Site design by Zaphod. Best viewed on broadband at 1024x768 or higher. Please be patient.

Traitor to democracy... visit to help

    Subscribe in NewsGator Online Subscribe to Newsburst Add the Zaphod's Heads feed to My MSN! Subscribe in Rojo Subscribe with Bloglines BlogMad! Mini-Painter Yahoo group Blogarama - The Blogs Directory MSN Alerts Blogroll Me!
    • Progressive Bloggers
    • Vast Left Wing Conspiracy
    • Liblogs
    Peace logo created by Zaphod. Use as you wish!

    Thursday, May 18, 2006


    Stardate 5782.70

    Last night, H-Dawg held his parliamentary debate and vote on the big issue of extending Canada's role in Afghanistan. Naturally, I was hoping that the vote would swing such that we could bring our troops home, especially after losing our first female soldier on duty over there. Don't get me wrong, one doesn't join the army without taking the risk of getting killed (it is in the job description) but perhaps this changed a few minds on the vote. Of course, the vote was very tight, and with the Bloc and NDP playing "political games" as Harper puts it, it passed with a 149 to 145 vote margin (like his own cabinet isn't playing political games... I wonder how many Tory MPs voted against this?)

    Several things strike me as strange about this vote though... First, there was only a few days notice, and a brief 6 hour debate on the matter, which realistically affects thousands of Canadian soldiers for several years. Second it comes right when NATO has asked Canada to take the reigns in Afghanistan in 2008. It reeks of political maneuvering to me. What happens then? If we take over the mission and then pull out in a year? I doubt that would happen...

    As for the two year extension? What will the mission develop into? I doubt anyone really knows. What happens when the next deadline draws near? Another extension? I doubt anyone really knows. I think this mission is important, though it is definately different than the typical peace-keeping stance we normally take. Is this taking troops and resources that could be used in other places like Darfur? I guess this means we won't be supporting the UN with peacekeepers there. As you can tell, I have more questions than answers, or maybe it is just this heat wave...

    I begin to wonder though, if this is anything like Iraq, there may never be an end to it.

    Further thoughts...

    I am really starting to think that Canada should not be a part of Operation Enduring Freedom, as the scope of work is not a classic Canadian role in foreign affairs. After all, we are great peace keepers, and it seems very strange that we are hunting out terrorists, and blowing things up. Maybe we should not accept NATO's request, and stay on in a different role. That would be something I could relaly support. Of course I doubt H-Dawg would ever turn down something like that...

    All opinions shared on this site are strictly my own. Some people may disagree and that is fine, but rude comments or overzealous debate will be curtailed. I enjoy civil discourse, and encourage independent thought. I oppose George W. Bush and his Wars based on lies.

    Site design created by Zaphod. All written work and code is the intellectual property of Glyn Evans.