Jack Layton says ....

Jack Layton says ....

...Canadians don't support involvement in Afghan offensive

TORONTO (CP) - As Canadian troops prepare to do battle with insurgents in the mountains of southern Afghanistan, NDP Leader Jack Layton says the public is not in favour of going on the offensive in that war-torn country.

He pledged Tuesday to use his party's influence in the next Parliament to maintain the Canadian military's good-guy peacekeeper role around the world.

"Our view is that Canadians support the peacekeeping role," he said following a speech to the Toronto Board of Trade.

"But what Canadians do not support, in my view, is a war-like offensive role in the context of Afghanistan."

Roughly 2,200 Canadian troops are set to deploy to the dangerous Kandahar region, where just two days ago the political director of the Canadian provincial reconstruction team was killed in a suicide bombing against a military convoy. Three soldiers were also injured, two of them critically.

One of the missions of the multinational brigade, which will be led by a Canadian general, is to take the fight to remnants of the Taliban regime and al-Qaida in remote villages and mountains.

As he did earlier in the election campaign, Layton called for a halt to future troop deployments and a Parliamentary debate about the changing role of the mission.

He said the country's top generals should appear before the Commons defence committee "to explain precisely what the mission is now and how they see it changing."

The evolving nature of Canada's commitment to the NATO-led force has been the subject for public discussion for the better part of a year, as Defence Minister Bill Graham has given a series of speeches, warning the public to expect casualties.

Layton has denied he's late in coming to the discussion, saying his party has been calling since last spring for a debate on the switch from peacekeeping in the Kabul area to all-out war in Kandahar.

"Canada's role is the peacekeeping role, the peacemaking role, nothing more than that," he said.

"Canadians feel helping the Afghanis build a democratic society is a role that is appropriate for Canadians to play."

A move to offensive operations is "a significant change in Canadian foreign policy" that needs to be agreed upon democratically, Layton said.

His call for discussion puts him in line with the feelings of some other NATO countries, most notably the Netherlands, which is expected to debate pulling its troops out of Afghanistan in the coming weeks.

However, the Liberals and the Conservatives are apparently determined to press ahead with the operation.

Prime Minister Paul Martin has said the peace and stability of Afghanistan depend on Canadians taking on dangerous missions.

If they win Monday's election, the Conservatives have also made it clear that they will not withdraw Canadian troops from the fight.

But the uncertain political dynamics of minority government might force them to at least examine the question, especially if Layton's NDP hold the balance of power.

Please register to see links

Re: Jack Layton says ....

Makes sense. Unlike America, I am sure Canadians would want to know we are at war so any casualties could be a bit easier to stomach.

Re: Jack Layton says ....

This is what makes me laugh about, we arenot in afganisthan to bring democracy to the afganies, we are there to please the americans, this is what really pisses me off.

We are simply on the wrong side. Shame on paul martin, and stephan harper, they are not better than george w bush.

RE: Jack Layton says ....

Layton seems somewhat clueless. Canada's role is..."peacemaking"...but somehow this does not mean going on the offensive? Please Jack, go visit Romeo Dalliare. Then come back to us when you have a clue.

Sometimes peaceKEEPING doesn't work; that's when you need peace MAKING, which, BY DEFINITION, is offensive.

Yet again, Jack is wandering around cluelessly.

Re: Jack Layton says ....

Don't you know why you are in Afghanistan?

RE: Jack Layton says ....

To stamp out Islamofacism?

Re: RE: Jack Layton says ....

Lol, probably somewhere in the 4th dimension yes, but not in reality.

RE: Jack Layton says ....

I don't understand... is he for our involvement in Afghanistan or agin it? Or only for it if there is absolutely no risk for our troops. If we believe in the cause the cost shouldn't matter.

RE: Jack Layton says ....

I don't see why we are there. I don't see how attacking a bunch of camels in a desert is going to change things here. We attack terrorists and then we let thousands of them into our country.

RE: Jack Layton says ....

"Thousands of them?"

Who is them? Terrorists? And what grounds can you claim them to be terrorists?

Re: Jack Layton says ....

Unless you have the balls to actually join the military and do something you comments make you look foolish......we are not there to help Bush or America, I can't stand people who are soo blinded by anti Americanism that they can't see the forest for the trees. I am happy Martin and Harper are supporting this mission. Layton is not coming out against this mission because it will be seen as disrespectful...however it does not take much imaginatinon to know what he really thinks.

And what do you mean we are on the wrong side!!! I wish we could ship some of the ungrateful people living in Canada over there for the Taliban to teach.....then we will see whos side they are on.... oh yea thats right, they will be beheaded.

Re: Jack Layton says ....

I'm not so big on Canada being in Afghanistan. I think a peace keeping roll is alright but as far as I know our guys are not wearing the blue helmets, of the UN. *shrugs* I might be wrong though.

Either way I'm pretty sketchy on Canada's involvement as we are making ourselves a target for terrorism.

Re: Jack Layton says ....

Seems to me some people are short-sighted.

And actually you could make the case we are pleasing America, because, to stay out of Iraq we sent the warships and the larger contingent of troops to Afghanistan. So until you know what you talk about, learn your facts.

And a Retired Colonel, yesterday on CBC said the exact same thing that I said in my first post.

Re: Jack Layton says ....

The facts are, you had troops in Afghanistan well before Iraq even started.

Re: Jack Layton says ....

Yes, but they were pulled out with a little firendly-fire incident they came home.

Then when the Iraq war started, Canada said it would send a number of warships to the Gulf and a number of troops to Kabal and later kandahar, to at the time in one newspaper, to keep troops out of Iraq but please Americans.

Re: Jack Layton says ....

How is a war on terrorism "pleasing" Americans?

Re: Jack Layton says ....

Because to some people in Canada, I'm not one of them with the Afghanistan case, but the war on terror is just a way for America to mop up for past mistakes, etc, etc.

Re: Jack Layton says ....

Afghanistan was a retaliatory strike for September 11th. What are the mistakes you speak of?

Re: Jack Layton says ....

Bin Laden.

Against the Russians his Mujhadeen forces were trained and financed by American resources. As well as other. When Hussein invaded Kuwait, he asked the Saudi's and AMericans if he could lead his Mujhadeen forces against Hussein.

However, he was denied.

Or that is what the people claim.

Re: Jack Layton says ....

Where do i say , i am anti american??I am very pro american for what they really stands for, i critize the bush adminsitration, the bush family , cause they are the one to blame for this whole mess, they arent getting rid of terrorism, they are making it, and multiplying the sources.They are the real terrorist.

would you like to be occupied by a foreign nation, who come to your land , and steal your ressources??




Tell me, what is the mission behind that?? don t tell me it is about democracy, cause i am not ignorant and stupid.



We are simply on the wrong side, we are occupying foreign country and we are killing peoples.