Harper Warns Afghanistan of Dissent

[FiveParadox]

During their meeting yesterday, the Right Honourable Stephen Harper, P.C., M.P., the Member for Calgary Southeast and Prime Minister of Canada, warned His Excellency Hamid Karzai, the President of Afghanistan that, despite the fact that his Government of Canada wishes to continue the anti-terrorism and pro-democracy initiative in Afghanistan, the operation could be cut short by dissenting voices in the House of Commons.

As I said to the President, we have a parliamentary system and I don't control the majority and I don't control the other parties, but I would hope that if in the future we reduce our military presence, it's because we've achieved two of our objectives.

...

Our two principal military objectives are to fight terrorism, fight the forces of terror here, and to reduce the threat, and the second is to aid the Afghan forces in fighting it themselves.

Click here for the entire article, in English (a French translation is unavailable).

In response to the comments of Prime Minister Harper, Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition was incensed at his conduct. While strengthening his vow to remain in Afghanistan to the President, he simultaneously used a statement abroad to put pressure on the parties in Canada to step down from their demands for a debate on the issue in the House. The Liberal Party of Canada said that the Prime Minister should leave bickering politics at home, and convey a positive, united Canada abroad.

The Honourable Stéphane Dion, P.C., M.P., the Member for Saint-Laurent—Cartierville and the Foreign Affairs Critic for Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition, noted that the Right Honourable Jean Chrétien, P.C., had never expressed a fractured or contradictory view to the world during his trips to Afghanistan in 2003; Mr. Chrétien did not discuss the internal debates of the House of Commons outside of Canada, in terms of relationships with foreign nations.

President Karzai expressed the importance of Canada's presence in Afghanistan.

Providing stability in Afghanistan, helping it stand on its own feet, the Canadian troops -- the Canadian sons and daughters -- are also providing for the long-term security of Canada and the countries around it."

...

Afghanistan and Canada are connected in one common objective. The common objective is the fight against terrorism as it affects us, as it affects you, as it may affect anybody else if we don't fight them and finish them in this part of the world.

Click here for the entire article, in English (a French translation is unavailable).

:?: Sources
Click here for the Web site of The Globe and Mail.

 

[Sassylassie]

Keep-um coming Five, thanks for the read.

 

[cortez]

canadian sons and daughters----- what the F fascist crap is that
just stick to the facts- harper bitch

 

[Sassylassie]

Cortez, I know you are frustrated but Please respectfully--calm down and take a rest. Live to fight another day, okay.

 

[Mogz]

RE: Harper Warns Afghanis

Well Harper isn't utterly wrong. There is dissent, and it has been placed in to effect by the very people who ok'd the mission. Also Harper is a political genious for making the comment on the international stage, Chretien did it tons of times in his career.

 

[FiveParadox]

While I would agree that what Mr. Harper may have said is true (in that support cannot be, in fact, guaranteed where an opposition motion could cause the Armed Forces to be withdrawn in the upcoming weeks or months), I think that he should not have discussed, in public discourse in a foreign nation, the bickering taking place in the [soon-to-be-assembled] House of Commons.

I have said it before, and I am going to say it again; Mr. Harper should prompt a discussion, a debate, or whatever, on his terms to appease the opposition, before someone has an opportunity to prompt a discussion on their own, beyond the authority of the Government; that would only serve to heighten the controversy in the eyes of the media, and would put too much power in the hands of the opposition by way of a motion to withdraw.

:!: (Revision) Resolved a typing exception (first paragraph).

 

[Jersay]

Party politics.

 

[Johnny Utah]

Re: RE: Harper Warns Afghanis

Well Harper isn't utterly wrong. There is dissent, and it has been placed in to effect by the very people who ok'd the mission. Also Harper is a political genious for making the comment on the international stage, Chretien did it tons of times in his career.

Now it's Conservatives who are in power and Liberals want to debate the Mission, yet when they were in power and gave the okay for the Mission it wasn't up for debate. This is hypocritical of the Liberals, then again it's nothing new from the Liberal party.

 

[FiveParadox]

Johnny Utah, while I am not going to defend any decisions of the Liberal Party of Canada to act without debate or to close debate prematurely (except in exigent circumstances, of course, as with anything), I would assert that the Conservative Party of Canada should not be required to take its cues from a previous Government of Canada; they said they were better, and now it's their turn to prove it.

 

[darkbeaver]

RE: Harper Warns Afghanis

I just went out for an hour for drugs and booze and the place is falling apart, why can,t the regulators take care of things, can anyone help me find my apostrophy. Stupid American keyboard.

 

[Johnny Utah]

Re: RE: Harper Warns Afghanistan of Dissent

Johnny Utah, while I am not going to defend any decisions of the Liberal Party of Canada to act without debate or to close debate prematurely (except in exigent circumstances, of course, as with anything), I would assert that the Conservative Party of Canada should not be required to take its cues from a previous Government of Canada; they said they were better, and now it's their turn to prove it.

Your right it's the Conservative's turn to show their stuff. It's just the gull of the Liberals demanding a debate is as I said "Hypocritical" of them.

If there is a debate, hopefully it will be kept out of the media so the Soldiers back in Afghanistan don't have to hear it going on as they have other more important things that require their attention.

 

[cortez]

i disagree the debate should be widely covered

if the soldiers dont want to hear it they are free to put their heads in the sand-- theres a lot of it out there

 

[FiveParadox]

I do not care, in particular, if the mainstream media decides to air coverage of the debate; in order to keep things low-key, though, perhaps it would be better to keep the discussion limited to its standard broadcast on CPAC.