overthere Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 What exactly is Trudeaus foreign policy, setting aside soundbite rhetoric? He is apparently intent on 'rebranding' Canada, and 'reinstating the respect we once had internationally'. I don't see how anything he has done since he began in November as PM gains interntaional respect. His immediate statement to Obama that he was pulling out of the ISIS battle is now bearing fruit, but not the kind he wanted. His massive dog and pony show in Paris was a big deal for CBC TV, but nobody else on the globe notices or cares. At his other string of international appearances - same thing. My take is that world leaders think he is is fluff. Perhaps that is his intent, since fluffy does not need much in the way of actual commitment. Smiles and selfies are enough for fluff. But the international community has noticed.....in a tangible way by excluding Canada from important planning meetings for dealing with ISIS. John Ivison says ... How can the Liberals leave others to defend our national security? It is a valid question. But comments last week by Ash Carter, the U.S. secretary of defence, appear aimed squarely at Ottawa. “Any nation that cares about the safety of its people or the future of its civilization must know this — America will continue to lead the fight but there can be no free riders,” he said in remarks to the 101st Airborne Division at Fort Campbell, Ky. “Many nations are already contributing greatly. Many can do more.” This week he will meet with the defence ministers of nations with a “significant stake” in accelerating the efforts against ISIL — France, Australia, German, Italy, the U.K. and The Netherlands. No mention of Canada. Because Canada has given the impression it does not take the jihadist threat seriously, the countries that do have decided they will not take Canada seriously. Harjit Sajjan, the new defence minister, is a serious man who was still just a candidate for parliament when the Liberals decided to oppose the deployment. He tried to downplay the snub Tuesday, saying it doesn’t put Canada on the outside. But he knows he is putting a brave face on a situation he would have found humiliating as a soldier. Is this the direction we as citizens want to go with our foreign policy? Or is what is happening now an affront to the word 'policy'?. Canada has often been involved in peacekeeping activiities. There is absolutely no possibility that the situation in Syria/Iraq now is ready for peacekeepers. Canada has never been a neutral or unaligned country. We belong to alliances, serious alliances that come with serious responsibilities. And need serious leaders. Are we now ready to heed a call for help from one of our oldest and trusted allies for actual help, not 'let's pretend' help as offered by Trudeau? The ally I speak of is France by the way, who leads the fight against ISIS now. And the answer is stated every day by the silence in Ottawa. Our 6 jets in the ME are obviously a token in terms of firepower, but they are very meaningful in terms of how those friends view our country and our leader. A trust has been broken. http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/john-ivison-how-can-the-liberals-leave-others-to-defend-our-national-security Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 His "leadership" is all symbolism, no substance. Just like him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Guy Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 I guess it depends on your view of what role Canada should have in the world. I agree with what Trudeau has been doing except that I would like to see him pull every Canadian out of that civil war in the Middle East. Canada should have a foreign policy based on our own interests and not those of the USA. I remember how Chretien was criticized (the old "pacifist" and "Neville Chamberlain of Canada" and "head in the sand") with all kinds of ridicule and denouncing by other Canadians when he said "No" to Bush to join him in the invasion and subjugation of Iraq. Any of you folks think that we should have gone in with the USA and joined their parade of body bags coming home? The USA suffered 4,425 total deaths (including both killed in action and non-hostile) and 32,223 wounded in action (WIA) as a result of Operation Iraqi Freedom. You warriors out there think we should have been part of that mistake? Harpers vision of Canada was to make it a "warrior nation" and a permanent ally of the USA. Trudeau is trying to take Canada the other way. I agree with Trudeau. Because of our immigration policies and diversity of population, Canada is seen as a peaceful, accommodating country. It will take Trudeau some time to get the rest of the world to understand that. In my view, there is no trust here that has been broken. I trusted Harper to do what he thought was best for Canada and he did his best to satisfy his vision. I also trust that Trudeau will be doing what he thinks is best for Canada to attain his vision. I hope him well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 I believe your solution is to side with that supporter of international terrorism, the Islamic Republic of Iran rather than our traditional friend and ally, the United States. Let's see a show of hands on that proposal... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 I remember how Chrétien politized the helicopter issue, cancelled the contract, and cost the lives of several Canadian service members dying while operating outdated and substandard equipment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 I believe your solution is to side with that supporter of international terrorism, the Islamic Republic of Iran rather than our traditional friend and ally, the United States. Let's see a show of hands on that proposal... The USA is moving to lift sanctions, swapped prisoners and is moving to (somewhat) normalize relations with Iran. Canada seems to be following the U.S. lead. Please inform us... How is Canada following Iran and not the USA? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 I remember how Chrétien politized the helicopter issue, cancelled the contract, and cost the lives of several Canadian service members dying while operating outdated and substandard equipment. Please provide a cite for Canadian service members dying from outdated helicoptors since that time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Guy Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 I believe your solution is to side with that supporter of international terrorism, the Islamic Republic of Iran rather than our traditional friend and ally, the United States. Let's see a show of hands on that proposal... You believe wrong. My solution is to side with what is best for Canada, its citizens and our reputation around the world. That may involve joining the USA in certain foreign policy and ignoring it when it is not beneficial for us. Everybody who wants our foreign policy be dictated by the USA please raise your hands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overthere Posted January 20, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 there is no trust here that has been broken. Then you are willfully blind. Our allies have just spoken on that very subject. You can choose not to listen. It is not just the US that is our ally, it is many European countries as well. I can see you are not a NATO supporter. Then you must be a supporter of non aligned status, like Sweden or Switzerland. They also have something in common: they are exceedingly well armed and both of those nonaligned countries punch well above their weight militarily. But if Canada wishes to maintain cordial diplomatic relationships and beneficial trade relations with our former friends and allies, we have to pull our weight in military alliances. Of course. There is no free lunch. Speaking frankly, I don't think that Trudeau has much of a clue about any of this. Every posture has a price. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Guy Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 I remember how Chrétien politized the helicopter issue, cancelled the contract, and cost the lives of several Canadian service members dying while operating outdated and substandard equipment. I am not going to debate the pros and cons of the Chretien government. That is the role of pundits and time. Do you think we should have joined the USA in the invasion and subjugation of Iraq? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overthere Posted January 20, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 our reputation around the world. Our reputation lately is that we are unreliable, prone to rash stupid statements and not to be trusted by our longtime friends and allies. That may involve joining the USA in certain foreign policy and ignoring it when it is not beneficial for us. Which we have done for a long time and continue to do. Please retire this old turd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overthere Posted January 20, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 I am not going to debate the pros and cons of the Chretien government. That is the role of pundits and time. Do you think we should have joined the USA in the invasion and subjugation of Iraq? Your third sentence contradicts the first entirely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 I am not going to debate the pros and cons of the Chretien government. That is the role of pundits and time. Do you think we should have joined the USA in the invasion and subjugation of Iraq? What role are you referring to? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 The USA is moving to lift sanctions, swapped prisoners and is moving to (somewhat) normalize relations with Iran. Canada seems to be following the U.S. lead. Please inform us... How is Canada following Iran and not the USA? Obama is...the next President is unlikely to be as friendly towards Islam. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Guy Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 Every government is responsible for the things that make Canada better and those which do not do so. The Chretien government is responsible for many things - most of which we could spend days on debating. Chretien, under pressure from George Bush to join the USA invasion of Iraq and "liberating" the population said "No thanks". Do you folks think that he was wrong and we should have joined the USA on that expedition? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 Every government is responsible for the things that make Canada better and those which do not do so. The Chretien government is responsible for many things - most of which we could spend days on debating. Chretien, under pressure from George Bush to join the USA invasion of Iraq and "liberating" the population said "No thanks". Do you folks think that he was wrong and we should have joined the USA on that expedition? I think Chrétien already had us busy in his expedition in Afghanistan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 Obama is...the next President is unlikely to be as friendly towards Islam. So how is Canada following Iran and not our ally? That was your claim. Please explain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 I think Chrétien already had us busy in his expedition in Afghanistan. At least he had the ability to do that legally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Guy Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 I think Chrétien already had us busy in his expedition in Afghanistan. I am not trying to diss you or argue with you but I honestly wondered if you thought that staying out of Iraq was a good idea. If you do, then why do you want to see Canada in Iraq and Syria now fighting ISIS (which I understand is made of the remnants of the Iraq Republican Guard)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 Chretien, under pressure from George Bush to join the USA invasion of Iraq and "liberating" the population said "No thanks". Do you folks think that he was wrong and we should have joined the USA on that expedition? Australia did. They suffered a lot fewer casualties than we did by taking door number two and going into Afghanistan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 At least he had the ability to do that legally. Iraq was in breach of multiple UN resolutions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 Iraq was in breach of multiple UN resolutions. Good thing they went in there and cleaned that place up. They certainly got rid of the threat in Iraq, eh? MISSION ACCOMPLISHED! oh... excpet for that little ISIS issue.... Shady, where is the cite I asked for about dead service members and helicoptors? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 I'm pretty sure if a poll was taken about Canada's role in the ME, Canadians would probably want Canada of the military part and into helping the people's welfare. The ME war won't crumble if Canada pulls it jets and if there's a trust broken its only in the eyes of people who want a new PM or makes money on the war. What is Canada's interest there? We have our own natural resources, so it can't be that. Any Canadian who feels Canadians should be there fighting,...go.. and join and kill as many of ISIS as u want. The American's have said its a 30 year war, can any country last that long financially? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 Australia did. They suffered a lot fewer casualties than we did by taking door number two and going into Afghanistan. So is they what we do? Go where it's less dangerous? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 Please provide a cite for Canadian service members dying from outdated helicoptors since that time. Here and more details on the crash summary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.