General Hillier is of course the mouthpiece for a defence lobby intent on perpetuating the notion that our military is, and must be, a war-fighting force and that peacekeeping is nothing but a quaint anachronism. But is this the truth?
I would like to tell you about a new report commissioned by The Council of Canadians that uncovers the military-industrial motivations behind this well-funded public relations campaign, a report that shows there’s not one shred of evidence to back this tough-talk up and plenty to refute it.
[You may download the report here:
http://www.canadians.org/documents/Marching_Orders_06.pdf]
The report also decries the fact that we have spent more than $5 billion on the “war in Afghanistan”, a term the government now uses. Next year, we will spend $1.4 billion on the mission. Not to mention the cost in lives.
Canada has only 56 soldiers currently involved in UN missions in contrast to 1,149 in 1991. This is the antithesis of a global trend that has seen a marked rise in Blue Helmet activities by other, often more financially strapped countries. The stats don’t lie: despite the profitable climate of fear, these actions have resulted in more peaceful resolutions than ever before in history.
John Urquhart, Executive Director of The Council of Canadians, said his group is demanding a change of focus for Canada's military — back to peacekeeping and out of Afghanistan.
Urquhart wants this to be a defining issue in the next federal election.
“If Canada is to maintain its independence from the United States and the respect of other nations, and salvage its reputation as a peacekeeper internationally, it needs to change course now,” Urquhart said from Charlottetown.
Despite debate to the contrary, the evidence shows that UN missions are far more effective in resolving conflicts than U.S. missions, and the UN needs Canada now more than ever.
I urge you to read this report. While it exposes the back-room decisions that have landed us where we are today, it also contains a message of hope which proves that peace is achievable when hi-tech, expensive warmongering is shunned in favour of diplomacy and humanitarianism.
http://www.canadians.org/documents/Marching_Orders_06.pdf?tr=y&auid=2149243
Note: http://www.canadians.or...
http://www.canadians.or...
Marching Orders
Posted on Tuesday, November 21 at 10:03 by 4CanadaContributed By
Topic
Article Rating
(0 votes)
Options
Stumble It!Comments
view comments in forum
Page 1 2
Especially to a bunch of ill-informed mindless sheep who have no clue of how to think for themselves. Someone who wants to impose his will on others uses a term like "right perceptions." Most people with half a brain, who know how to think for themselves, have "differing perceptions."
Now get in line!
Please tell me of some of these UN actions that have resulted in peace.
Rwanda - 1 million dead - resolved by rebel invasion after UN FUBAR
Somalia - Still in civil war after major UN mess
Sudan - UN Blue Helmets and African Union soldiers stop nothing... 100,000+ killed and continues.
Bosnia - UN FUBAR, NATO takes over and solves
Haiti - UN is there for the 3rd time in 20 years... no resolution in sight. Armed gangs rule the streets.
Nepal - oh, wow... civil war.
Ethiopia and Eritrea - 2 countries with a truce that will hold only long enough for them to rearm - both countries have remobilized their militaries. But until an actual attack proceeds, I guess this is a "success"
Liberia - UN did such a good job both the rebels and government asked for US intervention
Wow. What a testament to the UN peacekeepers. And insofar as why Bangladesh has more peacekeepers than Canada... it's because the UN pays them to send their "troops". They send these guys without equipment to make money off the deployment - not to actually do peacekeeping. They leave their troops to basically fend for themselves. Which is why many of the missions fail miserably. Not for bad intentions, but because missions don't get proper troops in the field (instead you get a bunch of 3rd world pseudo soldiers) nor do they equip them properly or give them decent rules of engagement.
The quoted stats of 56 military people don't include deployments to Bosnia, the Sinai, Sierra Leonne, or African Union relationships for Sudan, etc... nor do they include police deployments for UN missions to Haiti. The fact is, because we have learned that the UN is inept at peacekeeping, we have had to stretch out to do things with other organizations (like the AU and NATO) as well as doing things ourselves.
While the Canadian public perception may be that UN sanctioned peacekeeping is the holy grail, the only fact that exists is that peacekeeping has only worked in Cypress, the Sinai (when it was first conceived) and the Golan between Israel and Syria (if you can call that working). No other UN "peacekeeping mission" has had a success. And the UN has gotten worse at it as time has gone on. There has not been 1 successful peacekeeping mission that started in the last 20 years (Ethiopia and Eritrea excepted because they look like they will go to war again). Of course, this is never discussed by the UN lovers... because peacekeeping must succeed or else they have been misleading their followers for years. Too bad that we have had to bury more than 200,000 people for the failures of UN peacekeeping in the meantime.
---
Expect little from life and get more from it.
O'Connor one day says we have plenty of troops to stay until 2009 and hell maybe for decades and the next day we have to have any new recruits trained by private companies because they've obviously sent the teachers into Afghanistan as well. This "pseudo-government" has no clue about what they are doing and how much damage they are creating at home and abroad. While they send our military away to kill others they are increasing the danger for Canadians everywhere.
---
"And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music." Friedrich Nietzsche
Are you trying to say that NATO is a success and will be a success in Afghanistan? If you are, I am here to say that I disagree. I watched quite a few hours of the recent NATO parliamentary session in Quebec on CPAC and that did not sound like a group of countries that WANTED to be trying to solve the war in Afghanistan.
Most countries like to make other countries THINK they have strong militaries yet when it comes to actually doing something it proves they do not. That includes the USA.
I would say that more NATO countries are not interested in fighting US made wars than are. So why is it that war supporters continue to push for something that is destined to fail? At what point to do you stop thinking war is the answer rather than giving some honest aid to these countries?
NATO MPs were suggesting that they would be better off working with the UN. And I was thinking they are wasting resources being two separate organinzations.
I believe more and more people are less and less interested in fighting wars and that is becoming obvious with the lack of enthusiasm being shown for either the Afghan participation or joining in on the occupation of Iraq.
Your long list of failed UN missions is not proof that the UN failed it is proof that corporate fascism otherwise known as capitalism does not work here or over there.
---
"And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music." Friedrich Nietzsche
The UN is bankrupt - both morally and economically. It has no direction since it devolves into petty arguements over every situation. It gets very little done since the competing interests of the security council members almost always result in a veto over action. And those actions that proceed are hindered by non-engagement clauses or by sending ill equipped troops into situations they cannot be prepared for.
The Europeans want a UN mission in Afghanistan because it lends additional "public" legitimacy for their involvement and it will help get them re-elected. However, the UN is what gave the initial invasion by NATO international credence in the first place. 5 different UN Security Council resolutions passed against Afghanistan under the Taliban - 1368, 1373, 1383, 1378 and 1386. These resolutions did everything from condemning the Taliban, to legalizing the setting up of the new government. These were unanimously approved - even China and Russia agreed to every single one of them. Under the approval of the UN, NATO acted (in part because the UN is too slow to act).
When you have an arguement for the continued existence of UN peacekeeping missions based on some tangible success let me know and we can continue this debate.
And as fact, there have been zero deserters or conscientious objectors to Afghanistan in Canada. The only guy claiming this status was never going to be sent to Afghanistan anyway (Francisco Juarez). Of course, those sorts of facts are overlooked by the likes of the NDP and others who want (or is it they need) someone with credibility (no matter how tenuous) to speak out on their behalf.
The traditional, historical purpose of any military is either to further the wealth creating ambitions of some ruling sector, or defend against them.
Develop an economic system that doesn't rely on "free wealth creation" and there won't be any need for the incredible waste of resources and lives for the military and in wars.
Ten days of the present global military spending would ensure clean water for everybody on Earth. But we have our Harpers, Bushes and their heroes, like Hillier and so 5,000 children die every day from filthy water they have to drink.
Michael, the UN may be bankrupt, but nowhere near to the extent of the Land of the Righteous and Holy, our Harpie and Hillier desperately want us to join.
Ed Deak, Big Lake, BC.
If nothing I said was constructive to you Michael, you are the one beating yourself over the head, no one has to do that for you. And just because I responded to something you said does not make this a personal attack, where did I call YOU a corporate fascist? Or are you reading between my lines something that only you could have conjured up?
---
"And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music." Friedrich Nietzsche
And that is what I find so appauling about war Ed. This kind of spending would go so much farther than what we are doing yet there are still enough of the knuckle walkers to keep us from becoming the best we can be as a species.
---
"And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music." Friedrich Nietzsche
But I'd still like to hear about those UN successes that would lend credence to your assertion that doing missions without the UN is bad.
They ARE already. CBC had interveiwed Canadian solders training in the south.
---
Expect little from life and get more from it.
From what I understand, these lads make about $6K a month for being over there. There appears to have been as many deaths from MVAs as there was from the enemy. Perhaps Tim Hortons serves a function and the fact the boys haven't been over that long.
---
Expect little from life and get more from it.