by Michel Chossudovsky
While the US Congress questions the legitimacy of the war on Libya, the Canadian parliament with one dissenting voice, votes in favor of extending Canada's participation in an illegal and criminal military undertaking:
On Tuesday, after Canada recognized the NTC as Libya's legitimate government, Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird said the rebels are the true representatives of the Libyan population and will therefore be a critical player in Canada's efforts to provide assistance.
"Our government will engage with the institutions and representatives of the NTC," Baird told Parliament on Tuesday before the evening vote. "I will be seeking a meeting with my counterparts on the NTC.
"We will identify members of the NTC responsible for domestic issues and propose meetings with their Canadian counterparts. We will also happily arrange meetings between NTC members and honourable members of this place."
The announcement also came hot on the heels of Ottawa's new commitment of $2 million in humanitarian assistance to civilians in Libya.
Green Party Leader Elizabeth May was the only dissenting MP to vote against the extension of the mission for three-and-a-half months. (CTV, June 15, 2011)
The broader implications of this "humanitarian war" and Ottawa's role in the US-NATO military alliance, not to mention the cost of this military operation to Canadian taxpayers has been barely mentioned in Canada's media.
The New Democratic Party (NDP) and the Bloc Quebecois, which claim to be "progressive' and "anti-war", have given a blank cheque to the US-NATO sponsored war in North Africa.
read full article http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=25301
Stumble It!
http://www.ceasefire.ca/?p=8058
added on June 20, 2011
Stop Bombing Libya
Tell Stephen Harper and other party leaders that you do not support the current bombings by Canadian fighter-bombers in Libya. Send your letter, right away.
Prime Minister Harper:
I strongly urge you to stop the bombing in Libya by Canadian fighter-bombers, and instead work towards a ceasefire that will bring a long-term peaceful, secure, and democratic outcome to the conflict.
By Rick Rozoff
Each of the wars the U.S. and its NATO allies have waged since 1999 has gained the Pentagon and the Alliance new military bases and expeditionary contingents in subjugated and adjoining nations in Southeastern Europe, the Eastern Mediterranean and Persian Gulf, and South and Central Asia.
Just as the Yugoslav, Afghan and Iraqi wars contributed to developing a U.S.-led NATO international military intervention capability for use against Libya today, so the Libyan experience is being employed for future conflicts.
read full article http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php? ... &aid=25314
http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20 ... en-110620/
Civilian deaths won't derail Libya mission: NATO chief
http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20 ... en-110620/
"And obviously we deeply regret the loss of life," he added, "but we do all we can to avoid civilian casualties."
whereas:
Dadaab, a sprawling desert "city" in Kenya with a population expected to reach 450,000 by the end of the year, has run out of space, Médecins sans Frontières (MSF) said.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/ju ... lared-full
Syrian forces shot dead at least 18 protesters yesterday as one of its most reviled figures gave up his business empire in an attempt to assuage public anger.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... igure.html
And the list goes on.
Vancouver Riots.jpg
So Caleb, what's your answer? We go into all those places and act as policeman? We started off saying we were just going to create a no fly zone in Libya, now we seem to be getting ready for another land war. I guess all those guys coming back from Astan need somewhere to go.
I have no sweeping answers. I'm just saying we can't in good conscious sit back and do nothing. We also can't police everywhere, especially due to our lack of long range capabilities. And when we try to buy new fighters that would help to reduce civilian deaths, that gets endlessly debated about until nothing is done as well.
We have limited capabilities, so we have to pick our battles carefully. Ghadaffi was the only one using military force to quell civilian unrest. The UN sanctioned action, and we are making a difference in Libya, so it seems that is what we should put military effort behind right now.
And to diffuse your paranoia, it's ground troops we have returning Afghanistan. Not much help in an air-only operation.
So Caleb, what's your answer? We go into all those places and act as policeman? We started off saying we were just going to create a no fly zone in Libya, now we seem to be getting ready for another land war. I guess all those guys coming back from Astan need somewhere to go.
I have no sweeping answers. I'm just saying we can't in good conscious sit back and do nothing. We also can't police everywhere, especially due to our lack of long range capabilities. And when we try to buy new fighters that would help to reduce civilian deaths, that gets endlessly debated about until nothing is done as well.
We have limited capabilities, so we have to pick our battles carefully. Ghadaffi was the only one using military force to quell civilian unrest. The UN sanctioned action, and we are making a difference in Libya, so it seems that is what we should put military effort behind right now.
And to diffuse your paranoia, it's ground troops we have returning Afghanistan. Not much help in an air-only operation.
My point was that the pressure seems to be on to turn this into a ground operation. It seems we have to win at all costs.
Absolutely! Sign that petition! Let Ghadaffi kill more civilians while we sit on our asses and do nothing, just like Dharfur!
Sorry Mr. C. But why should we be allowed to dispense "justice" at our (completely subjective) discretion? If we're to be a force to be reckoned with, as per the swine McKay's rantings, then we must be prepared to spread outselves mighty thin. But I don't see NATO itching to get into the Syrian fray the way it has with Libya.
http://robwipond.com/?p=501
Not meaning to digress, but governments in general like to sugar-coat their favorite projects. Next thing we'll hear is that the Tar Sands will boost our longevity and vital health........
My point was that the pressure seems to be on to turn this into a ground operation. It seems we have to win at all costs.
Where do you see we are turning this into a ground operation? I see nothing about it in the opinion piece linked in this story.
Are we not there to protect civilians from harm? What about that is so bad that we need to 'lose' at all costs?
[quote="Dr Caleb":3hhnlo1j]Absolutely! Sign that petition! Let Ghadaffi kill more civilians while we sit on our asses and do nothing, just like Dharfur!
Sorry Mr. C. But why should we be allowed to dispense "justice" at our (completely subjective) discretion? If we're to be a force to be reckoned with, as per the swine McKay's rantings, then we must be prepared to spread outselves mighty thin. But I don't see NATO itching to get into the Syrian fray the way it has with Libya.
Personal attacks aside, as I said, action in Libya is sanctioned by the UN. That same body has not sanctioned action in Syria. But don't let Mr. Chossudovskys' rant get in the way of some really good non sequitrs.
"Global Research" always cracks me up.
Not meaning to digress, but governments in general like to sugar-coat their favorite projects.
Then why do you?
Since when is sending young men to their deaths a favourite thing for governments to do?
Wars are where old men talk and young men die.
Wars are always fought for old men by young boys.
- Herodotus
Not meaning to digress, but governments in general like to sugar-coat their favorite projects.
Since when is sending young men to their deaths a favourite thing for governments to do?
Ever since there's been wars, Dr.C. Old men don't fight wars. They just reap the profits. You somehow think it's any different - that we're "more civilized"?
So, again, my question was, "Which governments had 'favourite projects' involving sending young men to their deaths?" I don't recall any government that enjoyed doing that. Ever.