Coyne Savages Trudeau

[PrimeNumber]

It's not as much our mess to clean up as it is the mess of the people who live there, and not as much our responsibility as those in the immediate neighbourhood (Ie, Turks, Egyptians, Saudis), but it is definitely not in our interests to have such organizations grow and prosper and gain influence over that or any other part of the world.

I'm pretty sure America can fight this battle without Canada. Our 6 fighters are merely a "Hey look at us, we want to help too" gesture towards America then any real help. Slovakia, Sweden, Norway and Poland are all providing aid without military support I'm sure we can step up our refugee game and asylum game. ISIS is already condemned, what happens now will not sway any more or less in their favour with Canada's military support. it's more or less up to America at this point and it damn well should be they set all of this in motion.

If conservatives didn't give a damn about the people in that area they wouldn't give a damn about them being brutalized and murdered and wouldn't want to intervene.

Like they give a damn about the DRC or Burma or Sudan? Oh wait I guess because those countries haven't cut off their precious supply of oil to the western world, it's not worth the time to get them "back on track."

It's nice how you seem to know what I think. Maybe you should ask Bob Rae what should be done. He seems to think we should be giving both military and humanitarian help. He doesn't seem to find the idea of a military contribution to be worthy of nearly as much hand-wringing as you are conducting over it.

That's nice for Bob Rae.. You have made it perfectly clear in your own words what you think.

[overthere]

Like they give a damn about the DRC or Burma or Sudan? Oh wait I guess because those countries haven't cut off their precious supply of oil to the western world, it's not worth the time to get them "back on track."

That does not explain the involvement of the US or Canada, neither of which cares about oil coming from Iraq or Syria. It also does not speak to the involvement of all the neighbours, who are awash in oil.

[PIK]

That does not explain the involvement of the US or Canada, neither of which cares about oil coming from Iraq or Syria. It also does not speak to the involvement of all the neighbours, who are awash in oil.

When they throw out the ''O'' word ,you know they are desperate.

[PrimeNumber]

That does not explain the involvement of the US or Canada, neither of which cares about oil coming from Iraq or Syria. It also does not speak to the involvement of all the neighbours, who are awash in oil.

Iraq has the world 5th largest oil reserves and is one of the few places left where vast reserves, proven and unknown, have barely been exploited. Since ISIL has taken over they have been selling oil on the black market to Chinese, Russian and even Kurdish businessmen and using refinery facilities to fuel their war machines. The Kurdish Peshmerga have taken control of the largest oil reserve in Iraq, which means oil contracts can be sold, and very cheaply I might add to whomever they deem fit. Right now as it stands there are a lot of oil contracts to fill as the Kurds liberate many of the oil fields in ISIL's control with the help of the American lead coalition. Not to mention the fact that Iraq produces a lot of oil, the 7th highest oil producing country in the world in fact and is expected to triple or more it's production within the next 15-30 years provided it can get it's infrastructure on track. Without that production, what do you think that does to the price of oil?

Don't get me wrong I'm not saying it's a big oil conspiracy, what's happening over there is devastating. But you can't say oil doesn't have anything to do with America's decision to invade Iraq in 2003, their decision to return in 2014 and Harper's decision to support them. Currently Exxon is the biggest player in Iraq oil, if you don't think they have political sway in the US and even here in Canada, you're mistaken.

[PrimeNumber]

I forgot to mention that these oil fields the Kurds are liberating actually belong to the Iraqi government, technically. Chinese state owned oil companies and Russian oil company Lukoil seemed to be key players after the US left Iraq, followed closely by Royal Dutch Shell. But with the Kurds in power, supported by America's coalition, you may see the remaining contracts being leased to Exxon, Dutch and BP. A "Big Win" for democracy no doubt.

[jbg]

But with the Kurds in power, supported by America's coalition, you may see the remaining contracts being leased to Exxon, Dutch and BP. A "Big Win" for democracy no doubt.

Would you prefer to see kleptocratic leases? At least Exxon, Dutch and BP can explore for more oil and maintain production. Nationalization has been a disaster for proper oil field maintenance.

[PrimeNumber]

Would you prefer to see kleptocratic leases? At least Exxon, Dutch and BP can explore for more oil and maintain production. Nationalization has been a disaster for proper oil field maintenance.

I'm just stating some facts. I could personally care less what Iraq does or does not do with their oil. I'm just stating that the American government and their allies seem to care quite a bit.

[bush_cheney2004]

I'm just stating some facts. I could personally care less what Iraq does or does not do with their oil. I'm just stating that the American government and their allies seem to care quite a bit.

True....Iraq has large proven reserves of sweet crude that is needed by the world's hydrocarbon economy. Dick Cheney explained all this over a decade ago. The U.S. does not need Iraq's oil, but it does need the stable world economy that needs Iraq's oil (i.e. China). More oil for everybody !

[PrimeNumber]

True....Iraq has large proven reserves of sweet crude that is needed by the world's hydrocarbon economy. Dick Cheney explained all this over a decade ago. The U.S. does not need Iraq's oil, but it does need the stable world economy that needs Iraq's oil (i.e. China). More oil for everybody !

And helping their buddies out at Exxon, BP and Shell while they're at it. Keep the flow of oil up, prices rise worldwide. The worlds biggest corporations are happy. America gets it's heroes, ammo, blood, guns, guts and glory. And the conservatives get to pretend they're doing something "useful" on the world scene while ignoring the environmental issue and all other prevalent domestic issues all while creating the most opaque government we have probably ever had. it all comes together now.

[Derek 2.0]

True....Iraq has large proven reserves of sweet crude that is needed by the world's hydrocarbon economy. Dick Cheney explained all this over a decade ago. The U.S. does not need Iraq's oil, but it does need the stable world economy that needs Iraq's oil (i.e. China). More oil for everybody !

Bingo......not only do bad things happen when we don't have oil, but based on global economic realities, other nations like China etc upset the card table.....

[Michael Hardner]

Back to the OP:

http://www.torontosun.com/2014/10/08/a-test-for-trudeau-canadas-liberals-split-on-iraq-combat-mission

OTTAWA - Justin Trudeau is facing the first serious test of his leadership of Canada's Liberals in the wake of a parliamentary vote to send Canadian fighter jets to Iraq.

Trudeau and most Liberal MPs voted against the idea.

But Liberal MP Irwin Cotler, a former justice minister and a globally recognized human rights defender, abstained from the vote, saying in a statement that his "principled abstention", as he called it, was a result of his recognition that military intervention against Islamic terrorists in Iraq and Syria is required but that the Harper government's proposal lacked "clarity."

Cotler, former Liberal Leader Stephane Dion and former Liberal cabinet ministers Lawrence MacAulay and Mauril Belanger were also absent from Tuesday night's vote.

Influential Liberals like former interim leader Bob Rae, former cabinet minister Lloyd Axworthy, and retired general and former Liberal senator Romeo Dallaire all argued ahead of the vote for a combat mission in Iraq.

The apparent schism among Canada's Liberals was an opportunity for Trudeau's political opponents to pounce.

...

Indeed, Trudeau now may have more work convincing his own party, let alone Canadian voters, that he was right to reject the combat mission Iraq largely on the basis that, in his estimation, the Harper Conservatives had not made the case for a combat mission.

[Michael Hardner]

I'm looking for quotes that validate the OP's accusation of inconsistency on Trudeau's part: does anybody have a link to a statement supporting international intervention ?

[waldo]

I'm looking for quotes that validate the OP's accusation of inconsistency on Trudeau's part: does anybody have a link to a statement supporting international intervention ?

while you at it, you could call for quotes validating the claims of your just linked Sun article's author speaking to a "schism" amongst Liberals... in the face of all Liberals voting against Harper's war... in the face of including Bob Rae in his apparent "schism" list. As much as there was a flurry of zeal on MLW over Rae's writings (as selectively cherry-picked and presented by the Sun)... I quoted the Rae comments that the Sun somehow managed to exclude... the Rae comments where he makes the distinction on military support to not include combat.

[Michael Hardner]

while you at it, you could call for quotes validating the claims of your just linked Sun article's author speaking to a "schism" amongst Liberals...

Schism may be overstating it, but there are dissenters. Not for me to defend the article, though, as I posted it to bring the thread back to OP territory.

[cybercoma]

while you at it, you could call for quotes validating the claims of your just linked Sun article's author speaking to a "schism" amongst Liberals... in the face of all Liberals voting against Harper's war... in the face of including Bob Rae in his apparent "schism" list. As much as there was a flurry of zeal on MLW over Rae's writings (as selectively cherry-picked and presented by the Sun)... I quoted the Rae comments that the Sun somehow managed to exclude... the Rae comments where he makes the distinction on military support to not include combat.

Not all Liberals. Irwin Cotler abstained.

[jbg]

And helping their buddies out at Exxon, BP and Shell while they're at it. Keep the flow of oil up, prices rise worldwide.

Prices rise when the flow goes up? You're joking I hope.

The worlds biggest corporations are happy. America gets it's heroes, ammo, blood, guns, guts and glory.

Guns and ammo are manufactured from oil? No you have me confused.

And the conservatives get to pretend they're doing something "useful" on the world scene while ignoring the environmental issue and all other prevalent domestic issues all while creating the most opaque government we have probably ever had. it all comes together now.

I'm not sure that eliminating Iraqi oil does much for the environment or to solve domestic issues. Unless your thought is that higher fuel prices paid by lower middle class worker consumers helps them somehow.

[overthere]

I'm not sure that eliminating Iraqi oil does much for the environment or to solve domestic issues.

USA gets about 5% of its foreign oil supply from Iraq and 0% from Syria. The Iraqi supply is easily replaced.

Canada is by far the largest supplier of foreign oil to USA, with around 40%+ of the toal coming from Canuckistan.

Canada supplies about as much as all of OPEC to the US, and double what the entire Persian Gulf supplies to the US..

[jbg]

USA gets about 5% of its foreign oil supply from Iraq and 0% from Syria. The Iraqi supply is easily replaced.

Canada is by far the largest supplier of foreign oil to USA, with around 40%+ of the toal coming from Canuckistan.

Canada supplies about as much as all of OPEC to the US, and double what the entire Persian Gulf supplies to the US..

Oil is a fungible product. The country of origin barely matters.

[PrimeNumber]

Prices rise when the flow goes up? You're joking I hope.Guns and ammo are manufactured from oil? No you have me confused.I'm not sure that eliminating Iraqi oil does much for the environment or to solve domestic issues. Unless your thought is that higher fuel prices paid by lower middle class worker consumers helps them somehow.

Sorry I should have clarified. As long as there is a conflict, as long as the oil begins flowing again, under western oil companies then the price goes up. Without the conflict no prices rise, provides uncertainty to the market. I never said guns and ammo were manufactured from oil. I was merely talking about the glorification of war in American culture. I also didn't say that eliminating Iraq oil does anything for the environment or domestic issues. But its easy to divert the attention of Canadians away from these issues at home with the issue of a war abroad.

[overthere]

Oil is a fungible product. The country of origin barely matters.

The source of oil matters to this pack of knobs, they keep introducng oil into the discussion as if getting oil out of Iraq was some big motivator for the USA. At this point, USA is a lot more focused on getting oil out of Fargo than Fallujah.

[overthere]

As long as there is a conflict, as long as the oil begins flowing again, under western oil companies then the price goes up.

blahblahblah you are wrong. There has been a conflict raging in oil country for months/years/decades now. The price of oil is dropping hard. Now stop, please. The game has changed, your meme is kaput. You're just embarassing yourself by spouting recycled 80s rhetoric. I apologize if you are actually the ghost of Jack Layton.

[PrimeNumber]

blahblahblah you are wrong. There has been a conflict raging in oil country for months/years/decades now. The price of oil is dropping hard. Now stop, please. The game has changed, your meme is kaput. You're just embarassing yourself by spouting recycled 80s rhetoric. I apologize if you are actually the ghost of Jack Layton.

Price of oil started jumping in 2003 and peaked shortly thereafter. As soon as the Americans started leaving Iraq it dropped now that they're back its going up again. Easily verifiable. The graphs are all over the internet. Just pointing out Facts. Not my problem if you refuse to see them.

[overthere]

Price of oil started jumping in 2003 and peaked shortly thereafter. As soon as the Americans started leaving Iraq it dropped now that they're back its going up again. Easily verifiable. The graphs are all over the internet. Just pointing out Facts. Not my problem if you refuse to see them.

we are in the middle of a serious conflict right now and oil is not rising.

The supply chain has changed.

Try again.

[guyser]

The price of oil is dropping hard.

where?

[PrimeNumber]

we are in the middle of a serious conflict right now and oil is not rising.

The supply chain has changed.

Try again.

It's just recently dropped back down to 90-95 what it was when I was working in Estevan from 2010-2012, after that it began dropping below 90 again right around the same time America left Iraq. It's back up to it's minimum high right now and It will jump to 101-105 by this years end. Mark my words. Conflict has a direct effect on oil prices, if you haven't noticed that it must be fun living in lala land.