Go, Canada!

[Zylka]

Originally posted by Frogger


Zylka, the US has no real leverage over us. Playing nice gets us sh*t all in trade concessions, as we've seen over the last 5 years, and playing the ball how we see it won't hurt us.

Ok I agree, especially in that that's the end we discuss

...but I'm starting to really wonder, can't we just do what's morally "right" in a situation like this?

[Ozz]

Originally posted by Felch X
If Chretien keeps saying stuff like this, he might be next.

How about it, canucks? Feel like being liberated from French occupation?

You make his point, eh.

Nice thing about this Iraq mess is the masks are torn
and we all get to see our friends and enemies TRUE
colours.

Seems some of our former "friends" have no problem
with the idea of conquest and conversion by the sword
while paying lip service to freedom for all men.

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by Zylka
...but I'm starting to really wonder, can't we just do what's morally "right" in a situation like this?

This seems to be exactly what your Prime Minister is trying.

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by Ozz
Nice thing about this Iraq mess is the masks are torn
and we all get to see our friends and enemies TRUE
colours.

Seems some of our former "friends" have no problem
with the idea of conquest and conversion by the sword
while paying lip service to freedom for all men.

Agreed; absolutely!

"CANADA! CANADA! CANADA!"

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Ozz
Seems some of our former "friends" have no problem
with the idea of conquest and conversion by the sword
while paying lip service to freedom for all men.

That has been the US foreign policy, from Korean War on.

[lord of the mark]

This is kinda silly. Canada is sending another frigate to replace the one that had the accident.

Canada is NOT sending ground troops, as the 2000 they are sending to Afghan exhausts their ability to project force. Which is fine with me, Im sure they'll do a good job in Afgan.

Canada's position at the UN has not aligned completely with the US, but not with France either. It doesnt surprise me much, given Canada's strat position and the makeup of the current govt.

Of course the distinction between regime change and disarmament is silly, given that Chretien seems to accept the notion of disarmament by force. Once a couple of hundred thousand coalition start marching around IRaq to disarm it, theres no way a regime based completely on force can survive.

List - there is no list of course. For several reasons -
1. Iraq is legally unique - no other country has the same legal obligation to disarm that Iraq does, for reasons going back to the end of Gulf War 1.
2. We do have issues with countires that support terrorism, but since at this point we have made no publci ultimatums on this issue (other than to the Taliban) it is yet to be seen how alleged terrorist supporters will respond, or how the world will view US claims of terror support.
3. IF Iraq goes well, we will have sources of leverage in the region that will make force less important OTOH if things go badly, the whole policy will be dead in the water.

[KrazyHorse]

Of course the distinction between regime change and disarmament is silly, given that Chretien seems to accept the notion of disarmament by force

Does he? I wish somebody could tell me.

[lord of the mark]

IIUC the current Canadian suggestion at the UN would give the US and UK more explicit sanction for force than IN UK/US/Spain proposal. in exchange for delay to March 28.

[KrazyHorse]

I haven't seen the text. Unfortunately, a quick search also didn't get one for me. Just got a bunch of commentary on it (not particularly helpful). You have a primary source?

[lord of the mark]

nah, i dont think its been made public.