Quote:
|
Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction
Despite the straw man arguments being directed towards me, I never said that Bush is the reason Canada is in Afghanistan.
I understand what out NATO obligation is in Afghanistan. The issue I have is with the decisions Bush has made since the invasion of Afghanistan, and how it has prolonged the conflict there, and how it has actually undermined what Canada, and the rest of the NATO alliance is trying to accomplish there.
Could you imagine if Bush actually chose to put the same effort and resources into Afghanistan as he has Iraq? The conflict would be over by now - the mission would be accomplished! But instead, Canadians are still there chasing the exact same people who ruled the country 5 years ago! It's not at all about propping up an elected government or rebuilding... it's about hunting down Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters. If the U.S. was not attacked in 9-11, then we wouldn't be there... no reasonable person can deny that. That is the reality of Afghanistan no matter what the spin masters are saying. Right now, as we speak, Canada and other NATO allies are preparing to send more troops to Afghanistan so the U.S. can pull out thousands of theirs. If Canada were ever attacked, thereby invoking NATO allies to arms, I'm sure our allies would start wondering what they were still doing there 5 years later if we were in the process of pulling out like the U.S. is now.
Flashback to 2003. Canada made the decision to take a larger role in Afghanistan in order to allow the U.S. to invade and occupy Iraq. Since then, Bush and his supporters have ignored that, and have focused on simply our absence from Iraq - and we get punished for it in our trade disputes. All I am hoping is that these recent sacrifices of Canadian soldiers receives some appreciation from Bush - and that it is indicated in their policies towards us.
I'm not holding my breath though.
|
I totally agree with this part of the post...
As for the trade disputes, it just goes to show what kind of hypocrites the US are - how many rulings from the international court have gone against them with respect to the softwood lumber issue? 3? 5? The point is that international law is on the side of Canada, and yet the US continues to play protectionist and drag its heels...
That's why I laugh at those who have such an idealistic view of the US - they don't do things out of altruism...Everything they do is calculated to benefit their position....