[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[crazy canuck]

Nothing has yet changed regarding the bombing missions.  They are still being conducted as before.  Yes Trudeau has confirmed he will pull Canada out of that role but he has yet to do it.  On the other hand you appear to be agreeing with the logic of the Liberal strategy.  Our role in the air war is rather insignificant so there is no real purpose in continuing it.  Also ironically your position about needing more boots on the ground is exactly what the Liberal strategy calls for.  They have committed to put troops in the area to train Kurdish and Iraqi troops.  There are of course big risks with this strategy that the Conservatives were not willing to take.  Putting our troops near the fight increasing the chances they will be involved in the fighting even if they are there ostensibly only to train others.  Also, the chances of Canada being drawn into a ground war increases once we commit to this course of action.

Remember when we were just going to send a few military advisers and helicopters to Vietnam? Fortunately IS is pretty wimpy compared to the NVA.

Yeah, exactly so.  The horrible hypothetical is that the troops we have there are massacred and the government is forced into an escalation.  The air war was the safe easy way of saying we were contributing.  Boots on the ground is a whole other level of commitment.  I think it is likely one the Western world is going to have to make before this is over.

[viper37]

There are Belgian soldiers in Syria?

they're debatting it since the Paris attacks, apparently.  Don't ask me the level of support for this idea though.  They are part of NATO, so it's only a matter of time before someone invokes article 5.

[viper37]

Muslim woman attacked in Toronto

I guess if, the last time such attacks occured it was because of the Conservatives, now it's because of the Liberal Party?

[Jacob]

Muslim woman attacked in Toronto

I guess if, the last time such attacks occured it was because of the Conservatives, now it's because of the Liberal Party?

An alternate theory: it's related to the recent bombing in Paris.

[viper37]

About the Niqab, another bunch of filthy racists, the Canadian Muslim Congress:
Appeal to Muslim women: reject the niqab

here they are again, transforming Canada into a neo-nazi haven

Middle Eastern garments designed to cover a woman's face are "medieval" and "misogynist" symbols of extremism with no basis in Islam, a Canadian Muslim lobby group said Wednesday as it urged Ottawa to ban the burka and the niqab.

From 2009.

Muslim Canadian Congress calls for a ban on burka
Again from 2015.

As far back as 2009, Farzana Hassan, a Pakistani-Canadian author, speaker, human rights activist and former spokesperson for the Muslim Canadian Congress said the practice of wearing the burka and niqab is rooted in Middle Eastern culture and there is nothing in the Qur'an which stipulates that women must cover their faces. Hassan said the issue of the niqab is one of public safety. "To cover your face is to conceal your identity," she said. "If a government claims to uphold equality between men and women, there is no reason for them to support a practice that marginalizes women." Hassan also explained that many women who cover their faces in public are being forced to do so by their husbands and families. As a result, she argued, these women are denied opportunities and cannot live freely as other women in this society.

Filthy racists, totally un-canadian of them.

[Razgovory]

Is there some rule that Francophones are not allowed to draw well?

[viper37]

Muslim woman attacked in Toronto

I guess if, the last time such attacks occured it was because of the Conservatives, now it's because of the Liberal Party?

An alternate theory: it's related to the recent bombing in Paris.

That would be impossible.  Racist canadians, as I have learned during the campaign, are totally unable to think for themselves and need a government signal to act.  It is impossible to suggest, as I did, that they would be inspired by actuality rather than any discourse from the government that could be twisted into being racist, even when it has nothing to do with racism.

[HVC]

For someone who complained about emotional liberals before the election you sure have been taking losing the election in a strange way.

[Admiral Yi]

Yeah and they are generally contradictory and arbitrary. I guess now in addition to regular suckiness of Halloween it is going to be 'right wing people dress up in racist costumes to get the left wingers all riled up' annual special combined with 'costume person thought was innocent makes them an object of international ridicule'. The culture wars really ruin everything.

It has nothing to do with the culture wars and everything to do with political correctness.  The internal logic of political correctness allows for no correcting mechanism or brake on the claims of protected minorities to feel oppressed.  It will only continue to get worse until the entire premise is discarded.

[Josephus]

Muslim woman attacked in Toronto

I guess if, the last time such attacks occured it was because of the Conservatives, now it's because of the Liberal Party?

An alternate theory: it's related to the recent bombing in Paris.

That would be impossible.  Racist canadians, as I have learned during the campaign, are totally unable to think for themselves and need a government signal to act.  It is impossible to suggest, as I did, that they would be inspired by actuality rather than any discourse from the government that could be twisted into being racist, even when it has nothing to do with racism.

That was never the argument here. Just that there are racist Canadians and Harper figured out how to galvanize them into supporting him.

[Valmy]

Is there some rule that Francophones are not allowed to draw well?

It is obviously an art style.

[garbon]

One that lacks style?

[crazy canuck]

Muslim woman attacked in Toronto

I guess if, the last time such attacks occured it was because of the Conservatives, now it's because of the Liberal Party?

An alternate theory: it's related to the recent bombing in Paris.

That would be impossible.  Racist canadians, as I have learned during the campaign, are totally unable to think for themselves and need a government signal to act.  It is impossible to suggest, as I did, that they would be inspired by actuality rather than any discourse from the government that could be twisted into being racist, even when it has nothing to do with racism.

What are you on about? Of course there are racist Canadians.  And of course the Conservatives tried to exploit that with their ill-conceived Niqab banning (struck down by the Court) and floating the idea of a barbaric cultural tip line.  I don't particular care why someone might try to justify being racist.  I do care quite a bit when a government attempts to use that racism for political advantage.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

There are Belgian soldiers in Syria?

no.
there are, however, F-16s campaigning with the coalition. but only over Iraq. I doubt what's left of the army is going anywhere. that said: France's campaign might start with bombing Molenbeek. I doubt it's recoverable after the passage of the PS

[Malthus]

Nothing has yet changed regarding the bombing missions.  They are still being conducted as before.  Yes Trudeau has confirmed he will pull Canada out of that role but he has yet to do it.  On the other hand you appear to be agreeing with the logic of the Liberal strategy.  Our role in the air war is rather insignificant so there is no real purpose in continuing it.  Also ironically your position about needing more boots on the ground is exactly what the Liberal strategy calls for.  They have committed to put troops in the area to train Kurdish and Iraqi troops.  There are of course big risks with this strategy that the Conservatives were not willing to take.  Putting our troops near the fight increasing the chances they will be involved in the fighting even if they are there ostensibly only to train others.  Also, the chances of Canada being drawn into a ground war increases once we commit to this course of action.

Remember when we were just going to send a few military advisers and helicopters to Vietnam? Fortunately IS is pretty wimpy compared to the NVA.

Yeah, exactly so.  The horrible hypothetical is that the troops we have there are massacred and the government is forced into an escalation.  The air war was the safe easy way of saying we were contributing.  Boots on the ground is a whole other level of commitment.  I think it is likely one the Western world is going to have to make before this is over.

My impression is that the government is changing from one form of minor, token support to another form of minor, token support. In both cases, the contribution wasn't serious, but was intended purely for domestic consumption. In the case of the Liberal strategy, the significant aspect - the actual impetus for the change - was that Canada was going to cease having an actual "combat role" (i.e., actually killing people). The "combat role" thing was repeated in every Liberal pronouncement on the issue I read.

This from a few days ago (I.e. before the Paris attack):

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-liberal-cabinet-mandate-1.3317692

The letter does flesh out what the Liberals have in mind when it comes to re-engaging in United Nations peacekeeping.

The Trudeau government is prepared to make available "Canada's specialized capabilities — from mobile medical teams, to engineering support, to aircraft that can carry supplies and personnel — on a case-by-case basis."

Sajjan will also be expected to co-ordinate with Foreign Affairs Minister Stephane Dion to help the UN "respond more quickly to emerging and escalating conflicts and providing well-trained personnel to international initiatives that can be quickly deployed, such as mission commanders, staff officers and headquarters units."

That means — for the moment — Canada is not ready to make the kind of significant boots-on-the-ground UN contribution that both the Liberals and NDP have lamented was lost under the Conservatives.

Trudeau gave a return to peacekeeping a full-throated endorsement during the foreign policy debate midway through the election campaign. He was responding at the time to the pledge by 50 countries to contribute an additional 30,000 troops and police for missions in trouble spots around the world.

In short - pull back and wait to commit resources with the UN as "peacekeeping".

Objectively, I can't see this as a brave investment in ground operations. Indeed, neither does the CBC commentator, who emphasized "That means — for the moment — Canada is not ready to make the kind of significant boots-on-the-ground UN contribution that both the Liberals and NDP have lamented was lost under the Conservatives".

His timing was perhaps somewhat unfortunate ...