Layton/NDP wants Canada to pull out of Afghanistan

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Thanks for the military lesson, Dwight.

Why should canada sacrifice the lives of their soldiers to mop up a mess created by another country, while trying to appease a puppet government that has shown a lack of leadership in any democratic avenue.

Because we pledged our support for the people of Afghanistan, and by rights, as Canadians, we need to live up to our word.

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

I wonder how the negotiations with the Taliban would work. Jack agrees with the Taliban that half of the women can vote? Executions will be on day of the month that are prime numbers? Only terrorist groups whose names are 4 syllables or greater will be supported?

Sure. Or if you want to be serious rather than mocking the suggestion, how about giving them the right to form a political party if they cease violence. They are welcome to pursue their vision of Afghanistan in any manner that does not violate the constitution. Rather than offering power, you offer them the chance to pursue power through democratic process. In so doing, you deny them the ability to pursue terrorism, censorship, restriction of freedoms, and yet allow them to work toward some of the less restrictive aspects of Shari'ah law. Do I think that the Taliban would go for such a proposal? Not a chance, given how strong they currently are. However, by providing them with an out that they fail to use, the government can further undermine public support for the taliban, and maybe cause some dissention within the Taliban. And it sets up a greater likelihood of military victory: give them the option of a peace they can live with, and then the threat of military action that they aren't sure they can survive.

[Clarkey]

Jack Layton is running a "SHOCK AND AWE" campaign.

June 2006

After the arrests of 17 boys and men from the Toronto area on terrorism related charges, Layton was quoted as saying that he was "shocked and dismayed".

May 2006

The Bloc Quebecois had announced that they were supporting the Conservative government’s budget. Said Layton, "I am frankly shocked that Gilles Duceppe and the Bloc Quebecois is supporting the budget".

May 2006

Commenting on the fact that the Conservatives appeared to be moving away from the Kyoto Accord, Jack said, "I was more than surprised; I was shocked".

March 2006

Stephen Harper refused to be interviewed by then-ethics czar Bernard Shapiro. Jack Layton was quoted by the Toronto Star as saying that he was "quite shocked to hear he wouldn’t be interviewed".

January 2006

Prior to the federal election that was being held at the end of the month, Layton was quoted as saying that he was braced for any result and will not be shocked like he was at the result of the 2004 election.

January 2006

The Conservatives had announced that they would roll back the income tax cuts that were introduced by the Liberals and that took effect on January 1. Jack was quoted by CP as saying that "he was shocked to learn of Harper’s plan".

December 2005

During the election campaign, former Liberal worker Mike Klander called Layton names and compared his wife and fellow candidate, Olivia Chow, to a dog. Jack Layton quite properly didn’t personally comment on Klander’s offending comments that were written on his blog but his spokesperson, Ian Capstick issued a statement saying, "We were shocked, disappointed and offended".

June 2005

It surfaced that the Liberals allegedly offered Conservative MPs, Gurmant and Nina Grewal, incentives to cross the floor to sit as Liberals. Layton was quoted by the Toronto Sun as saying that he was "shocked and appalled".

January 2004

During then-Prime Minister Paul Martin’s time when he was in favour of joining the Americans’ missile defense system, the Minister of Defense, David Pratt, had sent a letter to U.S. defense officials saying that Canada wanted to be involved. Regarding the letter, Jack Layton said, "I’m shocked at the tone of it".

October 2003

Layton was commenting on how much revenue Newfoundland and Labrador actually get from their oil and gas reserves. He said, "I was shocked to read the royal commission report; how much of the revenue of the offshore resources is going to the government of Canada instead of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador".

May 2003

Commenting on the proposed First Nations Governance Act, Jack said, "I have been shocked to learn about the divide and conquer strategies that have been undertaken, attempted, not successfully, by minister Nault".

February 2003

During Question Period, Joe Clark asked Prime Minister Jean Chrétien if he knew where Osama bin Laden was. Chrétien offered to call bin Laden on Clark’s behalf. Jack was quoted by CP as being "shocked" at Chrétien’s attempt at making a bin Laden joke.

[Azure]

[Devils'Advocate]

I am a solid NDP supporter. I was quite proud to have Ed Broadbent as my MP and am happy to have an NDP return to the House as my representative. I don't expect them to get a fair shake on a Calgary-based board. However, the garbage being thrown out here is ridiculous.

You take "comprehensive peace process involving all parties" as "only half the women are allowed to vote" or "only terrorist groups whose names are 4 syllables or greater will be supported"?!?!?! What are we? In grade school?

BTW - The whole "shocked" thing I think he picked up from Alexa. When she was an MLA in Nova Scotia she earned the nickname "Ms. Shocked and Dismayed". I'm not often shocked by what the government does (Liberal or Conservative).. but quite often dismayed.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

On this particular issue, I am in disagreement with the NDP. There is a big difference between Afghanistan and Iraq. In Iraq they want the US troops out of their country; in Afghanistan they want the UN troops to stay. They know that they don't have the military to hold off outside influences and internal warlords (the ones profiting from the opium/heroin production). Most citizens want the UN's protection from these murderous criminals. And it is Canada's role to keep the peace. It always has been. Yes, Jack is right when he says the mandate has changed from one of peacekeeping to one of offensive excursions, but one offensive excursion would have stopped the Rwandan massacre in its tracks. The Taliban outposts in the countryside need to be taken out or they just grow stronger.

I have written to my MP on this issue, letting him know that one of the people that voted for him believes that Canada needs to be in the role of keeping the civilians of Afghanistan safe. I don't care about the image of Canada or the damage to our reputation if we pull out; I only care about our duty as the nation responsible for peace keeping to take the tough assignments and stick to it until the job is done.

I also think the whole "exit strategy" thing is a red herring. Nobody ever has an exit strategy. You stay until they don't need you anymore. There was no exit strategy for Cypress either; there were peacekeepers there for 30 years.

[Flames in 07]

DA, the concept of negotiating with an entity that is so alergic to basic human rights is rediculous in the first place. I won't dignify the concept with anything more than a sarcastic response.

The NDP and the extreme left wing in general hold views that sound nice, but have no basis in reality. it would be nice if we could just talk our way to a solution with the Taliban, but my god, they fostered terrorists who flew airplanes into buildings. How the he// could you expect to trust anything they say?

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

DA, the concept of negotiating with an entity that is so alergic to basic human rights is rediculous in the first place. I won't dignify the concept with anything more than a sarcastic response.

The NDP and the extreme left wing in general hold views that sound nice, but have no basis in reality. it would be nice if we could just talk our way to a solution with the Taliban, but my god, they fostered terrorists who flew airplanes into buildings. How the he// could you expect to trust anything they say?

Just because you don't trust someone doesn't mean you can't negotiate with them; the US and the USSR were constantly under negotiations; Israel and the Palestinian forces have negotiated from time to time; North Korea and their neighbours, etc. None of those countries trust one another, and yet they negotiate. Again, you don't completely abandon military options; but peace doesn't often occur through military alone.

[Shazam]

Doesn't the NDP know that the withdrawal method is successful only 70% of the time?

[nuckles]

Originally Posted by longsuffering

You should get a job in the Bush White House.

Let's see what Layton said about the Afghan mission shall we?

It has no clear goals, no exit strategy and no criteria to judge success, he said at a news conference Thursday.
"This is not the right mission for Canada,'' he said. "There is no balance. In particular, it lacks a comprehensive rebuilding plan and commensurate development assistance.''

Sounds fairly accurate to me. Is having clear goals, an exit strategy, a rebuilding plan and a development assistance plan a bad thing?

And I seem to have missed the part where (you claim) he wants to engage in dialogue with the Taliban, unless you're referring to this quote:

He said Canada should be working for a "comprehensive peace process'' involving all parties to the fighting in Afghanistan.

So it would seem White Doors is playing fast and loose with the facts.

What a surprise.

Owned

[longsuffering]

Originally Posted by White Doors

They have a rebuilding and development plan and are doing so at this time. Just because that doesn't get the headlines that battles do, doesn't mean it isn't happening. You have to have security in a given area in order to develop it.

Thanks for coming out.

All right White Dork, how about backing up your statement with a link? Show me the plan!

Does this alleged plan include an exit strategy or a yardstick to measure sucess?

I love how you ALWAYS state 'facts' but rarely, if ever, provide a meaningful link to add even a ounce of credibility.

[Red Mile Style]

Originally Posted by longsuffering

All right White Dork, how about backing up your statement with a link? Show me the plan!

Does this alleged plan include an exit strategy or a yardstick to measure sucess?

I love how you ALWAYS state 'facts' but rarely, if ever, provide a meaningful link to add even a ounce of credibility.

Nice!

[Azure]

And once again, the argument is turning personal.

Just great.

[pepper24]

I've always been satisfied with Canada helping out the States in Afganistan. I think getting out is a bad idea as this is helping out the global war of terror and disagree with the NDP.

I've always been satisfied with Canada for not helping out the States in Iraq which is a bogus war in my mind.

[Jetsfan]

Just look tp the past. British Prime Minister Chamberlain tried this crap with Hitler and the Nazis and look how well that turned out.

[White Doors]

Originally Posted by longsuffering

All right White Dork, how about backing up your statement with a link? Show me the plan!

Does this alleged plan include an exit strategy or a yardstick to measure sucess?

I love how you ALWAYS state 'facts' but rarely, if ever, provide a meaningful link to add even a ounce of credibility.

How clever. So you admit that you were wrong about the diplomacy then I assume? Excellent.
The withdrawal plan? They stay until the democratic government of Afghanistan says that they are no longer needed. Kind of obvious isn't it?
Well, maybe not for you?

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Jetsfan

Just look tp the past. British Prime Minister Chamberlain tried this crap with Hitler and the Nazis and look how well that turned out.

This is nothing like that situation.

[White Doors]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

This is nothing like that situation.

Oh! well that's that then!

[Devils'Advocate]

Originally Posted by White Doors

Oh! well that's that then!

Well, it was a kind of ridiculous statement.

One party negotiated with another party and it ended up in a World War.

Therefore no party should ever negotiate with any other party ever.

I'm not saying that anybody should be inviting the Taliban to a negotiating table. I'm saying that dismissing any type of negotiation, ever, based on Chamberlain/Hitler is foolish. Which is what Jetsfan seemed to be insinuating.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Flames in 07: You are against negotiating with China, North Korea, Nigeria...? Hell, it was by negotiation with a government that didn't respect human rights that ended aparthied in South Africa.

[White Doors]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

Well, it was a kind of ridiculous statement.

One party negotiated with another party and it ended up in a World War.

Therefore no party should ever negotiate with any other party ever.

I'm not saying that anybody should be inviting the Taliban to a negotiating table. I'm saying that dismissing any type of negotiation, ever, based on Chamberlain/Hitler is foolish. Which is what Jetsfan seemed to be insinuating.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Flames in 07: You are against negotiating with China, North Korea, Nigeria...? Hell, it was by negotiation with a government that didn't respect human rights that ended aparthied in South Africa.

Well, fair enough, but I didn't get that from his post. I'll let him clarify himself. I do believe that the civilized world is facing a different, albeit just as dangerous, threat as last faced in WW2 - which was my point.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by White Doors

Well, fair enough, but I didn't get that from his post. I'll let him clarify himself. I do believe that the civilized world is facing a different, albeit just as dangerous, threat as last faced in WW2 - which was my point.

Trying to end a possible world war by negotiating the return of territories that were largely germanic with an emerging military state is far different than negotiating with a pocket of armed resistance who used to be the government within a state, but is now competing amongst many other violent interests for sepremacy in the immediate region of aghanistan.

Wholly different situation that I felt was fairly self-evident.