He was in Halifax to inspect the fire-damaged HMCS Chicoutimi and to speak to the Nova Scotia Progressive Conservative Party's annual meeting.
Harper was responding to a report that Canadian troops may be deployed to Iraq to help with reconstruction if Prime Minister Paul Martin agrees to the anticipated request from U.S. President George Bush.
The two leaders are expected to discuss the issue when they meet later this month in Brussels for a NATO summit meeting, the Toronto Star reported Saturday.
The paper says a small contingent of 40 Canadian troops would be sent abroad, joining another 300 NATO forces -- if Martin agrees.
The news comes days after Bush's State of the Union address. In it, he called on his allies for more foreign aid and support for Iraq's new government after a Jan. 30 election that Bush deemed "a great and historic achievement."
The mandate of the Canadian troops would be to help train Iraqi troops and prepare the violence-ravaged country for the eventual withdrawal of foreign troops.
etc
And another contributor writes:
05-02-06
Contributed by: Roy_Whyte
According to the Toronto Star and their sources, Paul Martin will discuss sending Canadians to Iraq during the upcoming NATO meeting on Feb. 22. Considering the overall position of the Canadian populace has been against involvement in Iraq, the Martin government is being very coy about this development.
The purpose of the deployment would be to help train Iraqi police forces. While that is an enduring move and hard to argue against, Paul Martin and his government need to remember how Iraq got to this point. Citing elections in Iraq as the reason for taking another look at sending troops, the Martin government is overlooking just why we stayed out of Iraq in the first place. Elections in this case do not excuse prior actions.
Canada would also be taking an opposite approach to not only earlier decisions on Iraq by Chrétien's government, but to that of other NATO members as well. France, Germany and Spain are showing no inclinations towards involving themselves in Iraq. The citizens of those nations have been against operations in Iraq since the beginning, much like Canadians.
{No. Like usual, Harper is just talking without researching. Don't feel bad for the shameless plug Roy ;) This is a matter that needs exposure. Dr.C}
[Proofreader's note: this article was edited for spelling and typos on February 7, 2005]
Stumble It!
---
If I stand for my country today...will my country be here to stand for me tomorrow?
---
"If you must kill a man, it costs you nothing to be polite about it." Winston Churchill
I don't think Harper is opposed to the 'idea' of sending troops to Iraq, I think he's holding Martin accountable for his words during the election.
So let us remember just HOW this war started. It started with the Bush cabal claiming that Iraq was responsible for 9/11, was in defiance of the UN, and was in cahoots with Osama. Of course all have been proven to be utterly wrong, and most of the charges were based on outright lies. Knowing this, the US government has changed the reason, the lemmings have bought it, and now it's about Iraqi freedom.
Well, there are those little things called 'international law', 'Nuremberg Trials', and the 'Geneva Conventions'. If the rightwing would stop with the rhetoric, they would realize that Iraqis have both a legal and an intrinsic moral right to fight the occupying armies. The rightwing foam at the mouth over this, but in the world of law and precedent, that is both fact and unassailable. The Iraqi army never surrendered. That is fact. That gives those soldiers the right under international law to fight on. Once again, the foaming begins, but fact is fact.
Canadians going to Iraq will not change any of that. That is fact. The world’s strongest army cannot stop it, adding a few Canadians will change nothing. What it WILL do is erode 50 years of Canadian gains on the fronts of human rights, multilateral action, and working from within the UN. To the far right in Canada, our proud history seems to mean nothing. It is all about gaining brownie points with a US president who is roundly hated around the world, including by a majority of Canadians.
Canada did the right thing by going to Afghanistan. That was a real war, based on law, and support by Canadian citizens. Iraq is the complete opposite. There is legal justification for the illegal invasion, no matter how they try to spin it after the fact. Elections there change nothing, as the death tolls again today show. What is more, the Shia leaders, the same ones who will win this quasi election, are already hinting at asking the Americans to leave. Why in the hell should Canadians be sent to a place where there is both open hostility, and an overall want by the people of the nation for the foreigners to get the hell out?
That leads me to my next point... the same rightwing that would have us give up our proud history, are the same ones championing these elections. If you REALLY believe that, then adhere to what the Iraqi people want - they want the foreigners out. So why do you want Canadians to go against the wishes of the 'free Iraqi people'? Answer that one!
There are far more places around the world that can use Canadian assistance where Canada will be recognized for it, will not become a terrorist target for it, and will actually be able to change the course of actions in said country. Like the Congo. I don't see these same freedom monkeys screaming and howling that we should be sending troops there, even though three million have already died. How come? Is it because America is not there, or is not in the least interested in bringing freedom to those who have endured a decade of civil war and savage killing? Enquiring minds would like to know, why Iraq and not Sudan or Congo?
“Battling the insurgents would demonstrate Canada's commitment to Iraqis.” NO, listening to the Iraqi people under the framework of international law would demonstrate our commitment to Iraqis.
---
If there was ever a time for Canadians to become pushy - now is the time - for time is running out on this nation called Canada.
---
If there was ever a time for Canadians to become pushy - now is the time - for time is running out on this nation called Canada.
---
The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter --
Winston Churchill
---
If there was ever a time for Canadians to become pushy - now is the time - for time is running out on this nation called Canada.
---
The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter --
Winston Churchill
It's a shame that so many people have the intellectual capacity of a 12 year old.