Ignatieff wants Canada that ‘takes risks'

[sanch]

Here is Ignatieff 's explanation for his support for the Iraq war. It should be mentioned that this kind of support from Harvard faculty was crucical for Bush as he sought to justify reasons for the invasion.


Wow, your WAY OFF (the Harvard Bush idea). That was not his reason for supporting the invasion, and it is presumptions like that are unneccesary.

That's not what I wrote at all. I wrote: "Here is Ignatieff 's explanation for his support for the Iraq war."

Prior to the Iraq invasion Bush was citing the support he was receiving from a large cross section of prominent Americans, as well as various countries. He continuously made reference to this support. All I said is that Ignatieff’s support fell into that category. Further Ignatieff would have been well aware of the weight of his support. And his support for invasion was long standing.

One of those said to have "joined the ranks of the reluctant hawks" was New York Times Magazine contributor Michael Ignatieff. Shortly before the Gulf War, Ignatieff wrote in the London Observer (12/9/90) that the U.S. secretary of state should show Saddam Hussein "a video demonstration of the shortest way to turn Baghdad into a car park. The dictator is a military man: The West must speak his language." Another of the Times' "longtime doves" was Paul Berman, who wrote an op-ed for the Times during the Gulf War (1/31/91) criticizing protesters for "mobilizing against the war in Vietnam" when Iraq represented "a dynamic, expanding Fascism, 1930's-style."

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1135

It seems very convenient that it is only once he entered Canadian politics that he chose to retract and change his position on Iraq.

 

[sanch]

Here is Ignatieff’s position. It’s a smart move as his record is too public to vacillate. I have more respect for him for making this statement and I don’t entirely disagree with him.


http://thechronicleherald.ca/Opinion/494217.html

I went to Iraq in 1992 and saw what Saddam Hussein had done to the Kurds and the Shia. I decided then and there that I’d stand with them whatever happened. I’ve stuck with them ever since. Whatever mistakes the Americans have made, one day Iraqis will create a decent society. When that day comes, Canadians should be there to help because their struggle is ours too.’

 

[Jay]

So I guess the Liberals are thinking of putting someone more right of center in power?

 

[sanch]

That is probably what they will do at least on foreign policy.

 

[vishliberal]

Re: RE: Ignatieff wants Canad

Especially since he's joined the Liberal party, and they're going to be out of power for years!

This they would surely deserve. The one thing that would bring them back quickly is an ineffective conservative government. If Harper gets the Acountability Act passed and hands out whistles to uncover more liberal corruption than they will be doomed. But this is a big if. Harper appears willing to find ways to insert his own agenda atop the corrupt structure that exists. So it will be more of the same.

Ignatieff as a leader would not be beholden to any class interests and this would be a plus.

Please, Harper can barely back his own Federal Accountability Act, from crossing the floor, to lobbyists, it is sad that one would depend on his accountablility act to uncover anything else, if there is.

 

[sanch]

Re: RE: Ignatieff wants Canad

Please, Harper can barely back his own Federal Accountability Act, from crossing the floor, to lobbyists, it is sad that one would depend on his accountablility act to uncover anything else, if there is.

It's not sad or happy but a political strategy. Harper may turn out to be just as corrupt as the liberals but if he gets the country focusing on liberal corruption then he wins.

 

[vishliberal]

Here is Ignatieff 's explanation for his support for the Iraq war. It should be mentioned that this kind of support from Harvard faculty was crucical for Bush as he sought to justify reasons for the invasion.


Wow, your WAY OFF (the Harvard Bush idea). That was not his reason for supporting the invasion, and it is presumptions like that are unneccesary.

That's not what I wrote at all. I wrote: "Here is Ignatieff 's explanation for his support for the Iraq war."

Prior to the Iraq invasion Bush was citing the support he was receiving from a large cross section of prominent Americans, as well as various countries. He continuously made reference to this support. All I said is that Ignatieff’s support fell into that category. Further Ignatieff would have been well aware of the weight of his support. And his support for invasion was long standing.

One of those said to have "joined the ranks of the reluctant hawks" was New York Times Magazine contributor Michael Ignatieff. Shortly before the Gulf War, Ignatieff wrote in the London Observer (12/9/90) that the U.S. secretary of state should show Saddam Hussein "a video demonstration of the shortest way to turn Baghdad into a car park. The dictator is a military man: The West must speak his language." Another of the Times' "longtime doves" was Paul Berman, who wrote an op-ed for the Times during the Gulf War (1/31/91) criticizing protesters for "mobilizing against the war in Vietnam" when Iraq represented "a dynamic, expanding Fascism, 1930's-style."

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1135

It seems very convenient that it is only once he entered Canadian politics that he chose to retract and change his position on Iraq.

Sorry about that, I misread

 

[sanch]

Well I at least am getting more comfortable with Ignatieff. He seems very confident he will be the one.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060407.wliberal0407/BNStory/National/home

Rookie Liberal MP Michael Ignatieff — widely viewed as one to watch in the race for the leadership of the federal Liberals — formally announced his candidacy Friday.

"I am not running against my colleagues and friends," he said. "I am running against Stephen Harper."

The Prime Minister's view of the country, he said, is one of a "provincial Canada, an unequal Canada, a Canada that forgets its aboriginal citizens, a Canada that fails to invest in the universities research centres and scientists, a Canada that fails to invest in the skills of its immigrants, a Canada that fails in the challenge of environmental renewal."

"That is not the Canada that you want," he said.

He also heralded Canadians as not just citizens of this country but also citizens of the world.

"We should be a country imaginative enough to promote democracy, human rights, and sustainable development, and we should be courageous enough to do it when the going gets tough — as in Afghanistan," said Mr. Ignatieff, who has previously drawn criticism for his backing of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.