Have the Liberals robbed us of an election over Afghanistan?
As I write, Stephen Harper is mulling over the “Liberal position” on Afghanistan.
As I am writing, another news story came in across the wire saying a suicide car bomber targeting a Canadian military convoy detonated his explosives at a busy market in southern Afghanistan today killing 37 civilians and wounding three Canadians.
The day before, on Sunday, more than 100 people were killed by a suicide bomber outside Khandahar city. It was the deadliest bombing since the invasion of Afghanistan began in 2001.
The Liberals have proposed suggestions to the Government in order to reach a compromise on our role in Afghanistan and its duration. Why? Why a compromise?
There are some, in the Liberal caucus, apparently, that agrees with Stephen Harper’s approach to Afghanistan: an open-ended combat role and a muscular approach to Canadian involvement that would see more “peace-making and less “peace-keeping”.
It looks as if neither the Conservatives, nor the Liberals, want to use the war in Afghanistan as a “wedge” issue. Why?
The Liberals are saying they would like to see more emphasis on reconstruction and less on combat. To that end, they would like to see the diminishment of “sweep missions” that search out the enemy to engage.
There are about four support people “behind the wire” for every one active combat personnel in the field.
Canada currently has a combat battalion of 1200 troops. Liberal defense critic Denis Coderre has said he would like to see that element out of Khandahar completely. Coderre was overruled by other Liberals and he has been back-peddling ever since. On my broadcast Tuesday, February 19, 2008 I will ask Coderre what he meant/means. Many, simply find the whole Liberal position muddled – a mess.
Simply put, if you are in Khandahar, you are in a combat zone. The only way to completely avoid security concerns is to reposition troops to the north. That would be a Liberal position that actually makes sense.
What Stephane Dion wants is to stop the bleeding and let someone else take a turn in the heavy lifting department. Approximately 70 percent of Canadians agree, according to current polls.
So, why not let the combat/no-combat aspect of the Afghanistan mission play out in a general election? It is not “playing politics” with out troops, it is about democracy in action.
In the 1930’s, the Dictators of Europe often spoke about the messy democracies that they replaced by saying that the “future of a country is not something with which people should play politics; that it should not be left to “intriguers’ and meddlers”. Only a “firm hand” can drive a cart – you cannot have a cart being pulled by 12 horses going in different directions.
You get the idea.
Democracy, and democratic processes, should never be convenient for the status-quo. Only NDP Leader Jack Lyaton, and the Bloc, are saying leave Afghanistan completely. In other words, the Conservative position, stay and fight, and the NDP position, leave now, are understandable. Leave it to the Liberals to confuse everyone.
The military are saying to me that the Liberal position is untenable because in order to have security, in order to have reconstruction in the south, in Khandahar, you have to engage the enemy, and you need the freedom to conduct engagement and not have your hands tied.
By staying in Khandhar, the Liberals are falling into a semantics trap when it comes to “security” and what it means. The military will simply conduct business as usual and the Liberals and Conservatives can call it a new name – or sell the idea that there is greater emphasis on “reconstruction” and Afghan army training.
The Quebec wing of the Liberal party, led by Dion and Coderre, clearly want an end to combat deaths and combat exposure. We have done our part, they say. To that end the Quebec Liberals are more in line with the majority of Canadians.
But the contentious nature of our involvement in Afghanistan has been high-jacked by the status-quo Tories and English Liberals who are preventing public discourse on this issue while billions are being spent and soldiers are being wounded and dying.
The only real difference between the Liberal position as it stands now and the Tory position is the Liberals want out completely by 2011. It is not much of a distinction.
Let a debate happen.
What are the Liberals and the Tories afraid of anyway, democracy?
What a concept.
February 19th, 2008 at 6:44 am
Other than a politian or a couple of bleeding-heart liberal positioned, people, who is really against Afghanistan?
Everyone I have met is for it and everyone I’ve heard is for it except a few small groups. Why tell me WHY should we be debating this?
This is a made-up political issue in my opinion.
February 20th, 2008 at 1:21 pm
I agree with you that Dion and the Liberals have robbed the Canadian people of an election on Afghanistan. However, as the polls tell us, the Canadian people do not want an election and members of parliament do not want ( or so they say) an election.
That being said- this very important issue should be debated in the house without Harper’s threat of a confidence motion. This transparent move by the P.M. has probably lost him the next election. By backing down Dion, as well, has most likely lost any support he might have had.
Whether one wants the troops left in Afghanistan or not- an honest debate is necessary with or without an election. The only winners in this situation are the hawks of both parties and possibility the NDP at the next election.
February 21st, 2008 at 6:44 am
People are naive to think that a spring election will do anything but assure the Afghan mission will continue until 2011. Should there be a spring election the Tories are virtually guaranteed a majority government….something that couldn’t come soon enough for me. Although I live in the Eastern Shore/Sackville riding and will be giving my vote to Peter Stoffer (because he has earned it) I will be hoping that the Conservatives secure the majority gov.
Finally…a government with some nerve.
February 21st, 2008 at 9:09 am
I agree with you that Dion and the Liberals have robbed the Canadian people of an election on Afghanistan. However, as the polls tell us, the Canadian people do not want an election and members of parliament do not want ( or so they say) an election.
That being said- this very important issue should be debated in the house without Harper’s threat of a confidence motion. This transparent move by the P.M. has probably lost him the next election. By backing down Dion, as well, has most likely lost any support he might have had.
Whether one wants the troops left in Afghanistan or not- an honest debate is necessary with or without an election. The only winners in this situation are the hawks of both parties and possibility the NDP at the next election.
February 25th, 2008 at 9:10 pm
The real question should be-does our presence in Afghanistan even matter?
Has Canada reached a whole new level of irrelevancy in foreign and military affairs?
We may belong to the UN , NATO and the G-8 and many more world organizations, but the truth is that Canada has ceased to matter.
In the cut-throat realm of international relations, power still comes primarily from the barrel of a gun, not from ranks of social workers we Canadians believe we send abroad. Our shaky defense policies, pandering to political correctness and too little money thrown too late have left our military weak. The weakness of the Canadian military has played a part in limiting its ability to operate on foreign fields as well as destroying the country’s reputation in global capitals.
We continue to dispatch heavily stressed service men and women into dangerous situations around the world to serve political end. We supply our troops with ancient equipment and uniforms, beg transport from the US, and place restrictions on their strategies that cripple our servicemen in field with rules and regulations.
We preach and posture our values to the world and Ottawa thinks the world cares.
We claim we are peace makers. Currently we are 34th in providing troops for UN peacekeeping. Somewhere behind Bangladesh and Figi.
It has not always been this way.
There was a time when we boasted a fierce reputation.
Between 1914-1918 we raised 650,000 men from a population of just 8 million.
In World War II, Canada put 1.1 million men and women in uniform, 10% of the population.
We sent what became the world’s third largest navy, raised the fourth largest airforce.
Now we squabble over the meager 2500 servicemen ill supported in Afghanistan.
Have we changed so much?
When did pandering politics and cheap popularity replace sound judgement.
When did Anti-Americanism become our foreign policy?
When did scepticism replace bravery and mediocrity for excellence?
Where are the cries of citizens supporting brave men and women doing great deeds?
I believe we can look to our proud national history to remind ourselves who we are. We are proud defenders of good values. We are as fierce as we are peaceful and polite. It is the legacy handed down to us and well earned in hardfighting Vimy, Ortona, and the Battle of the Atlantic.
I am unabashedly proud of Canada.
I believe in our Afghanistan effort to provide basic security and human decency to a country overrun with corruption and disrespect for human life.
I would like to see us tackle it properly with adequate resources, and a forcefulness representative of true Canadian spirit.
Laura
February 26th, 2008 at 7:59 am
In refernece to your comments about Rick Hillier at the begining of your February 26 show…
Are you completely incapable of seeing the obvious? All Hillier has said is that the debate on Afghanistan has been going on for far too long and it is time for the politicians, and by extension the people, to shit or get off the pot! The men and women of the forces don’t choose the battles they are sent to fight in, they volunteer to go where they are needed and lay their lives on the line for reasons that many ordinary people will never understand. But we all have to start realizing that there is a big difference between supporting a government and supporting the troops and that we all have a role in any deaths that occur in Afghanistan as long as the debate continues.
If we as a people want our troops out of Afghanistan, then we need to send a clear message to the government….if we believe in the mission then we have to send that message as well, but we cannot continue to allow our indecision to be the primary reason our troops are being targeted. This situation is analogous to two parents fighting over how to discipline an unruly child….as long as the debate continues over how to handle the situation then the child will continue to act out and in all likely hood behave even worse. The Taliban is no different. They know that they cannot win a conventional war, so they use the simplest tactic in warfare…divide and conquer…as long as we show a divided front on the subject of Afghanistan we invite the Taliban to continue using (hard to counter) guerilla tactics to kill our soldiers.
Our indecision and that of other countries involved has claimed the lives of more soldiers than any single member of the Taliban and that is just the cold hard truth. If NATO countries pull out, the killing would stop…if they choose to fight as one with the goal being to truly overwhelm and eliminate the Taliban, then far fewer lives would be lost then if they were to sit back on their heals for the next 10 years debating what to do next.
Pardon the language but it is time to shit or get off the pot. Hillier knows what he is talking about and anyone who questions his motives should pick up a weapon and stand in front of our troops if they are unwilling to stand behind them.
Brett
Saint John, NB
February 27th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
The liberals have robbed us of nothing. But according to many people , they did rob us of between 250-500 million dollars while they were in power for 10 years. Nobody is being made to answer for that except these Guite and Breault fellows- and that only over 1.4 million. Paul Martin immorally set up a sham head office in the Barbados for his multi-gazillion dollar Canada steamship lines so that he could avoid paying fair taxes here in Canada…. The GD country he was Prime Minister of. Like always, the only time the little guy gets heard from is when he brings his trap door underwear and a tube of KY. Smile, big brother is watching.
March 2nd, 2008 at 7:32 am
Do you think Dion wants to be in the PMs chair if the Canadian troops are pulled out of Kandahar Province prematurely? The Taliban would immediately move back in and the slaughter of retribution would take place.
March 28th, 2008 at 10:03 am
Hi Andrew. I hope you display my comment this time.I heard you this morning saying RODNEY MACDONALD is going to be on your show soon. Would you give us advance notice so I can turn to another station.Even though I listen to you every day ,that is one day I turn you OFF. I cannot express how disgusted I am with this government .They have ripped off everyN.S,in every way they can from the ATV owners to the senior s with the pharmacare premiums and lately to USER FEES ,not to mention personal income tax which is about the highest in canada.I wish the opposition will get a backbone and throw these guys out of office .The damage they have done will never be corrected,but put them out before more damage is done, This comment is submitted by a lifelong Progressive Conservative,but never will I vote for this partyagain. I am 75 years of age and I have never seen this bad a govenment before ,they have found a NEW LOW.To all voters PLEASE vote for anyother party ,but not the P.C. party