Jack Layton Says Surrender.....

[jbg]

Hmmm...Taliban Jack smells blood and political opportunity, but I think he has overplayed his hand in the wake of attempted bombings in Britain. He is putting all his chips on domestic reaction to body count:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/afghanis...ties/total.html

Thank G-d he'll never have the opportunity to be the leader of the party with the largest number of MP's.

[margrace]

Hmmm...Taliban Jack smells blood and political opportunity, but I think he has overplayed his hand in the wake of attempted bombings in Britain. He is putting all his chips on domestic reaction to body count:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/afghanis...ties/total.html

Thank G-d he'll never have the opportunity to be the leader of the party with the largest number of MP's.

Really remember Bob Rae what happened there.

[jbg]

Hmmm...Taliban Jack smells blood and political opportunity, but I think he has overplayed his hand in the wake of attempted bombings in Britain. He is putting all his chips on domestic reaction to body count:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/afghanis...ties/total.html

Thank G-d he'll never have the opportunity to be the leader of the party with the largest number of MP's.

Really remember Bob Rae what happened there.

Though I know that the NDP is the same party, provincially and federally, a ruling party has certain constraints that makes it more pragmatic. Realistically, Tal. Jack will never be in a PM role.

Even so, Rae had his drawbacks as Premier, IIRC.

[Rue]

I believe if you were not there now, doing what you do, I would not be here able to debate.

I worry that you guys are exposed. Had I known you were reading this I would not have said it out loud. I would have kept my big mouth shut.

Huh? If Canadian soldiers were not in Afghanistan you would not be able to debate? You really think the Taliban and AQ are able to take over Canada? That is pretty silly.

Andrew

I was really annoyed at the smugness in your response but then I said I better try respond without emotion. Canadian troops are not in Afgnanistan to prevent an invasion of Canada by a conventional army from Afghanistan. The fact that you refer to Taliban or AQ as if it is a conventional army that can't attack Canada shows your profound ignorance.

The terrorism, the Islamic fundamentalism as manifested by Al uaeda or by Taliban (who are in fact from many political cells) or by countless Muslim terrorist cells external to Aghhanistan and Iraq now engaging in terror in these countries or in Lebanon, or the West bank/Gaza does not come in the form of a conventional army fighting a conventional war.

Your naive assumption that if you simply stay in Canada and ignore it- it will never both you is unbelievable.

The terrorism, the ideology being manifesteddoes not stop at any border. It spreads. It spreads to countries all over the world by internet, radio, t.v., letters, through refugees, relatives, government operatives, and people-people like you and me who decide terror is the way to express free will.

No they won't wear a uniform and attack you all at once. They come one by one or in cells. They are civilians. They infiltrate respectable Mosques and community centres and they recruit through intimidation, black mail, or by exploiting someone's sense of loss or lack of pride.

The profile of a terrorist is not some uneducated oppressed serf simply defending his field, he is an educated Middle Class person who feels his priviliges are being challenged and then they go and recruit people who are less educated then them and use their privilege and education status to exploit them. Its easy to recruit people when they are illiterate and they believe because you read they should listen to you. Its easy to recruit young angry unemployed teens when their recruiter is a Muslim cleric or a doctor or an engineer or lawyer -someone they look up to.

These terrorists are not simply fighting because someone is in their country. Grow up. Get off your smug butt and read and find out what they believe in and how they want to achieve it. Until you do that, yes you will make smug comments like something being silly simply because you have no clue what it is someone is trying to tell you because you are making no effort to even find out what it is.

If Canadian troops were not in Afghanistan these same fundamentalist terrorists would move along to your neighbourhood and yes you would then not find them silly.You would be the first screaming and squeeling for protection. Go read what happened with the FLQ in Quebec to see how Canadians reacted to something far less intense then what is going on in Afghanistan.

Read what these terrorist cells stand for. Read their charters. Read their books. Read what they teach and promulgate to their followers in Mosques, schools, community centres, hospitals. Wipe that smugness off your face and read and try understand what you dismiss so easily as being an isolated problem that would simply go away if only those guys and their Tim Horton's coffee would come back home.

You are a naive fool to think you can ignore the global spread and interaction and connection of terrorism by simply ignoring it.

You are a fool to think it can not operate without having world wide organized criminal and business networks to fund itself.

You are a fool to think these terrorists are isolationists and simply want to be left alone.

Make an effort to try understand the ideology you simply assume is rational and contained and has a specific purpose. Your denial and attempt to treat terrorism as simply a rational, isolated act of self defense shows your lack of understanding and lack of research and if I were to come on this post and say its silly to think Taliban are dangerous and not part a worldwide phenomena-I would be embarassed.

Yah if I was a soldier someone as naive as you would make me puke. But then I say to those soldiers, people like you are as naive as you are precisely because you are so sheltered from war and conflict because of these soldiers. You are a sign of the affluence they protect but I say to them, don't worry. There are others of us who do get it.

We understand these fundamentalists are interested in spreading their beliefs world-wide. We get it and we know why you are there. We know you are the first line over there dying so we continue to live in peace able to write posts pretending terrorists only exist because of soldiers who go after them.

My sole concern at this point is the Canadian troops over there, are allowed to do what it takes. No more no less.

I do not mean to second guess the military tactics openly if I knew troops would be reading it.

I just hope you people over there are allowed to do what it takes and are not held back by politicians. When I referred to the mission as a suicide one, I meant it symbolicallyi n the sense if the politicians do not support you then that is what they would be doing to you guys. I did not mean it in a disrespectful way to suggest what you are doing is pointless. I just can't stand us doing something half-way. I just want the politicians and NATO to fully commit and not try play both sides of the fence and leave you guys in limbo and many I think the vast majority of Canadians agree with me. We do not war monger when we say we support you and want the best for you. We are proud of you because you represent us and you are our family.

Tell me. Does anyone think the person calling the notion terrorism is a world wide phenomena silly is willing never to drive in a car again and is willing to cut back his lifestyle to the point where we are not dependent on external energy?

Right. Yah. I will hold my breath. If there is one thing I have learned about smug people is that they usually speak from shelter and privileges they take for granted and would never give up and have no clue what others do to guarantee they can have them.

This is my last post on Afghanistan as I just don't feel right talking about it knowing someone reading what I say is in danger. I just don't want to say anything else other then my thoughts are with them and I thank them.

[margrace]

I believe if you were not there now, doing what you do, I would not be here able to debate.

I worry that you guys are exposed. Had I known you were reading this I would not have said it out loud. I would have kept my big mouth shut.

Huh? If Canadian soldiers were not in Afghanistan you would not be able to debate? You really think the Taliban and AQ are able to take over Canada? That is pretty silly.

Andrew

You just don't get it. Terrorists won't go away and no you won't be safe if you pretend they are OVER THERE and if you just stay away from them you will never hear form them.

Man talk about denial. If we simply ignore them they go away and everyone is happy.

If you can't understand the global implications of terrorism, maybe its time you try.

Oh yes we bury our head in the sand and look over there. We have lots of terrorists, here. They are the drug dealers, the organized crime groups and the ones who make and bring in illegal guns.

If you believe we only have to worry about someone in another country think again. These young men should be here in our police forces aye.

[madmax]

Cowards never join the military they join Peace Marches and Parades and vote NDP a few pretend they are liberals but I don't believe them.

There are lots of cowards and lots of people in the basement using their parents computers. I have no reason to believe you are not one of them. I can find cowards in any political forum and in any bar. I can find cowards in any political party. Many cowards hide behind Conservative Bravado. I brought that forth because you seem to believe that there are a finite amount of cowards and they are all in one party.

One of the biggest cowards in my recollection is named Adolph Hitler. He not only joined the military, he fought in WW1. He is still a coward and is a measure of weakness in mankind, when driven by fear.

I believe there are cowards on these forums. They are often accusatory, blaming, and weak in content when it comes to discussion.

I have noticed that some people here will apologize for unthoughtful comments. I consider this a position of strength, not cowardice, and these people as far as I can tell, belong to all politicial persuasions.

[AngusThermopyle]

You make some good points MadMax. I'm not sure if coward would be my choice of words to describe Hitler though. I'm not saying he wasn't, just that the word coward seems like it would fall far behind other descriptors that could be applied to this man.

What I fail to understand is why some here seem to take pride in being cowardly. Have we become so jaded that we no longer see value in honour, self sacrifice and virtue. Has our society become so indolent that attempting to denigrate those who choose service to others is seen as a virtue? I'm not directing these questions at you Max, just musing as to why this malaise of character has become so accepted.

[capricorn]

People like Andrewl denigrate soldiers out of fear. They are petrified in the face of the growing threat of terrorism around the world. They feel powerless to stop it so they think anyone else and no country can. Indeed, they are probably powerless in ever facet of their pathetic lives.

Apart from using the mission's every minor setback and casualties for political opportunism, I think Jack Layton is one of those who live in fear of this threat. He too feels powerless to stop the scourge of terrorism so he impedes the brave and courageous of those who are trying. Among the brave I count some of our politicians and all of our troops.

I am reminded of the words: Courage is being afraid but going anyway.

[AngusThermopyle]

You know what? I think you may be onto something there capricorn. I remember first arriving in Yugo, I felt fear, so did many others amongst us, we went anyway, we had made a commitment to do so. Yugo was a real mess when it first blew up, it was a mess for years after as well. we lost guys over there, we took some serious casualties as well. Not a lot, but serious nonetheless.

I also saw atrocities that were beyond the pale, things I don't talk about because the average Canadian citizen just would not be able to relate to them in any way. Not to mention the fact that I just don't like to think about them.

I'm sure that if our other missions and losses had been made public there would have a hue and cry from the likes of Layton back then. The governments at the time liked to call casualties "accidents" back then though. That way no one could really get their backs up and start squealing about the brutal canadians.

In my opinion Layton is nothing more than a social parasite, willing to gain opportunism from the sacrifices of better people than himself.

[Rue]

"If you believe we only have to worry about someone in another country think again. These young men should be here in our police forces aye."

So following your assumptions and analysis;

1-one can not police and enforce domestic criminal laws if they send troops overseas to fight terrorists

2-police enforcement and military services compete for the same tax money

3-soldiers would be police officers if they weren't soldiers

4-domestic crime is unrelated to international terrorism.

You make a lot of assumptions. Here let me respond slowly;

1- yes its possible to enforce domestic criminal laws AND enagge in operations overseas to fight terrorism

2-police enforcement, and the decisions made as to how many police officers to hire and the expenditures for

military operations overseas do not come from the same taxes or for that matter same jurisdiction of governments

4-if soldiers were not in the armed services there is absolutely no guarantee anyone would hire them as police officers or

feel the need to

5-domestic crime and international terrorism are attached, they are not distinct and seperate

6-terrorism overseas is linked directly to domestic crime in Canada

7-no the world does not have neat designations where crime suddenly stops when it leaves the borders of

Canada

8-no the world does not have neat designations where terrorism suddenly stops outside the borders of

Afghganistan.

I will not discuss Afghanistan any more but I certainly will continue to challenge and address people like you who

line in a world where there are a hell of a lot of assumptions being made.

Capricorn and Angus I appreciate your words.

By the way for me having witnessed soldiers in action and terrorism I am not ashamed at all to say I am a coward and thank God for better men then me.

I think brave people in history have shown us they were "cowards" just ordinary people with the same fears as you and me, but they were called upon to do extra-ordinary things and they did.

I am in no position to call anyone a coward. I have seen people under the exact same condition act in entirely different ways. I thank God one could function but I do not belittle the other who could not.

As for myself, what I saw transcended emotions. It goes past that. There are no words. I can not explain it but I know it when I see it in a refugee's eyes, or in a soldier's eyes or in a veteran's eyes. They don't need to say anything. I just know. Its like you can see this fatigue in their eyes-this weeriness-something that just cuts through everything and defies words or feelings.

I judge no one but myself. All of us have feared and may fear. I can and do admire the men overseas. That I do not have to qualify or apologize for and they have nothing to prove to me. Just wearing the uniform is enough.

[AngusThermopyle]

I hear people saying we should "bring in the Army" quite a bit. As a former serving member I must state that I believe this is an absolute fallacy. The forces should never be used as police except in the most dire and severe situations. Martial law should only be invoked as a very very last resort.

Armies are not intended to be used as police. To use them as such leads to a very slippery totalitarian slope.

[runningdog]

I hear people saying we should "bring in the Army" quite a bit. As a former serving member I must state that I believe this is an absolute fallacy. The forces should never be used as police except in the most dire and severe situations. Martial law should only be invoked as a very very last resort.

Armies are not intended to be used as police. To use them as such leads to a very slippery totalitarian slope.

you hit the nail on the head

[ScottSA]

I am neither on the left or the right. I am a refugee from the political spectrum. I am not anti war or anti american, nor am i pro american or pro war. I believe in freedom from nation-states entirely. If anything at this moment in life i would consider myself neo-tribalist and anti-civilization. (both the western and eastern types). I can't possibly identify with any political party i have ever heard of, nor can i identify with any culture of the civilized world. When i vote i simply vote for the opposite of the incumbent. Just to make sure change is constant. I could care less what 'side' their on. Our entire paradigm has to change.

The real worlds problems will never be solved by armies and wars. They never have been. One war has always guaranteed the next. As is the modern history of afghanistan.

This kind of startrekism is I'm afraid the product of living in a fat, free, far-from-the-bone society, where these kinds of sophomoric and childish dreams can be indulged in. The romanticization of poverty and peasantry can only be understood by those who have never been within 1000 miles of grinding poverty. Not the "poverty" of Canadian welfare, in which one can only afford one tv (without cable) and an older car, but the grinding poverty of the third world, in which working in a sweatshop is a much sought-after step up in life from picking through a local dump, and where one can expect to someday sit and watch one's parents, and quite likely kids, die of a curable desease, because they can't afford the drugs to heal them. The romanticization of tribalism can only be understood by someone who has never been within a 1000 miles of a third world race riot or tribal warfare euphemistically refered to as "civil war." But I spose as long as people are willing to continue putting their lives on the line to keep your sorry ass safe, you'll continue to be able to indulge in make believe fantasies like this.

[ScottSA]

"If you believe we only have to worry about someone in another country think again. These young men should be here in our police forces aye."

Where did I say we only have to worry about terrorism? How could you possibly take what I said and invent that out of it?

More to the point if I follow your reasoning, we shouldn't fight terrorism because we need to fight domestic crime instead and you can't do both.

Brilliant analysis. Domestic crime and terrorism are not related.

Even more brilliant is your financial and political assumption that Canadian soldiers would be hireed as police officers if not in the armed forces.

Then again I doubt you see any absurdity in what you said. Aye.

If we're gonna get all Canuck here, the proper spelling is "eh."

[AngusThermopyle]

If we're gonna get all Canuck here, the proper spelling is "eh."

Now it makes sense!

I thought it was some obscure nautical way of making a point!

Could be because I was a Sailor at one time I guess.

[B. Max]

I hear people saying we should "bring in the Army" quite a bit. As a former serving member I must state that I believe this is an absolute fallacy. The forces should never be used as police except in the most dire and severe situations. Martial law should only be invoked as a very very last resort.

Armies are not intended to be used as police. To use them as such leads to a very slippery totalitarian slope.

What if the army comes the conclusion we are already on the slippery slope and removes the government.

[weaponeer]

I hear people saying we should "bring in the Army" quite a bit. As a former serving member I must state that I believe this is an absolute fallacy. The forces should never be used as police except in the most dire and severe situations. Martial law should only be invoked as a very very last resort.

Armies are not intended to be used as police. To use them as such leads to a very slippery totalitarian slope.

What if the army comes the conclusion we are already on the slippery slope and removes the government.

Good luck giving those orders to the troops. They'd laugh you out of the room....

[M.Dancer]

Why is an American so interested in seeing Canadian young men killed and why aren't your over? Those men over there are putting their actions where their beliefs are, why aren't you.

Putting aside the conventions against torturing the english language, who are you talking at?

[jbg]

Why is an American so interested in seeing Canadian young men killed and why aren't your over?

I don't know if you're referring to me, but the free world is in this together. Either we stand together or fall apart. If it's us or them, I choose us.

And as far as having a stake in the matter, I have two children, 11 and 10. So I have some skin in the game.

[Moxie]

What if the army comes the conclusion we are already on the slippery slope and removes the government.

Good luck giving those orders to the troops. They'd laugh you out of the room....

Indeed they would, I hope there will be tickets to the event. Nigh the end is near, nigh the end is near.