news Canadian News
Good Morning Guest | login or register
  • Home
    • Canadian News
    • Popular News
    • News Voting Log
    • News Images
  • Forums
    • Recent Topics Scroll
    •  
    • Politics Forums
    • Sports Forums
    • Regional Forums
  • Content
    • Achievements
    • Canadian Content
    • Famous Canadians
    • Famous Quotes
    • Jokes
    • Canadian Maps
  • Photos
    • Picture Gallery
    • Wallpapers
    • Recent Activity
  • About
    • About
    • Contact
    • Link to Us
    • Points
    • Statistics
  • Shop
  • Register
    • Gold Membership
  • Archive
    • Canadian TV
    • Canadian Webcams
    • Groups
    • Links
    • Top 10's
    • Reviews
    • CKA Radio
    • Video
    • Weather

Longer Afghan mission doesn't need vote: Harper

Canadian Content
20686news upnews down
Link Related to Canada in some say

Longer Afghan mission doesn't need vote: Harper


Political | 206861 hits | Nov 12 10:18 am | Posted by: Curtman
42 Comment

A formal parliamentary vote is not needed to implement the extension of Canada's Afghanistan mission, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said Friday.

Comments

  1. by Anonymous
    Fri Nov 12, 2010 6:30 pm
    Harper noted that the Liberals have been in favour of extending the Afghan mission in a non-combat capacity that would see Canadian troops helping to train Afghan forces.


    The Liberals were proposing this years ago. Harper said something about it being offensive that he should dictate to military commanders on the ground.


  2. by avatar bootlegga
    Fri Nov 12, 2010 6:31 pm
    I agree, something like this doesn't need debate in the House of Commons.

  3. by avatar EyeBrock
    Fri Nov 12, 2010 6:37 pm
    I think it should be debated.

  4. by avatar Mowich
    Fri Nov 12, 2010 8:11 pm
    There is absolutely no need for debate on this matter. As usual, Layton is conveniently leaving out the fact that the troops will be in non-fighting capacity, teaching roles as you will.
    Canada is right to stay in Afghanistan and do their best to help the people of that country.

  5. by avatar andyt
    Fri Nov 12, 2010 8:21 pm
    "Mowich" said
    There is absolutely no need for debate on this matter. As usual, Layton is conveniently leaving out the fact that the troops will be in non-fighting capacity, teaching roles as you will.
    Canada is right to stay in Afghanistan and do their best to help the people of that country.


    The push is on from NATO to have the troops outside the wire, ie be involved in missions with the Astani troops. Sounds like a fighting capacity to me if that is how this shapes up.

  6. by Anonymous
    Fri Nov 12, 2010 8:26 pm
    "EyeBrock" said
    I think it should be debated.


    Can you tell me about your opinion? Again, I don't want a fight. I can talk to people in my circle of friends, and I can talk to people in passing during the day, but I never get a chance to talk to people who are informed about the issue.

  7. by avatar martin14
    Fri Nov 12, 2010 8:41 pm
    "andyt" said
    There is absolutely no need for debate on this matter. As usual, Layton is conveniently leaving out the fact that the troops will be in non-fighting capacity, teaching roles as you will.
    Canada is right to stay in Afghanistan and do their best to help the people of that country.


    The push is on from NATO to have the troops outside the wire, ie be involved in missions with the Astani troops. Sounds like a fighting capacity to me if that is how this shapes up.


    The article specifically mentions a non combat role, what NATO and principally
    the US want is another matter, but I don't think it will be heard in Canada.

    The UN bit has sealed that deal.


    I would also like EBs opinion.

  8. by avatar andyt
    Fri Nov 12, 2010 8:44 pm
    "martin14" said
    There is absolutely no need for debate on this matter. As usual, Layton is conveniently leaving out the fact that the troops will be in non-fighting capacity, teaching roles as you will.
    Canada is right to stay in Afghanistan and do their best to help the people of that country.


    The push is on from NATO to have the troops outside the wire, ie be involved in missions with the Astani troops. Sounds like a fighting capacity to me if that is how this shapes up.


    The article specifically mentions a non combat role, what NATO and principally
    the US want is another matter, but I don't think it will be heard in Canada.

    The UN bit will seal that deal.


    I would also like EBs opinion.

    Things have a way of changing. But I have no problem sending our military to help the Afghanis if they're not getting killed for it. I don't think the deaths are worth the likelihood of success. Let's just make sure we have some planes available when the time comes to evacuate them, and let's make sure we get them out of there before the Taliban have the strength to take the fight inside the wire.

  9. by avatar EyeBrock
    Fri Nov 12, 2010 9:25 pm
    "Curtman" said
    I think it should be debated.


    Can you tell me about your opinion? Again, I don't want a fight. I can talk to people in my circle of friends, and I can talk to people in passing during the day, but I never get a chance to talk to people who are informed about the issue.


    Ok, and I think we have both moved on from our pointless fighting phase Curt.

    Harper is right, the government doesn't need to have a debate on this but the whole Afghanistan mission is much more than a debating point to a great many Canadians.

    We have lost a lot of guys out there and it's an emotive topic to many.

    I think Parliament should have an open and public debate since Harper has changed tack. I'm sure the Libs and Tories can push it through anyway, but to not have a debate on an issue of such national significance is a mistake.

    Let's hear what Layton, Harper, Iggy and Duceppe have to say on this if we are to go on with any kind of mission after our pull-out date.

    Whether our guys are behind the wire or not, they can still get killed. What's wrong with a national discussion on this before the CF takes on this new 'mission' after it's combat role ends?

  10. by Anonymous
    Fri Nov 12, 2010 9:38 pm
    "EyeBrock" said
    Ok, and I think we have both moved on from our pointless fighting phase Curt.


    I hope so. :)

    "EyeBrock" said
    Harper is right, the government doesn't need to have a debate on this but the whole Afghanistan mission is much more than a debating point to a great many Canadians.

    We have lost a lot of guys out there and it's an emotive topic to many.

    I think Parliament should have an open and public debate since Harper has changed tack. I'm sure the Libs and Tories can push it through anyway, but to not have a debate on an issue of such national significance is a mistake.

    Let's hear what Layton, Harper, Iggy and Duceppe have to say on this if we are to go on with any kind of mission after our pull-out date.

    Whether our guys are behind the wire or not, they can still get killed. What's wrong with a national discussion on this before the CF takes on this new 'mission' after it's combat role ends?


    I'm not really interested in whether they need to vote or not. I'm curious if you (or anyone else here) thinks they're being asked to stand by and watch a tragedy. am I reading too much into what a non-combat role means?

    I know it says Liberal up there beside my picture, but I don't necessarily agree with asking anybody to do that. Even if my "default" party does.

  11. by avatar EyeBrock
    Fri Nov 12, 2010 9:42 pm
    My view Curt is, Afghanistan is a country in the middle of a war.

    Whatever role we play there in the future, if we are in the country our guys are at risk. People will die, our people. Parliament should have a say. Mission 'creep' in this theatre is something our guys won't be able to avoid.

    The NATO nations who have their guys hiding in their barracks, getting pissed and shagging whores like the Germans, have lost guys to suicide bombers and IED's.

  12. by avatar djakeydd
    Fri Nov 12, 2010 10:52 pm
    Afghanistan is a lost cause, Gorbachev just made that clear in a statment, but lets just keep on that lost cause with our little nazi leading the cheering section. By the way, I dont see him or his cabinet pals volunteering their sons and daughter for that hell hole. Let me make this abundantly clear, Afghanistan will NEVER be won.

  13. by avatar djakeydd
    Fri Nov 12, 2010 11:01 pm
    Now maybe, just maybe our very own nazi could hire these capable chaps to bring some of this equipment to rout out that nasty ole terrorist of terrorists, Osama bin lately, and blow his network of millions of caves to kingdome come. Then we could just send a nice cheque over to putin and co and be done with the mess.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sq-TRC_z7TQ

  14. by avatar djakeydd
    Fri Nov 12, 2010 11:05 pm
    And if that isnt enough, here is some more footage of inferior russian technology..

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzPBAHwF ... re=related



view comments in forum
Page 1 2 3

You need to be a member of CKA and be logged into the site, to comment on news.

  • Login
  • Register (free)
 Share  Digg It Bookmark to del.icio.us Share on Facebook


Share on Facebook Submit page to Reddit
CKA About |  Legal |  Advertise |  Sitemap |  Contact   canadian mobile newsMobile

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