Globe & Mail editorial: Trudeau has performed poorly in his first major policy test


Locutus
#1


Justin Trudeau’s opponents constantly try to brand him as unready for office, and the Liberal Leader keeps proving them wrong. Until lately, that is. Suddenly we’ve been hit with the temptation to say, Quiet, Justin. The adults are talking.

It’s hard to imagine what Mr. Trudeau was trying to prove when he said the government should provide humanitarian aid and non-combat support to the coalition taking on the Islamic State – “rather than whip out our CF-18s and show them how big they are.”

Did he think his remark was funny? Hip? Accurate?

Between that comment, his reference in the Commons to the CF-18s as “a few aging warplanes” and his party’s weakly reasoned argument against a combat role for Canada in Iraq and Syria, Mr. Trudeau has performed poorly on the biggest file to cross his desk since becoming party leader.

The nub of his argument against a combat role is that “it is always easier to get into a war than to get out of one.” Yes, it can be easier to get in than out, but he has offered no evidence that the deployment of six CF-18s, one refuelling plane and two surveillance aircraft will grow into something larger. He is not saying it will, and he’s not saying it won’t. He’s just saying, darkly, it could.

Okay, but you still have to make a decision. The question as defined by the government’s motion was, Should we or should we not join our friends and allies – the U.S., Saudi Arabia, France, the U.K., Germany, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Australia, the Netherlands and others – that have committed their air forces to bombing IS positions? It’s that question that Mr. Trudeau has avoided answering directly.

Thomas Mulcair, the Opposition Leader, wasn’t any more compelling in his refusal to support the combat mission. “The tragedy in Iraq and Syria will not end with another Western-led invasion in that region,” he said. It is a big stretch to qualify this as an invasion, and a significant number of the active participants are not Western countries but Middle Eastern ones.

At least Mr. Mulcair is being consistent with his role as Opposition Leader and with the core values of the NDP. Mr. Trudeau, on the other hand, leads a third party that, when in government, showed a willingness to take the risk of deploying troops. Key Liberals – Roméo Dallaire, Lloyd Axworthy and Bob Rae – support a combat mission. Mr. Trudeau, though, dismisses combat as macho posturing and Canada’s military capabilities as “a few aging warplanes.” If he were prime minister, is this what he would tell Canada’s allies?


Justin Trudeau’s lousy week - The Globe and Mail
 
Walter
+1
#2  Top Rated Post
But he's pretty.
 
relic
Free Thinker
+1
#3
But he's right, what fat serve is doing is macho posturing, and the world knows about our few aging warplanes. Everybody knows the joke about Canadian ground attack missions, dropping Sea Kings on the enemy.
 
Zipperfish
No Party Affiliation
#4
Yeah, it wasn't that politic to say, but he's not wrong about the state of Candian military hardware.

Still time will tell. If it quagmires, Trudeau's right. If ISIS and the other tIslamist factions are gone next year, Harper was right.
 
Goober
Free Thinker
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by Zipperfish View Post

Yeah, it wasn't that politic to say, but he's not wrong about the state of Candian military hardware.

Still time will tell. If it quagmires, Trudeau's right. If ISIS and the other tIslamist factions are gone next year, Harper was right.

Oh they will not be gone. The Iraqi Military is in a shambles from the past corruption under the former PM.
Now with arms including heavy armor, artillery for Kurds, training and equipping the Iraqi army again then ISIL could be degraded.
Turkey is one major key here.
The small number of troops being trained in Saudi, approx 5 k- will not make a difference in Syria.
So if over the next year we see ISIL degraded, Trudeau will wear it.
 
damngrumpy
No Party Affiliation
#6
I'm not sold on Trudeau however to suggest he did poorly is a misnomer.
Trudeau didn't agree with Tory Policy should he lie and say he was in favor.
Because you don't agree with the Prime Minister you are seen as not performing?
Give me a break. The other measure seems to be Question Period and I question
Question Period that is not government in action its theater.
Trudeau you may find is on the Canadian wave length most don't see a combat role
as necessary, I don't agree with them but the majority will have their say next Oct.
 
Zipperfish
No Party Affiliation
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by Goober View Post

Oh they will not be gone. The Iraqi Military is in a shambles from the past corruption under the former PM.
Now with arms including heavy armor, artillery for Kurds, training and equipping the Iraqi army again then ISIL could be degraded.
Turkey is one major key here.
The small number of troops being trained in Saudi, approx 5 k- will not make a difference in Syria.
So if over the next year we see ISIL degraded, Trudeau will wear it.

What does degraded mean? Unable to expand?
 
Goober
Free Thinker
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by Zipperfish View Post

What does degraded mean? Unable to expand?

Less territory inside Iraq, interrupting arms - oil - money flow.
Inability to strike at will as they are now.
Cutting their supply - transportation routes and routes from Turkey need to be closed.

A US assessment stated that 26 Iraqi Brigades were OK, the rest crapola.
How quickly can they achieve Combat capability to operate jointly with other Iraqi units or separately.
Their ability to attack, hold and control territory is unknown.

The present Govt has to convince the Sunni in Anbar prov that grievances will be addressed. A significant number of Sunni in this prov are aligned with ISIL.

Using 300 K$ missiles to kill a pickup truck is useless.
Find their concentrated areas, bring in B52's from Diego Garcia.
I recall a 500 Lb bomb load leaves a swath of destruction 1/4 mile wide and 1/2 mile long.
News reports are stating that around Kobani ISIL had large concentrations of equipment- apparently left untouched by the US.

Armor and artillery, anti tank, for the Kurds.
 
Zipperfish
No Party Affiliation
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by Goober View Post

Less territory inside Iraq, interrupting arms - oil - money flow.
Inability to strike at will as they are now.
Cutting their supply - transportation routes and routes from Turkey need to be closed.

A US assessment stated that 26 Iraqi Brigades were OK, the rest crapola.
How quickly can they achieve Combat capability to operate jointly with other Iraqi units or separately.
Their ability to attack, hold and control territory is unknown.

The present Govt has to convince the Sunni in Anbar prov that grievances will be addressed. A significant number of Sunni in this prov are aligned with ISIL.

Using 300 K$ missiles to kill a pickup truck is useless.
Find their concentrated areas, bring in B52's from Diego Garcia.
I recall a 500 Lb bomb load leaves a swath of destruction 1/4 mile wide and 1/2 mile long.
News reports are stating that around Kobani ISIL had large concentrations of equipment- apparently left untouched by the US.

Armor and artillery, anti tank, for the Kurds.

So your idea of a successful mission is an objective of less Islamic State territory in Iraq in--what?--12 months?
 
Goober
Free Thinker
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by Zipperfish View Post

So your idea of a successful mission is an objective of less Islamic State territory in Iraq in--what?--12 months?

If Kobani falls the PKK will walk from peace negotiations with Turkey. Turkey has been working with the PKK for a few years and have settled many of the issues.
But the PKK will not tolerate Kobani falling right on the Turkish border.

If the Turks move in and set up a safe zone, inside Syria knowing they will be supported by the US and others.
Arming the Kurds with the proper weapons is the fastest bet.
Let the Arab countries who want ISIL gone put boots on the ground.

We should see progress within 4- 6 months or so.
Lots of what ifs involved.
A very messy situation.
 
CDNBear
#11
"Until lately"

Objectivity, you're doing it wrong.
 
Goober
Free Thinker
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBear View Post

"Until lately"

Objectivity, you're doing it wrong.

I am missing something here?
 
CDNBear
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by Goober View Post

I am missing something here?

It's a quote from the article. And it hasn't been just lately.
 
Goober
Free Thinker
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBear View Post

It's a quote from the article. And it hasn't been just lately.

Found it, and in context.
Justin Trudeau’s lousy week - The Globe and Mail
"Justin Trudeau’s opponents constantly try to brand him as unready for office, and the Liberal Leader keeps proving them wrong. Until lately, that is. Suddenly we’ve been hit with the temptation to say, Quiet, Justin. The adults are talking.

It’s hard to imagine what Mr. Trudeau was trying to prove when he said the government should provide humanitarian aid and non-combat support to the coalition taking on the Islamic State – “rather than whip out our CF-18s and show them how big they are.” Did he think his remark was funny? Hip? Accurate?"
 
CDNBear
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by Goober View Post

Found it, and in context.

Good for you.

I quoted it in context, it's actually not a broad assertion.
 
Goober
Free Thinker
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBear View Post

Good for you.

I quoted it in context, it's actually not a broad assertion.

Here is an interesting article- if you cannot open it, I use phony email addresses to register.

Wanted: A Coalition to Defeat the Islamic State and Assad
 
CDNBear
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by Goober View Post

Here is an interesting article- if you cannot open it, I use phony email addresses to register.

Wanted: A Coalition to Defeat the Islamic State and Assad

Cool, thanks.
 
Locutus
#18
Conservative PartyVerified account ‏@CPC_HQ



For once we have nothing to add - @GlobeandMail writes about @JustinTrudeau , RT if you agree #cdnpoli