If the Liberal motion is, as Radwanski hints, a way to trick Canadians into accepting an anti-insurgency campaign by calling it security, then I think both the Liberals and Conservatives are in for a world of hurt. If however, both the government and the military accept that they are no longer supposed to run all over the countryside looking for the Taliban, then it is something I can live with.
If this turns out to be a "too clever by half" measure to fool Canadians, then Iggy/Rae and Harper will have a lot to answer for. The question they will have to answer is, why are we extending the same mission for three years when things will not be any more secure at that point? Everyone knows this. What is so special about 2011, other than it is three more years to "save face"? If we are just hanging on to the same strategies in order to appease the war hawks in the Liberal caucus and make it easier on them when we finally do abandon Afghanistan, then I say we are condemning our soldiers to die for nothing, post 2009. I and the rest of the Canadian people will be watching, very closely.
Update:Well, it certainly does look like the Iggy/Rae have staged a bloodless coup and now run the Liberal Party. No big surprise there, really. It makes voting preferences pretty clear. Anyone opposed to the current direction of the Afghan war can't support the Liberal Party.
Recommend this Post
He should've stood his ground.
ReplyDeleteBut then, he should have stood his ground in September.