China warns Canada not to be 'naive' in thinking allies can help fix issues (updated with Trudeau's reply)

[Dougie93]

Just to understand the sequence of events, first Canada sticks its nose in by training shady Partisans in southern Mali, these partisans then go to war against the Tuareg, the Jihadists then exploit the chaos by launching an invasion from Libya, which then results in the full on French intervention with four battle groups called Operation Serval, once the French stabilized things, the African Union was brought in to be Peacekeepers, the French then lobbied for their EU allies to send troops to protect the Peacekeepers and they also pressed Canada for support, resulting in the Liberals sending as little as possible, which is the medical evacuation unit at Camp Castor in Gao, to include an Infantry company for force protection of the medics when they get off the Chinooks.

Once again Canada is a shady incompetent mischief making Neocolonialist corptocracy, which then fails to live up to the courage of its supposed convictions and tries to run off and hide when it blows up into a theater war.  

Edited July 6, 2019 by Dougie93

[Zeitgeist]

17 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

Just to understand the sequence of events, first Canada sticks its nose in by training shady Partisans in southern Mali, these partisans then go to war against the Tuareg, the Jihadists then exploit the chaos by launching an invasion from Libya, which then results in the full on French intervention with four battle groups called Operation Serval, once the French stabilized things, the African Union was brought in to be Peacekeepers, the French then lobbied for their EU allies to send troops to protect the Peacekeepers and they also pressed Canada for support, resulting in the Liberals sending as little as possible, which is the medical evacuation unit at Camp Castor in Gao, to include an Infantry company for force protection of the medics when they get off the Chinooks.

Once again Canada is a shady incompetent mischief making Neocolonialist corptocracy, which then fails to live up to the courage of its supposed convictions and tries to run off and hide when it blows up into a theater war.  

That’s a real stretch.  It’s difficult at best to anticipate that unfolding of events and Canada didn’t act alone.  I know you want Canada wrapped up in a version of Benghazi, but Canada was protecting minorities under threat as part of a UN peacekeeping force.  Canada has given a tremendous amount of aid to Mali, trying to protect the country from Jihadi extremism.  Nothing to do with Libya’s ambitions.  Anyway, Trudeau wanted the Canadians out.  Medical support is always good.  

Edited July 6, 2019 by Zeitgeist

[Zeitgeist]

18 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

A Canadian PM with majority government rule has far more unchecked power than a U.S. president, especially for domestic issues.   Trump has been stymied by many court rulings and injunctions, unlike Trudeau.   Canadian government is also less open and transparent for public records access.

Trudeau has one vote and must have caucus support.  He could try to whip caucus, but that can backfire.  In the end he’s beholden to the support of his party.  Also, all bills must go through the senate and can be challenged on constitutional grounds in the Supreme Court.  

[Dougie93]

56 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

That’s a real stretch.  It’s difficult at best to anticipate that unfolding of events and Canada didn’t act alone.  I know you want Canada wrapped up in a version of Benghazi, but Canada was protecting minorities under threat as part of a UN peacekeeping force.  Canada has given a tremendous amount of aid to Mali, trying to protect the country from Jihadi extremism.  Nothing to do with Libya’s ambitions.  Anyway, Trudeau wanted the Canadians out.  Medical support is always good.  

Oh Canada aspires to be a Neocolonial power broker, make no mistake, in the African Sahel it is on behalf of mining companies.

Canada just doesn't have the resolve to follow through on anything, soon as the going gets slightly tough, Canada runs off and hides once again in the American's petticoats.

You really have to be absurdly deluded to accept the rubric of Humanitarian Aid as being anything other than a front for imperialism

Edited July 6, 2019 by Dougie93

[Zeitgeist]

1 hour ago, Dougie93 said:

Oh Canada aspires to be a Neocolonial power broker, make no mistake, in the African Sahel it is on behalf of mining companies.

Canada just doesn't have the resolve to follow through on anything, soon as the going gets slightly tough, Canada runs off and hides once again in the American's petticoats.

You really have to be absurdly deluded to accept the rubric of Humanitarian Aid as being anything other than a front for imperialism

Bullshit.  Canada is no imperial power and its motives in Mali aren’t about mining.  You complain about Canada having its hands tied from using force to defend people in UN missions then complain when they’re empowered to use force.  The threat of Jihadi extremism in the region is real and you can bet your hero US prez would reserve the right to use force in similar circumstances.  

Edited July 6, 2019 by Zeitgeist

[Dougie93]

6 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Bullshit.  Canada is no imperial power and its motives in Mali aren’t about mining.  You complain about Canada having its hands tied from using force to defend people in UN missions then complain when they’re empowered to use force.  The threat of Jihadi extremism in the region is real and you can bet your hero US prez would reserve the right to use force in similar circumstances.  

I don't complain, I never wanted to escalate from UNPROFOR to IFOR, you're confusing me with Army Guy, I am with Curtis LeMay, don't intervene, let them fight,  ostensibly "humanitarian" intervention simply prolongs wars and gets more people killed in the process.

The Jihadists only got their opening to make their move from Libya, after Canada sowed chaos in Mali by picking sides and then training and equipping that side to make war on their ethnic tribal enemies, again, because in the African Sahel, corrupt, incompetent and dysfunctional Canada is entirely in the pocket of the mining companies.

Edited July 6, 2019 by Dougie93

[Zeitgeist]

I don’t think it was a matter of picking a side as much as preventing a bloodbath.  It’s about stabilizing instead of letting a dominant group run roughshod over a weaker group.  Basically without stabilization you create a refugee crisis.  Being on the ground in the country ensuring safety is a preventative measure; accepting refugees is disaster relief, actually worse because the home country is left to the wolves. 

[Dougie93]

9 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

I don’t think it was a matter of picking a side as much as preventing a bloodbath.  It’s about stabilizing instead of letting a dominant group run roughshod over a weaker group.  Basically without stabilization you create a refugee crisis.  Being on the ground in the country ensuring safety is a preventative measure; accepting refugees is disaster relief, actually worse because the home country is left to the wolves. 

Canada caused the bloodbath, the Tuareg were no threat to the Malians, it was Canada who trained and armed death squads to attack internal persons in Mali, once again, Canada is in fact an international pirate which is totally subservient to Neocolonial vested interests, that's all Canada is, a sycophant, a crony, a two nickel whore.

[Zeitgeist]

5 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Canada caused the bloodbath, the Tuareg were no threat to the Malians, it was Canada who trained and armed death squads to attack internal persons in Mali, once again, Canada is in fact an international pirate which is totally subservient to Neocolonial vested interests, that's all Canada is, a sycophant, a crony, a two nickel whore.

Evidence?

[Dougie93]

15 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

Evidence?

This is all open source, this is not classified secrets,  Canada's military proxies in Mali turned into  death squads and incited a civil war when these special forces trained troops started launching competing coup attempts, kidnapping, murder, torture,  the whole shebang, the claim of these military proxies being that the democratically elected government wasn't killing enough Tuareg's in the north, the Tuareg's being the repressed minority in Mali in revolt against the government, the only reason the Taureg were working with the Jihadists is because the Tuareg don't stand a chance otherwise against western trained and equipped death squads.

It's Neocolonialism, it's the same shit the Belgian's did in the Congo, divide and conquer, and the only reason for America, France and Canada to be in Mali,  is mining.

Contrary to the popular sentiments of oblivious Canadians living in la-la-land, Canada doesn't do UN Chapter 6 Peacekeeping anymore,  Canada only does Chapter 7 with NATO and the Americans, Chapter 7 is not Peacekeeping, Chapter 7 is war making.

This is the problem with CANSOFCOM, it's not that CANSOF itself is a bad idea, and they are outstanding soldiers, but when you have governance as corrupt, incompetent and dysfunctional as in Canada,  giving that government secret special forces is just going to lead to chaos, CANSOFCOM will be used, not for humanitarian missions, rather they will become the covert armed proxies of rapacious Canadian corporations like SNC Lavalin,Talisman Energy, Barrick Gold, etc.

Edited July 7, 2019 by Dougie93

[Zeitgeist]

1 hour ago, Dougie93 said:

This is all open source, this is not classified secrets,  Canada's military proxies in Mali turned into  death squads and incited a civil war when these special forces trained troops started launching competing coup attempts, kidnapping, murder, torture,  the whole shebang, the claim of these military proxies being that the democratically elected government wasn't killing enough Tuareg's in the north, the Tuareg's being the repressed minority in Mali in revolt against the government, the only reason the Taureg were working with the Jihadists is because the Tuareg don't stand a chance otherwise against western trained and equipped death squads.

It's Neocolonialism, it's the same shit the Belgian's did in the Congo, divide and conquer, and the only reason for America, France and Canada to be in Mali,  is mining.

Contrary to the popular sentiments of oblivious Canadians living in la-la-land, Canada doesn't do UN Chapter 6 Peacekeeping anymore,  Canada only does Chapter 7 with NATO and the Americans, Chapter 7 is not Peacekeeping, Chapter 7 is war making.

This is the problem with CANSOFCOM, it's not that CANSOF itself is a bad idea, and they are outstanding soldiers, but when you have governance as corrupt, incompetent and dysfunctional as in Canada,  giving that government secret special forces is just going to lead to chaos, CANSOFCOM will be used, not for humanitarian missions, rather they will become the covert armed proxies of rapacious Canadian corporations like SNC Lavalin,Talisman Energy, Barrick Gold, etc.

I disagree.  The force is used not to equip a side in a civil war but to prevent one group from committing genocide, the murder of a people kind.   That was the worry with the Serbs in Bosnia (and the Croats to a lesser degree), in Syria with the rebels (who ended up dying, fleeing, or sometimes capitulating to ISIS), and much could be said about Rwanda, where the UN force had strict rules that prevented any effective action to end the slaughter.  You’re right that working with a local side can backfire, as with the Mujahideen in Afghanistan.  

Once Mali began to look like a quagmire where it’s really hard to know who to help, Canada started winding it down.  Mining is always problematic.  The question is always about who benefits from the resource development and whether western companies are going too far in taking advantage of the country’s lower labour standards to exploit people and make money.  It’s a tricky business because the labour standards and standard of living are so much lower, so often any kind of resource development is valued by the local governments and populations.  It can be very positive or very negative.  It’s hard to comment on without specific knowledge of projects.  I will say that China is extremely active in Africa and is using extortive financing practices.  The IMF used to be criticized for this.  I don’t think it’s as easy as simply saying Canadian companies shouldn’t be involved in the developing world, because our companies are probably far from the worst.  Local companies and governments can be far worse.  

Edited July 7, 2019 by Zeitgeist

[Dougie93]

3 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

I disagree.  The force is used not to equip a side in a civil war but to prevent one group from committing genocide, the murder of a people kind.

Patently naive, as in Jugoslavia, there are no good guys, they are all committing genocide, in Sarajevo the Serbs were on top, in the Krajina the Croats were on top, in Kosovo NATO sided with the Kosovars, who promptly started taking revenge against the Serbs.

All Humanitarian Intervention is folly, Aegrescrit Medendo

[Dougie93]

The only rational choice for both America and Canada,  is to rule the waves as the British did, big navies, small armies, maintain freedom of navigation on the high seas, and otherwise never get out the boat unless you are going all the way.

 

[Zeitgeist]

6 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Patently naive, as in Jugoslavia, there are no good guys, they are all committing genocide, in Sarajevo the Serbs were on top, in the Krajina the Croats were on top, in Kosovo NATO sided with the Kosovars, who promptly started taking revenge against the Serbs.

All Humanitarian Intervention is folly, Aegrescrit Medendo

Most military action is and should be humanitarian.  Military is mainly there to prevent oppression.  That’s what it should be about when we talk about just wars.  It’s not about invading and taking people’s stuff.  

[Dougie93]

3 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Most military action is and should be humanitarian.  Military is mainly there to prevent oppression.  That’s what it should be about when we talk about just wars.  It’s not about invading and taking people’s stuff.  

Again, patently naive and doomed forever to be getting yourself into endless quagmires.   The purpose of the military is do mass murder on behalf of the British Crown, trying to use it as a humanitarian organization is the problem, but people like you will never learn, you're deluded beyond any rational discussion of the matter, you too live in la-la-land.

Edited July 7, 2019 by Dougie93

[Yzermandius19]

Just now, Zeitgeist said:

Most military action is and should be humanitarian.  Military is mainly there to prevent oppression.  That’s what it should be about when we talk about just wars.  It’s not about invading and taking people’s stuff.  

That's not what the military is for. Humanitarian Pixie Dust is a helluva drug.

[Zeitgeist]

Just now, Dougie93 said:

Again, patently naive and doomed forever to be getting yourself into endless quagmires.   The purpose of the military is do mass murder on behalf of the British Crown, trying to use it as a humanitarian organization is the problem, but people like you will never learn, you're deluded beyond any rational discussion of the matter, you too live in la-la-land.

No you lost your way, buddy.  Fuck the Crown or any other imperial bullshit.  The Crown derives her authority from the people, not the reverse.  You serve the people, not one woman drinking interminable teas. 

[Yzermandius19]

7 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

No you lost your way, buddy.  Fuck the Crown or any other imperial bullshit.  The Crown derives her authority from the people, not the reverse.  You serve the people, not one woman drinking interminable teas. 

The people derive any authority they have from The Crown, and Dougie pledge an oath to the Crown, not "We The People". 

You want it to be one way, but it's the other way. If you want to live in a republic that derives authority from "We The People", America is right next door bro.

 

Edited July 7, 2019 by Yzermandius19

[Zeitgeist]

1 minute ago, Yzermandius19 said:

The people derive any authority they have from The Crown, you want it to be one way, but it's the other way.

 

The Queen has next to zero authority in Canada except symbolically.  Crown lands are owned by the provincial and federal governments, period.  We could elect to be a republic tomorrow but choose not to.  We enjoy the traditions and connections to Britain.  When the Crown starts to become politically active there are problems. She is only there to ensure that the people aren’t oppressed by the government, which is there to represent the people.  

[Yzermandius19]

2 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

The Queen has next to zero authority in Canada except symbolically.  Crown lands are owned by the provincial and federal governments, period.  We could elect to be a republic tomorrow but choose not to.  We enjoy the traditions and connections to Britain.  When the Crown starts to become politically active there are problems. She is only there to ensure that the people aren’t oppressed by the government, which is there to represent the people.  

Parliament represents the people, but legally the country is the crown, you can hand wave that away as mere "symbolism" all you want, it doesn't change reality. If you want to live in a Republic, you're in the wrong country.

Edited July 7, 2019 by Yzermandius19

[Zeitgeist]

Just now, Yzermandius19 said:

Parliament represents the people, but legally the country is the crown, you can hand wave that away as mere "symbolism" all you want, it doesn't change reality.

The Queen has zero authority over Crown land in Canada.  

[Yzermandius19]

Just now, Zeitgeist said:

The Queen has zero authority over Crown land in Canada.  

She has all authority, it's called Crown land for a reason. Just because she chooses to delegate for the sake of pragmatism does not mean she has zero authority.

[Zeitgeist]

1 minute ago, Yzermandius19 said:

She has all authority, it's called Crown land for a reason. Just because she chooses to delegate for the sake of pragmatism does not mean she has zero authority.

Totally wrong.  At no point can the Monarch sell or choose to designate a particular use for this land.  That’s all under the authority of Canada’s parliaments.  Sure though, think whatever you like.  

[Yzermandius19]

2 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Totally wrong.  At no point can the Monarch sell or choose to designate a particular use for this land.  That’s all under the authority of Canada’s parliaments.  Sure though, think whatever you like.  

Where does the parliament get their authority again? Oh yeah, The Crown. The Crown delegating to Parliament does not mean she has no authority, she has all the authority.

Edited July 7, 2019 by Yzermandius19

[Zeitgeist]

44 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Where does the parliament get their authority again? Oh yeah, The Crown. The Crown delegating to Parliament does not mean she has no authority, she has all the authority.

Actually no.  The parliament could literally vote against any even symbolic involvement.  If it received Senate and court support, the GG could sign off on it.  Again, there’s no push to do that because there’s no need to do that.  The people call the shots.  The Queen neither creates any laws nor determines any tax expenditures at all.  We like the pageantry, Rideau Hall, changing of the guard, that kind of quaint cultural stuff because it invokes a rich cultural heritage.  Our institutions derived from it.  

Edited July 7, 2019 by Zeitgeist