watching&waiting Posted August 4, 2006 Report Posted August 4, 2006 I really do not think that anyone really believes what polls say from day to day especially between elections. I do believe that Canada always had a role to play in Afghanistan and I am glad we are playing our role there. Yes there are many other countries that also play roles in that and that bshould make Canadians proud. Those who are always belly aching about it should go find some country that suits them better. They are the underside if Canada's belly that we polite Canadians try to hide. Much like the way we hide Liberals and are always apologizing for their behaviour in advance of anything. The Liberals will never see a win in this country for decades and that is just how it should be. Especially after being proven that they were theives and liars on the grandest scale ever known to Canadians. Hell even the Liberal party leaders hopefuls do not know how to approach things so they are having so many leaders from so many different ways in hope that one may be right. So far I see no leadership skill in any of those running. In 2007 they will still not be ready for an election because the country is doing quite well without them that people are not going to want to rock the boat. Even if an election was called they would not win and the PC would probably get the majority they seek. So yes 2007 will be a good year for the PC and the People of Canada. Quote
jdobbin Posted August 4, 2006 Report Posted August 4, 2006 I really do not think that anyone really believes what polls say from day to day especially between elections. I do believe that Canada always had a role to play in Afghanistan and I am glad we are playing our role there. Yes there are many other countries that also play roles in that and that bshould make Canadians proud. Those who are always belly aching about it should go find some country that suits them better. They are the underside if Canada's belly that we polite Canadians try to hide. Much like the way we hide Liberals and are always apologizing for their behaviour in advance of anything. The Liberals will never see a win in this country for decades and that is just how it should be. Especially after being proven that they were theives and liars on the grandest scale ever known to Canadians. Hell even the Liberal party leaders hopefuls do not know how to approach things so they are having so many leaders from so many different ways in hope that one may be right. So far I see no leadership skill in any of those running. In 2007 they will still not be ready for an election because the country is doing quite well without them that people are not going to want to rock the boat. Even if an election was called they would not win and the PC would probably get the majority they seek. So yes 2007 will be a good year for the PC and the People of Canada. The Conservatives ignore the polls at their peril. Canadians might not so much vote for the Liberals as vore for the Tories. Right now, they are losing support in provinces they need for their majority. Quote
Leafless Posted August 4, 2006 Report Posted August 4, 2006 This is good news for Canada. It's good for the world also. Canada will return to being the voice of peace and reason. The environment - in need of particular attention at the moment - will also benifit. This only PROVES Canada is politically ungovernable and the fact some Canadians never did know who their allies are. Quote
Leafless Posted August 4, 2006 Report Posted August 4, 2006 This is good news for Canada. It's good for the world also. Canada will return to being the voice of peace and reason. The environment - in need of particular attention at the moment - will also benifit. This only PROVES Canada is politically ungovernable and the fact some Canadians never did know who their allies are. Quote
Argus Posted August 4, 2006 Report Posted August 4, 2006 Women leaders in Canada have not done well - think Kim and the two female NDP leaders. Kim Campbell was already dealing with the Titantic. The captain and most of the crew had abandoned ship and she took it down to the bottom. As far as 2 female NDP leaders, they both came from the least populated areas of the country. I don't know that Findlay will win in the leadership. What she has done is win herself a place on the front bench. Campbell led a tory party which was ahead in the polls before her numerous election blunders. As for the NDP and their two female leaders - well, that's nothing more than an indication of the failures of affirmative action. Neither female leader was elected because they were any good, but because the leadership decided they must have a female leader, one with the right credentials, of course. I believe one was from the far north, which appealed to their sense of environmental awareness, for example. Neither would have stood a chance if they'd been male. They were both weak and shallow - mind you, that pretty much describes the entire NDP caucus at any given time. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted August 4, 2006 Report Posted August 4, 2006 This is good news for Canada? This is terrible news for Canada. Supporting a leaderless party that unabashedly stole millions from the taxpayers shows just how stupid people are. It might be preferable to some Canadians than a party committted to staying in Afghanistan long term when the situation might worsen substantially. So you're saying when the going gets tough the Canadians get going? Nice national motto. "Canada is here to protect you! Well, unless it gets dangerous, then we're getting the hell out of here and tough luck for you." Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
jdobbin Posted August 4, 2006 Report Posted August 4, 2006 So you're saying when the going gets tough the Canadians get going? Nice national motto. "Canada is here to protect you! Well, unless it gets dangerous, then we're getting the hell out of here and tough luck for you." I'm saying the insurgency might not be defeated so long as Pakistan cannot or will not stop the al Qaeda and Taliban from taking shelter across the border. I also think that the drug industry is something even ordinary Afghans are involved in because they are dirt poor. I think some Canadians are well aware of this and have been hesitant to give a blank check to the government to solve problems beyond their mission parameters. We may be the fuel of the insurgencies fire. The strategy could be to leave, maintain a smaller NATO force nearby and strike any attempt to set up future al Qaeda training camps. We let the Afghan people find solutions themselves. Hardly cut and run but better than villagers shooting at us because the Taliban pays better. Quote
Hicksey Posted August 4, 2006 Report Posted August 4, 2006 Apparently broken promises and embezzlement are actions that promote an image of sanity. How laughable is that? What's funny is that every time that Harper does something, the Liberals instantly rush to the nearest news outlet to call him a failure because he didn't do what they want. Well ... DUH! If we wanted him to do what the Liberals would have, we would have re-elected the Liberals. I'm not going to lie and even claim that Harper's been anything better than OK. Right now, with what little faith I have in our elected representatives (regardless of affiliation), I am willing to accept someone that can make it through a term without being caught with his hand in the till. Other than a couple of sacrificial lambs thrown to the wolves the Liberal Party IMOis largely the same scandalous party it was. We've already seen that leadership does not change that, so until they rebuild IMO the party isn't fit to hold any office -- including Mayor of Oungah, ON. (POP 10) Quote "If in passing, you never encounter anything that offends you, you are not living in a free society." - Rt. Hon. Kim Campbell - “In many respects, the government needs fewer rules, but rules that are consistently applied.” - Sheila Fraser, Former Auditor General.
Argus Posted August 4, 2006 Report Posted August 4, 2006 So you're saying when the going gets tough the Canadians get going? Nice national motto. "Canada is here to protect you! Well, unless it gets dangerous, then we're getting the hell out of here and tough luck for you." I'm saying the insurgency might not be defeated so long as Pakistan cannot or will not stop the al Qaeda and Taliban from taking shelter across the border. I also think that the drug industry is something even ordinary Afghans are involved in because they are dirt poor. I think some Canadians are well aware of this and have been hesitant to give a blank check to the government to solve problems beyond their mission parameters The mission parameters are that we help provide security while the UN helps set up an Afghan national government and aid in the expansion of its control over the country. It is not our mission to "defeat" the Taliban et al, but to help secure the area and provide breathing space while the new democratically elected government and army grow into power. The strategy could be to leave, maintain a smaller NATO force nearby and strike any attempt to set up future al Qaeda training camps. We let the Afghan people find solutions themselves. Let them "find solutions themselves" seems to translate into cutting and running, and letting them cope with the lunatic fringe headquartered across the border themselves. The only way a national government is going to come into being is either after another massive series of civil wars, where, presuming anyone wins, that party will control Afghanistan, or by securing the country until the present government's control can be expanded into all areas. I would think the latter approach more sensible, and certainly better for the locals. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted August 4, 2006 Report Posted August 4, 2006 What's funny is that every time that Harper does something, the Liberals instantly rush to the nearest news outlet to call him a failure because he didn't do what they want. Well ... DUH! If we wanted him to do what the Liberals would have, we would have re-elected the Liberals.I'm not going to lie and even claim that Harper's been anything better than OK. Right now, with what little faith I have in our elected representatives (regardless of affiliation), I am willing to accept someone that can make it through a term without being caught with his hand in the till. Other than a couple of sacrificial lambs thrown to the wolves the Liberal Party IMOis largely the same scandalous party it was. We've already seen that leadership does not change that, so until they rebuild IMO the party isn't fit to hold any office -- including Mayor of Oungah, ON. (POP 10) I think it says a lot about the credibility of the Liberals on Afghanistan, indeed on military and defence matters, that their defence critic is none other than Ujjal Dosanjh, a slimy, grasping political weasel and turncoat who has never had the slightest interest in the military and knows absolutely nothing about it. Today, the little toad is in the paper condemning the tories for "militarizing our role in Afghanistan". If it weren't so sad it would be laughable. This guy, under party leader Bill (where can I find a good boy prostitute) Graham, who continues to squeal about Canada's noble "honest broker" role being threatened, and Dan Mcteague, and his continuing snivelling about Israel and the Lebanon evacuation are all pretty blatant indications of why this is not a party anyone wants representing Canada on international interests. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
jdobbin Posted August 4, 2006 Report Posted August 4, 2006 Securing the area has meant defeating the Taliban. That is what General Fraser said last night when he was being interviewed about the deaths of the four soldiers. Reagan cut and run from Lebanon after having Marines mombed in Beirut. His people told him that the battle couldn't be won by U.S. troops and it wasn't. Harper can continue the present policy and be defeated or he can be like Reagan and let the people of Afghanistan work out their own problems. Quote
jdobbin Posted August 4, 2006 Report Posted August 4, 2006 I think it says a lot about the credibility of the Liberals on Afghanistan, indeed on military and defence matters, that their defence critic is none other than Ujjal Dosanjh, a slimy, grasping political weasel and turncoat who has never had the slightest interest in the military and knows absolutely nothing about it. Today, the little toad is in the paper condemning the tories for "militarizing our role in Afghanistan". If it weren't so sad it would be laughable. This guy, under party leader Bill (where can I find a good boy prostitute) Graham, who continues to squeal about Canada's noble "honest broker" role being threatened, and Dan Mcteague, and his continuing snivelling about Israel and the Lebanon evacuation are all pretty blatant indications of why this is not a party anyone wants representing Canada on international interests. The comments on Graham are uncalled for and raise the potential of a lawsuit. You should retract them. Quote
Kiraly Posted August 4, 2006 Report Posted August 4, 2006 Doubtful Graham would want to draw attention to that story. Quote
gc1765 Posted August 4, 2006 Report Posted August 4, 2006 Other than a couple of sacrificial lambs thrown to the wolves the Liberal Party IMOis largely the same scandalous party it was. Who are these scandalous members of the Liberal Party you are referring to? Do you have any evidence that current members of the Liberal caucus were involved in scandals? There are (I believe) 102 Liberal members of parliament, how many of them do you think are corrupt? Quote Almost three thousand people died needlessly and tragically at the World Trade Center on September 11; ten thousand Africans die needlessly and tragically every single day-and have died every single day since September 11-of AIDS, TB, and malaria. We need to keep September 11 in perspective, especially because the ten thousand daily deaths are preventable. - Jeffrey Sachs (from his book "The End of Poverty")
Argus Posted August 4, 2006 Report Posted August 4, 2006 Securing the area has meant defeating the Taliban. That is what General Fraser said last night when he was being interviewed about the deaths of the four soldiers.Reagan cut and run from Lebanon after having Marines mombed in Beirut. His people told him that the battle couldn't be won by U.S. troops and it wasn't. The US was far more sensitive to casualties then. They cut and run from Somalia too, and in both cases they did not see their vital intersts to be at stake enough to risk political damage. Harper can continue the present policy and be defeated or he can be like Reagan and let the people of Afghanistan work out their own problems. In other words - run away. Let the Belgians and Danes and British and French and Turks and Italians and Germans and Dutch and British and the others of our allies stay there and cover for us while we run away from the big bad Taliban? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
jbg Posted August 4, 2006 Report Posted August 4, 2006 Remember, the 1983 attack was far closer in terms of historical memory to Viet Nam. The politics have been upended by the successful (though incomplete) 1991 Gulf War and by the September 11 attacks. 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).
jbg Posted August 5, 2006 Report Posted August 5, 2006 Other than a couple of sacrificial lambs thrown to the wolves the Liberal Party IMOis largely the same scandalous party it was. Who are these scandalous members of the Liberal Party you are referring to? Do you have any evidence that current members of the Liberal caucus were involved in scandals? There are (I believe) 102 Liberal members of parliament, how many of them do you think are corrupt? Yet they were silent when all of that was going on. I mean, weren't many of them in the various Chrétien/Martin cabinets? 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).
gc1765 Posted August 5, 2006 Report Posted August 5, 2006 Other than a couple of sacrificial lambs thrown to the wolves the Liberal Party IMOis largely the same scandalous party it was. Who are these scandalous members of the Liberal Party you are referring to? Do you have any evidence that current members of the Liberal caucus were involved in scandals? There are (I believe) 102 Liberal members of parliament, how many of them do you think are corrupt? Yet they were silent when all of that was going on. I mean, weren't many of them in the various Chrétien/Martin cabinets? Do you have any proof that Liberal cabinet ministers (aside from Gagliano who is no longer an MP) were aware of the fact that contracts were awarded to liberal-friendly agencies, or any other scandals for that matter? Quote Almost three thousand people died needlessly and tragically at the World Trade Center on September 11; ten thousand Africans die needlessly and tragically every single day-and have died every single day since September 11-of AIDS, TB, and malaria. We need to keep September 11 in perspective, especially because the ten thousand daily deaths are preventable. - Jeffrey Sachs (from his book "The End of Poverty")
jdobbin Posted August 5, 2006 Report Posted August 5, 2006 The US was far more sensitive to casualties then. They cut and run from Somalia too, and in both cases they did not see their vital intersts to be at stake enough to risk political damage.In other words - run away. Let the Belgians and Danes and British and French and Turks and Italians and Germans and Dutch and British and the others of our allies stay there and cover for us while we run away from the big bad Taliban? Canada also left Somalia early. The problems there were insurmountable. They still are. The governments of most NATO countries are carefully evaluating the situation in Afghanistan. We have to ask what our vital interest is and if we are truly serving Afghanistan. I still think a rapid deployment force to crush any al Qaeda encampments that spring up may be more effective. The rest of the country we can leave to their tribal ways and offer help through regular aid channels. Quote
jdobbin Posted August 5, 2006 Report Posted August 5, 2006 Yet they were silent when all of that was going on. I mean, weren't many of them in the various Chrétien/Martin cabinets? Hardly silent. It was Martin who initiated the Gomery Inquiry. There are already new Liberals not associated with any of the last cabinets being nominated. A lot of the old war horses are gone. Quote
newbie Posted August 5, 2006 Report Posted August 5, 2006 The Liberals will never see a win in this country for decades and that is just how it should be. Especially after being proven that they were theives and liars on the grandest scale ever known to Canadians. Proof of MP involvement please?? Indictments, convictions?? Quote
Leafless Posted August 5, 2006 Report Posted August 5, 2006 Hardly silent. It was Martin who initiated the Gomery Inquiry. Here is the Top 10 List of Gomery Hypocrisy: http://www.canadafreepress.com/2005/wajsman110205.htm Quote
Hicksey Posted August 5, 2006 Report Posted August 5, 2006 Other than a couple of sacrificial lambs thrown to the wolves the Liberal Party IMOis largely the same scandalous party it was. Who are these scandalous members of the Liberal Party you are referring to? Do you have any evidence that current members of the Liberal caucus were involved in scandals? There are (I believe) 102 Liberal members of parliament, how many of them do you think are corrupt? To this day they refuse to name those of their membership that accepted the pilfered funds. Until they release those names we will never know. As such, until they decide to be honest and cleanse their house of these people I have to assume they all are dirty. Just name them and oust them, and they have a clean slate with new leadership. Quote "If in passing, you never encounter anything that offends you, you are not living in a free society." - Rt. Hon. Kim Campbell - “In many respects, the government needs fewer rules, but rules that are consistently applied.” - Sheila Fraser, Former Auditor General.
jdobbin Posted August 5, 2006 Report Posted August 5, 2006 Here is the Top 10 List of Gomery Hypocrisy: http://www.canadafreepress.com/2005/wajsman110205.htm If Harper feels the Liberals got off lightly, he can call an inquiry into Gomery. If not, the issues fought in the next election will probably be on today's issues. Quote
gc1765 Posted August 5, 2006 Report Posted August 5, 2006 To this day they refuse to name those of their membership that accepted the pilfered funds. Until they release those names we will never know. As such, until they decide to be honest and cleanse their house of these people I have to assume they all are dirty. Just name them and oust them, and they have a clean slate with new leadership. According to the Gomery Inquiry, it was people like Corbeil, Renaud, Corriveau and Morselli who accepted the cash donations. The Liberal MPs wouldn't necessarily have known where the money came from. Do you have any evidence to suggest that unnamed MPs in Quebec were aware that they were accepting illicit money? Quote Almost three thousand people died needlessly and tragically at the World Trade Center on September 11; ten thousand Africans die needlessly and tragically every single day-and have died every single day since September 11-of AIDS, TB, and malaria. We need to keep September 11 in perspective, especially because the ten thousand daily deaths are preventable. - Jeffrey Sachs (from his book "The End of Poverty")
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.