• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Another Layton press conference against the mission

FascistLibertarian

Member
Inactive
Reaction score
0
Points
210
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070704.waghanlayton07043/BNStory/Front

Layton says Afghan deaths too high a cost
Canadian Press

July 4, 2007 at 12:25 PM EDT

OTTAWA — The Prime Minister needs to engineer a scale-back of military operations in Afghanistan in the face of mounting civilian and military deaths, NDP Leader Jack Layton said Wednesday as six more NATO troops were reported killed.

Mr. Layton said Prime Minister Stephen Harper needs to show leadership by urging the United States to stop high-altitude bombing in the war-torn country and withdrawing Canadian troops from what he characterized as a hopeless mission.

It's the wrong mission; it's not working; it's not going to accomplish the goals,” said Mr. Layton, adding his party will ensure the issue is front and centre in coming federal byelections.

NATO's presence in Afghanistan is only boosting Afghan support for the Taliban, he said, adding the only way to peace is through negotiation. He urged Harper to take a lead role in establishing a peace process.


New Democratic Party leader Jack Layton discusses Canada's mission in Afghanistan at a news conference in Ottawa Wednesday. (New Democratic Party leader Jack Layton discusses Canada's mission in Afghanistan at a news conference in Ottawa Wednesday.)

Related Articles
Recent

Six NATO soldiers killed in southern Afghanistan 
Mr. Layton said 270 Afghan civilians have been killed during military operations in Afghanistan this year alone.

His news conference was held as NATO announced a roadside bomb had hit a military vehicle in a volatile region of Kandahar province, killing six soldiers and their Afghan interpreter.

The war is escalating and Ottawa's commitment to provide troops to the NATO alliance in Afghanistan for at least two more years is ill-conceived, Mr. Layton said.

He wants Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion and Bloc Québécois Leader Gilles Duceppe to reconsider their positions on Canada's role in Afghanistan and join the NDP in calling for Canada's immediate withdrawal.

He said Canadians should voice their opposition to the war by voting against the government in the byelections, expected before summer's end.

“The strategy we're following is wrong; we should take our troops out,” he said.

“Students of history will know that all major conflicts are resolved, ultimately, through peace-oriented discussions. . . . And that's what needs to happen here.”

Ottawa has committed troops to Afghanistan through February 2009. Mr. Harper has said he will seek an all-party consensus in Parliament on Canada's future role with the NATO force, if any.

Has he ever even talked to a CF member.
He seems to think that everyone here thinks that the solution is purely military.  ::)
I remember how we won ww2 through 'peace-oriented discussions'.
::)

I dunno, having met and talked to Layton I have to say he seems smart and to believe what he says, but I disagree with it so much.....

edit: another good article with comments from Douglas Bland
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=68947b61-ffa4-4ee6-b7c9-8b4884b9cf6f&k=66811
edit #2:
http://www.ndp.ca/page/5496

Statement by NDP leader Jack Layton on the combat mission in Afghanistan
Wed 4 Jul 2007  |   Printer friendly
The growing civilian death toll in Afghanistan at the hands of NATO forces is more disturbing evidence that the counter-insurgency mission is not working.

These deaths mark an escalation in the conflict. We have lost more Canadians in this - our heaviest combat, since Korea.

We support our troops and their families and it is out of the deep respect for each and everyone of them that we seek a de-escalation of this conflict.

We learned with great sadness from Afghan officials, that 45 civilians were killed this weekend by a NATO air strike.

According to the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission - the organization which Prime Minister Harper and his government have entrusted to monitor detainees - over 270 civilians have been killed in military operations by international forces, so far this year.

Two-hundred and seventy.

This is unacceptable.

It is unacceptable to Canadians, and to the Afghan people.

On Monday, the Afghan ambassador to the United States asked foreign forces to limit the use of high altitude bombing in their campaigns.

Yesterday, the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission, responding to the surge in civilian deaths including the deaths of 7 children in a single attack, called on NATO to minimize civilian casualities.

Today I am calling on the Prime Minister to take a leadership role and add Canada’s voice in telling both the Bush administration and the North Atlantic Council of NATO that the level of Afghan civilian deaths is unacceptable and that indiscriminate and deadly airstrikes be stopped. Airstrikes which are only adding to the escalation to a war that shows no signs of ending.

The ratio of combatants versus Afghan civilians killed by NATO forces is quickly reaching the 50-50 mark. Clearly, the current strategy is not working.

Mr. Harper isn’t building the conditions for a lasting peace.

He’s fuelling the conditions for an escalating war.

That’s not what Canadians want.

And never before has the need for leadership on this issue been greater.

As Parliament rose for its summer recess, the Standing Committee on Defence, tabled its report on the current mission in Afghanistan.

Amazingly the Liberals tabled what it called a “complementary” report – simply accepting most of the government’s recommendations on the mission.

That’s not leadership.

Stephane Dion and the Bloc Quebecois seek to have Canada’s involvement in this mission continue for two more years.

We believe that two-more years is two years too long.

I call on Stephane Dion and Gilles Duceppe to answer the question – to their fellow Quebeckers and fellow Canadians - “if the mission is wrong in 2009 – why isn’t it also wrong in 2007?”

In the upcoming by-elections, voters will finally have an opportunity to have their say on Canada’s involvement in this mission.

The choice is clear.

They can vote for parties that got us into this mission, extended this mission, or who want it to go on another two years – or they can vote for the NDP.

Canadians want us to go in a different direction in Afghanistan – it’s time the Prime Minister started listening to them.

Thank you.


Edited by Vern to correct typo in topic title.
 
Why is it when I see Taliban Jack, I think of that silly little dog Paris Hilton carries around in her purse? ::)
 
recceguy said:
Why is it when I see Taliban Jack, I think of that silly little dog Paris Hilton carries around in her purse? ::)
This one?
SamUgliestDogLulu.jpg
 
No......that one looks kinda mean......

Taliban Jack just looks like a sissy
 
CDN Aviator said:
No......that one looks kinda mean......

Taliban Jack just looks like a sissy

Sissy???!!! Naawwww, Now way! No one who takes a bike to work everyday could possibly be a sissy!
Oh, whats that? It's not a motorcycle? A self-powered leg-operated bike, you say?

Hmmm.
 
So how does Jack know if the mission is working or not?

Six million children going to school?
40,000 children/year surviving disease that would have killed them in 2002?
10% /year economic growth?
Schools, roads and infrastructure rebuilt?

If these sorts of statistics don't count in his book, then how does he define "success?".

If you, the reader, didn't know these statistics, write your newspaper/radio station/TV station/Cable provider and ask why they are not covering these stories. (Jack knows these stats BTW, since they are reported to Parliament. He just dosn't let facts get in the way of his good story).
 
To add to a_majoor's post, what on earth does Stephen Staples know about IEDs? CTV had him on earlier talking about what the CF can do to better protect itself from them. He really has no right to speak about such things and CTV should be ashamed of itself giving this man the ability to spread his misinformation.
 
The media will spin for dollars.
It's obscene but that's how it works.

Jack Layton however, is quite beyond any forgivness.

He provides the Taliban a way to survive and continue.
He provides comfort to the enemies of Canada  and
to the enemies of decency itself.

This week I witnessed a CBC documentary that showed how
politicians pander to ethnic groups in spite of  the internal politics
at play.  There's Jack, partying with a group apperantly
complicit in the Air India bombing.

To me, ( just my opinion mind you ) is that Jack Layton is a traitor.
His support for capitulation is a liablity that is unacceptable from a member
of parliment.

Sorry for the rant - just saw him on the news after a really good glass of red wine.




 
“Students of history will know that all major conflicts are resolved, ultimately, through peace-oriented discussions. . . . And that's what needs to happen here.”

Seen this on CPAC last night and the reporter from Canwest Global tore jack a new arsehole. Something about WWII being resolved through troops marching into Berlin and atomic bombs being dropped on Japan. I guess Jack missed that part in his socialist revisionist history class. ::)
 
the reporter from Canwest Global tore jack a new arsehole.

I'd pay money to see that!

I'd pay a lot of money to do it myself! ;D
 
Flip said:
I'd pay money to see that!

I'd pay a lot of money to do it myself! ;D

While not a huge fan of the press, this had me angry that I didn't record it for my amusement. I was almost in tears watching it as I was laughing so hard.

Later on CTV?, I watched Denis Coderre and Audrey Machlachan discusing the Afghan mission. Denis finished up with the statement that "Audrey was completely unqualified to make any decisions regarding Afghanistan". Again, almost in tears with laughter. That was the political version of "You're an idiot so shut your gob!"  ;D
 
a_majoor said:
So how does Jack know if the mission is working or not?

Six million children going to school?
40,000 children/year surviving disease that would have killed them in 2002?
10% /year economic growth?
Schools, roads and infrastructure rebuilt?

If these sorts of statistics don't count in his book, then how does he define "success?".

Jack might have an opinion that is not so popular right now...or may be a lot of Canadians would agree with him, that the mission is not going so well. I can tell you that most people in Quebec are not too thrilled about CF being in Afghanistan, especially a few weeks away from seeing R22R leaving for Kandahar. Even when our Prime Minister talks about the mission, he's not as convinced as he was a few months back.

As far as your numbers are concerned, I tend to agree with what you're implying...but have you thought about the possibility that it might be mainly because of the efforts made by other forces than our own ? What about the British forces ? Any contribution on their part ?

You're right...Afghans need our help...but so does half of the World, where NATO might be involved.

It seems that it's mostly our soldiers who dies over there...and some of our politicians and some members in our society doesn't like that, which leads to comments like Jack's.

 
Whoever fails to learn the lessons of history is doomed to repeat them - or words to that effect. No idea who said it!

There were those who talked capitulation with Hitler at the beginning of WWII. Thank goodness a voice of reason came along and had the courage to force the issue that you don't negotiate with mad dogs.

I'd suggest Jack be invited to join us, but he wouldn't like us much, and we've already been through THAT ad nauseum on another thread!

:cdn:
Hawk
 
Hawk said:
Whoever fails to learn the lessons of history is doomed to repeat them - or words to that effect. No idea who said it!

There were those who talked capitulation with Hitler at the beginning of WWII. Thank goodness a voice of reason came along and had the courage to force the issue that you don't negotiate with mad dogs.

Hawk

How many soldiers Canada provided to WWII ?...and how many do we provide now in Afghanistan ?

As the digits (WWII) suggest, it was a war...a world war, at a time where UN and NATO were not around; in Afghanistan right now, isn't it a peace mission ?

Not so long ago, a power much stronger than Canada, USSR, got their butts kicked in Afghanistan...then, how are we suppose to triumph over the Talibans without the intervention of the United States ? Even they are getting a serious beating in Irak. They are being handed another Vietnam on a silver plate. Since 9/11, they lost more men in Irak than the number of victims from the 9/11 attacks.

P.S. If Germany surrendered in '45, it's mainly because of the USA. Let's not forget what history taught us.
 
Actually it was more what the Soviets did. Perhaps you should learn some history and how to spell. ;D
 
united93......What are you babbling about?
 
The Previous poster said that the Germans surrendered because of what the Americans did. Last time I checked it was the soviets who gutted the German army not the Americans.
 
Quote
Layton says Afghan deaths too high a cost
Canadian Press

July 4, 2007 at 12:25 PM EDT

OTTAWA — The Prime Minister needs to engineer a scale-back of military operations in Afghanistan in the face of mounting civilian and military deaths, NDP Leader Jack Layton said Wednesday as six more NATO troops were reported killed.

"mindles drivill deleted here"

He wants Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion and Bloc Québécois Leader Gilles Duceppe to reconsider their positions on Canada's role in Afghanistan and join the NDP in calling for Canada's immediate withdrawal.

He said Canadians should voice their opposition to the war by voting against the government in the byelections, expected before summer's end.

“The strategy we're following is wrong; we should take our troops out,” he said.

Students of history will know that all major conflicts are resolved, ultimately, through peace-oriented discussions. . . . And that's what needs to happen here.”

And exactly what wars is he talking about here.  Quick Review:

WWI, polictical/diplomatic end to the war.  Lead to 20 years of punative punisahment and then 6 years of all out slayter.

WWII.  Decisive MILIARTY victory by the the Allies, England, Soviets, Canada, et al.  Result, no major War in Europe since then.

Korea.  Now at 50+ years of stalemate after a cease fire.  No meaningful progress made to date on what is going to happen to the TWO Korea's.

Vietnam.  Viet Min devistate the French army, Country partioned into North and South.  Deplomatic end to The American Involvement, (Victory with Honour I think Kissenger called it.)  Result, North Viet Nam re-unites Viet Nam as one country through Military action.

Cyprus.  UN negotiated Cease Fire.  No perminate solution on the horizion.

Isreal/ Syria - Golan.  UN Cease fire.  No peace on the horizon.

Countless others that follow the same pattern.  The lesson here is that Taliban Jack doesn't know how to read a histroy text book to save his Life.
 
Back
Top