A
VIEW ON ATTACKING SYRIA
Canadians are either perplexed or angry that the unelected leader of the
country appointed to the position by his political counterparts is prepared to
declare a war of sorts on another country with only the support of those that
initially elected the leader to power. Canada's system of parliamentary democracy
allows for such action if the leader’s party holds a majority in the House of
Commons.
All Canadians are now aware the mission in the Mideast the government, with the support of the third party, launched to bomb a perceived enemy is going to be extended and expanded. Perceived enemy of Canada only because a couple of Canadians, that according to news reports and media analysis, were supporters of the Mideast ISIS or ISIL (whichever fits the fancy that day) terrorist regime. Those two actual incidents that took the lives of our troops were sad instances and the same in character to a great extend to the recent killing of police officers by another deranged individual. The acts were against Canadians by Canadians.
So in effect if a Canadian of Russian ancestry were to kill a Canadian soldier or two in an act of perceived terror, maybe even attacking the House of Commons for supporting the Ukraine government, it should follow that our military jets would be dispatched to bomb the Russian insurgents currently attacking the Ukraine. It apparently could happen if the Syrian threat is any indication, and especially if another NATO country agreed to join the mission.
As CTV long time and highly respected commentator Craig Oliver suggested in effect on the Sunday March 29, 2015 Question Period broadcast, Prime Minister Harper is making some monumental threats of military action by a relatively small country (Canada) while wielding a twig rather than a big stick. In reality Canada has a limited number of older jet fighters, a small outdated ineffective naval force and limited small army. Facing an enemy of any consequence at home or abroad would require the might of our American neighbour, the United Kingdom or possibly some other world military force. Canadian military forces at the present time would probably face defeat in a short time if attacked.
There is a great deal of rhetoric in the media about the Harper government decision to attack Syria for the sake of “making Canada safer”. The scenario is definitely more politically inspired than clear common sense. The solution to the problem of the Conservative Party of Canada ignoring Canadians security for political purposes might be to list the ridings and members that supported the proposed attacks on another nation. Then using the list for election campaign fodder send letter advising voters in the riding their elected member voted for the international aggression.
Imagine the effect a letter to every voter in every riding where the member supported the issue stating “your (named) member” agreed to allow Canada to bomb and possibly kill citizens in Syria solely for political purposes. Another alternative could be to point out the alternative of directing the funding used for the aggression to more humanitarian efforts. Humanitarianism was the Canadian reputation prior to the Harper government drive to change the Canadian character. Now human suffering relief appears secondary to aggressive behavior.
Listening to the parliamentary debate the evening of March 30, 2015 was to some degree a disappointment. Of course Prime Minister Harper was absent as is the constant case with every important parliamentary discussion. It is inconceivable the country’s leader would be absent while one of the most important pieces of legislation in recent years was under discussion. With what turned out to be a 13 seat majority Prime Minister Harper reflected disinterest in the wants of the other 129 parliamentarians elected to represent the 65% or so of Canadians that did not vote for the CPC. Although the best system in the world parliamentary democracy has flaws such as the one witnessed when this minority of parliamentarians was able to commit the nation to possibly illegally attacking another nation’s territory.
The future will determine to what extent Canadians will suffer from the current government venture into uncharted aggressive activity on the world stage. It is likely impossible to stop home based sympathizers of another culture, regime, religious order or any other perceived or real enemy from performing tremendous acts labeled terrorism. We will likely not find some foreign terrorist with a bomb strapped to his or her body creating havoc in a public place. On the other hand we will probably have to cope with some unstable Canadian sympathetic to the activities in the Mideast or Ukraine prepared to commit a horrendous crime in our country. It has already happened and attacking the source of that person’s ideology in a distant nation is not the solution.
All Canadians are now aware the mission in the Mideast the government, with the support of the third party, launched to bomb a perceived enemy is going to be extended and expanded. Perceived enemy of Canada only because a couple of Canadians, that according to news reports and media analysis, were supporters of the Mideast ISIS or ISIL (whichever fits the fancy that day) terrorist regime. Those two actual incidents that took the lives of our troops were sad instances and the same in character to a great extend to the recent killing of police officers by another deranged individual. The acts were against Canadians by Canadians.
So in effect if a Canadian of Russian ancestry were to kill a Canadian soldier or two in an act of perceived terror, maybe even attacking the House of Commons for supporting the Ukraine government, it should follow that our military jets would be dispatched to bomb the Russian insurgents currently attacking the Ukraine. It apparently could happen if the Syrian threat is any indication, and especially if another NATO country agreed to join the mission.
As CTV long time and highly respected commentator Craig Oliver suggested in effect on the Sunday March 29, 2015 Question Period broadcast, Prime Minister Harper is making some monumental threats of military action by a relatively small country (Canada) while wielding a twig rather than a big stick. In reality Canada has a limited number of older jet fighters, a small outdated ineffective naval force and limited small army. Facing an enemy of any consequence at home or abroad would require the might of our American neighbour, the United Kingdom or possibly some other world military force. Canadian military forces at the present time would probably face defeat in a short time if attacked.
There is a great deal of rhetoric in the media about the Harper government decision to attack Syria for the sake of “making Canada safer”. The scenario is definitely more politically inspired than clear common sense. The solution to the problem of the Conservative Party of Canada ignoring Canadians security for political purposes might be to list the ridings and members that supported the proposed attacks on another nation. Then using the list for election campaign fodder send letter advising voters in the riding their elected member voted for the international aggression.
Imagine the effect a letter to every voter in every riding where the member supported the issue stating “your (named) member” agreed to allow Canada to bomb and possibly kill citizens in Syria solely for political purposes. Another alternative could be to point out the alternative of directing the funding used for the aggression to more humanitarian efforts. Humanitarianism was the Canadian reputation prior to the Harper government drive to change the Canadian character. Now human suffering relief appears secondary to aggressive behavior.
Listening to the parliamentary debate the evening of March 30, 2015 was to some degree a disappointment. Of course Prime Minister Harper was absent as is the constant case with every important parliamentary discussion. It is inconceivable the country’s leader would be absent while one of the most important pieces of legislation in recent years was under discussion. With what turned out to be a 13 seat majority Prime Minister Harper reflected disinterest in the wants of the other 129 parliamentarians elected to represent the 65% or so of Canadians that did not vote for the CPC. Although the best system in the world parliamentary democracy has flaws such as the one witnessed when this minority of parliamentarians was able to commit the nation to possibly illegally attacking another nation’s territory.
The future will determine to what extent Canadians will suffer from the current government venture into uncharted aggressive activity on the world stage. It is likely impossible to stop home based sympathizers of another culture, regime, religious order or any other perceived or real enemy from performing tremendous acts labeled terrorism. We will likely not find some foreign terrorist with a bomb strapped to his or her body creating havoc in a public place. On the other hand we will probably have to cope with some unstable Canadian sympathetic to the activities in the Mideast or Ukraine prepared to commit a horrendous crime in our country. It has already happened and attacking the source of that person’s ideology in a distant nation is not the solution.