 PM unveils compromise motion on Afghan mission The Harper government has unveiled a new motion to end the Canadian mission in the volatile Kandahar region of Afghanistan by 2011 -bridging the gap between previous Conservative and Liberal motions.Commentsview comments in forum You need to be a member of CKA and be logged into the site, to comment on news. |
Share
Who voted on this?
|
Mobile
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2025 by Canadaka.net
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2025 by Canadaka.net
Looks like the Conservatives have moved towards the Liberal position on Afghanistan, props to that.
We have done alot of good there, the afghans do want us there, our soldiers have died, all we need is a bit more resolve while applying more pressure to NATO for more troops and we have this job sooner that we think.
Think of the consequences of bailing too quick, which is the Bloc and the NDP's view on Afghanistan, they say to hell with all that mentioned above and pull out now. How bad would that be, as a nation, to the world, for our military.
Its not the Canadian way to just pick up and leave because things are a little rough and uncomfortable to watch and read about. We can't have peace unless we are willing to fight for it when we should be.
Liberals and Conservatives have to come to our collective senses, work together and keep in mind of the alternatives that Canadians have in the corner like the Bloc and NDP lunatic fringe that dont give a shit regardless and are just itching to spend more of our money for an election no one really wants. Even though the results would be more or less the same...
Looks like the Conservatives have moved towards the Liberal position on Afghanistan, props to that.
well i wouldn't say they have done that , more they have made ther afghanistan position more clear and realistic . they realised some canadians wanted to know when the mission would end and wanted to see more help from other nato countries over there.
maybe it shows that sometimes the minority can actualy work and results that please canadians can be achived .
"Dion has boxed himself on the issue. He did it in advance of Manley and, hard as it is to believe, his own trip to Kandahar ... Now he will have to climb down or risk running an election while ceding the moral high ground to Harper," one supporter said.
There is said to be a large group of Liberal MPs, by no means all Ignatieff supporters, who will not endorse a party position that sees Canada quitting Afghanistan a year from now. "Some of us will not stand a simple departure," one MP said. Asked if this might see some Liberals voting alongside the government in favour of Mr. Manley's recommendations, the MP replied: "Absolutely."
http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/col ... ?id=272581
It's good to have them on board but I don't think it was the CPC who changed all that much:
"Dion has boxed himself on the issue. He did it in advance of Manley and, hard as it is to believe, his own trip to Kandahar ... Now he will have to climb down or risk running an election while ceding the moral high ground to Harper," one supporter said.
There is said to be a large group of Liberal MPs, by no means all Ignatieff supporters, who will not endorse a party position that sees Canada quitting Afghanistan a year from now. "Some of us will not stand a simple departure," one MP said. Asked if this might see some Liberals voting alongside the government in favour of Mr. Manley's recommendations, the MP replied: "Absolutely."
http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/col ... ?id=272581
Keep crying. I understand its frustrating for you to understand compromise and why you feel the need to try and highlight supposed Liberal infighting all the while ignoring the fact it was your party that was ripped apart by disloyalty then thrust back together after several failed incarnations but its just not happening.
Still the support just doesn't seem to be happening for harper does it? While Dion has likely a very one shot only election to improve Liberal fortunes, Harpers continued inability to break out of the middle is just natures way of telling you cons that Canada won't vote conservative often nor for very long.
Sorry for your luck.
It's good to have them on board but I don't think it was the CPC who changed all that much:
"Dion has boxed himself on the issue. He did it in advance of Manley and, hard as it is to believe, his own trip to Kandahar ... Now he will have to climb down or risk running an election while ceding the moral high ground to Harper," one supporter said.
There is said to be a large group of Liberal MPs, by no means all Ignatieff supporters, who will not endorse a party position that sees Canada quitting Afghanistan a year from now. "Some of us will not stand a simple departure," one MP said. Asked if this might see some Liberals voting alongside the government in favour of Mr. Manley's recommendations, the MP replied: "Absolutely."
http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/col ... ?id=272581
Keep crying. I understand its frustrating for you to understand compromise and why you feel the need to try and highlight supposed Liberal infighting all the while ignoring the fact it was your party that was ripped apart by disloyalty then thrust back together after several failed incarnations but its just not happening.
Still the support just doesn't seem to be happening for harper does it? While Dion has likely a very one shot only election to improve Liberal fortunes, Harpers continued inability to break out of the middle is just natures way of telling you cons that Canada won't vote conservative often nor for very long.
Sorry for your luck.
Because Canada likes Liberals more
It's good to have them on board but I don't think it was the CPC who changed all that much:
"Dion has boxed himself on the issue. He did it in advance of Manley and, hard as it is to believe, his own trip to Kandahar ... Now he will have to climb down or risk running an election while ceding the moral high ground to Harper," one supporter said.
There is said to be a large group of Liberal MPs, by no means all Ignatieff supporters, who will not endorse a party position that sees Canada quitting Afghanistan a year from now. "Some of us will not stand a simple departure," one MP said. Asked if this might see some Liberals voting alongside the government in favour of Mr. Manley's recommendations, the MP replied: "Absolutely."
http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/col ... ?id=272581
Keep crying. I understand its frustrating for you to understand compromise and why you feel the need to try and highlight supposed Liberal infighting all the while ignoring the fact it was your party that was ripped apart by disloyalty then thrust back together after several failed incarnations but its just not happening.
Still the support just doesn't seem to be happening for harper does it? While Dion has likely a very one shot only election to improve Liberal fortunes, Harpers continued inability to break out of the middle is just natures way of telling you cons that Canada won't vote conservative often nor for very long.
Sorry for your luck.
Because Canada likes Liberals more
Yet no matter how bad it looks for the Liberals there is still that little nagging fact that Harper won only a slim minority and 2 years on looks no better.
Sorry for your luck.
It's good to have them on board but I don't think it was the CPC who changed all that much:
"Dion has boxed himself on the issue. He did it in advance of Manley and, hard as it is to believe, his own trip to Kandahar ... Now he will have to climb down or risk running an election while ceding the moral high ground to Harper," one supporter said.
There is said to be a large group of Liberal MPs, by no means all Ignatieff supporters, who will not endorse a party position that sees Canada quitting Afghanistan a year from now. "Some of us will not stand a simple departure," one MP said. Asked if this might see some Liberals voting alongside the government in favour of Mr. Manley's recommendations, the MP replied: "Absolutely."
http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/col ... ?id=272581
Keep crying. I understand its frustrating for you to understand compromise and why you feel the need to try and highlight supposed Liberal infighting all the while ignoring the fact it was your party that was ripped apart by disloyalty then thrust back together after several failed incarnations but its just not happening.
Still the support just doesn't seem to be happening for harper does it? While Dion has likely a very one shot only election to improve Liberal fortunes, Harpers continued inability to break out of the middle is just natures way of telling you cons that Canada won't vote conservative often nor for very long.
Sorry for your luck.
Because Canada likes Liberals more
Yet no matter how bad it looks for the Liberals there is still that little nagging fact that Harper won only a slim minority and 2 years on looks no better.
Sorry for your luck.
Sorry for your luck. Canadians no longer park their vote with the Liberals when their in -decisive. The Libs are going to have to start earning their votes, something Dion is incapable of doing.
Dion was part of the government that signed this agreement so he should know.
He's also been very vocal that we must pull out by 2009, then he supports the mission, then we must bring taliban prisoners to Canada, then we have to invade Pakistan, then we must leave again, now we can stay till 2011 but only if we don't shoot anyone.
Who the hell is selling out for the sake of politics again?
The Conservatives have always been behind the mission and the men and women of the forces of Canada and Afghanistan.
The Liberals started it, supported it, dropped it, supported it then flip flopped all over the globe. Just look at the quote I posted and the deep devisions that still exist in the liberal camp.
You're putting lipstick on a pig that no one's going to buy.
It's good to have them on board but I don't think it was the CPC who changed all that much:
"Dion has boxed himself on the issue. He did it in advance of Manley and, hard as it is to believe, his own trip to Kandahar ... Now he will have to climb down or risk running an election while ceding the moral high ground to Harper," one supporter said.
There is said to be a large group of Liberal MPs, by no means all Ignatieff supporters, who will not endorse a party position that sees Canada quitting Afghanistan a year from now. "Some of us will not stand a simple departure," one MP said. Asked if this might see some Liberals voting alongside the government in favour of Mr. Manley's recommendations, the MP replied: "Absolutely."
http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/col ... ?id=272581
Keep crying. I understand its frustrating for you to understand compromise and why you feel the need to try and highlight supposed Liberal infighting all the while ignoring the fact it was your party that was ripped apart by disloyalty then thrust back together after several failed incarnations but its just not happening.
Still the support just doesn't seem to be happening for harper does it? While Dion has likely a very one shot only election to improve Liberal fortunes, Harpers continued inability to break out of the middle is just natures way of telling you cons that Canada won't vote conservative often nor for very long.
Sorry for your luck.
Because Canada likes Liberals more
Yet no matter how bad it looks for the Liberals there is still that little nagging fact that Harper won only a slim minority and 2 years on looks no better.
Sorry for your luck.
Sorry for your luck. Canadians no longer park their vote with the Liberals when their in -decisive. The Libs are going to have to start earning their votes, something Dion is incapable of doing.
You guys love my little sayings don't you?
Say what you will but I have style.
As for your belief that Canadians are no longer voting Liberal well that just flies in the face of all your rhetoric about Liberals only Liberal.
What exactly do you base this on? Those continual polls showing Harper well short of a majority?
The historic anti-Liberalism of Canadians?
Voodoo dolls in the likeness of Dion that you plan to violate come election day? (perhaps thats just for personal reasons rather then political).
Lets see (rolls dice).
Unlucky (rare but no less valid).
derby. It's all sad & hollow banter anyways because Paul Martin signed the Afghanistan Compact that requires us, with no conditions or qualifications, to be there till 2011.
Dion was part of the government that signed this agreement so he should know.
He's also been very vocal that we must pull out by 2009, then he supports the mission, then we must bring taliban prisoners to Canada, then we have to invade Pakistan, then we must leave again, now we can stay till 2011 but only if we don't shoot anyone.
Who the hell is selling out for the sake of politics again?
The Conservatives have always been behind the mission and the men and women of the forces of Canada and Afghanistan.
The Liberals started it, supported it, dropped it, supported it then flip flopped all over the globe. Just look at the quote I posted and the deep devisions that still exist in the liberal camp.
You're putting lipstick on a pig that no one's going to buy.
Your BS rhetoric is getting rather tiresome as is your shocking misinformation about the whole affair.
The agreement ends in 2009 and no agreement dictated what role we were assigned.
Your lies about Dions position are as pathetic as any moon landing hoax theory and based on the same logic.
Keep it up though because as long as people like you continue to spout your position and party then every party but the CPC gets stronger.
The 2 minute penalty is almost over.
It's good to have them on board but I don't think it was the CPC who changed all that much:
"Dion has boxed himself on the issue. He did it in advance of Manley and, hard as it is to believe, his own trip to Kandahar ... Now he will have to climb down or risk running an election while ceding the moral high ground to Harper," one supporter said.
There is said to be a large group of Liberal MPs, by no means all Ignatieff supporters, who will not endorse a party position that sees Canada quitting Afghanistan a year from now. "Some of us will not stand a simple departure," one MP said. Asked if this might see some Liberals voting alongside the government in favour of Mr. Manley's recommendations, the MP replied: "Absolutely."
http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/col ... ?id=272581
Keep crying. I understand its frustrating for you to understand compromise and why you feel the need to try and highlight supposed Liberal infighting all the while ignoring the fact it was your party that was ripped apart by disloyalty then thrust back together after several failed incarnations but its just not happening.
Still the support just doesn't seem to be happening for harper does it? While Dion has likely a very one shot only election to improve Liberal fortunes, Harpers continued inability to break out of the middle is just natures way of telling you cons that Canada won't vote conservative often nor for very long.
Sorry for your luck.
Because Canada likes Liberals more
Yet no matter how bad it looks for the Liberals there is still that little nagging fact that Harper won only a slim minority and 2 years on looks no better.
Sorry for your luck.
Sorry for your luck. Canadians no longer park their vote with the Liberals when their in -decisive. The Libs are going to have to start earning their votes, something Dion is incapable of doing.
You guys love my little sayings don't you?
Say what you will but I have style.
As for your belief that Canadians are no longer voting Liberal well that just flies in the face of all your rhetoric about Liberals only Liberal.
What exactly do you base this on? Those continual polls showing Harper well short of a majority?
The historic anti-Liberalism of Canadians?
Voodoo dolls in the likeness of Dion that you plan to violate come election day? (perhaps thats just for personal reasons rather then political).
Lets see (rolls dice).
Unlucky (rare but no less valid).
I base it on the remaining 34% of Canadians who don't vote Liberal or Conservative.
The agreement ends in 2009 and no agreement dictated what role we were assigned.
(sigh.. I know it's a waste of time to argue with someone as stuborn and narrow minded, but here goes)
Canada’s military presence in Afghanistan has been extended several times since the Canadian Forces were first deployed to the country. Canada’s first military mission, which was initiated in 2002 as part of the US-led Operation Enduring Freedom, was only intended to last six months. In 2003, however, the Canadian government, under Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chrétien, recommitted military personnel to Afghanistan under Operation Athena, which was only to last until August 2004. This Operation was later extended, until the summer of 2005, by Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin.
In 2005, the Martin government re-committed Canadian Forces to Afghanistan, this time in support of the ISAF mission in southern Afghanistan. Under the Liberal government’s plan, the deployment in southern Afghanistan would begin in February 2006 and last up to one year in duration. In January 2006, however, a new government was formed under Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper. In May 2006, the Harper government extended the mission another two years, until February 2009, following a close vote in the House of Commons.
As of September 2007, the Canadian military role in Afghanistan is set to end in February 2009. However, it is not absolutely certain this will be the case. Canada continues to receive pressure from the United States and other NATO countries to maintain its forces in Afghanistan. Moreover, the Harper government has indicated its preference to keep troops in Afghanistan until the country is stabilized (CBC, March 13, 2006). Much, however, will depend on the outcome of the next federal election in Canada, and the level of support among Canadians when it comes to extending the military mission.
In February 2006, approximately 40 countries, including Afghanistan, signed the Afghanistan Compact, the successor to the Bonn Agreement (see above). The Compact provides the framework for international community initiatives in Afghanistan for the period , with the overarching purpose of creating conditions of peace and security for the Afghan people through security, good governance and the rule of law, and social and economic development. The Compact, in effect, sets out the general parameters and goals of international efforts in the country.
For more information on the Afghanistan Compact:
The Afghan Compact
Afghanistan National Development Strategy: The Afghanistan Compact
The Government of Canada was a contributor to, and signatory of, the Compact. Under the agreement, Canada committed to contributing to Afghanistan’s rehabilitation through to February 1, 2011. Canada’s contribution during this period may come in the form of military assistance or non-military aid.
For more information on Canada and the Afghanistan Compact:
Canada and the Afghan Compact
http://www.mapleleafweb.com/features/ca ... activities
Do you accept these as facts?
Chretien put us there and martin extended the mission.
Martin also took us from the north and put us in the south.
At no time did either of them specify or set conditions similar to the Euro-weenies.
I will now go on to prove Dion's contractictory position on the Afghanistan.