Extending the Afghan Mission Without Parliamentary Approval?
- Thread starter Spade
- Start date
Ah, don't you love a good excuse for inflation, debt and high interest rates?
Good post. So if Harper decides unanimously to go to war and Parliament chooses not to fund it, then I guess the military will have a hard time finding fuel to fly the troops to Afghanistan. That way we can redirect funds towrds taking care of our injured veterans. Damage control.
As for getting Parlaimentary approval for war, you'd think a PM who truly believed in consultation with the representatives of the people would try to get parliamentary approval. The only time we should not wate our time with such niceties is when the hoardes are knocking on our door. Last I chekced though, the Taliban Marine Corps, assuming it even exists, is devoid of the modern naval infrastructure needed to reach Canadian shores.
Now, should we remain in Afghanistan?
I'd place the following minimum criteria on that:
1. That this move should have the support of the international community,
2. That it have the support of Parliament, and
3. that the government is prepared to finance it responsibly.
While the first two points still do not guarantee that it would be a just war (which is always open to interpretation), they would seem to be the minimum requirement. As for the last point, that's just a sign of responsible stewardship of the government.
Now, should we remain in Afghanistan?
I'd place the following minimum criteria on that:
1. That this move should have the support of the international community,
2. That it have the support of Parliament, and
3. that the government is prepared to finance it responsibly.
While the first two points still do not guarantee that it would be a just war (which is always open to interpretation), they would seem to be the minimum requirement. As for the last point, that's just a sign of responsible stewardship of the government.
Certainly, the Honourable the Senate of Canada, and the House of Commons, should be able to express whatever sentiments they choose about our deployments abroad (think of someone moving "that, in the opinion of the House, the Canadian Forces should be withdrawn from Afghanistan", and the like). However, let us be clear--the deployment of the Canadian Forces has been, is, and for the foreseeable future will remain a Crown prerogative and, therefore in practical terms, a prerogative of the executive branch of Government. For those American friends not well-versed in the Canadian dynamics of politics, this is nearly exclusively the prime minister, and ministers.
Imagine the disastrous ramifications in the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan if our presence there were subject to the political mood of the day in the House of Commons. The Government and opposition parties are best friends one week, and bitter enemies the next; this sort of day-to-day political coin toss is not an appropriate method of commanding the Canadian Forces. We cannot have an intervention that depends on whether the Government accedes to the demands of an opposition party; we cannot have a war that depends on whether an opposition party thinks it has the chance to win an election; we cannot have our training of Afghan police dependent upon whether the Bloc Quebecois thinks it would be good for its single province.
Can you imagine the absurdity of it?
Imagine the disastrous ramifications in the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan if our presence there were subject to the political mood of the day in the House of Commons. The Government and opposition parties are best friends one week, and bitter enemies the next; this sort of day-to-day political coin toss is not an appropriate method of commanding the Canadian Forces. We cannot have an intervention that depends on whether the Government accedes to the demands of an opposition party; we cannot have a war that depends on whether an opposition party thinks it has the chance to win an election; we cannot have our training of Afghan police dependent upon whether the Bloc Quebecois thinks it would be good for its single province.
Can you imagine the absurdity of it?
Some things should not be political.
What could be more political than war? There is no republic in Afghanistan. It is a corrupt, puppet dictatorship. We have no business being there. Anybody who supports our troops should be screaming to have them brought home before any more get killed for nothing.
I'm thinking we could arrange an agreement with the Taliban and seal it with Karzai's severed head. No doubt, we Canadians are much despised in Afghanistan because, as you pointed out, we prop up that 'President' (see Warlord).
The Taliban had offered to give up Osama to Bush. The Taliban dismantled the police and the army because they were instruments of Western Imperialism and later Soviet Imperialism.
Even then, what stopped those former policemen from continuing to uphold the law? What? No more salary?
I don't think it's any different in Canada as most of our cops are in it for the power and salaries; yet, we have honest people in Canada who would do it for free.
I'm sure that the majority of people are against Afghanistan but the fact that all our political parties seem to be in cohort about the war just seems to indicate that our political parties are not representing Canada but rather corporate and international cabals.
The Taliban had offered to give up Osama to Bush. The Taliban dismantled the police and the army because they were instruments of Western Imperialism and later Soviet Imperialism.
Even then, what stopped those former policemen from continuing to uphold the law? What? No more salary?
I don't think it's any different in Canada as most of our cops are in it for the power and salaries; yet, we have honest people in Canada who would do it for free.
I'm sure that the majority of people are against Afghanistan but the fact that all our political parties seem to be in cohort about the war just seems to indicate that our political parties are not representing Canada but rather corporate and international cabals.
There is more to armed interventions than what is necessarily popular, and this is the driving factor (I feel) for why it is essential for the process and final decision-making of deployments to be entirely independent of elected legislators. Our Parliament can decide to outright reject the Government and force general elections if it so chooses, as a recourse for disagreement, but it should not be able to decide independently of the executive how the Canadian Forces should be commanded. It is the prime minister, and the Minister of Defence who must "advise" the Governor General on these matters, and not Parliament--it is Parliament's role to hold the prime minister to account for those decisions.
Do you still believe in the tooth fairy? I suppose your faith in parliamentary procedures would be laudable if it had any validity, but I hate to break it to you but we do not live in a free and democratic country any more than Afghanistan does. The whole world is under a corporate dictatorship and democracy is an illusion they allow us while they go about doing whatever the hell they please. But fairy tales are much easier to digest.
As much as I immensely enjoy your "creative" outlook on the Canadian political process, the fact is that the Parliament of Canada is the supreme legislative authority in Canada. Even if elected members of Parliament were influenced by corporate money (as is possible, in any country where corporations and individuals are able to make political donations), the fact that we have an appointed Upper House in the Honourable the Senate of Canada--that is able to operate independent of the electoral process, and the potentially-influential donations that come with it--counters your logic that we live in a corporatocracy.
FiveParadox: It wold appear that you have the same school book delusions of how government operates as Tonnington. Simply put the Senate is not independent, it is filled with appointees of the PM of the day and as such is beholden ,to the same groups of donators as the elected MPs. Government is like business in a lot of ways. What the school books say and what happens in reality are not always the same. You would probably have to run a business for a few years to really understand it, I know from experience.
Tonnington: Whats with the bad post ratings? You having a problem with reality again?
Tonnington: Whats with the bad post ratings? You having a problem with reality again?
Can you Guys please drop the personal attacks, as I'm busy try'n to keep
you all from drowning in spam, & it's a full time job lately.
you all from drowning in spam, & it's a full time job lately.
Last edited:
Maybe we should just hand it over to China for debt relief? They have 20 Million men with no hopes of ever having a wife or child. They can finish the job and rebuild Afghanistan just like they did in Tibet.
So why complain about it. You won't get anywhere fighting it, so why not embrace the fairy talel and enjoy what time you have.