Iraq Crisis – Again

[GostHacked]

As an American, I just don't see what problem BC-2004 has with Canada or Canadians. I happen to think Canada's a pretty good country, one I'm proud to have a neighbor.

Some might call it Anti-Americanism , but mainly we are taking the failed policies of the Bush administration. Sure 'Canada' will be thrown around in desperate attempts to derail and detract, but overall the failures of both Bush/Cheney, Obama/Biden are quite present and in your face.

Iraq was to be pacified to not be a safe haven for terrorists, much like Afghanistan was to be pacified. Instead we are seeing quite the opposite.

Now Canada is sending two cargo planes full of arms to the Kurds in Northern Iraq. This is going to create a weird dynamic.

Turkey : Not a fan of the Kurds, and used by NATO to arm and train rebels fighting in Syria.

Kurds : Both Turkey and Iraq are not fan of the Kurds. Both have tried to cause them great harm.

Iraq : Now a cesspool of terrorism (weekly bombings for 2+ years) in which the Iraq military/police forces cannot contain.

NATO backs Turkey. US/Canada/UK and others are now trying to support the Kurds and the Iraq security forces at the same time while fighting ISIS.

50+ years of foreign policy and intervention from the west has brought us to this state of chaos in the Middle East.

But you know ... Canada.

[GostHacked]

Other interesting thing to note about the cargo planes from Canada. At least this time it seems that it is openly admitted it is weapons. South of the 49th it might be construed into 'humanitarian aid', with a dose of American patriotism spewing the praises of their freedom and democracy. But with each incident in the USA, we see a tighter grip via security. The land of the free is now governed my militarized police and MRAPS. Can you taste the freedom?

Who knows but even the dumbest, like Chief Wiggums (oh no another 'Merikan reference) knows that 'it's going to get a lot worse before it gets better'.

[bush_cheney2004]

It's nice to see Canada using their American made airlift for its intended purpose. No more excuses...not even for DART deploying to far away places.

[GostHacked]

Probably American made weapons as well. Let's dance around the fire to celebrate.

[jbg]

Such is your choice, but this "merikan" is not going to be willfully blind to the obvious anti-"merikan" positions on display here and in Canadian media by some Canadians. They can dish it out but can't take it ? Sorry, but turnabout is fair play.

I have spoken about the anti-American animus of some Canadians. Fortunately it is in the minority.

[GostHacked]

I have spoken about the anti-American animus of some Canadians. Fortunately it is in the minority.

I think he his showing his anti-Canadianism more than pointing out others that are alleged to be anti-Americanism. Sounds a lot like antisemitism. Trot it out when you have nothing else to give to the forum. Trot it out when you have nothing else to give period.

[Big Guy]

One difference in Canadian reaction in the first Iraq invasion and this most recent military incursion. The first time, our Canadian government wanted no part of any participation in what it saw as a lost cause. This time, the Harper government has decided that Canada is in.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/08/15/canadian_transport_planes_joining_military_effort_in_iraq.html

Canadian airplanes are transporting military arms from other countries into Iraq.

This Harper government may just get us mired into this civil war in the Mideast to a point where the next government cannot get us out.

[Derek 2.0]

Canadian airplanes are transporting military arms from other countries into Iraq.

This Harper government may just get us mired into this civil war in the Mideast to a point where the next government cannot get us out.

How would delivering weapons and humanitarian supplies get us mired in a multi-year conflict? Also, is a perspective Liberal Government opposed to such deliveries? The previous Liberal Government did get Canada involved in increased combat operations in Southern Afghanistan.

[bush_cheney2004]

.. The previous Liberal Government did get Canada involved in increased combat operations in Southern Afghanistan.

Indeed...as the previous Liberal governments (plural) used Canadian military forces to "illegally" bomb a sovereign state (Kosovo War - 1999) and kidnap the democratically elected president of another (Haiti - 2004).

[bush_cheney2004]

I have spoken about the anti-American animus of some Canadians. Fortunately it is in the minority.

Maybe yes...maybe no. I have invested a great deal of time reading many Canadian authors who explicitly describe the origins and current state of such animus towards the United States and "Merkins". It is a topic and issue as old as the beginnings of each nation and far larger than any opinions expressed on this forum.

[Big Guy]

How would delivering weapons and humanitarian supplies get us mired in a multi-year conflict? Also, is a perspective Liberal Government opposed to such deliveries? The previous Liberal Government did get Canada involved in increased combat operations in Southern Afghanistan.

How would a small force sent to stabilize the peace in Afghanistan that will come later?

Remember this in 20001 from Minister of Defence Eggleton: He summed up the dominant thinking in the government at the time when he said, "Any Canadian military deployment to Afghanistan may well be similar to a situation in Eritrea and Ethiopia where we went in on the first wave, we helped establish the stabilization, the basis for ongoing peace support operations that would come after ... but then turned it over to somebody else."

That was the start of our "peace operations" into that quagmire of Afghanistan.

It does not take much to deploy "some" armed personnel to protect our "humanitarian" flights and landings then maybe just a few "advisors" to help distribute the goods. But if they are fired upon then we have to negate those "detestable murderers and scumbags" with re-enforcements and allow those little girls to go to school and if there is any armed resistance then ...

I do not care which party is in power, there is always potential to get caught in that vortex of violence in the Middle East where treasure and blood disappear in very large quantities.

I say stay the h$ll out of those civil wars.

[Derek 2.0]

I say stay the h$ll out of those civil wars.

So to clarify your position, you’re opposed to the GoC providing humanitarian aid to war torn regions?

[Derek 2.0]

Indeed...as the previous Liberal governments (plural) used Canadian military forces to "illegally" bomb a sovereign state (Kosovo War - 1999) and kidnap the democratically elected president of another (Haiti - 2004).

The vast majority of all military conflicts that Canada has participated in, began under a Liberal Government……isn’t the same true of Democrats?

[Big Guy]

So to clarify your position, you’re opposed to the GoC providing humanitarian aid to war torn regions?

Like those trucks filled with humanitarian aid from Russia to Ukraine?

On a serious note, there are a number of neutral relief organizations that would co-ordinate and deliver humanitarian aid. That is what they are for. They keep nations from getting stuck into military entanglements and protect people from their politicians and generals.

http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CDUQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.globalcorps.com%2Fjobs%2Fngolist.pdf&ei=Vu3wU9DjONawyASxvYIQ&usg=AFQjCNFZoK5hvBmtIrg31FC6xIk5L8xvFA

and

http://reliefweb.int/

[Derek 2.0]

On a serious note, there are a number of neutral relief organizations that would co-ordinate and deliver humanitarian aid. That is what they are for. They keep nations from getting stuck into military entanglements and protect people from their politicians and generals.

What good is providing humanitarian aid, be it directly or through an NGO proxy, if the people we’re providing the aid to, are unable to defend themselves against aggressors and will ultimately be killed?

[Big Guy]

What good is providing humanitarian aid, be it directly or through an NGO proxy, if the people we’re providing the aid to, are unable to defend themselves against aggressors and will ultimately be killed?

I do not have an answer for that. Why decide to provide humanitarian aid for this conflict and not for that conflict? Are some "humans" more worthy than other "humans"? Sooth the conscience perhaps? Or perhaps the "humanitarian" aid is directed by a specific political agenda?

What I do not accept is any government, politicians or a party in power using the excuse of humanitarian aid to misdirect and misinform their citizens to get entwined into a conflict. If they are prepared to get militarily involved then be up front with those intentions and allow the electorate voice their opinions on the participation.

BTW - You may have noticed that I am not favoring or blaming Cons or Libs or Greens or NDP's or Commies or Fibs or whatever. I try not to play that game.

Edited August 17, 2014 by Big Guy

[On Guard for Thee]

The vast majority of all military conflicts that Canada has participated in, began under a Liberal Government……isn’t the same true of Democrats?

The Democrats have participated in more wars by roughly 50%. If you look into the service record of Repubs vs Dems, the former fail miserably.

[Derek 2.0]

I do not have an answer for that. Why decide to provide humanitarian aid for this conflict and not for that conflict? Are some "humans" more worthy than other "humans"? Sooth the conscience perhaps? Or perhaps the "humanitarian" aid is directed by a specific political agenda?

I’ve no doubt that any Government that delivers humanitarian, financial or military aid is executing a political agenda, in all circumstances.

[Argus]

Like those trucks filled with humanitarian aid from Russia to Ukraine?

I'm sure I'm not the only one who noted his failure to answer the question...

[Big Guy]

If the USA has promised "no boots on the ground" then that special forces contingent must have been wearing slippers when that team went into Iraq to try to save the American journalist. This is not looking good for the USA.

The USA is being pushed closer and closer to Iran and the Assad dictatorship in Syria. They are the only nations with armies powerful enough to match ISIS and seem to be the only option remaining. The USA continues "strategic" bombing but then you cannot win a war from the air.

It looks more and more like the only military solution will be Iranian and Syrian troops on the ground with American air cover. I just hope Harper does not commit any Canadian military aid to such a bizarre combination.

It is said that "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" but it seems the West has so many enemies over there that anybody can be a friend.

[bush_cheney2004]

If the USA has promised "no boots on the ground" then that special forces contingent must have been wearing slippers when that team went into Iraq to try to save the American journalist. This is not looking good for the USA.

The USA is not afraid to do what is necessary to pursue policy interests. Americans don't worry about what Canada will do in Iraq.

[GostHacked]

The USA is not afraid to do what is necessary to pursue policy interests. Americans don't worry about what Canada will do in Iraq.

And the US Government does not even care what Americans think. If you oppose war, you hate freedom. Am I doing this right?

[On Guard for Thee]

And the US Government does not even care what Americans think. If you oppose war, you hate freedom. Am I doing this right?

Opposing war goes against the feeding of that military industrial complex, and let's face it, US taxpayers are used to it by now.

[Big Guy]

The USA is not afraid to do what is necessary to pursue policy interests. Americans don't worry about what Canada will do in Iraq.

And I give the USA Kudos and hope them the best. The USA appears to want to be the cowboy of the world and carry the flag of their democracy to cover the globe - and are ready to sacrifice their young to get that goal. Again, I say God Bless America! I hope that they continue to sacrifice their blood and treasure to protect the rest of us - and bask in the glory of that enterprise. They deserve it.

I would hope that Canada on the other hand protects their young from enterprises of glory. I would hope that Canada can fly the banner of "mission accomplished" when our society can be comfortable in our peaceful role on this earth and our young can expect to live to see old age.

I think the United States is a wonderful country. It seems ready to keep expanding Arlington National Cemetery, keep playing that anthem, keep folding those flags and giving them to the grieving relatives and shooting off those rifles to maintain its role on this earth. It deserves the glory that comes at that price.

I have no interest in glory. I prefer to visit my children and grandchildren in their homes, not the cemetery.

But that is only my view. I would not assume to speak for anybody else and especially not for the whole nation.

God Save America!!!

Edited August 22, 2014 by Big Guy

[bush_cheney2004]

LOL..."opposing war"...but loving those military contracts and jobs in Canada.