# Duceppe threatens to topple Harper government over Afghanistan



## charlesm (11 Dec 2006)

Link    http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.html?id=1ca5e03a-02ef-489b-835f-b862b3e0b428&k=57083

Montreal Gazette
Published: Monday, December 11, 2006 
 QUEBEC — Bloc Quebecois leader Gilles Duceppe said Monday his party is prepared to defeat the Harper government on a confidence motion over Canada's mission in Afghanistan.

Duceppe called on the Harper government to ìmodify profoundly the orientation of the Canadian mission in Afghanistan.

"We will not hesitate to withdraw our support," Duceppe told a Quebec City Chamber of Commerce audience.

Duceppe said the Bloc objects to the transformation of the mission from reconstruction to combat, saying he doesn't want "the sacrifice of human lives without any result."


----------



## career_radio-checker (11 Dec 2006)

charlesm said:
			
		

> saying he doesn't want "the sacrifice of human lives without any result."



I can agree with Mr. Duceppe here. Him and Laton have had extensive experience knowledge in this area, being part of the many research counsels that have spent many hours mulling over this mission and its expense... oops sorry they aren't part of any committee. Well ok Layton's Defence critic, Dawn Black, is part of the Defence council -- the body setting the mandate for the Afghan mission -- and they have extensive first hand knowledge what with their many trips to Afghanistan... Oh wait, that's right! They haven't been over there once. Well ok, Duceppe and Layton are both major party leaders and surely have taken advantage of the Parliamentary program with DND which allows MPs to spend time with the troops. I mean if anyone it should be the leaders who... Oh that's right, neither of them have ever stepped foot in Afghanistan. Ok I'm no Subject Matter Expert on this issue so I will shut up now. Hopefully Duceppe will realize the same.


----------



## Rodahn (11 Dec 2006)

career_radio-checker said:
			
		

> Ok I'm no Subject Matter Expert on this issue so I will shut up now. Hopefully Duceppe will realize the same.



I hope your not holding your breath......


----------



## Brad Sallows (11 Dec 2006)

Someone tell Duceppe to go ahead and pull the trigger.  You'd think with a minority government the Bloc (or for that matter, NDP) would have used their limited opportunities to set the parliamentary agenda to pull together a non-CPC coalition to pass the sort of child care or environmental legislation they keep bleating about as national platforms (assuming the LPC would allow this to happen without the "Liberal Canadian Values" brand stamped firmly all over it), but instead the most important thing they could think of to do with their time is to try to push through their sorry piece of anti-scab legislation for the n'th instance.  Why tolerate this abortion of a minority parliament in which you have to think of things to do other than whine in opposition, when you long deeply to once again be ineffectual mice rising up on your hind legs to squeak at a Liberal majority doing only what it pleases on the government benches?


----------



## Navy_Blue (11 Dec 2006)

Do the block and NDP have the power to pull this off without the liberals??  I thought the Block only had 51 and the NDP around 29??  They still need some red to topple the Conservatives right???  Duceppe is just upset that Harper pulled off the whole nation thing


----------



## warspite (11 Dec 2006)

Navy_Blue said:
			
		

> Duceppe is just upset that Harper pulled off the whole nation thing


Bingo... we have a winner ;D


----------



## Fishbone Jones (11 Dec 2006)

I really hope he does......and soon. It's time for a Tory majority.


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (11 Dec 2006)

I see on CBC's website tonight that the Liberals were adopting a "wait and see" attitude, but that (not surprisingly) Taliban Jack was willing to leap in to support the motion wholeheartedly.

Frankly, it is now beyond my comprehension what these idiots want and how they propose to alter the mission.  Do they seriously suggest that reconstruction can take place without adequate security?  What are their proposals (aside from the asinine "proposal" of Dion's for a "Marshall Plan" - disregarding the fact that one already exists)?  Are we to withdraw to the north and join the cringing Europeans, who are too paralyzed by fear of their own electorates to venture anywhere dangerous?  Are we to send in CIDA with a bag full of cash?  Which NGOs are we to fund to venture into the front lines?

What utter tripe our political leadership spouts on Afghanistan.  "Reorient the mission"...nice plan - it will survive contact for about three minutes once the Taliban start bombing our feel-good, happy glad "projects".

All this takes is a whipped vote by Dion, Duceppe and Taliban Jack, and we'll join the Germans, French and Italians in the ranks of the weasel nations.  But that, of course, is the entire objective...  :


----------



## CrazyCanuck (11 Dec 2006)

Why does the Bloc even care? or more importantly why are they allowed to care? They are a party that represents a single Province, there support on the national scene is less than 15% They do not represent even a slim minority of the overall Canadian population, they should have no right to bring down governments or voice their opionions on solely Canadian affairs. 
But then again when power is unequally spread within a country this is what you get. (BC and Alberta combined have more people than Quebec but Quebec has more seats than the two of them or something like that)


----------



## a_majoor (12 Dec 2006)

A veiw from the blogosphere:

http://chuckercanuck.blogspot.com/2006/12/all-we-are-saying-is-give.html



> *All we are saying is give reconstruction a chance*
> 
> Gilles Duceppe announced today the Bloc's intention to introduce a motion of non-confidence in the government over Afghanistan. The NDP will surely support the motion, as it wants the troops home in time for Valentine's day. The Liberals will surely support the motion, since their new leader wants our troops to perform the club-med like duties that Germany and France have nobly taken up in Afghanistan. Unless there is a revolt from within the Liberal caucus, it seems a winter election is unavoidable.
> 
> ...


----------



## CrazyCanuck (12 Dec 2006)

Well now I Know why they care


----------



## career_radio-checker (12 Dec 2006)

Boater said:
			
		

> But then again when power is unequally spread within a country this is what you get. (BC and Alberta combined have more people than Quebec but Quebec has more seats than the two of them or something like that)



BC+Alberta = 64 seats
Quebec = 75 seats
You have to remember that the House of commons has a max capacity of about 311 seats (308 now)


----------



## CrazyCanuck (12 Dec 2006)

Would Quebec and Ontario start screaming bloody murder if we shuffled the seats around to give BC and Alberta more? (It's retorichal I know)


----------



## career_radio-checker (12 Dec 2006)

Boater said:
			
		

> Would Quebec and Ontario start screaming bloody murder if we shuffled the seats around to give BC and Alberta more? (It's retorichal I know)


Would the Quebec and Ontario populace scream bloody murder? No. But the politicians representing them would. Quebec politicians more so because that would affect their power base in the House of Commons. And besides, they're a nation now. They have to have more equal representation than others  :


----------



## Brad Sallows (12 Dec 2006)

>Are we to send in CIDA with a bag full of cash?

I think that's the general idea.

I have a (markedly cynical, overly generalized) hypothesis to explain how people approach charity.  On one hand there are people who want to know what sort of difference they are making, and on the other the people who are satisfied simply to know that money is going somewhere and don't particularly care - or, as Living Colour put it in "Go Away" (lyrics from a web site; errors - if any - not my own):

"I see the starving Africans on TV
I feel it has nothing to do with me
I sent my twenty dollars to Liveaid
I've aided my guilty conscience to go away"

For some people, it is just about the bag of cash - they don't want to hear about delivery problems, corruption, unreasonably high overhead costs, or project failure weeks or months or years down the road.  They just want to be able to say what caring people they are for giving (and helping you to give, too).


----------



## kilekaldar (12 Dec 2006)

Bloc issues ultimatum on Afghan mission
Duceppe says he'll try to topple Tories unless focus of troops shifts to rebuilding 
RH&EACUTE;AL S&EACUTE;GUIN and DANIEL LEBLANC AND GLORIA GALLOWAY 

From Tuesday's Globe and Mail
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20061212.wafghan12/BNStory/National/home

QUEBEC AND OTTAWA — Bloc Québécois Leader Gilles Duceppe is ready to trigger the defeat of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's minority government if Canada's role in Afghanistan does not change soon.

Mr. Duceppe wants the mission to concentrate on reconstruction, noting it is now “essentially military.” If the change in emphasis doesn't take place soon, he will consider introducing a no-confidence motion in the House of Commons to topple the government.

To succeed, the Bloc would need the support of both the NDP and the Liberals. The three opposition parties have 182 votes in the Commons, compared with the Conservatives' 124.

The NDP's Jack Layton supports the removal of Canada's troops as soon as possible, while Stéphane Dion, the new leader of the Liberals, said he was watching the issue closely. While he would not withdraw troops overnight, Mr. Dion has said he would consider a staged pullout if progress is not made.

Related to this article
Articles 
NDP blasts association with warlord  
How Pakistan makes life easier for the Taliban  
Why the main suspect in the death of a Canadian diplomat walked free  
NATO allies need to ‘get real' about Taliban threat, Britain says  
Afghanistan at crossroads, says head of UN mission  
Latest Comments 
Even if one were to not support the war, would it be better to... 
No Canadian wants to see Canadian soldiers in danger but we have... 
This is less about Duceppe's concerns about our military and... 
FANTASTIC! Another example of Canadian tolerance having gone... 
5 reader comments | Join the conversation 
Follow this writer 
Add RH&EACUTE;AL S&EACUTE;GUIN to my e-mail alerts  
Add DANIEL LEBLANC AND GLORIA GALLOWAY to my e-mail alerts  
 This is the first time the Bloc has hinted it is laying the groundwork for a no-confidence motion since the separatists worked to bring down the Liberals last November over the sponsorship scandal. 

While the Bloc Leader refused to say when he would table such a motion, he did not exclude forcing a vote as early as February. Soldiers from the Royal 22nd regiment from Valcartier, Que., will be sent to Afghanistan next August.

“Everything is possible ... I'm not excluding anything. We will judge,” he said.

Canada risks getting in deeper and deeper, sacrificing the lives of its soldiers without producing any concrete results, he argued. 

“Mr. Harper will need to rapidly and profoundly change the Canadian mission in Afghanistan, which in a few months will be made up of men and women from Valcartier. We will not be accomplices of an obtuse government who would stubbornly maintain the current course,” he said.

Mr. Duceppe made the remarks in a speech to the chamber of commerce. 

“If Mr. Harper refuses to make changes and remains incapable of getting better co-operation from our allies, we will not hesitate to withdraw our support and if we have to, defeat his government on the Afghan issue.” 

Once again, the Bloc is working to distance itself from the party in power on a key issue for Quebeckers. Mr. Duceppe's threat to bring down the government comes almost one year since Mr. Harper made a breakthrough campaign speech in Quebec City last Dec. 19.

Mr. Harper and his Conservatives went on to win 10 seats in Quebec, including seven in the immediate Quebec City region, with the promise of a more open federalism and a solution to the fiscal imbalance between Ottawa and the provinces.

The Bloc has been waging a fight ever since to reclaim its old ridings in the provincial capital, culminating with Mr. Duceppe's speech yesterday.

The Bloc initially supported the deployment of Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan. Last May, the party voted against extending the mission until 2009. Mr. Duceppe said Mr. Harper has no mandate to go beyond that period and must begin preparing now for the eventual withdrawal of troops.

Afghanistan isn't the only issue on which the Bloc would like to make life difficult for the Tories. If Mr. Harper fails to eliminate the fiscal imbalance in the next federal budget by giving Quebec $3.9-billion a year in additional funding or if he maintains his refusal to comply with the Kyoto Protocol to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the Bloc will seek to defeat the government on these issues as well. 

The Conservative Party fought back by accusing the Bloc of impotence on the federal stage.

“Given the Bloc's lack of a list of accomplishments over the last 13 years here in Ottawa, our government has delivered on key campaign commitments,” said Dimitri Soudas, a spokesman for Mr. Harper. “They could be in Ottawa for another 113 years and still be unable to deliver a single thing to Quebec.”

International Co-operation Minister Josée Verner, who is also the lead minister in Quebec City, said Mr. Duceppe should pay more attention to the Canadian Forces members in Valcartier.

“I'm told that Mr. Duceppe is regularly in Quebec City. I invite him to meet the people at the base, which he hasn't done,” she said.

Ms. Verner rejected the accusation that the Conservatives are inactive and are sending Transport Minister Lawrence Cannon to drive home the point in his own speech in Quebec City at the end of the week.

Mr. Layton said his party has long opposed the mission in Afghanistan, and would gladly vote against it one more time.

“We have never had confidence in Mr. Harper's approach to this foreign policy matter. We have said so and we have voted accordingly and it would not be a surprise to Canadians to have us continue on that path,” Mr. Layton said.

Mr. Dion is also calling for a refocusing of the mission, which he said is facing “enormous problems.” He refused to state how he would vote on a no-confidence motion in relation to Afghanistan, but he insisted the government was wrong to prolong its commitment until 2009.

“It was completely irresponsible for [Mr. Harper to do so] and now we are in the trouble that we know,” Mr. Dion told reporters.

Mr. Duceppe's comments came on the same day that Kim Howells, British Minister of State for Foreign Affairs, urged Canada to “stay the course” in Afghanistan. 

After his address, Mr. Howells was asked what he felt about Mr. Dion's assertion that Canada could withdraw from the region “with honour” before 2009. 

“I am not sure what withdrawing with honour would mean from Afghanistan, quite frankly,” Mr. Howells said. 

“I think it's a very honourable endeavour to try and help the democratically elected government of Afghanistan fight the tyrannical body, a very cruel Taliban, and it seems to me the most honourable course would be to see that fight through.”


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (12 Dec 2006)

I guess that highway being built in front of me is my imagination.  Geez if it were I'd have it done by now.


----------



## KevinB (12 Dec 2006)

To my mind most of these politicians (Dawn Black from the CCP NDP, et. al. and now specifically the Bloc) are utterly ignorant of the situation and circumstances in Afghanistan.  99% of them have no experience in Afghanistan and are pulling this stuff out of the posterior.

I have not seen anyone rallying to get the NGO's sitting in Kabul (and partying at L'atmosphere) out down to the areas where they are needed.  I could rant on and on about this - but other than army.ca readers I dont think the Canadian public gets it.


----------



## career_radio-checker (12 Dec 2006)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> I have not seen anyone rallying to get the NGO's sitting in Kabul (and partying at L'atmosphere) out down to the areas where they are needed.  I could rant on and on about this - but other than army.ca readers I dont think the Canadian public gets it.



http://www.cbc.ca/news/feedback/index.html?Second%20part%20of%20Arar%20report%20to%20focus%20on%20RCMP

Forget the fact it mentions Arar, I want to draw your attention to the three bubbles on the right which say: 

o   Comment on an issue, news story or feature
o   *Suggest a story idea*
o   Tell us your story

We as CF members can't do this but someone from outside can.


----------



## KevinB (12 Dec 2006)

Thanks


----------



## kilekaldar (12 Dec 2006)

This was my responce to the article, I posted it in the article forum on the G&M.

Perhaps the Honourable Member Giles Duceppe would care to explain to us how we are suppose to focus on rebuilding while we are being bombed, shot at, rocketed and mortared? 
The politicians back home keep saying how we should focus more on rebuilding instead of combat, and that might sound good in the media, but how do they propose we do this exactly? How would this work on the ground in Kandahar province? Or do they suggest we withdraw from the province and let it fall to the Taliban? Withdraw to where, the safer areas where the Germans, Italians, Spanish, and French have taken refuge? How 'safe' will these areas be and for how long if we stop fighting the Taliban in the south? What do they consider as "focus on rebuilding" when our main effort for the past few months has been the construction of roadways through isolated areas, does this not fit their definition?
I understand these are military questions, but since the Bloc, the NDP, and now the Liberals(who sent us here) seem to be so critical of how we do things here and talk like they have a better way, I would like to hear what exactly they want us to do.
That or they could keep their noses out of military matters, let us do our jobs and not use the deaths of Canadian soldiers for domestic political ends. Nothing good has ever come of politicians meddling and micromanaging a war and military decisions, as they are singularly unqualified for the task. 
Many of us here frankly believe that the statements on this topic made by certain parties in Canada is exclusively geared towards domestic politics and the media, and has no bearing on the day to day reality of Kandahar or Afghanistan as a whole.


----------



## Good2Golf (12 Dec 2006)

kilekaldar said:
			
		

> This was my responce to the article, I posted it in the article forum on the G&M.
> 
> Perhaps the Honourable Member Giles Duceppe would care to explain to us how we are suppose to focus on rebuilding while we are being bombed, shot at, rocketed and mortared?
> The politicians back home keep saying how we should focus more on rebuilding instead of combat, and that might sound good in the media, but how do they propose we do this exactly? How would this work on the ground in Kandahar province? Or do they suggest we withdraw from the province and let it fall to the Taliban? Withdraw to where, the safer areas where the Germans, Italians, Spanish, and French have taken refuge? How 'safe' will these areas be and for how long if we stop fighting the Taliban in the south? What do they consider as "focus on rebuilding" when our main effort for the past few months has been the construction of roadways through isolated areas, does this not fit their definition?
> ...



+1

Exactly.

G2G


----------



## Caleix (12 Dec 2006)

I am not going to comment on tactics and how our troops are deployed in Afghanistan, because I have yet to go over and see what they put up with and experience, but what I want to know is if the bloc leader has even stepped one foot on Afghan soil....and if so does that automatically make him the great wise and mighty Duceppe of military tactics?!

Caleix


----------



## nowhere_man (12 Dec 2006)

career_radio-checker said:
			
		

> BC+Alberta = 64 seats
> Quebec = 75 seats
> You have to remember that the House of commons has a max capacity of about 311 seats (308 now)



Well I'm in computer class and I'm bored so i went on stats Can and found that in 2001 Alberta had about 3 million people and and B.C. about 4 million. and Quebec has.....(insert drum roll)  7,237,479 so maybe 7,500,000 now. so those 2 provinces combined should roughly be the same as Quebec (but we all know it never will). Oh yea what are they going to do when they have 311 seats and they need #312?


----------



## foerestedwarrior (12 Dec 2006)

Caleix said:
			
		

> I am not going to comment on tactics and how our troops are deployed in Afghanistan, because I have yet to go over and see what they put up with and experience, but what I want to know is if the bloc leader has even stepped one foot on Afghan soil....and if so does that automatically make him the great wise and mighty Duceppe of military tactics?!
> 
> Caleix




He hasnt even visited the troops he is trying to protect by this.....It is a convienient timing fo this, force the vote just before the vandoo's are to go.


----------



## George Wallace (12 Dec 2006)

Bloc Québécois Leader Gilles Duceppe should follow his own advice.  We should equate any withdrawal of Canadian troops fighting for Freedom of Afghanistan's citizens and the safety of Canadians to the withdrawal of the Bloc Québécois Party from Parliament and their fighting for the Rights of the Québécois.  If he wants us to spend more on 'reconstruction' in Afghanistan, then surely he must support the election of parliamentarians who are more interested in the building of a strong Canada, not the destruction of it.


----------



## infuntry_boi (12 Dec 2006)

Proud Forester said:
			
		

> He hasn't even visited the troops he is trying to protect by this.....It is a convenient timing for this, force the vote just before the vandoo's are to go.



[joke] I have a solution! make every member of Parliament serve a tour of duty in the CF! (Wait! They probably wouldn't get past the fitness req.  ;D) [/joke]

But in all honesty, if politicians would focus on the issue instead of using the issue to gain seats, then this country (   ) might actually start working.


----------



## career_radio-checker (12 Dec 2006)

nowhere_man said:
			
		

> Well I'm in computer class and I'm bored so i went on stats Can and found that in 2001 Alberta had about 3 million people and and B.C. about 4 million. and Quebec has.....(insert drum roll)  7,237,479 so maybe 7,500,000 now. so those 2 provinces combined should roughly be the same as Quebec (but we all know it never will). *Oh yea what are they going to do when they have 311 seats and they need #312? *



Increase the constituency boundaries to encompass about 200 000 citizens (now varying from 90 000 to 150 000).


----------



## Armymedic (12 Dec 2006)

Bring the motion, Mr Duceppes, bring it.

And then lose all credability when the facts come out.  

Oh wait...the Blocs defence critic is on Newsworld....this should be good.

From him "We have briefings from the military who say they are doing reconstruction, but what international NGO's tell us is different"

"If the current government does not listen to us about the reconstruction, then we will have no choice to bring forward a nonconfidence vote and force another election" 

Sounds more like a threat for a bargaining position then anything else.


----------



## Edward Campbell (12 Dec 2006)

career_radio-checker said:
			
		

> Increase the constituency boundaries to encompass about 200 000 citizens (now varying from 90 000 25,000 to 150 000).



That’s a great idea, indeed a vital step in wrenching the Canadian Constitution out of the 19th century.  Imagine: equality! representation by population! How will we ever survive the shock!?!

There are two slight problems, both _*constitutional*_ and both in the part of the Constitution which requires unanimity for amendment:

1.	Prince Edward Island (pop 135,000) is entitled to four senators – vice six for Alberta (pop 3,000,000) which is entitled to six; and

2.	No province may have fewer MPs than it has senators.

Without a unanimous constitutional amendment, to bring something better than the *sham* democracy to Canada – wherein a vote in Cardigan PEI is ‘worth’ three or four times as much as a vote in Metro Toronto or Calgary, the only sensible alternative is to 'grow' the House of Commons to about 1,000 seats: one for every 35,000 residents.  That means (about):  85 MPs from Alberta, 200 from Québec, 4 from PEI and a whopping 315 MPs from Ontario!


----------



## career_radio-checker (12 Dec 2006)

You just had to burst my bubble didn't you Ed?  
As for increasing the House size, I'm categorically against that. I am quite the political animal but I also care for the environment. If we let the MP population grow exponentially like you suggest then we risk endangering the other species that live in and around the Ottawa habitat. Before you know it, our attempts to improve democratic environment will have been overshadowed by the flood of pesky MPs who will begin taking the best corner offices, blocking the airwaves with their blackberry traffic, and stealing all the cabs in the downtown area. There won't be enough natural resources in this beautiful habitat support other species like the lobbyist, layers or the rare protester. Of course we could deal with the problem with trap and relocation programs or even have an open season where hunters are allowed a 2 or 3 MP maximum per year. But that would cost millions of dollars and I would rather we realize a boondoggle before it happens. Sorry Ed I can't support you on your proposition.  ^-^


----------



## Link (12 Dec 2006)

As someone relatively new to the army, and hoping to get a combat tour, the recent political news is very disheartening.  If the NDP, Bloc and Liberals get their way, I will never see combat, be relegated to garrison, have to do peacekeeping tours where I can't engage those who are firing at me, and so on.  It seems as though when the future of the CF is looking up, you get the bleeding hearts and ehem *p#ssies* bringing it back down.  I want to be able to say that I used my skills and trade effectively, that I did what I was trained to do.  I'm not saying that peacekeeping is a waste of time, or that those of you that have been peacekeepers did nothing, because I respect you for the job that you did, also I'm not a blood thirsty maniac either, but I want to be part of the fast paced operations tempo as well, and I want to say that I was there and that I did too.  Sorry if this is in the wrong place, but I know this is how not only myself but many of the other new soldiers feel about the current situation.

Thanks,

Link


----------



## George Wallace (12 Dec 2006)

A true Pessimist!


----------



## Link (12 Dec 2006)

I'm not a pessimist, I'm commenting on how it looks, there is so much pressure right now to end the mission in a'stan. I don't want to miss out.


----------



## Old Sweat (12 Dec 2006)

NDP Joe Cromartin was a guest on 'The Lunch Bunch" on CFRA radio in Ottawa today. Among other gems he dropped were:

a. The NDP has not yet decided on whether or not they would support the BQ motion as they have not yet seen it.

b. When pressed, he agreed that most of Afghanistan is secure and peaceful, and that the Canadians are defeating the Taliban in our area of operations.

c. He claimed that success would only lead to defeat as the Taliban would be inspired to continue to resist.

As the Bloc apparently would not introduce their motion until February, this thread should be mega pages long by then. More important, the situation in country and the political situation in Canada may be radically different by then. Hang onto your hats.


----------



## George Wallace (12 Dec 2006)

What little I did catch of that program, Joe Comartin sounded like a fish out of water by the end of it.  I was also very surprise at the reaction that he raised in the other two hosts.  Comartin lost quite a bit of credibility with his waffling.  I think he will now be working overtime to find some sort of platform that is defendable, if this should keep up.


----------



## Journeyman (12 Dec 2006)

*NDP agrees that "most of Afghanistan is secure and peaceful, and that the Canadians are defeating the Taliban in our area of operations"??*

WHAT?! Who snuck some oxygen into the causus chambers? Can we assume that the NDP's Honourable Member from Windsor-Tecumseh is now being drummed out the party?


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (12 Dec 2006)

> c. He claimed that success would only lead to defeat as the Taliban would be inspired to continue to resist.



So, memme get this straight:  success leads to failure?  ???


----------



## Kirkhill (12 Dec 2006)

Teddy Ruxpin said:
			
		

> So, memme get this straight:  success leads to failure?  ???



Global cooling begat Global warming begat Climate Change.....
Success leads to Failure

Having your cake and eating it too.

Winston Smith, where are you?


----------



## schart28 (12 Dec 2006)

CBC News: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2006/12/12/duceppe-afghanistan.html?ref=rss

Prime Minister Stephen Harper attacked the Bloc Québécois Tuesday, calling its threat to topple the government over Afghanistan nothing more than political opportunism.


Harper accuses Bloc of 'playing politics' on backs of soldiers
Last Updated: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 | 4:00 PM ET 
CBC News 
Prime Minister Stephen Harper attacked the Bloc Québécois Tuesday, calling its threat to topple the government over Afghanistan nothing more than political opportunism.

Harper directed most of his criticism squarely at Bloc Leader Gilles Duceppe.

"He's just playing politics on the backs of our soldiers," Harper said in French during question period in the House of Commons.
"The only problem here is the political opportunism of the leader of the Bloc."

Harper was responding to Duceppe's announcement Monday that the Bloc might table a no-confidence motion if the mission in Afghanistan isn't rapidly and profoundly altered.
The Bloc wants to see resources put into reconstruction, not fighting.


On Tuesday, Duceppe reiterated his demand for change. He said Harper has an us-versus-them world view that is doomed to fail in Afghanistan.
"He sees everything in black and white," Duceppe said. "Will he stop using these soldiers and put an end to his ideological ideas?"
Harper acknowledged the mission in Afghanistan is very dangerous, leaving Canadian soldiers dead.
"But we have to help," he said.

After question period, Duceppe said he cannot discuss what his party will do if Harper and the Conservative government refuse the request to change the Afghanistan mission.
"I never discuss strategy," Duceppe said. "I said this is where we stand and if it comes in a question of confidence, we won't be scared in having an election on that if an election is needed."

He said he is waiting to see what other parties have to say on the issue.
Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion has said he would wait to see a no-confidence motion before making a decision. He has criticized the Afghanistan mission in the past for many of the same reasons as Duceppe.

NDP Leader Jack Layton appears poised to support a no-confidence motion. He said earlier that he never had confidence in Harper's approach in Afghanistan.
Forty-four Canadian soldiers and one diplomat have been killed since the Afghan mission began in 2002. Most deaths occurred this year.
Canada has more than 2,000 Armed Forces members in Afghanistan, most stationed in the volatile south.


----------



## youravatar (12 Dec 2006)

Gilles gone low but never like this. Shame on him.


----------



## schart28 (12 Dec 2006)

Gille's position has always been the same. Everyone is blaming each other in politics.


----------



## Brad Sallows (12 Dec 2006)

>c. He claimed that success would only lead to defeat as the Taliban would be inspired to continue to resist.

IOW, if we lose, the Taliban wins; if we win, the Taliban eventually wins.  I hope your characterisation of his remarks is incorrect, otherwise I must conclude him to be a fool.


----------



## CrazyCanuck (12 Dec 2006)

Well he is NDP afterall


----------



## Kirkhill (12 Dec 2006)

Boater said:
			
		

> Well he is NDP afterall



Actually that may be closer to the mark - for the socialist isn't it all about the revolution without end? There is never an acknowledgement of defeat. Just pauses.  "A la prochaine fois".


----------



## Baloo (13 Dec 2006)

> *Duceppe threatens to topple Tories*
> _Bloc leader warns he may trigger early election over handling of Afghan mission_
> Dec. 12, 2006. 01:00 AM
> SUSAN DELACOURT
> ...



http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1165877416022&call_pageid=968332188774&col=968350116467

Highlighted in yellow, I was reading this article in the Star this morning, and was overwhelmed by the opportunistic attitude taken by Mr. Dion. I realize that he is the new leader of a major political party, however in spite of this, _his duty is to the Canadian public and citizenry_, not a partisan power struggle. Maybe one day he can make a true decision based on the merits and betterment of Canadian society as a whole, rather than simply pandering to the lowest common denominator.


----------



## Juvat (13 Dec 2006)

Here is a caricature fitting for this topic


----------



## North Star (13 Dec 2006)

Dion is a typical academic - talking about a "Marshall Plan II" is absolutely great as it will provide an endless forum for debate and fuzzy-feelings, and does not have any of the risk action usually entails. 

However, right now I think he's stuck between a rock and a hard place. While the Liberals (according to Decima) are tied with the Cons in the 3-week trailing poll, that's probably not enough to tackle a government that will blitz the public with tax cuts if an election is triggered. So, he's waffling. He's waiting to see where the polls lead him, despite his very strong support for the mission in the past. 

If the Liberals come back, I bet you dollars to doughnuts there will be a sequel to the book "While Canada Slept" as the Libs make a deal with the NDP to caveat our participation in Afghanistan to the point we'll be the laughing-stock of NATO and the UN again. When that happens, expect us to later be committed to a hair-brained UN mission to make up for this loss of face. It happened to the Dutch after their Srebenitza experience...


----------



## nowhere_man (17 Dec 2006)

North Star said:
			
		

> If the Liberals come back, I bet you dollars to doughnuts there will be a sequel to the book "While Canada Slept" as the Libs make a deal with the NDP to caveat our participation in Afghanistan to the point we'll be the laughing-stock of NATO and the UN again. When that happens, expect us to later be committed to a hair-brained UN mission to make up for this loss of face. It happened to the Dutch after their Srebenitza experience...



And the lesson boys and girls is simple.... Dont vote Liberal


----------



## old fart (17 Dec 2006)

nowhere_man said:
			
		

> And the lesson boys and girls is simple.... Dont vote Liberal



I will echo that, never in a million years..................AIRBORNE..............


----------



## antique (17 Dec 2006)

Mr.Duceppe and his cohort of Mp's in Ottawa are only there for one reason,themselves.By ,making statemwnts of the likes he can go to Quebec and pound his stomach"See I'm defending you against bad Harper"Vote for me,vote for me...His friend in the Quebec legislature,you know the one with white powder around the nostrils(and it is NOT icing sugar)will probably face and election very very soon and the outcome is ...well...no so sure for him. SO Duceppe wants to help.
Mr.Duceppe in the event of a federal election will,no doubts,be reelected and that is the ULTIMATE goal for him....stay in Ottawa bacause the country that he so much wants to breakup will in the end pay him a fat pension and yes that's you and me


----------



## a_majoor (18 Dec 2006)

Mr.Duceppe, Mr Layton and Mr Dion all want to be seen as champions of human rights, yet are willing to throw the Afghan people to the wolves at the first sign of hardship or discomfort.

I think this bodes very ill for how they intend to run Canada in the event they can get their hands on the levers of power. If human rights are considered "situational" by these men and their supporters, how will they act to support *Canadian's* rights to free speech, free press, property ownership and so on?


----------



## Colin Parkinson (18 Dec 2006)

Excuse me while I blow my own horn, they printed my letter!!  ;D ;D

Bloc wants to give the Taliban a free hand to kill

  Letter 

Monday, December 18, 2006


Re: Bloc threatens to topple the Tories, Dec. 12

Two female teachers were recently murdered by the Taliban, along with their grandmother and two other family members. Their only crime was teaching children and girls.

Now the Bloc Quebecois wants to give a free hand to the Taliban so it can carry on killing more teachers and wiping out the hopes and dreams of yet another generation of Afghans. The Taliban know and understand that the real battle is in the classroom; if this generation of Afghans becomes educated, the Taliban is finished.

Bloc members are full of wonderful rhetoric about human rights and freedoms, but for them it's just words -- they don't want to get their hands dirty making anything happen. During the Second World War, many of the Quebec elite felt that Adolf Hitler wasn't their problem; now the Bloc (who see themselves as the new elite) repeats history by saying the Taliban isn't Canada's problem.

They were wrong on both counts. There is an old saying that is as relevant today as when it was first said: Evil flourishes when good men do nothing.

Colin Parkinson

North Vancouver




http://www.canada.com/components/print.aspx?id=a7b91a84-e1ec-4ea5-a1b6-c1d1106fff2d


----------



## George Wallace (18 Dec 2006)

Congratulations Colin.

I hope that it gets a lot of readers to think of what you have said.


----------



## Kirkhill (18 Dec 2006)

Here's a thought - let's assume that 50% of the Canadian Population is opposed to the mission.  The polls also seem to indicate that 50% support the mission.

With Layton, Duceppe and Dion splitting the opposed vote that leaves 50% available to support the Conservatives.

If the Opposition parties succeed in making Afghanistan THE issue in the next election which party is likely to benefit?

Keep in mind that 40% of the vote buys a majority in this country.

TV ads of Canadian Soldiers "Fighting Chaos", digging wells, putting smiling Afghan girls back to school.

It only works IF Afghanistan is the issue.  Therefore Afghanistan probably won't be the issue.



Quebec "Nationalism" is off the table as a Liberal/Conservative wedge.  It will always be a Separatist/Federalist wedge.


Hence the push on the Environment for the Liberals and the fear of resolving "THE FISCAL IMBALANCE" by the Bloc.


----------



## Trinity (18 Dec 2006)

Wow...

I like 2 reporters now


----------



## xo31@711ret (18 Dec 2006)

Great letter Colin (and excellent points). Now let's wait & see how (or if) a response is made...


_There is nothing so likely to produce peace as to be well prepared to meet the enemy._ - George Washington


----------



## Haggis (18 Dec 2006)

Stephane Doin has announced that he will not support the Bloc in their threat: 

Posted with the usual Fair Dealings provisions foremost in my mind:  http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/War_Terror/2006/12/18/2859470-cp.html

*Grits won't topple gov't over Afghanistan: Dion*

QUEBEC (CP) - The new leader of the federal Liberals says he won't topple the Tory government over Canada's mission in Afghanistan. 

Stephane Dion is refusing to back a Bloc Quebecois threat to introduce a motion of non-confidence if Prime Minister Stephen Harper doesn't overhaul the Afghan effort. "I don't understand the Bloc's position, at all," Dion told reporters in Quebec City. 

"It doesn't seem very useful to me to want to bring down the government on that in February as (Bloc Leader Gilles) Duceppe is proposing." 

Duceppe has said he may try to topple the minority Conservative government with a non-confidence motion unless the Afghan operation is "rapidly and profoundly" revamped to focus on reconstruction instead of fighting. 

A Bloc motion could not bring down the government without Liberal help. 

The Bloc is looking for an excuse to provoke a quick election before Liberals can get organized, according to Dion.  "We'll prepare for an election, but it doesn't seem to me that Canadians want an election in the middle of winter," Dion said. 

Harper has accused Duceppe of playing politics with soldiers. Jason Kenney, Harper's parliamentary secretary, said Duceppe would abandon Afghans to the "tender mercies" of the Taliban. 

At a party meeting in Quebec City, Dion named former leadership rival Michael Ignatieff as deputy leader of the Liberal party. 

Dion will hand out other jobs to former leadership contenders on Tuesday.


----------



## Kirkhill (18 Dec 2006)

And as the CF and NATO get the upper hand, and violence dies down and reconstruction picks up, the Liberals will claim credit for forcing the government to refocus on Canada's traditional roles.....

And thus politics.  :


----------



## schart28 (18 Dec 2006)

yeah, that's how it seems to work...



			
				Kirkhill said:
			
		

> And as the CF and NATO get the upper hand, and violence dies down and reconstruction picks up, the Liberals will claim credit for forcing the government to refocus on Canada's traditional roles.....
> 
> And thus politics.  :


----------



## career_radio-checker (20 Dec 2006)

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> Here's a thought - let's assume that 50% of the Canadian Population is opposed to the mission.  The polls also seem to indicate that 50% support the mission.
> 
> With Layton, Duceppe and Dion splitting the opposed vote *that leaves 50% available to support the Conservatives*.
> 
> ...



And don't forget that a fraction of those eligible to vote actually go and vote -- a variable which skews the entire support/against Afghanistan as an election debate.

As for Fiscal imbalance: the only ones making noise now about fiscal imbalance are those Provinces seen as 'Have-Nots.' And right now it's only Quebec (politicians) making that noise. I thought that issue was done and over with.

So in closing I don't think this will be an election debate, I think Duceppe will try to make it one but the other parties won't bite. Even Layton is starting to realise this issue is making him lose popularity with the swing voters. The only time he is listened to is when there are heavy casualties and lately he has been very tactfull how he says how he wants the troops to be pulled out.


----------



## Jaydub (21 Dec 2006)

> PM won't be swayed on mission
> Harper prepared to be defeated on Afghanistan if necessary
> Article Tools
> Printer friendly
> ...



http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/story.html?id=65f4e70a-45a1-4ca2-b524-4667d09d3ce6&k=1284&p=2

Here's a leader who actually stands for something, and doesn't bend with the wind for a temporary rise in the polls.


----------



## bilton090 (21 Dec 2006)

I don't feel pressure by threats from the Liberals or NDP or Bloc to bring me down [on Afghanistan]," he said.

"If ultimately I were brought down on that, and even defeated on that, I can live with myself. I could not live with myself making a decision on Canada's role in the world and our strategic and defence interests if I knew I had done that for political reasons that were the wrong reasons. That I could not live with."

Mr. Harper said what does influence him is the notion the Canadian soldiers who have lost their lives in Afghanistan should not have died in vain.

"The most difficult part of the job I have is phoning every single Canadian family when there is a loss and talking to them," the Prime Minister said.

"And I have to tell you that what they ask of me, in almost every case, is their assurance that the government will not, because of political pressure, abandon a mission that their sons and daughters believed in and were prepared to give their lives for."

     He's got my vote !


----------

