Celtic Radio Community [Powered by Invision Power Board]

Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format

Celtic Radio Community > Canada > Canadian Politics

Posted by: Camac 03-Sep-2008, 07:47 PM

Well my fellow Canadians it looks like Stevie boy is going to call an election on the 9th of Sept. That means 35 days from then on the 14 Oct. we will be at the Polls. To tell the truth I thinks it's a waste of time and money because there isn't one of them worth voting for but personally I don't think we can take another 4 years of Steve and his cronies.

Camac.

Posted by: Lady-of-Avalon 04-Sep-2008, 03:47 PM

Though I am not into the politic cauldron at all there are a few things that I sometime listen.
I completely agree to the fact that it is a waste of time and money.But again this is all in their strategy.
For one thing I won't be here to vote

and again they will bore people to death on television about predicting this and that...for what...the same ole crap...
One that doesn't stick to me at all is Dion...this one has something that I just don't like...I don't know...he just don't inspire me at all...
He doesn't have the stamina and backbone of a leader...in m eyes anyways.
And I certainly don't like Duceppe and his disciples freaking hypocrit face. All this one can do is yap for nothing and offers no solutions for anything.

My two pence
LOA

Posted by: Camac 04-Sep-2008, 05:41 PM

LOA;

Dion's a whimp, Harper's a Republican, and Duceppes solution for everything is seperation. and of course there is Layton the chief protester. Great selection for a Federal Election. I think I'll hibernate this one out.

Camac.

Posted by: Lady-of-Avalon 04-Sep-2008, 05:54 PM

You can always ask Bear to hibernate it with you after all...I'm sure he'll oblige ya!

Yes I agree not much of choices in these mongrels, sometimes I think we are becoming like our americans counterparts...no offense but we need new ideas, young ideas not the same old sh_t stories all the times.

LOA

Posted by: Camac 04-Sep-2008, 06:12 PM

QUOTE (Lady-of-Avalon @ 04-Sep-2008, 06:54 PM)

LOA;

BRING BACK PIERRE! Le

Bear can find his own cave.

Camac.

Posted by: Camac 07-Sep-2008, 07:31 AM

Well it is now official as of 8:00AM this morning we will be at the polls in 35 days to elect a new government. Very likely a new minority government or should I say old minority government. Over the next 34 days we will be subjected to the usual hooplah, promises and rhetoric. I'm a Liberal and will vote Liberal but it is wasted because as long as MR. Dion is head of the party they stand a snowball chance in Hell forming a majority.

Camac.

Posted by: oldraven 09-Sep-2008, 02:36 PM

All I can say is, this thread should be moved to the Politics forum ASAP. They set that section up with a disclaimer for a reason, and I don't think bringing up a political topic elsewhere on the boards would be appreciated.

Posted by: Camac 09-Sep-2008, 03:13 PM

oldraven; My mistake but when I enquired of macfive about a Canadian section to discuss all thing Canadaian I was informed that there already was one and it should or could be used,

Camac.

Posted by: Patch 09-Sep-2008, 08:48 PM

I like your limit to the campaign time,

Slàinte,

Patch

Posted by: Camac 10-Sep-2008, 06:59 AM

Patch;

Yeah 35 days is enough of listening to the Politicians, make false promises and lie.
I think the first TV add was aired within minuets of the election being called and already the Conservatives have had to apologize and withdraw one of them for being insulting. We up here don't much like attack adds especially if the get insulting. When Chretien was PM and running for another term the conservatives ran adds making fun of the way he talked and it cost them big when the votes were counted.

Camac.

Posted by: oldraven 10-Sep-2008, 07:19 AM

Let's start a tally! So far Harper has promised to cut our diesel tax in half. That only adds up to 2c/L, but who's counting?

That's 1! Last time there were so many promises made he had to stumble upon coming through with one or two whilst he was in office. Still, if you make 100 promises and follow through on 4, are you a keeper of promises, or just cast a wide net?

Posted by: Camac 10-Sep-2008, 09:11 AM

oldraven;

Lets face it they all promise the keys to the kingdom until they are elected. Personally I'm from Missouri "Show Me". As I have said I'm a life long Liberal and politicians are all the same. Guess it's a case of the devil I know. That 2c/L tax cut will just be pocketed by the oil companies and not passed on. They'll claim they need it for searching for new sources. I have to admit though that there is something about Harper I don't trust, not because he is Conservative, it's something in his eyes. Those three cohorts, Van Loan, and Keeny and the one from the Ottawa riding , I can't remember his name, remind me of Nixon's Watergate boys, do and say anything to get and keep power.

Camac.

PS. Here in Ontario most people are really POed that an election was called. How about the Maritimes?

Posted by: Patch 11-Sep-2008, 05:26 PM

When a politicians lips move, they are telling a lie! As to Harper, I felt the same way about Putin but bush looked into his eyes and saw a decent and honorable man that Americans could trust!

We hear nothing of your elections down here. Maybe we are too self absorbed in our problems.

Slàinte,

Patch

Posted by: Camac 11-Sep-2008, 06:17 PM

Patch;

Twice now this week P.M. Harper has had to apologize becaus the young bucks running his campaign have run off at the mouth and insult first the Liberal Leader Dion and just yesterday a Father whose son was killed in Afghanistan. This campaign onthe Conservative side is starting off dirty and they had better rein these young bucks in or they will definately blow it. Which is fine by me.

Camac.

Yeah! Harper reminds of a Bush/Putin type.

Posted by: Patch 11-Sep-2008, 07:11 PM

QUOTE (Camac @ 11-Sep-2008, 08:17 PM)

I certainly wish you better though it is somewhat comforting to know we are not the only one with problems.

Slàinte,

Patch

Posted by: Camac 11-Sep-2008, 07:16 PM

Patch;

AIN'T POLITICS FUN...

Posted by: Patch 11-Sep-2008, 07:39 PM

Yes, sometimes. It does bother me when I know a politician is telling lies and the masses just take it in and believe every word.

Slàinte,

Patch

Posted by: Camac 11-Sep-2008, 07:48 PM

Patch;

I think all politicians yours and ours go to a special school where they learn that if they tell a lie long enough and loud enough it becomes the truth. I think Dr. Goebels said something to that effect circa 1930s'.

Camac.

Posted by: Patch 11-Sep-2008, 07:57 PM

Sadly that works!

Slàinte,

Patch

Posted by: Camac 11-Sep-2008, 08:52 PM

QUOTE (Patch @ 11-Sep-2008, 08:57 PM)

Sadly that works!

Slàinte,

Patch

Patch;

How true.

Anyway I'm off to our nations' capitol on Sat. and if I see any of our gallant leaders I will be sure to ignore them just as they ignore the people unless they want something.

Camac.

Posted by: Patch 11-Sep-2008, 08:58 PM

QUOTE (Camac @ 11-Sep-2008, 10:52 PM)

QUOTE (Patch @ 11-Sep-2008, 08:57 PM)

Sadly that works!

Slàinte,

Patch

Have a good trip and as is my favorite saying, "Give em hell"!

Slàinte,

Patch

Posted by: Camac 29-Nov-2008, 08:11 AM

To-day 29 Nov. 2008 Canada stands on the brink of History and within a week we will learn if we go back to the polls or possibly have a coalition government, the first time that occurred was 1917, 91 years ago under P.M. Borden during the 1st War. Under our system this could very easily happen as the G.G. has the constitutional right to ask the opposition if they can form a government after a vote of non-confidence brings the rulling government down. To be honest I don't like Harper and his Conservatives but the country doesn't need this now, we have enough problems. In the last election Harper promised to work with all parties to come up with a solution to the financial crisis and as usual he was all talk and no action. His Finance Minister, Flaherty, stood in Parliament and said not one word about a proposed stimulus pack just how they were going to cut programs to save money. Canada might be in the best situation of all industrialized nations but we aren't out of the line of fire and we are going to get hit. Especially the Auto Sector which is the largest part of our Industrial base. The Gods protect us from fools and simpletons.

Camac.

Posted by: Lady-of-Avalon 29-Nov-2008, 08:44 AM

QUOTE (Camac @ 29-Nov-2008, 09:11 AM)

Especially the Auto Sector which is the largest part of our Industrial base. The Gods protect us from fools and simpletons.

Camac.

But dear Camac,

Whether we like it or not our neighbors to the south are the "driving" force behind our economy. Right now our neighbors are between governments so the real decisions will be taken after January 20th. Yes they have helped the banking industry, bailed them out is a better word, why, because there banking system was in shambles. This is one area where we canadians should be the example to follow, no system is perfect and our banks are still making profits be it less then expected.

Getting back to the auto industry I believe we do have to wait to see the American package and then our help to this industry can be and will be more pertinent. I can't see how GM in Canada could survive if GM in the States goes bankrupt. No one likes it when the government meddles in companies business, but in this case with the size of the bail out, conditions will have to be imposed to the GM's of this world. You can't keep on living over your head with the tax payers money.

Note: Since my english is not very good today I have asked the help of my husband to help express my opinion so it be understood without offense.

LOA

Posted by: Camac 29-Nov-2008, 08:58 AM

LOA;

The truth be known I am against bailing out the Auto Industry. Even if they go bankrupt they will still be here. Someone else will buy them out reduce the size and make cars that people want and can afford. If the government decides to help the big three it should be under very stringent rules. It should be in the form of loans that must be paid back with interest and the big three have to have a viable working plan that is going to bring long term benefits. The big problem is with the U.S. in that in order for the big three to survive there they will close plants and layoff workers and the first ones to go will be plants outside the U,S, such as Oshawa and Windsor. Last night on the news they announced that the Ontario Gov. has given Ford, G.M., and Chrysler 3 days to come up with a viable plan for consideration. To bad Magna didn't buy Chrysler when they had the opportunity.

Camac.

Posted by: oldraven 29-Nov-2008, 12:21 PM

Camac, I am all for loaning the money to the Detroit 3 (we no longer can call them the Big Three). Otherwise, I agree with what you've said. They do have to show a proven long term plan to get back to profitability, and just like back in 1979, it should be a loan. That loan was paid back in full, with interest, so there's no reason to think this one won't be.

About the product, the sad situation is that GM and Ford are producing those cars people are asking for. They just don't buy them when they're delivered. I think the most important part of this whole auto sector crisis is it will have, and already has, forced the domestic automakers to produce better, higher quality, more economical, unique cars, at the same time that North Americans realise how important it is to support the local auto sector. Two lessons will be learned here. They're also planning to DRIVE to Washington, with a number of workers from different states, in 51 of Detroit's environmentally friendly and fuel efficient models (yes, 51 between mostly two automakers, since Chrysler only has three EV converted cars as concepts; a Caravan, a Wrangler, and a Lotus Europa with a Dodge badge on the snout), as an attempt to show that they have indeed been working hard on developing low emissions, fuel sipping, hybrid driven, top quality cars for the market. This is a very obvious and VISIBLE campaign that will show, literally, the North American public that the stigma the D3 live with as builders of only dino-guzzling SUVs, trucks, and full size cars that drive like they're made of pop-sickle sticks and elastic bands, is way off base, and outdated. An old stigma that has been proven wrong by statistics, awards, and independent testing. They've even had to set up a virtual caravan for all of the hundreds of people who showed an interest in making the trip to DC with the automakers, to show support. Of course, they were given a 'Thanks, but no thanks', because that would be a nightmare when the Environmental groups got wind of it.

The US Gov. has already demanded that the D3 come back to the table with clearly outlined plans for turnaround and cost cutting. The previous $25B deal is for the tooling, development, and building of new green cars and technologies. That can't be used in the other bleeding arms of the corporation.

I was rooting for Magna to win the bid to buy Chrysler as well, but now I'm glad they didn't. Chrysler (Cerberus) is a lame duck. I really don't think this loan will get them farther than six months down the road. The best option now is for Magna to be there to buy the manufacturing and design infrastructure after Chrysler is dismantled. It would be much better to have Magna as its own auto manufacturer with their home offices in Canada, than have the fall of an auto giant on the hands of a Canadian buisiness. I don't know about you, but I'd be ecstatic to own an honest Canadian car, marketed as by green car company.

Posted by: Camac 29-Nov-2008, 12:27 PM

oldraven;;
Didn't there use to be a Canadian car that was designed and made in Nova Scotia. I believe it was a luxury sports car made from stainless steel. It would be great if Magna did produce its own car.

Camac.

Posted by: oldraven 29-Nov-2008, 12:53 PM

QUOTE (Camac @ 29-Nov-2008, 11:27 AM)

The Briklin SV1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bricklin_SV-1 It was produced in New Brunswick, but wasn't any more a Canadian car company than GM, as they both had foreign ownership. Malcolm Bricklin was the brainchild behind the car, and he set up the factories in NB just as VW sets up factories in Brazil and Mexico. Back in the 70's, Canada was actually a cheap place to build a car, whereas a year ago we were technically the most expensive place on earth to build one. That explains the plight of Oshawa.

Now, there is a company in Quebec who's developed a mid-engined supercar, and has shown two prototypes at auto shows in the past. The Locus Plethore. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Locus_plethore

There are also a number of small outfits that build EV's and such, though the biggest, Zenn (Zero Emissions No Noise), is only available for sale in Quebec, thanks to Transport Canada ruling against them in a regulation for low speed vehicles, though in the US it's available in most States. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZENN

Posted by: Camac 30-Nov-2008, 08:26 AM

oldraven;

If you have been watching the news things are going to bein turmoil over the next week. Harper has already backed down over the election subsidies and by delaying the vote gives them time to come up with something on the economy. We live in interesting times.

Camac

PS: "Only in Canada".

Posted by: Patch 30-Nov-2008, 12:12 PM

I was by the local GM dealer this AM and the big SUV's and 4wd pickups are now over 90% if their inventory. There were also 5 full size Cadillac's No Pontiacs or Buicks and 3 Chevrolets. There was a Corvette in the show room.

They have no room for more Vehicles.

Slàinte,

Patch

Posted by: oldraven 01-Dec-2008, 06:59 AM

Thank goodness Truck and SUV sales have picked back up. I don't think GM or Ford will continue on with their previous emphasis on these vehicles, but it will help them immensely to get rid of the inventory so they can get the new models in.

Posted by: Lady-of-Avalon 01-Dec-2008, 05:21 PM

Well, I have to say that I'm totaly disgusted by what is going on in Ottawa.
They have managed to do the "coup d'état" in modern style because that's exactly what it is....

Now we found ourselves govern by a knitwit as Prime Minister that could not even have the vote of confidence from his own party members and the people in the last election...wonderful.
And the BQ and the NPD that all of a sudden will support him and promised it in writing...

This is the perfect proof that even though they preach the right to vote is a privilege...well I say to hell for my vote didn't count for nothing here.And it proves another thing as well...that goverments wherever it is either in Iran or Iraq or U.S.A or here the supposedly best country in the world,holds each and everyone of us by the balls...They do whatever they want like it or not without the peoples opinion.Now they promise all kinds of things about job loss and act to reinstate the economy...where do they take all that money all of a sudden.

One journalist ask Dion and the other two how can they explain all this to the people...Dion bent his head and ask Layton to answer this one....that's promising!!!

In France during the Revolution power abusers went through the same place.
Madame La Guillotine...

...this is where they should all end up.In those days the people had enough of the so called "peoples politics" and the people did the clean up...I think we need do the same.

Vive la Révolution!!!!!!

Posted by: oldraven 01-Dec-2008, 07:24 PM

Well, LoA, your vote still counts. We don't vote for a leader, in Canada. We vote for a representative, and your current one isn't going anywhere. It's not a coup, either. This is a Coalition, which isn't a new idea. Look to Germany for a history on that. Really, this is the same thing the Torries did when they joined with the Alliance, which was Torry anyway. We'll have to wait and see, but I for one will be glad to see Harper out of office.

Also, they didn't stick with Dion, did they? Are they well?!? I thought Iggy was a shoe in on this one!

Posted by: oldraven 01-Dec-2008, 07:27 PM

Another way to look at it is this. My vote didn't count for anything either. Neither my MP, nor my PM are the person I voted for. The majority of Canadians did not vote for the Conservatives. There are a lot of ways to see this change in Government.

Posted by: Camac 01-Dec-2008, 07:34 PM

LOA;

I agree with you on Dion but what is possibly going to happen is completely legal and within the bounds of our constitution. Harper is a mean vindictive person and wanted to get back at the opposition because he didn't get a majority. Well it's backfired on him and now he and the conservatives are running scared. He still has one possible option left and that is to recess Parliament Early and come back in the New Year with a new Throne Speach heavy on Econamic Stimulus and try to ride out the storm.
I for one don't want to have another election so soon, most people didn't want the last one so I think the G.G. will ask the opposition to form a government and go from there. All legal under our Parliamentary System. We had a coalition government once before, 91 years ago in 1917 under P.M. Borden during the 1st World War.

Camac.

Posted by: sisterknight 02-Dec-2008, 01:42 PM

there seems to be a lot more green party signs out my way than anything else....as for this coalition....well talk about the back way to become pm!my question is why did they wait sooooo long to topple this gvt? i mean didn't they talk about this ages ago?????i tend to agree with ye aule raven about iggy....

Posted by: Leelee 14-May-2009, 08:16 AM

I heard this morning on the news that Canada may have to increase their defence force....

Russian report suggests conflict over Arctic possible
By Randy Boswell, Canwest News Service
May 13, 2009

The national security strategy released Wednesday surveyed a range of possible threats facing Russia along its Asian, European and Arctic frontiers, according to various news reports from Moscow.Photograph by: Marcel Mochet/AFP/Getty Images, Getty ImagesA new Russian government security report that predicts possible military conflict over energy resources — including Arctic oil — is another "wake-up call" for Canada, says one of the country's top analysts on polar geopolitics.

"In a competition for resources, problems that involve the use of military force cannot be excluded that would destroy the balance of forces close to the borders of the Russian Federation and her allies," states the document, which forecasts security threats up to 2020 and named the petroleum-rich Arctic — where seabed boundaries are now being determined under the rules of a UN treaty — as a potential conflict zone.

The national security strategy released Wednesday surveyed a range of possible threats facing Russia along its Asian, European and Arctic frontiers, according to various news reports from Moscow.

Requests to the Russian Embassy in Ottawa for a copy of the security report and comments on its implications for Canada were not immediately returned.

A Department of Foreign Affairs spokesman said Canadian officials would not comment until receiving the report.

University of Calgary political scientist Rob Huebert — who said the Russian outlook released Wednesday appears to be a "realistic" view of possible conflicts —insisted that it should spur Canada's efforts to beef up Arctic defences while continuing to pursue peaceful outcomes on boundaries, shipping rules and resources in the disputed polar realm.

"The Russians have been talking very co-operatively, but they have been backing it up with an increasingly strong military set of actions," said Huebert, associate director of the university's Centre for Military and Strategic Studies.

"You mix uncertain boundaries with major powers and massive amounts of oil and gas, and you always get difficult international circumstances," he added. "I think the Russians have made that calculation."

Over the past three years, Russia has been sending conflicting signals to Canada and other polar nations about its planned approach to resolving potential Arctic conflicts, said Huebert.

A Russian submersible's planting of a flag on the North Pole sea floor in August 2007 sparked an international war of words over Arctic sovereignty, with Defence Minister Peter MacKay — then Canada's foreign minister — decrying the Russian act as a throwback to "15th-century" territorial imperialism.

Tensions appeared to flare again in late February when MacKay — nine days after two Russian aircraft ventured close to Canadian airspace in the Arctic — described in a news conference how Canadian fighter planes had raced northward to "send a strong signal" to the Russian pilots that "they should back off and stay out of our airspace."

But Russia's defence minister later objected to what he called MacKay's "bizarre" criticism of a "routine" test flight, and insisted his country is committed to co-operative, peaceful approach to problem-solving in the Arctic.

A Feb. 20 meeting in Moscow between top Canadian and Russian officials — revealed earlier this week by Canwest News Service — does appear to show significant co-operation between the two countries on Arctic issues.

The two sides appeared to be in agreement about Canada's claim to jurisdiction over the Northwest Passage, and even discussed a possible joint Russian-Canadian-Danish submission to the UN to determine Arctic sea floor boundaries.

But Wednesday's security report suggests Russia is also bracing for more pointed conflict in the Arctic and elsewhere as it strives to secure its position as a global energy superpower.

"The attention of international politics in the long-term perspective will be concentrated on the acquisition of energy resources," the paper said.

It said regions where such a competition for resources could arise included the Middle East, the Barents Sea, the Arctic, the Caspian Sea and Central Asia.

The strategy document was approved by President Dmitry Medvedev on Tuesday and published on Wednesday by the Russian Security Council, which includes Russia's top politicians and intelligence chiefs and is chaired by Medvedev.

"I see a Russia that is not necessarily getting aggressive," said Huebert, "but is getting increasingly assertive about controlling what it sees as the future of its long-term strength."

Posted by: Camac 14-May-2009, 08:31 AM

Leelee;

Although I do not like Stevie and his Conservatives I will give them this that they have done alot to boost our forces since being in office. Regrettably it is not enough as far more has to be done in the Arctic. The North West Passage and both the Magnetic and True North Pole are in our territory but the rest of the world seem to think they can ignore that and encroach when ever they feel like it. Granted if Russia decided to take our northern territory I doubt we could stop them militarily but they would know they had been in a fight because we would not tuck our tails between our legs and run away. Be lots of good Russian meat for the Polar Bears.

Camac.

Posted by: Leelee 15-May-2009, 07:57 AM

QUOTE

Camac Posted on 14-May-2009, 08:31 AM
Leelee;

Be lots of good Russian meat for the Polar Bears.

Camac.

The poor Polar Bears may get drunk from the content i.e. Russians love their vodka....blood alcohol levels may be extremely high

Posted by: Camac 15-May-2009, 08:02 AM

Leelee;

Free dinner and drinks. What more could you ask for.

Camac.

Posted by: Camac 16-May-2009, 10:26 AM

Leelee;

In this mornings' Globe and Mail and TO Star, there is an article on the Arctic; Canada tells E.U and Russia "The Arctic is ours keep your Hands Off" 1/3 of the Arctic including the North West Passage are within Canada's Territorial Boundaries, including the resources that lie beneath the Polar ice. Russia's recent claim on the North Pole is a violation of Canadian Territory and will be dealt with accordingly. Canada successfully blocked a move by the E.U to sit on the Arctic Council and has gone on an agressive campaign to assert our rights in the region. Both France and the U.S have rejected Canada's claim that the N.W.P. is within our territory and take the stand that it is international waters. Russia has stated that disputes over Arctic resources could lead to military action. Like I said more meat for the Bears. Vodka marinated Long Pork.

Camac.

(Geez I'm getting agressive in my dotage)

Posted by: Leelee 16-May-2009, 01:43 PM

QUOTE

Camac Posted on 16-May-2009, 10:26 AM
Leelee;

In this mornings' Globe and Mail and TO Star, there is an article on the Arctic; Canada tells E.U and Russia "The Arctic is ours keep your Hands Off" 1/3 of the Arctic including the North West Passage are within Canada's Territorial Boundaries, including the resources that lie beneath the Polar ice. Russia's recent claim on the North Pole is a violation of Canadian Territory and will be dealt with accordingly. Canada successfully blocked a move by the E.U to sit on the Arctic Council and has gone on an agressive campaign to assert our rights in the region. Both France and the U.S have rejected Canada's claim that the N.W.P. is within our territory and take the stand that it is international waters. Russia has stated that disputes over Arctic resources could lead to military action. Like I said more meat for the Bears. Vodka marinated Long Pork.

Camac.

(Geez I'm getting agressive in my dotage)

Excellent

Thank you for sharing the additional news

and being aggressive does have it's advantages

I wonder if we can get some footage of the regal Polar Bears dining on long pork

BTW Camac dear, you are the Featured CR Member of the Day

Posted by: Camac 01-Apr-2010, 03:49 PM

Well the rumours in the Cdn. media were true. Yesterday at a press conference Sec. of State Hilary Clinton stated that the US wants Canada to stay in Afghanistan and the Brits are backing her. Last year a resolution was passed in Parliament that Canada would end it's combat role in Afghanistan in 2011. We have done our part. Instead of wanting us to stay get the rest of NATO to get off their collective butts and commit to a larger combat role. We have paid our price at 141 dead and that is enough. It is comments like what Clinton said that get Canadians backs up and feel that the US or Britain are butting into our affairs.
We are a sovereign nation and we will make our own decissions.

Camac

Posted by: oldraven 01-Apr-2010, 04:04 PM

What comments were they? I thought she did a pretty good job of appealing to a friend than shaking a fist at the skinny kid. It's also nice that they aren't asking that we commit to any further combat, just help rebuild and train. If you ask me, that's exactly what most Canadians want our troops to be doing over there.

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/editorials/finish-the-afghan-mission-89582502.html

That said, my views on the Afghan mission have been changing a lot lately. I guess the easiest way to put it is this. If you want to know why the Taliban should be defeated, ask a Afghan-Canadian/American woman.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/who-are-the-taliban/article1487435/

Posted by: oldraven 01-Apr-2010, 04:04 PM

Gah! I really have to start proofreading. That was a grammatical nightmare.

Posted by: Camac 01-Apr-2010, 06:10 PM

oldraven;

I know and believe that the Taliban must be beaten. You will get no argument on that point from me. I can agree to us staying in Afghanistan to help rebuild the country and provide aid. The problem is if we keep troops there to provide security for aid workers it is going to entail combat. The thing that annoys me about the mission is the fact that certain NATO countries with larger and better equiped militaries than us are sitting on their collective backsides in nice so called safe areas of the country while our people bear a big part of the fighting. We have more than proved our worth. We are amoungst the best fighting troops in the world some would say THE BEST.

Clintons criticizing us isn't the problem it is how she did it at a press conference blindsiding our people. As one expert on diplomacy mentioned she has started a new form of diplomacy "Diplomacy through the Media". I fought ion a warmlike Afghanistan and believe my Friend we cannot win militarily.

Camac