Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
bush_cheney2004

Canada To Launch Airstrikes Against ISIL

Recommended Posts

I hope we realize that we are now at war with the self declared state of ISIL. If supporters of ISIL who are now in Canada choose to join this war by targeting people and places in Canada, is that legitimate "war" action?

If they were not a clear and present danger before we got involved in that war then they certainly are now.

Harper has made them a clear and present danger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope we realize that we are now at war with the self declared state of ISIL. If supporters of ISIL who are now in Canada choose to join this war by targeting people and places in Canada, is that legitimate "war" action?

If they were not a clear and present danger before we got involved in that war then they certainly are now.

Harper has made them a clear and present danger

No declaration of war has been made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A majority of polled Canadians support military action against ISIL/ISIS...advantage Harper:

While MPs debate what kind of role Canada should play in the fight against ISIS, polls suggests a majority of Canadians are supportive of the country joining the United States and its coalition partners in a combat mission against the Islamic militants.

The polls also suggest a majority consider the fighters known as ISIS to be a direct or serious threat to Canada's interests.

...The most recent poll numbers, from an Ipsos Reid poll for Global News on Sept. 30 and Oct. 1, found 64 per cent of Canadians were somewhat or strongly supportive of a Canadian participation that included air strikes. The remaining 36 per cent were opposed, but just 16 per cent strongly — compared to 29 per cent who strongly supported a more intense role.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mps-to-debate-isis-combat-role-with-polls-suggesting-broad-support-1.2788540

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A majority of polled Canadians support military action against ISIL/ISIS...advantage Harper:

While MPs debate what kind of role Canada should play in the fight against ISIS, polls suggests a majority of Canadians are supportive of the country joining the United States and its coalition partners in a combat mission against the Islamic militants.

The polls also suggest a majority consider the fighters known as ISIS to be a direct or serious threat to Canada's interests.

...The most recent poll numbers, from an Ipsos Reid poll for Global News on Sept. 30 and Oct. 1, found 64 per cent of Canadians were somewhat or strongly supportive of a Canadian participation that included air strikes. The remaining 36 per cent were opposed, but just 16 per cent strongly — compared to 29 per cent who strongly supported a more intense role.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mps-to-debate-isis-combat-role-with-polls-suggesting-broad-support-1.2788540

And in this post by the same author, it suggests that not only a great deal of Liberal supporters favor strikes, but also a portion of the NDP's supporters.

Abacus%2BJets.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And in this post by the same author, it suggests that not only a great deal of Liberal supporters favor strikes, but also a portion of the NDP's supporters.

Wow....in a strange twist, PM Harper can successfully advocate for "bombing in Iraq" for 'Canadian values', the same way/reason PM Chretien said no without a UN resolution back in 2003.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

stop your hyperventilating! ... and in 6 months Harper will be back for an extension... if not before for "combat mission creep" as it's shown air-strikes don't work in urban confines and the latest "willing coalition" can't find willing 'resident' countries with enough boots!

It's good you have such amazing skills as a clairvoyant. Can you tell me what next week's lottery numbers are?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's good you have such amazing skills as a clairvoyant. Can you tell me what next week's lottery numbers are?

hey now! I'll line up that declared "clarvoyance" (along with it's historical, illegal and failed U.S. Iraqi invasion backdrop) with your keen uber-willingness to blindly accept anything from your most favoured Harper Conservatives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow....in a strange twist, PM Harper can successfully advocate for "bombing in Iraq" for 'Canadian values', the same way/reason PM Chretien said no without a UN resolution back in 2003.

......Well the NDP and Liberals represent "Quebec's values".........I wonder if any NDP and Liberal MPs that support the Governments plan, would break ranks and support the Government.....I guess we'll have to wait for the vote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hey now! I'll line up that declared "clarvoyance" (along with it's historical, illegal and failed U.S. Iraqi invasion backdrop) with your keen uber-willingness to blindly accept anything from your most favoured Harper Conservatives.

Yeah, I'm noted for that... :rolleyes:

I spoke in favour of it before Harper even spoke. As for the failed Iraqi invasion, let's hear from that brutal right winger Bob Rae...

There are some who quite mistakenly compare any decision to engage militarily against IS with the invasion of Iraq and the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. This is hardly the same issue. The government of Iraq has asked for military assistance. The regional government of Iraqi Kurdistan has done the same. The Kurdish, Christian, and other minorities in northern Iraq and Syria are under siege. To equate this with the invasion of Iraq over a decade ago is wrong.

Some also say that what is happening in the Middle East is essentially a battle within Islam itself, and that those opposing violent extremists should simply be encouraged to band together. This is a little too easy, since the threat to security doesn’t fall within such simple boundaries.

This is not a holy war, nor is it a crusade. It is about providing tangible help to people and governments who need it. Will it happen elsewhere ? Almost assuredly, yes, because this kind of violence is always testing the resilience of democracy.

This is not about “peace” versus “war”. This is about something different – the collective capacity of governments and international institutions to deal effectively with perpetrators of violence. In some distant future, the rules of engagement and enforcement may be clearer, the capacities of international police forces may be stronger. In the meantime, we have to deal with the worst examples, and the greatest threats. The rule of law requires nothing less.]]

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2014/10/06/kelly-mcparland-justin-trudeaus-failure-to-launch/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

......Well the NDP and Liberals represent "Quebec's values"

what kind of an asinine statement is this? Care to qualify your distinction between "Canadian and Quebec values"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope we realize that we are now at war with the self declared state of ISIL. If supporters of ISIL who are now in Canada choose to join this war by targeting people and places in Canada, is that legitimate "war" action?

If they were not a clear and present danger before we got involved in that war then they certainly are now.

Harper has made them a clear and present danger

What is this goofiness... Who's a clear and present danger? Specifically who? Assuming you know specifically who then what are they doing thats a clear and present danger?

Since those questions cannot as yet be answered then there is no Clear and Present danger.

Harper never made anyone a clear and present danger. We don't have a clear and present danger. All we have are imaginings that maybe - just maybe - there might be some as yet unidentified person/s in this country who may or may not support ISIL - maybe. And - maybe - if they do support ISIL, perhaps they might choose to do something - maybe.

This is not a clear and present danger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what kind of an asinine statement is this? Care to qualify your distinction between "Canadian and Quebec values"?

Are you suggesting Quebec doesn't factor into both the NDP and Liberals stances?

Conservatives were 67% in favour of sending jets, with 25% opposed.

Liberals were also strongly in favour, with 55% in support and 36% in opposition.

A plurality of New Democrats supported sending jets, but not a majority: 49% in favour, with 39% in opposition.

Greens and supporters of the Bloc were against sending jets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for the failed Iraqi invasion, let's hear from that brutal right winger Bob Rae...

you and Simple really are trying to milk that Rae article for all you can, hey! Not sure how you presume to tie that back to the hindsight learnings of the failed and illegal U.S. invasion of Iraq???

Harper chose the divisive route... he chose not to include Mulcair/JT in briefings... he chose not to bring them into Privy Council purview. Why so?

it's interesting the right-wing flavoured review of that Rae article doesn't include the complete article... let me finish it for you:

Canada’s role should be more than just military, and its diplomacy and its dollars need to match its rhetoric. This is not about positioning or posturing. This is about understanding the long term, enduring interest of our country in peace, order, and good government, for ourselves and for the world as well.

the stated Liberal position doesn't exclude military involvement... like strategic airlift, training, or medical support... the distinction being combat.

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

This is not a clear and present danger.

Will you accept an unclear and maybe a present danger, kind of.

But the PM started the statement that "there is a clear and present danger" with "Let myself be perfectly clear, "

But - too late now. We're in it because Harper has put us in.

We will support our troops and if this works out well then Harper will look golden. If it does not turn out well then Harper will look like ...

The troops are being deployed as I type - but the debate on the plan is still going on. Are we not supposed to wait for a vote before those guys/gals go into war?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you suggesting Quebec doesn't factor into both the NDP and Liberals stances?

is this your way of weaseling out of distinguishing what you meant, vis-a-vis Quebec vs. Canadian values?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is this your way of weaseling out of distinguishing what you meant, vis-a-vis Quebec vs. Canadian values?

What's there to weasel out of? The polls make it clear that opposition to air strikes is much stronger in Quebec than in the rest of Canada.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's there to weasel out of? The polls make it clear that opposition to air strikes is much stronger in Quebec than in the rest of Canada.

put that into "values" context... and make the values distinction between Canada and Quebec

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yah Harper said "there is a clear and present danger" with "Let myself be perfectly clear, " and he's full of shit.

If he truly believed that there'd be more than 6 f-18's heading that way. But there isn't and therefore he doesn't believe his own bullshit.

Too late now? Not at all. six f-18's doesn't a war make: its insignificant to the point of meaninglessness. Except for Domestic Politcal purposes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is this your way of weaseling out of distinguishing what you meant, vis-a-vis Quebec vs. Canadian values?

Weaseling? The only weaseling is on the part of the Trudeau Liberals, that have taken a position counter to the majority of Canadians, well their leader, insults and degrades the ability of the Canadian Armed Forces.............I would enjoy, if allowed to, the views of Andrew Leslie.....this is not his Grandfathers Liberal party......but then again, when Leslie's grandfather was fighting the Germans, Trudeau's father was dressing up as one :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

......but then again, when Leslie's grandfather was fighting the Germans, Trudeau's father was dressing up as one :lol:

oh my! Did you unwrap that gem from your latest riding association mailout? You do know you're bordering on Ezrant's territory, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yah Harper said "there is a clear and present danger" with "Let myself be perfectly clear, " and he's full of shit.

If he truly believed that there'd be more than 6 f-18's heading that way. But there isn't and therefore he doesn't believe his own bullshit.

Too late now? Not at all. six f-18's doesn't a war make: its insignificant to the point of meaninglessness. Except for Domestic Politcal purposes.

Putting RCAF personnel in danger to satisfy a political agenda is despicable.

If there is a danger to Canada, then we should actually put some effort into it, rather than a pittance. But it's better to send a token force so Harper can say he went to war rather than to try and justify anything larger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oh my! Did you unwrap that gem from your latest riding association mailout? You do know you're bordering on Ezrant's territory, right?

Is it not true?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the majority of Canadians from one poll are always right? And political parties should govern according to polls?

Conservatives used to actually stand for something... now they govern according to polling information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Putting RCAF personnel in danger to satisfy a political agenda is despicable.

If there is a danger to Canada, then we should actually put some effort into it, rather than a pittance. But it's better to send a token force so Harper can say he went to war rather than to try and justify anything larger.

Herer Here! *pounds desk*
Edited by Peter F

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When the airstrikes fail to destroy ISIS, should we send ground troops into Iraq and Syria?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...