing that can be debated on is the level of support that was given.

For Syria:

Our government is violating it's own laws now by providing support for the Free Syrian Army who is mostly a band of smaller known and recognized terrorist groups. We are providing support for terrorists that have caused issues in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya.

This is direct undeniable evidence our government is supporting terrorism.

[Guest Derek L]

now you're desperate... it was you that acknowledged Operation Apollo (2 years prior to the illegal Iraq invasion/war). Have you found the word "Iraq" in your provided Canadian Navy Operation Apollo link yet?

Have you provided (any) link suggesting the RCN didn’t interdict traffic coming and going to Iraq? Or why they provided escort and logistical support to allied vessels in the Persian Gulf? Who were they protecting them from? The Afghani Navy?

[waldo]

For Iraq:

Our military actions were in complete opposite of what the rhetoric was from our government.

no - direct government orders to the military not to support... and direct DND orders to the Canadian Navy not to engage... those direct orders are not "rhetoric".

[GostHacked]

no - direct government orders to the military not to support... and direct DND orders to the Canadian Navy not to engage... those direct orders are not "rhetoric".

No matter what the government tells you, the actions were in complete opposite of what was claimed and doled out to us.

We did not send troops in sure, but our Navy was and still IS present in the Persian Gulf. Our navy is giving logistical and intelligence on ship movements in the gulf.

So if our ships were not there to provide the support for the USA, then please tell me what they were doing there?

[Boges]

Good Ezra Levant column about Syria

http://ezralevant.com/2013/06/levant-fools-errand.html

[bush_cheney2004]

Good Ezra Levant column about Syria

http://ezralevant.com/2013/06/levant-fools-errand.html

A bit misleading....Obama did not lead Canadian CF-18's to Libya. France and the U.K. initially led the Libyan coalition in support of UNSC Resolution 1973. Canada entered the fray on its own.

[Guest Derek L]

A bit misleading....Obama did not lead Canadian CF-18's to Libya. France and the U.K. initially led the Libyan coalition in support of UNSC Resolution 1973. Canada entered the fray on its own.

I agree with the crux of his argument, in that we should have nothing to do with Syria (outside perhaps humanitarian aide), but have never really been a fan of his (Ezra) delivery.

[bush_cheney2004]

I agree with the crux of his argument, in that we should have nothing to do with Syria (outside perhaps humanitarian aide), but have never really been a fan of his (Ezra) delivery.

His argument may serve a larger non-interventionist policy, but it is just garden variety pandering to suggest that a reluctant USA led Canada into bombing Libya. Canada needs to own it, but for some reason it is politically impossible to do so for its domestic audience.

I've already had one friend die in Syria (1983), and that was one too many. Send Maher Arar over first.

[Guest Derek L]

His argument may serve a larger non-interventionist policy, but it is just garden variety pandering to suggest that a reluctant USA led Canada into bombing Libya. Canada needs to own it, but for some reason it is politically impossible to do so for its domestic audience.

I've already had one friend die in Syria (1983), and that was one too many. Send Maher Arar over first.

I agree, hence one of the reasons I don’t read/watch Sun New outlets with any great frequency…….As we went around the mulberry bush with regards to European and Canadian interests (of a petroleum nature) in Libya…….

If the West was to arm or militarily support any groups within Syria, it should be the minority Kurdish population in the North-East pocket of the country……Of course Turkey would likely oppose such a notion, but at this point in time, Turkey might be more politically malleable to such a suggestion…….

With that being said, Assad is doing the West a favour, in that he’s drawing every Muslim freedom fighter around the world to the rebels cause (and killing lot’s of them), well having Hezbollah supporting his regime……..In essence, pitting two major terrorists sects against one another……And it’s costing us near nothing……..

The best possible outcome would be for the West to keep tossing the rebels some small arms and munitions, well the Russian do likewise with the Assad regime, so as to keep the conflict going into perpetuity……

[GostHacked]

With that being said, Assad is doing the West a favour, in that he’s drawing every Muslim freedom fighter around the world to the rebels cause (and killing lot’s of them), well having Hezbollah supporting his regime……..In essence, pitting two major terrorists sects against one another……And it’s costing us near nothing……..

The best possible outcome would be for the West to keep tossing the rebels some small arms and munitions, well the Russian do likewise with the Assad regime, so as to keep the conflict going into perpetuity……

The best thing we can do is simply stay out of it all together. Looks more and more like another proxy war for Russia and the USA.

This rhetoric also flies in the face of actually reducing terrorism. But as long as it is not happening in your home country, no one cares.

But it now seems that you advocate terrorism to combat terrorism. Why do you hate freedom?

[Guest Derek L]

The best thing we can do is simply stay out of it all together. Looks more and more like another proxy war for Russia and the USA.

This rhetoric also flies in the face of actually reducing terrorism. But as long as it is not happening in your home country, no one cares.

But it now seems that you advocate terrorism to combat terrorism. Why do you hate freedom?

Of course I don’t care if it’s not happening in our own backyards, or the backyards of our interests………And Freedom, the Syrian people are free to kill each other…..no skin off my nose, and if it happens to further our interests, like they say about life giving one lemons……

[Boges]

I guess if Assad is using chemical weapons against his own people, it wouldn't be much of a stretch to assume he'll use it against Israel or Saudi Arabia so that's why the West may feel compelled to step in.

Not saying I agree, but it's a plausible reason.

[Guest Derek L]

I guess if Assad is using chemical weapons against his own people, it wouldn't be much of a stretch to assume he'll use it against Israel or Saudi Arabia so that's why the West may feel compelled to step in.

Not saying I agree, but it's a plausible reason.

Assad wouldn’t use them against Israel, as that would certainly trigger a nuclear response…….Though he is a brutal dictator, Assad (like his father before him) is ultimately pragmatic in his approach to the region and it ‘s occupants……..

I’d be more concerned with the rebels getting their mitts on the chemical weapons…..With that said, chemical weapons have a finite lifespan and require extensive maintenance by professionals once mated with munitions……One could hypotheses that due to the minimal amount of casualties from their reported use in Syria though, that the decay of the of the Iraqi Syrian weapon stocks has already begun……

[GostHacked]

Of course I don’t care if it’s not happening in our own backyards, or the backyards of our interests………And Freedom, the Syrian people are free to kill each other…..no skin off my nose, and if it happens to further our interests, like they say about life giving one lemons……

That kind of thing has been tried before,and that line of thinking is quite dangerous. We have seen it manifest itself with what is known as Blowback, and we had several buildings come down in NYC.

So as long as you are willing to accept responsibility for blowback, then please continue to stay in this line of thinking.

[Guest Derek L]

That kind of thing has been tried before,and that line of thinking is quite dangerous. We have seen it manifest itself with what is known as Blowback, and we had several buildings come down in NYC.

So as long as you are willing to accept responsibility for blowback, then please continue to stay in this line of thinking.

Frankly, that ship has already sailed......They hate us whatever we do or don't.....

[GostHacked]

I guess if Assad is using chemical weapons against his own people, it wouldn't be much of a stretch to assume he'll use it against Israel or Saudi Arabia so that's why the West may feel compelled to step in.

Not saying I agree, but it's a plausible reason.

Assad knows the moment he uses chemical weapons, things get really really difficult for him. I don't think he is that stupid to use them knowing what the results are. So the thing I am looking out for is something by the rebels to pin it on Assad. That seems to be the most likely scenario in my view.

[GostHacked]

Derek L, on 17 Jun 2013 - 1:50 PM, said:

Frankly, that ship has already sailed......They hate us whatever we do or don't.....

So instead of correcting the problem we will continue down this road?

[Guest Derek L]

So instead of correcting the problem we will continue down this road?

And how do you propose to correct it?

[waldo]

No matter what the government tells you, the actions were in complete opposite of what was claimed and doled out to us.

So if our ships were not there to provide the support for the USA, then please tell me what they were doing there?

no - are you also going to dispute the direct military orders from the government and the DND? Officially, the ships (and, as I said, surveillance aircraft) were there as a part of Operation Apollo... in support of Operation Enduring Freedom. If you're going just drop yourself into the thread...

[Guest Derek L]

And not to be left out:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/iran-to-send-4000-troops-to-aid-president-assad-forces-in-syria-8660358.html

The Independent on Sunday has learned that a military decision has been taken in Iran – even before last week’s presidential election – to send a first contingent of 4,000 Iranian Revolutionary Guards to Syria to support President Bashar al-Assad’s forces against the largely Sunni rebellion that has cost almost 100,000 lives in just over two years. Iran is now fully committed to preserving Assad’s regime, according to pro-Iranian sources which have been deeply involved in the Islamic Republic’s security, even to the extent of proposing to open up a new ‘Syrian’ front on the Golan Heights against Israel.

Sunnis and Shiites at odds in the Syrian sausage maker………+1 for the West.