watching&waiting Posted August 2, 2006 Report Share Posted August 2, 2006 Canada should onlysupply troops for peace keeping in Lebanon and first and foremost they should ask themselves if there truly is a want for peace. There must be a certain urgency for peace from both sides not just a break in the war to rearm themselves. Their needs to be a willingness for both sides to be able to talk and listen equally on the issues that would form the peace. Then and only then should Canada agree to send troops. If these things are not in place then no we should stay clear of any involvement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted August 2, 2006 Author Report Share Posted August 2, 2006 Your pretty quick to pull that trigger on harper, perhaps you can explain what the liberals had done in thier 12 years in office , or perhaps the NDP take on what thier policies are in regards to this matter. But if i had to compare the parties i'd have to say harper is way ahead of anthting the liberals did or want to do. You just said that the government wasn't doing anything. That came to my question of whether you had evidence that Harper was not acting. The government is now run by Harper. What else was I to think? It seems to me that the Liberals supported action against further terrorism from Afghanistan and sent troops there to ensure it. They didn't send troops to Iraq which the the Conservatives supported because they didn't believe that Iraq posed the same immediate threat that Afghanistan did. But that is now in the past. As I said, my original question was did you have evidence that Harper was soft on terrorism. You seemed to indicate that you were unhappy with the present policies. For most people, that is a reason why they decide to defeat a government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted August 2, 2006 Author Report Share Posted August 2, 2006 Canada should onlysupply troops for peace keeping in Lebanon and first and foremost they should ask themselves if there truly is a want for peace. There must be a certain urgency for peace from both sides not just a break in the war to rearm themselves. Their needs to be a willingness for both sides to be able to talk and listen equally on the issues that would form the peace. Then and only then should Canada agree to send troops. If these things are not in place then no we should stay clear of any involvement. Do you think that both sides want peace and wouldn't attack the preacekeepers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watching&waiting Posted August 2, 2006 Report Share Posted August 2, 2006 I believe that if the two sides truly want peace then they should be willing to sit and talk about it reasonably. That to me would be the only way I would say for our troop to go into that situation. Yes I know that there will be terroist cells always trying to break that peace, but if both main parties agree to agressively go after these cells and curtail them, then maybe we can see a lasting peace that will stand the test of time. I see where the Hezbolla has engrained itself into the fabric of the Lebanese people, where they hide and claim foul at any attempt to oust them. It is that very thing that must be beaten into submission before any serious talk of peace can exist. It will actually take the people themselves to cast out these so called freedom fighters, as they are the ones causing the lack of freedom. To me it is time for the Lebanese people to show they really want all this to end. When that comes to past, then there will be lasting peace in their countries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted August 2, 2006 Author Report Share Posted August 2, 2006 I believe that if the two sides truly want peace then they should be willing to sit and talk about it reasonably. That to me would be the only way I would say for our troop to go into that situation. Yes I know that there will be terroist cells always trying to break that peace, but if both main parties agree to agressively go after these cells and curtail them, then maybe we can see a lasting peace that will stand the test of time. I see where the Hezbolla has engrained itself into the fabric of the Lebanese people, where they hide and claim foul at any attempt to oust them. It is that very thing that must be beaten into submission before any serious talk of peace can exist. It will actually take the people themselves to cast out these so called freedom fighters, as they are the ones causing the lack of freedom. To me it is time for the Lebanese people to show they really want all this to end. When that comes to past, then there will be lasting peace in their countries. I think the Labanese made peace with themselves which basically meant let each side do what they want in a certain part of the country. That was enough for Hezbollah to being arming itself for a fight because they know the Lebanese army wasn't going to go to war with it. I think at some point that the Isrealis will want a ceasefire but Hezbollah won't. So whatever troops are there will be conflict with Hezbollah. I can't think of who would be brave enough to step in for what could be years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted August 2, 2006 Report Share Posted August 2, 2006 Don't know that we have troops to spare but if Canada is asked in New New York to supply troops to go to Lebanon, should the answer be yes or no?http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14070624/from/RS.2/ It will not be asked and no one has even remotely hinted they will be asked. NATO is quite aware Canada has no troops to offer. Quote I come to you to hell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted August 3, 2006 Report Share Posted August 3, 2006 I think most have forgot that Canada has joined the WAR on terror, last time i checked Canada has declared the Hezbullah a terrorist organization. It's not a big deal, but it should be checked into. I agree that Canada needs to clean out it's own backyard, that means shipping out all these terrorist bastards, and thier fund raising cronies back to where they came from. Declaring Hezbollah a terrorist organization doesn't mean we should be sitting in Lebanon waiting for suicide bombers to nail us. Even the Americans aren't dumb enough to drawn back into that country. That's why the UN is useless. If peace is to be made, they need to attack belligerants if they violate a truce, not merely provide a shield making it impossible for the civilized nation of the area to attack Hezbollah without nailing UN troops as well as civilians. A UN force that doesn't have the charter to fight to defeat violators of the UN charter is worse than useless; it's a shield for wrongdoing and murder. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted August 3, 2006 Report Share Posted August 3, 2006 My Webpage So to answer your question ? Is Canada letting them off the hook , i would answer yes, there is very little being done to say they are making it difficult for terrorist to operate in Canada. So then Harper has failed and it gives one more reason for people to vote him out of office He deserves a majority, clearly. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted August 3, 2006 Author Report Share Posted August 3, 2006 He deserves a majority, clearly. And yet his popularity in areas where he needs more seats has sunk back to the election day numbers. Minority numbers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted August 3, 2006 Author Report Share Posted August 3, 2006 That's why the UN is useless. If peace is to be made, they need to attack belligerants if they violate a truce, not merely provide a shield making it impossible for the civilized nation of the area to attack Hezbollah without nailing UN troops as well as civilians. A UN force that doesn't have the charter to fight to defeat violators of the UN charter is worse than useless; it's a shield for wrongdoing and murder. Which is why the only force capable of quelling what is happening in Lebanon is American forces. The U.S. should send the 15,000 to 30,000 or more troops needed there and be prepared to stay for at least several years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted August 3, 2006 Report Share Posted August 3, 2006 That's why the UN is useless. If peace is to be made, they need to attack belligerants if they violate a truce, not merely provide a shield making it impossible for the civilized nation of the area to attack Hezbollah without nailing UN troops as well as civilians. A UN force that doesn't have the charter to fight to defeat violators of the UN charter is worse than useless; it's a shield for wrongdoing and murder. Which is why the only force capable of quelling what is happening in Lebanon is American forces. The U.S. should send the 15,000 to 30,000 or more troops needed there and be prepared to stay for at least several years. Israel is quite well up to the job. Thank you. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted August 3, 2006 Author Report Share Posted August 3, 2006 Israel is quite well up to the job. Thank you. Israel has asked for a force that that will oversee the ceasefire. The U.S. has that force. The U.N. and every other nation of the world don't have the authority to what the U.S. can do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.