So the UK voted 400 to 220 to expand the war to include Syria, something they refused a couple of years ago. That vote includes about 1/3 of Labour MPs who voted against the party leader.
France stepping up, sending carrier UK stepping up. Russia kicking in. Even the Germans are contributing more.
Meanwhile, we turn and slink away. Brilliant. We'll be solidly at the kiddies table for the next 4 years at least.
I doubt our 6 planes make much difference. Meanwhile we're sending more trainers. But the US is talking about stationing some sort of special forces unit in Iraq to go after ISIS leaders and such. I could see Canada playing a role here, if some forces members wanted to volunteer. Launching a big army to try to defeat ISIS in battle is just stupid, they would melt away and we'd have to become an occupying force. That should be left up to the various players in the region. But smaller in and out operations would make sense to me, to co-ordinate with the air strikes.
something they refused a couple of years ago.
That vote includes about 1/3 of Labour MPs who voted against the party leader.
France stepping up, sending carrier
UK stepping up.
Russia kicking in.
Even the Germans are contributing more.
Meanwhile, we turn and slink away. Brilliant.
We'll be solidly at the kiddies table for the next 4 years at least.
Meanwhile, we turn and slink away. Brilliant.
We'll be solidly at the kiddies table for the next 4 years at least.
That's the Canada we know and love.
The Country that doesn't take a stance on anything to ensure we don't offend anyone.
Meanwhile, we turn and slink away. Brilliant.
Small countries, small responses.
In the Prime Minister's mind, Canada is a small country. At any moment, President Obama will say that Canada "punches above its weight."
But the US is talking about stationing some sort of special forces unit in Iraq to go after ISIS leaders and such.
Well, that was already shot down by the Iraqi govt. I mean if they really don't want help, maybe we should just let them go it alone.