Why didn't Canada join in an uneccessary war?

[gerryhatrick]

shouldn't Canada have rolled over and joined George like Tony did?

http://www.thecouriermail.news.com.au/comm...255E401,00.html

Why isn't Canada supporting the destruction of Iraq? What's WRONG with Canada? Jeez, Stephen Harper was SO RIGHT, we should have joined with the USA cause they're our "best friend in the whole wide world".

[Cameron]

Iraq is a dump that should have been cleaned up in '91. They just lied to get through the gates.

[gerryhatrick]

Iraq is a dump that should have been cleaned up in '91. They just lied to get through the gates.

Well, I think you win the award for the days most insightful post!

"Iraq is a dump"

23 million people.....living in a "dump" that needs "cleaning up". Call me crazy, but I think they were happy with thier dumpy homes before the USA levelled so many of them.

I'm curious, why was/is it a dump that required cleaning up? And how do you define "cleaned up"?

[GostHacked]

Iraq is a dump that should have been cleaned up in '91. They just lied to get through the gates.

Well, I think you win the award for the days most insightful post!

"Iraq is a dump"

23 million people.....living in a "dump" that needs "cleaning up". Call me crazy, but I think they were happy with thier dumpy homes before the USA levelled so many of them.

I'm curious, why was/is it a dump that required cleaning up? And how do you define "cleaned up"?

They needed to clean up all the oil so Haliburton could ship it back to the US. Come to think of it, how much money is put back into the US's corporation's coffers due to the war? GW just got another 108.B for war efforts. How much do companies like Haliburton rake in for their operations? It seems obvious that Iraq is not making enough money off the current rate of oil flow (much less than when Hussein was in charge) And you can count on alot of that oil profit going back into rebuilding Iraq. Too bad it is not enough.

[GostHacked]

Also, this coupled with the recent Mohammed cartoon will not turn out well.

[GostHacked]

This is way to good to leave alone

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/4675724.stm has an even better report. Seems like they wanted to pull off a 'Northwood' type deal.

And it says Mr Bush, told Mr Blair the US "was thinking of flying U2 reconnaissance aircraft with fighter cover over Iraq, painted in UN colours".

If the Iraqis Saddam fired on them, the would be in breach of UN resolutions, he suggested.

Dirty dirty dealings. But it was still the right decision right?

[geoffrey]

Absolutely it was the right decision. Saddam was a dictator, oppressed and killed his own people. These people need to be removed from power.

About the direct bash on Harper, Martin also supported going to war.

The Iraqis weren't all happy go lucky before the invasion, no matter what CBC tells you. No free media, death for speaking out against the government, and secret police forces assasinating people left right and centre.

How stupid can anyone be to actually assume life under a brutal dictator was a great experience?

In your cozy little western world, its easy to condemn liberators. But really, you have no idea how bad it was over there do you? Just because you can't stand the sight of a little bit of fighting that will create a huge improvement over a few years of one people's standard of living and human rights, and remove a huge destabilizing force in the middle east.

[Shady]

Call me crazy, but I think they were happy

Yeah, you're definitely crazy. They were about as happy with Saddam Hussein as the Jews were happy in their concentration camps. Please try and be serious about these kinds of issues. We can have an intelligent discussion without resorting to ridiculous comments.

[Black Dog]

Absolutely it was the right decision. Saddam was a dictator, oppressed and killed his own people. These people need to be removed from power.

We need to keep removing the dictators we formely supported.

In your cozy little western world, its easy to condemn liberators. But really, you have no idea how bad it was over there do you? Just because you can't stand the sight of a little bit of fighting that will create a huge improvement over a few years of one people's standard of living and human rights, and remove a huge destabilizing force in the middle east.

I don't think there's any evidence to show the new Iraq will eb a huge improvement in either living standards or human rights. Unless you expect great things from a semi-radical Islamic regime tied to Iran?

As for Saddam's Iraq being a huge destabalizing force in the region: it wasn't. But Iraq today most definietely is.

[GostHacked]

Absolutely it was the right decision. Saddam was a dictator, oppressed and killed his own people. These people need to be removed from power.

We need to keep removing the dictators we formely supported.

In your cozy little western world, its easy to condemn liberators. But really, you have no idea how bad it was over there do you? Just because you can't stand the sight of a little bit of fighting that will create a huge improvement over a few years of one people's standard of living and human rights, and remove a huge destabilizing force in the middle east.

I don't think there's any evidence to show the new Iraq will eb a huge improvement in either living standards or human rights. Unless you expect great things from a semi-radical Islamic regime tied to Iran?

As for Saddam's Iraq being a huge destabalizing force in the region: it wasn't. But Iraq today most definietely is.

Wait till they liberate Iran. That will go over like hot butter on popcorn.

[Shakeyhands]

Absolutely it was the right decision. Saddam was a dictator, oppressed and killed his own people. These people need to be removed from power.

About the direct bash on Harper, Martin also supported going to war.

The Iraqis weren't all happy go lucky before the invasion, no matter what CBC tells you. No free media, death for speaking out against the government, and secret police forces assasinating people left right and centre.

How stupid can anyone be to actually assume life under a brutal dictator was a great experience?

In your cozy little western world, its easy to condemn liberators. But really, you have no idea how bad it was over there do you? Just because you can't stand the sight of a little bit of fighting that will create a huge improvement over a few years of one people's standard of living and human rights, and remove a huge destabilizing force in the middle east.

Based on your post here, I wonder when "The Coalition of the Willing" will be paying a visit to Darfur or any of the other number of places that sound exactly like Iraq, but without the oil of course.

[tml12]

shouldn't Canada have rolled over and joined George like Tony did?

http://www.thecouriermail.news.com.au/comm...255E401,00.html

Why isn't Canada supporting the destruction of Iraq? What's WRONG with Canada? Jeez, Stephen Harper was SO RIGHT, we should have joined with the USA cause they're our "best friend in the whole wide world".

Gerry,

Your posts get more delusional as you go along. And I find your arrogance appalling.

As a moderate conservative, I don't doubt the U.S. went to war for oil. Iran used to supply the U.S. with oil, the Shah fell. Then it was the Saudi Royal Family...but the problem with them was they are starting to decline in their influence.

So the U.S. went in and now has the oil and hopefully soon a democratic government in the process. And Iraqis are getting a better life because of it. Now, France and Germany want in. I say: the heck with them.

Canada sent troops to Iraq anyway and dumped the Libs so I think we should be able to get some oil.

France still has Chirac so they can wait awhile until a more friendly government comes in.

Now that Merkel dumped the foamy Schroeder, hopefully she can help the U.S. in Iraq.

[Leafless]

tml12

You wrote- " Canada sent troops to Iraq anyway and dumped the Libs so I think we should be able to get some oil."

I don't know what Canadian troops your talking about as when President Bush was looking for allies Canada rejected that request.

Surely you are not making reference to the 31 Canadian exchange officers.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...s_030328?s_name =&no_ads

[newbie]

shouldn't Canada have rolled over and joined George like Tony did?

http://www.thecouriermail.news.com.au/comm...255E401,00.html

Why isn't Canada supporting the destruction of Iraq? What's WRONG with Canada? Jeez, Stephen Harper was SO RIGHT, we should have joined with the USA cause they're our "best friend in the whole wide world".

Gerry,

Your posts get more delusional as you go along. And I find your arrogance appalling.

Is is possible to make your point without personal attacks??

[GostHacked]

tml12

You wrote- " Canada sent troops to Iraq anyway and dumped the Libs so I think we should be able to get some oil."

I don't know what Canadian troops your talking about as when President Bush was looking for allies Canada rejected that request.

Surely you are not making reference to the 31 Canadian exchange officers.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...s_030328?s_name =&no_ads

There were come Canadian troops in Iraq, but they were on an exchange program between the Canadian and the US military. They were under US orders at that point, and the Canadian government also gave them the option to come home, knowing that Canada was not having a part of it.

[Slavik44]

Iraq is one of the biggest string of mistakes the western world has made in recent memory. The Iraq situation is a minefield of Political disaster. In 1991, we fumbled a perfect touchdown pass, an excellent oppurtunity to throw out a dictator more corrupt then Jean Chretien. Of course we passed up that oppurtunity as soon as it appeared that that the people of Iraq actually wanted us, were willing to fight for us. Now 12 years later we returned to give democracy, instead creating anarchy and driving the countryside into the control of the terrorists. Now after doing all that more and more pressure is being placed on politicians to pull the boys out. Pull the boys out, and hand the country over to Al Queda, personally I would have stuck with Hussien. U.K 57%, Poland 59%, Australia 53%, Denmark 48%, say pull them out. About 60% of Americans say pull the troops out. So what does Bush do? What does the man who said "Now that conflict has come, the only way to limit its duration is to apply decisive force. And I assure you, this will not be a campaign of half measures, and we will accept no outcome but victory." So what does bush do? no he doesn't pull troops out, he moves them out. This certainly isn't a war of half measures, no he must be giving it atleast 60% effort, and that is a pass. Unfortunately victory is not on the horizon, and the man who promised no outcome but victory looks to be accepting defeat with honour. I find it hard to believe Iraq has been cleaned up enough to be withdrawing troops. I didn't support bush starting this war, but if there is something I detest even more it is pulling the troops out before the Job is done. May I ask why the hell Canada should send troops to die for a dream, when the leaders of this war are to weak to achieve it. Why should Canada now send troops when every one else who started this shit is running away. They won't negotiate with terrorists, nope but they are more than happy to surrender. Canada shouldn't have been involved because right from the get go it was apparent that the leaders of this war were not willing to pay any price, beer any burden, or meet any hardship. In fact it seemed as though they thought they wouldn't meet any hardship at all. They were not prepared to fight and their primary reason for fighting was flawed and Canada made a wise decision in staying out of what will be known as nothing short of a disaster, a disater of the first magnitude.

[tml12]

tml12

You wrote- " Canada sent troops to Iraq anyway and dumped the Libs so I think we should be able to get some oil."

I don't know what Canadian troops your talking about as when President Bush was looking for allies Canada rejected that request.

Surely you are not making reference to the 31 Canadian exchange officers.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...s_030328?s_name =&no_ads

Leafless,

Your link does not work...there were Canadian troops fighting in Iraq along with the U.S.

[tml12]

shouldn't Canada have rolled over and joined George like Tony did?

http://www.thecouriermail.news.com.au/comm...255E401,00.html

Why isn't Canada supporting the destruction of Iraq? What's WRONG with Canada? Jeez, Stephen Harper was SO RIGHT, we should have joined with the USA cause they're our "best friend in the whole wide world".

Gerry,

Your posts get more delusional as you go along. And I find your arrogance appalling.

Is is possible to make your point without personal attacks??

I apologize...although I stand by the arrogance part of the comment...

[Leafless]

tml12

You wrote- " Your link does not work ...there were Canadians fighting in Iraq along with the U.S."

CTV moved it.

The link made reference to 31 Canadian exchange officers in Iraq but did not say if they were exposed to any fighting.

I have heard what you have said but could never verify it by way of media.

Are these 31 exchange officers the troops you are referring to?? Or do you have a link elaborating on troops other than these 31 officers?

What troops are you talking about?

[gerryhatrick]

About the direct bash on Harper, Martin also supported going to war.

You're either lying, or mistaken. Are you truely not aware that the oft-repeated quote used to support that is so out of context that calling it support for the war is absolutely a lie?

The Iraqis weren't all happy go lucky before the invasion, no matter what CBC tells you.

The CBC doesn't say that. Try to focus on the truth geoffrey.

Iraq is a bloody disaster. There is no security. The professionals are fleeing the country. No reconstruction can move forward.

Your claim that just becuse Saddam was opressive he needed to be removed is too narrow to take seriously

I'll be interested to see you come back on the Paul Martin claim. It will give a great deal of insight into you.

[gerryhatrick]

Gerry,

Your posts get more delusional as you go along. And I find your arrogance appalling.

Exactly what is "delusional"? You think the war was neccessary?

"As a moderate conservative" you believe the US went to war for oil. Therefore it was neccessary?

And since we're in the business of name-calling, are you too stupid to recognize this post - although truthful - is a response to the Why isn't Canada helping to promote democracy? Why isn't Canada in Iraq?" Montgomery Burns post?

What's your take on that? Do you think the US war was to "promote democracy" - as MBurns claims - or just for oil as you claim?

And Iraqis are getting a better life because of it. Now, France and Germany want in. I say: the heck with them.

You said something about "delusional"?

[tml12]

Gerry,

Your posts get more delusional as you go along. And I find your arrogance appalling.

Exactly what is "delusional"? You think the war was neccessary?

"As a moderate conservative" you believe the US went to war for oil. Therefore it was neccessary?

And since we're in the business of name-calling, are you too stupid to recognize this post - although truthful - is a response to the Why isn't Canada helping to promote democracy? Why isn't Canada in Iraq?" Montgomery Burns post?

What's your take on that? Do you think the US war was to "promote democracy" - as MBurns claims - or just for oil as you claim?

And Iraqis are getting a better life because of it. Now, France and Germany want in. I say: the heck with them.

You said something about "delusional"?

Not sure I follow you.

The democracy part was only part of it...democratize them and get their oil.

And yeah, France and Germany want to play the double-standard. I say, the heck with them.

Canada tried to do, but now the Conservatives are in power and Canada can and will play a larger role in the country.

[YankAbroad]

The whole war was based on a lie and a massive mistake. However, what's done is done. We're now there and have an obligation to leave it better than it is found.

That said, Canada, and every other country in the world who wants the situation resolved well, should participate in reconstructing the country.

[gerryhatrick]

The whole war was based on a lie and a massive mistake. However, what's done is done. We're now there and have an obligation to leave it better than it is found.

That said, Canada, and every other country in the world who wants the situation resolved well, should participate in reconstructing the country.

I agree with the US congressman Murtha. He comes off as an honest straight-shooting old soldier to me.

He says it's time for the US to get out because they've become the target...they're the reason the violence continues. He points out that the vast majority of the US enemy in Iraq are Iraqis and that a majority of Iraqis say attacks against US forces are legitimate.

Yes, it would be nice if the US could leave it better than it was when they marched in. I hope the fact that Saddam is gone will be enough to fulfill that argument and save face and allow them to get the hell out before it gets any worse.

BTW, reconstruction is all but over due to the lack of security. Contractors have fled the country. What reconstruction should Canada participate in? Training Iraqi forces? We're already doing that.

If the US wants to help that nation now they'll leave.

[tml12]

The whole war was based on a lie and a massive mistake. However, what's done is done. We're now there and have an obligation to leave it better than it is found.

That said, Canada, and every other country in the world who wants the situation resolved well, should participate in reconstructing the country.

I agree with the US congressman Murtha. He comes off as an honest straight-shooting old soldier to me.

He says it's time for the US to get out because they've become the target...they're the reason the violence continues. He points out that the vast majority of the US enemy in Iraq are Iraqis and that a majority of Iraqis say attacks against US forces are legitimate.

Yes, it would be nice if the US could leave it better than it was when they marched in. I hope the fact that Saddam is gone will be enough to fulfill that argument and save face and allow them to get the hell out before it gets any worse.

BTW, reconstruction is all but over due to the lack of security. Contractors have fled the country. What reconstruction should Canada participate in? Training Iraqi forces? We're already doing that.

If the US wants to help that nation now they'll leave.

That would be foolish, considering anarchy would result...