- Harper has Found His True Calling In Life???
submitted: 7:02am, PDT, 20 Apr.'10 The Toronto Star
Harper weighs a Congo role, Apr 20 2010
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/article/797891--harper-weighs-a-congo-role#article
It seems to me that Harper would be well advised to resolve Afghanistan first, before looking at some other region to get Canada and its good men and women in uniform mixed up in.
The vary statement "Kabila's government is weak and corrupt, the war is far from over, and the army has been accused of war crimes." ought to be enough to make any prudent Canadian leader back away, far away. But given Harper involvement in the Afghan Detainee Transfer scandal and ensuing cover-up, it is hard to imagine that his belligerent, right-wing extremist hawkish attitudes would cloud his better judgment to such a degree.
Also, if Harper's nature is so war-like, let him go over and take the position himself. Then all Canadians would be happy. We would get rid of Harper and Harper could play soldier.
While he's at it, he should take Peter MacKay with his as his 'batman', and how about taking Laurie Hawn and Gordon O'Connor as well, hay also, John Baird and Vic Toews, Stockwell Day. Wow, Canada's military 'Dream Team'. Now there's a mission I'm sure Canadians could support.
Hell! they could take over running the country for the Congolese - right-wing extremist dictatorship of a third world country, now talk about finding your true lot in life.
GW Bush went into Iran for the oil. Canada went into Afghanistan and remained there because of the Taliban threat and to help curtail global terrorism. This, and 9-11, gives meaning to the 146 Canadian men and women who have lost their lives in Afghanistan.
What possible meaning would it have for Canada to get involved with the Congo, even if it is simply lending a general to run the UN forces.
Lloyd MacILquham cicblog.com/comments.html
***
Submitted: 7:46 am, PDT, 20 Apr.'10 The Toronto Star
Could that be the answer, Harper wants a seat on the UN Security counsel so badly he is will to drag Canada and its reputation into the quagmire that is Congo.
It is unlikely that Canada would get on the Security Counsel without the support of the US and Britain.
Could this explain Hillary Clinton's and the British Foreign Secretary's highly unusual remarks about Canada not withdrawing from Afghanistan recently while in Canada and putting pressure on the Harper. If they will do that publicly, what are they doing behind closed doors
Yah, like, as if we will ever know the truth from Harper.
Let's wait and see if Harper really does pull our troops out of Afghanistan in 2011. I think Harper himself will be up to his eye balls in Afghan detainee transfer scandal and cover-up for quite some time though.
Lloyd MacILquham cicblog.com/comments.html
Harper weighs a Congo role, Apr 20 2010
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/article/797891--harper-weighs-a-congo-role#article
It seems to me that Harper would be well advised to resolve Afghanistan first, before looking at some other region to get Canada and its good men and women in uniform mixed up in.
The vary statement "Kabila's government is weak and corrupt, the war is far from over, and the army has been accused of war crimes." ought to be enough to make any prudent Canadian leader back away, far away. But given Harper involvement in the Afghan Detainee Transfer scandal and ensuing cover-up, it is hard to imagine that his belligerent, right-wing extremist hawkish attitudes would cloud his better judgment to such a degree.
Also, if Harper's nature is so war-like, let him go over and take the position himself. Then all Canadians would be happy. We would get rid of Harper and Harper could play soldier.
While he's at it, he should take Peter MacKay with his as his 'batman', and how about taking Laurie Hawn and Gordon O'Connor as well, hay also, John Baird and Vic Toews, Stockwell Day. Wow, Canada's military 'Dream Team'. Now there's a mission I'm sure Canadians could support.
Hell! they could take over running the country for the Congolese - right-wing extremist dictatorship of a third world country, now talk about finding your true lot in life.
GW Bush went into Iran for the oil. Canada went into Afghanistan and remained there because of the Taliban threat and to help curtail global terrorism. This, and 9-11, gives meaning to the 146 Canadian men and women who have lost their lives in Afghanistan.
What possible meaning would it have for Canada to get involved with the Congo, even if it is simply lending a general to run the UN forces.
Lloyd MacILquham cicblog.com/comments.html
***
Submitted: 7:46 am, PDT, 20 Apr.'10 The Toronto Star
Could that be the answer, Harper wants a seat on the UN Security counsel so badly he is will to drag Canada and its reputation into the quagmire that is Congo.
It is unlikely that Canada would get on the Security Counsel without the support of the US and Britain.
Could this explain Hillary Clinton's and the British Foreign Secretary's highly unusual remarks about Canada not withdrawing from Afghanistan recently while in Canada and putting pressure on the Harper. If they will do that publicly, what are they doing behind closed doors
Yah, like, as if we will ever know the truth from Harper.
Let's wait and see if Harper really does pull our troops out of Afghanistan in 2011. I think Harper himself will be up to his eye balls in Afghan detainee transfer scandal and cover-up for quite some time though.
Lloyd MacILquham cicblog.com/comments.html
posted by wlloydm at
7:52 AM
<< Home