Phony Debate On Afghanistan

Sorry, what is an "up down" vote?

I'm with you completely on your view of Canada's
likelihood of being trapped in Afghanistan.


________________________________________________________
My pickled onions are better than your pickled onions.
- Great Sage of the Mountains, circa 1889.
________________________________________________________

The Canadian army is in Afghanistan to protect Unocal's pipeline route from the Dauletabad gas fields in Turkmenistan to the seaport of Karachi in Pakistan. The pipeline route passes through Kandahar, an unstable area which is also known as the "tribal region". The mission of the Canadian army is to make this region safe for Unocal's pipeline.
Canadians should write their MPs and urge them to raise the issue in parliament during question period and to demand periodic updates on the pipeline's progress.

Bill Meyer

A vote is to follow even though little time has been given to the debate. All opposition will remain just that "apposed" to an extended term in Afghanistan. One may ask just why we have troops to settle American wars but none for peacekeeping. Voters are asking why we tag behind that country to clean up their mess's. I believe Harper has hidden cards or realizing the actual cost of sending troops in the front yard where the bullys fled from. When Bush invaded Afghanistan, he realized it was to be without resolve and attacked a country he thought would be easier to overcome. He was wrong once again and may be out on his third attempt with Iran.

---
Expect little from life and get more from it.

Say hello to another example of the Conservative idea of bringing ethics and accountability to government.

What's the rush? It's only mid-May and we are their already until 2007. If we are needed so badly those wanting us can wait another month or two for us to discuss this issue in full, instead of being ram-roded into making a decision.

Just like the softwood lumber deal, this deal reeks of pure politics. And like the softwood deal, will probably turn out to be a bad deal for Canada, but a good deal for the Conservatives and their perceived aura of 'getting things done'.

What I want to hear them answer is this - if we are there to create a new Afghan government, why are we killing members of the government - ie - the Taliban, who coincidentally make up part of the new government? And why are we supporting a government dominated by the Northern Alliance, who by all accounts are as dirty, corrupt, murderous and untrustworthy as the Taliban?

Oh what a twisted web we weave. And for what? Why are we having a debate on an extension when we haven't even had a debate on what we are doing there in the first place!

---
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.

LOL, an edit function would be a bonus for those of us that don't proof our work very much before hitting submit!

---
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.

Your points are well read and no need for editing. Good points made!

---
Expect little from life and get more from it.

Overextended due to Haiti? Dude... we have 6 people there (not including mounties). That isn't exactly a mega deployment. We have 21 people in the Balkans still, 28 in the Sinai and 48 in the Sudan (so much for not being able to contribute, eh?). <br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/operations/current_ops_e.asp">http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/operations/current_ops_e.asp</a><br />
<br />
I'm actually surprised to see any of you advocating a move for Canada to intervene in Sudan (I'd figure someone would be dredging up Talisman's Sudan adventure and saying that we were only there for the oil). I fully support this move... but I'd support a larger contingent in Haiti first. We never finished the job in Haiti, and if things continue on the road they are on, that country will degenerate yet again. Like our (larger) contingent in the Balkans, we should stay (in force if necessary) until we get the job done right. Then we can move on to the next mission. Otherwise, we are putting bandaids on severed arteries and doing little other than stemming the bleeding for a short time. <br />
<br />
Afghanistan and Haiti first. Complete the Balkans as well (although they seem fairly stabilized). If we have manpower, then Sudan. Where is the rest of the world while this is going on anyway? France, Germany, Belgium, etc... they have much larger armies... and I don't see them with huge deployments anywhere (although I could be wrong - so please correct me if I am).

I keep asking myself, “Where is the Arab league with respect to the Sudan?”