Staying the course in Afghanistan

Hank C

Electoral Member
Jan 4, 2006
953
0
16
Calgary, AB
Canada won't 'cut and run' from Afghanistan: PM

OTTAWA — Canada won't "cut and run'' from Afghanistan, says Prime Minister Stephen Harper, and there's no need for a House of Commons debate that could potentially sap the morale of troops overseas.

Harper suggested Tuesday that a parliamentary vote on the mission would be a foregone conclusion anyway because his government supports it and he expects the Liberals, who made the original commitment, to also support it.

"Canadians don't cut and run at the first sign of trouble,'' he said. "And when we send troops into the field I expect Canadians to support those troops, in particular those who made that decision.''

He said launching a Commons debate could cast doubt on the deployment.

"It is not the intention of this government to start to question that mission when our troops are in danger,'' he said.

"To do so would not only be not in the best interests of Canada's international reputation... it would be a betrayal of the brave men and women we have in the field who are in danger.''

The former Liberal government signed on last year for a NATO mission in Afghanistan involving about 2,200 soldiers. The Canadians are stationed in the troubled south of the country commanding an international brigade charged with the double duty of reconstruction and hunting down insurgents.

Harper said Canadians should be reminded why the mission is important and why Canadian troops are there.

"I believe it is always important to explain a military mission. It is important to explain a commitment to the international community and the population of Afghanistan.''

After the Liberal government agreed to the mission last summer, then-defence minister Bill Graham made a series of speeches across the country, warning that it would be a dangerous assignment and that there would be casualties.

Those warnings seem to have gone unheeded, though, lost in the election static. A series of incidents in Afghanistan in recent days, in which soldiers have been killed and wounded, prompted renewed calls for a formal debate and parliamentary approval for the mission.

But Harper said the commitment is there and won't be changed.

"We will not be in any way backtracking from an obligation which has been undertaken.''

NATO has said that rebuilding Afghanistan could take a decade, a time line that has been endorsed by Canadian generals.

Harper said Canada hasn't made a 10-year commitment and the mission will be reassessed after two six-month rotations.

"The exact involvement of our commitment does change every year or so... and we'll be reviewing those obligations at the appropriate time in the future.''
 

FiveParadox

Governor General
Dec 20, 2005
5,875
43
48
Vancouver, BC
I see no reason for the Government of Canada to reject a take-note debate; to do so would not "betray" the Canadian Armed Forces; rather, it would reflect the commitment of Canada to continuously consider the options at our disposal to ensure their safety, and the best interests of Canada.

A debate is not tantamount to a withdrawal; motions to bind the House of Commons to any particular action cannot be made during an emergency or take-note debate (assuming my knowledge of parliamentary procedure is correct), nor does the Government of Canada have the right to prevent the House of Commons from conducting such a debate, if a request for such a discussion is brought to the attention of the Speaker of the House of Commons.
 

I think not

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 12, 2005
10,506
33
48
The Evil Empire
Am I? :lol: Well think about it, it's true. Canadian forces have been in Afghanistan for years, and NOW they want to debate it? Come on!
 

Hank C

Electoral Member
Jan 4, 2006
953
0
16
Calgary, AB
Watching news here in Canada I am going to make the prediction that the media is going to turn against the mission in Afghanistan pretty darn soon...taking public opinion with them. I already see it, and its not just the propagandist CBC...

its sad...I hope the troops are not aware of the recent turn led by the media, of the foolish public.
 

Hank C

Electoral Member
Jan 4, 2006
953
0
16
Calgary, AB
On the other hand its reassuring to hear the Conservative gov't making statements confirming their commitment to our troops, who have been put there by a former gov't.

....at least its much better than a typical liberal response, or should i say non-response.
 

FiveParadox

Governor General
Dec 20, 2005
5,875
43
48
Vancouver, BC
Hank C, I support the current mission in Afghanistan, just to be clear; however, I think that through refusing to let the House of Commons so much as discuss what's happening is an inappropriate approach for a Government to take.

I would remind the membership that the Government of Canada would not have the power to stop the House from debating the issue if, say, a Member of the New Democratic Party of Canada went directly to the Speaker of the House of Commons to request an emergency or a take-note debate.
 

JomZ

Electoral Member
Aug 18, 2005
273
0
16
Reentering the Fray at CC.net
I don’t think it’s that way, Hank,

From the sense of the media it seems still very mixed and relatively guarded in its coverage of the events in Afghanistan. I don’t get the feeling that the media is ready to take definite sides as of yet.

As long as the Media, the politicians, and the military give us no-bullshyte assessments of the situation, then the public will hopefully stand beside their military through the good times and the bad. This is what turned the Iraq Occupation public opinion around, too much B.S. the administration was doing and the media at first turned a blind eye, then went after it aggressively.
 

Hank C

Electoral Member
Jan 4, 2006
953
0
16
Calgary, AB
Re: RE: Staying the course in Afghanistan

JomZ said:
From the sense of the media it seems still very mixed and relatively guarded in its coverage of the events in Afghanistan. I don’t get the feeling that the media is ready to take definite sides as of yet.

As long as the Media, the politicians, and the military give us no-bullshyte assessments of the situation, then the public will hopefully stand beside their military through the good times and the bad. This is what turned the Iraq Occupation public opinion around, too much B.S. the administration was doing and the media at first turned a blind eye, then went after it aggressively.

yes it is guarded, and that might be part of the problem too. Your right about Iraq , if the public is not educated enough on the mission then it just gives ammo for conspiracy theories and detractors.

I still feel like the media is going to take a negative poistion on the war, if this has not already happend.......my opinion

Hank C, I support the current mission in Afghanistan, just to be clear; however, I think that through refusing to let the House of Commons so much as discuss what's happening is an inappropriate approach for a Government to take.

I am not against an open debate, just believe the cards are going to be unfairly stacked against the military effort whether its for the better or not......
 

FiveParadox

Governor General
Dec 20, 2005
5,875
43
48
Vancouver, BC
Hank C, I agree with the sentiment of what you are saying; which is why I would support a discussion of the issue in an emergency or take-note debate only, since under those conditions, no dilatory motions or motions to affect the military could be introduced.
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
847
113
69
Saint John, N.B.
I loved this!

I had to quote it here.

Most of the Woodstock generation eventually cleared the smoke from between their ears and came to the realization that flowers, candle vigils and protests don't really accomplish a hell of a lot when it comes to making the world a safer place. I said most - the remainder troop along behind Jack Layton. A Canadian Army padre, acknowledging the presence of an anti-war group at a Rememberance Day ceremony in Ottawa years ago, said it best: "There is little use promoting vegetarianism when the wolves around you are of a different opinion." Jack, have you hugged a Taliban today? Why not?

James MacMaster, North Glengarry, Ontario

Heh-heh.

Edited to say:

Ohe Yeah!

From Letters to the Editor in today's National Post.