Canadian Politics, Election

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!!!!!!

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!

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.

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.

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....

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."

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.

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

Leelee;

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


Camac.

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

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

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/e...n-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/opinio...article1487435/

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

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