Quote:
Originally Posted by silent_jay
Who fucked it up then? The Easter Bunny?
|
Iraq was not Bush's war it is our war. Congress authorized the war and now it has spanned two different administrations and we are still there.
Quote:
Umm, it was rebuilding, we sent RCMP officers there to train Iraqi police, not to occupy the country, and Bob Rae, went in the summer of 2005 to help compose the new Iraqi constitution, and Jean-Pierre Kingsley served as head of the international team observing the Iraqi legislative election of January 2005, oh yeah and we gave approximately $300 million towards the rebuilding effort, so yeah, no occupation there.
Maybe read this, I know it's Wiki, but it may give you some insight Canada and the Iraq War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|
I get confused sometimes it is "rebuiling" or "nation building" and sometimes it is an "occupation" or an "illegal occupation" - like I said no matter how you say it, it was a war zone.
Quote:
|
Certainly not the PM at the time, if he supported the military effort, I reckon he would have supported the invasion, then again I'm not Mr. Chretien so I can't say what he was thinking. Maybe Harper when he was opposition leader, but look how well that support went once he was PM, he figured out fuck that, the people will butcher me if I sent soldiers to that clusterfuck.
|
Why did they send soldiers to Afghanistan. I read a report that Canadian soldiers were disproportionately killed in combat. What was the difference? Why did Canada even get involved?
---------- Post added at 03:27 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:20 PM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willravel
How many civilian deaths per year were there before the invasion vs. during and since? How was infrastructure in Iraq before the invasion vs. during and in the following 6 years? What was the state of radical (violent) islamic influence in Iraq before the invasion vs. after? By what measure do you find that Iraq was equal before and after the invasion?
|
I am not going to make a judgment on the question of if Iraq was F'd up by the US invasion or "occupation". I never lived their, it is not my country and I have no first hand basis to compare before and after. All I will say is that in some cases sacrifice or taking steps back may lead to long-term gain and may be well worth the price. It like when the US dropped nuclear bombs on Japan, who am I to say it F'd up Japan or not from the perspective of the Japanese people. From my point of view, it helped end the war - and that was worthwhile even-though there was loss of life and massive destruction. I think the alternatives would have been more costly.
---------- Post added at 03:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:27 PM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru
Well, I think the challenge is in being obvious about your convictions in the type of circumstances such as those Obama faces. It's not like he walked into your average presidential office.
|
We can not say Obama walked into a surprise. Everyone knew the circumstances and he ran saying how he would lead, his priorities, his goals, and how he believed the previous administration failed. Since he has not followed through.
Quote:
|
Maybe Obama's convictions aren't obvious to you; to say he has no convictions is a serious charge.
|
I see a pattern. We all occasionally fall short of what we want to be, but there is a theoretical point subjective to each of us where we make a determination on the question based on observed actions. On this question, I reach that point sooner than some. But at some point, I think even you would come to the same conclusion. This was my observation leading to my post #266. I think more people are coming to the conclusion I reached awhile ago.
And sometimes you must undo, where the mess is so terrible that doing something else would only make matters worse. If you're on the wrong path, you don't keep trotting down it; sometimes you have to backtrack.
Quote:
silent_jay more or less summed it up. But I will add that any support offered by Canadians on the level of government or elsewhere was generally applied more so to the "War on Terror" than it was in the mess (i.e. war operations) in Iraq.
Canadians tend to have a knack for wanting to fix things and make them better, and so that's what we do. Afghanistan is a bit of a different story, but it's a good place to look to see the difference between how we view one situation versus the other.
|
I understand taking a principled stance against preemptive war. what I am not clear on is a commitment of treasury and life to a war zone where a principled stance against a preemptive occurred. And my question has to do with how Bush influence Canada in that regard, if he did? And if so, why did it happen? What we have is American liberals saying Bush more or less fooled them into supporting a preemptive war, and now it appears Canadian's may have avoided initially being foold but later fell into Bush's trap. Given, Bush's alleged lack of intellect and diplomatic skills, it seems incredible that he could do all of that.
---------- Post added at 03:49 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:43 PM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by dc_dux
You dont think creating over 4 million refugees/displaced persons is a "fuck up"?
|
There are two issues here.
First, if it is a F-up, I see it as a US issue not a Bush issue.
Second, I say let the Iraqi people write the history on the impact the war had on their country. I would not want a war fought in my backyard, but before I concluded it was a F-up, I would want to see how everything ended up.
---------- Post added at 03:50 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:49 PM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by ring
Mixed media was much more eloquent regarding this type of verbiage,
the last time it raised its ugly head.
I want this to be the last time I ever see you, or anyone else,stoop
to this type of garbage. Knock it the fuck off.
|
After sleeping on this, I apologize. I should not have expressed my thought in that manner.