Quit picking on the Shiny Pony

[CDNBear]

Nice selective cropping...

The motion put forward by the Government in this regard recommends a combat mission as a central part of an international coalition response that I have been advocating for some time. Indeed, I have been a long-standing proponent – together with my Liberal colleagues – of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine, which states, simply put, that where there are war crimes, crimes against humanity, ethnic cleansing, or genocide, and the government of the region in question is unable or unwilling to take action – or worse, is the author of the criminality – the international community has a responsibility to intervene to protect targeted innocent civilians.

Your welcome. I wouldn't need to do that, if your were a little more honest though.

 

[waldo]

Nice selective cropping...

The motion put forward by the Government in this regard recommends a combat mission as a central part of an international coalition response that I have been advocating for some time. Indeed, I have been a long-standing proponent – together with my Liberal colleagues – of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine, which states, simply put, that where there are war crimes, crimes against humanity, ethnic cleansing, or genocide, and the government of the region in question is unable or unwilling to take action – or worse, is the author of the criminality – the international community has a responsibility to intervene to protect targeted innocent civilians.

Your welcome. I wouldn't need to do that, if your were a little more honest though.

but, but, but... you've selectively cropped out the salient points of Cotler's writing. You know, the part I quoted.

 

[captain morgan]

but, but, but... you've selectively cropped out the salient points of Cotler's writing. You know, the part I quoted.

Salient points from an ideologue?

That's a myth

 

[CDNBear]

but, but, but... you've selectively cropped out the salient points of Cotler's writing. You know, the part I quoted.

They're only important for your talking points.

His commentary as a whole makes far more sense and is far more honest.

 

[waldo]

That's a myth

yes, it certainly is a myth that there are no conservative ideologues within the CPC

 

[CDNBear]

There's that selective cropping again.

You know, you keep begging for abuse, right?

 

[waldo]

His commentary as a whole makes far more sense and is far more honest.

in your selective reading best! There's nothing I didn't quote that takes away from what I did quote; again, the part I quoted is the rational behind Colter's absentee vote. I appreciate you don't like having the Harper lack of transparency highlighted... the unwillingness of Harper to engage the Opposition highlighted.

 

[captain morgan]

yes, it certainly is a myth that there are no conservative ideologues within the CPC

Exactly.. So then, we agree that the logic from ideologues that you quote is entrely without merit

 

[waldo]

Exactly.. So then, we agree that the logic from ideologues that you quote is entrely without merit

no, we don't agree... but, excuse me... are there any politicos that you don't consider "ideologues"? Do you have a few examples from your apparent favoured Harper Conservative party? Just a few names will suffice, yes?

 

[CDNBear]

in your selective reading best! There's nothing I didn't quote that takes away from what I did quote;

Accept for the part you didn't quote. The part that puts dents in your talking points.

You know those things that you mock others for using?

 

[waldo]

Accept for the part you didn't quote. The part that puts dents in your talking points.

You know those things that you mock others for using?

no - no dents, no talking points. How does anything you presume to suggest was excluded (not quoted) relate to Cotler's rationale for his vote?

 

[CDNBear]

no - no dents, no talking points. How does anything you presume to suggest was excluded (not quoted) relate to Cotler's rationale for his vote?

I get why you'd ask that, since it has nothing to do with why you quoted him here in the first place, but has everything to do with distracting from the fact that you embarrassed yourself.

It's not as if I thought you'd start being honest or anything.

 

[waldo]

I get why you'd ask that, since it has nothing to do with why you quoted him here in the first place, but has everything to do with distracting from the fact that you embarrassed yourself.

It's not as if I thought you'd start being honest or anything.

heelarious! The Cotler writing speaks to R2P within the broader context of why he voted the way he did. You seem to think there's some "gotcha" in his overall writing that nullifies his rationale, inclusive of his R2P references, for the way he voted. I suggest you remove yourself from your fantasy reading.

 

[CDNBear]

I suggest you remove yourself from your fantasy reading.

Oh the irony.

Especially since I discarded the rest of your post, for being based on fiction.

 

[Corduroy]

Yes, there certainly a humanitarian crisis from the war in Syria.....to which we have donated $630 million, and offered to take in 1365 refugees (I hope to God they are Christian)

But that is not a solution. In fact, there is no solution. But the way to end genocide is kill ISIS. The only way.

Reality bites.

I'm not saying that's the solution. I'm saying that while you all mock the idea of humanitarian aid, it's still a thing that needs to get done. I don't get where Trudeau is coming from, but he isn't saying that humanitarian aid is the solution to the problem. He's saying Canada shouldn't have a military role. Why shouldn't we if we're committing to the operation I have no idea.

It's usually the case in this thread that while I don't agree with Trudeau I find your reactions to him ridiculous

they aren't

 

[CDNBear]

I'm not saying that's the solution. I'm saying that while you all mock the idea of humanitarian aid, it's still a thing that needs to get done.

And it is being done.

What gets mocked is JT's nonsense.

 

[waldo]

Oh the irony.

Especially since I discarded the rest of your post, for being based on fiction.

you can claim to discard whatever makes you feel better... none of your selective fantasy reading takes away anything from what I quoted or from what Cotler intended in his writing.

I don't get where Trudeau is coming from, but he isn't saying that humanitarian aid is the solution to the problem. He's saying Canada shouldn't have a military role. Why shouldn't we if we're committing to the operation I have no idea.

a military role doesn't automatically dictate a combat role... there's the obvious non-combat roles in strategic airlift, training, or medical support.... notwithstanding military support to assist refugees in all manner of food/water/shelter/etc.. Aside from both Opposition parties reluctance to support "the mission" on the simple basis of Harper refusing to be open and transparent with details/specifics, the vision of Harper relishing the thought of getting on board with Bush during the initial Iraq debacle runs strong, runs deep!

 

[Colpy]

obviously R2P is much broader than one country/one party; I expect you don't want to elevate R2P to its UN attachments, right? :

Oh, I am quite thrilled to stick the R2P on the UN. Promoted by the Liberal Party of Canada, adopted by the UN, and completely ignored by both, because both are useless, amoral, ball-less entities interested only in appearances and their own influence building.

In any case, you do know that R2P doesn't necessitate any particular country assume a combat role, it does compel countries to assist... as in, for example, humanitarian aid. ":

Right.

But R2P is Canada's baby, and we should lead the way in fulfilling its mission, we should set the example, not play let's-you-and-him fight.

. The much respected Irwin Cotler response properly sums up how many on the left view the Harper want to, "get his war on":

I am an admirer of Irwin Cotler. He is a good man, capable of working with all parties, respectful of all views............but often wrong. He is wrong being a member of the Liberal Party of Canada, is is completely wrong on gun control, and he is absolutely wrong on ISIS and the proper role for Canada in the R2P.

This has degraded my respect for him.

I could never understand how he could be a liberal, as steadfast as he (usually) is.....I guess this simply demonstrates he truly is Liberal.

Now, let's ask that other good Liberal, the one familiar with military action and genocide, the driving force behind R2P, Romeo D'Allaire:

Romeo Dallaire, the retired Liberal senator and founder of Child Soldiers Initiative, best known for leading the UN mission in Rwanda, told CBC that a plan of air strikes without ground force is “inappropriate.”
“There is no way that you will destroy that enemy without boots on the ground,” said Mr. Dallaire “There’s no other way around it…. It can’t be advisory. That sounds like Vietnam. It is actual, physical, reinforcement of capabilities on the ground, contain it, and build up capacity to destroy it.”

News.nationalpost.com/2014/10/05/isis-mission-reveals-liberal-divide-partys-grandees-express-support-for-robust-canadian-mission/

His message was simple: Doing nothing, or doing the least we can get away with, ought not to be an option for Canada.
“We are one of the 11 most powerful nations in the world,” he said off the top.
“We are not 69th or 70th. There are 193 nations in the world and we are part of the 11 most powerful.

And, “Today, we have to dance around the words ‘responsibility to protect’ and the International Criminal Court, and even the term ‘child soldiers’ to protect, out of fear of having to actually maybe turn our alleged principled foreign policy into principled action.

Christie Blatchford: Roméo Dallaire’s final speech explains where he sees Canada’s place in the world | National Post

 

[waldo]

Oh, I am quite thrilled to stick the R2P on the UN. Promoted by the Liberal Party of Canada, adopted by the UN, and completely ignored by both, because both are useless, amoral, ball-less entities interested only in appearances and their own influence building.

But R2P is Canada's baby, and we should lead the way in fulfilling its mission, we should set the example, not play let's-you-and-him fight.

I appreciate you pushing your agenda where you presume to show some contradiction between the Liberal Party of 2001 and today's Liberal Party. Notwithstanding your mega-reach, it's clear you have quite the skewed understanding of R2P and its origins.The 2001 ICISS process/report was the result of an international commission initiated by the Goverment of Canada (not the Liberal Party of Canada) in response to 1999/2000 initiatives made by then UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan. Of the 12 international members of that ICISS commmision, there were 2 Canadians... by the by, one of those two was Michael Ignatieff. In any case, there is a long protacted path between that 2001 ICISS commission report and the adoption... but still ongoing debate concerning R2P, within the UN.

I am an admirer of Irwin Cotler. He is a good man, capable of working with all parties, respectful of all views...........

apparently not... you can't seem to accept his principled stand so you go off on a slagging mission... and good on ya for dragging gun control into the mix!

 

[Corduroy]

a military role doesn't automatically dictate a combat role...

No, of course not. But why join the mission and explicitly reject combat? What kind of support is that really? WWe could just as easily not support the mission and continue providing humanitarian aid. If we're in it, we should provide from our ability to the mission's need. (Karl Marx, probably)