Comments on: The Commons: Support for the troops if necessary, but necessarily support for the troops http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/12/08/the-commons-support-for-the-troops-if-necessary-but-necessarily-support-for-the-troops/ Canada's only national weekly current affairs magazine. Wed, 26 Oct 2011 16:13:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: hurricane http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/12/08/the-commons-support-for-the-troops-if-necessary-but-necessarily-support-for-the-troops/comment-page-1/#comment-221311 hurricane Thu, 10 Dec 2009 17:42:52 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=96883#comment-221311 Also, what will be the deal with our troops when most of Karzai's soon-to-be ex Cabinet Ministers / warlords return to the hills. Also, what will be the deal with our troops when most of Karzai's soon-to-be ex Cabinet Ministers / warlords return to the hills.

]]> By: hurricane http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/12/08/the-commons-support-for-the-troops-if-necessary-but-necessarily-support-for-the-troops/comment-page-1/#comment-221310 hurricane Thu, 10 Dec 2009 17:34:04 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=96883#comment-221310 *What was the deal with the troops regarding their discomfort with Friday night parties and sodomy of young boys (their Afghan allies)? *What was the deal with troops when news about Karzai's brother, his drug trafficking and the CIA payroll was printed? *What was the deal with the troops when Karzai issued a new law in March that legalized rape within marriage. *What was the deal with the troops regarding the excessive deaths of civilians in this war, due to aerial bombing by US forces. It's got to enrage Afghans. *What was the deal with our troops when one of Canada's casualties were a result of aforementioned aerial bombing (30 Canadian soldiers wounded). *What was the deal with our troops when the Afghan elections turned out to be rife with fraud. *What was the deal with our troops when 1000 Taliban prisoners in Kabul escape. *What was the deal with our troops when Red Cross human rights warnings (Geneva Conventions) are lost in email folders for an alleged few years. Even the CIA re Guantanamo said the intelligence 'gathered' via the torture of al Qaeda men - if indeed they all were AQ men (as some the Pakistanis picked up appear to be cab drivers et al.) - was useless. People confess to anything. Mostly I think our troops are in an impossible situation (and best of providence to them.) *What was the deal with the troops regarding their discomfort with Friday night parties and sodomy of young boys (their Afghan allies)?

*What was the deal with troops when news about Karzai's brother, his drug trafficking and the CIA payroll was printed?

*What was the deal with the troops when Karzai issued a new law in March that legalized rape within marriage.

*What was the deal with the troops regarding the excessive deaths of civilians in this war, due to aerial bombing by US forces. It's got to enrage Afghans.

*What was the deal with our troops when one of Canada's casualties were a result of aforementioned aerial bombing (30 Canadian soldiers wounded).

*What was the deal with our troops when the Afghan elections turned out to be rife with fraud.

*What was the deal with our troops when 1000 Taliban prisoners in Kabul escape.

*What was the deal with our troops when Red Cross human rights warnings (Geneva Conventions) are lost in email folders for an alleged few years.

Even the CIA re Guantanamo said the intelligence 'gathered' via the torture of al Qaeda men – if indeed they all were AQ men (as some the Pakistanis picked up appear to be cab drivers et al.) – was useless. People confess to anything.

Mostly I think our troops are in an impossible situation (and best of providence to them.)

]]> By: adbass http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/12/08/the-commons-support-for-the-troops-if-necessary-but-necessarily-support-for-the-troops/comment-page-1/#comment-221309 adbass Wed, 09 Dec 2009 14:27:47 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=96883#comment-221309 Sorry, I was being sarcastic. I am disappointed by our government's handling of this issue and by all the spin, smears and selective leaks from the Conservative and senior military figures alike. Sorry, I was being sarcastic. I am disappointed by our government's handling of this issue and by all the spin, smears and selective leaks from the Conservative and senior military figures alike.

]]> By: tobyornottoby http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/12/08/the-commons-support-for-the-troops-if-necessary-but-necessarily-support-for-the-troops/comment-page-1/#comment-221308 tobyornottoby Wed, 09 Dec 2009 14:11:36 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=96883#comment-221308 Apparently that's what Gen. Natynczyk wanted them to do because his interpretation of the case heard before the MPCC was that the prisoner who was beaten by Afghan troops and rescued by Canadian soldiers wasn't detained by Canada. Unfortunately, the General neglected to mention that acccording to testimony the prisoner who was beaten was still wearing CAF cuffs. But you go ahead and help HQ cover their butt. Plenty of fabric needed. Apparently that's what Gen. Natynczyk wanted them to do because his interpretation of the case heard before the MPCC was that the prisoner who was beaten by Afghan troops and rescued by Canadian soldiers wasn't detained by Canada. Unfortunately, the General neglected to mention that acccording to testimony the prisoner who was beaten was still wearing CAF cuffs.

But you go ahead and help HQ cover their butt. Plenty of fabric needed.

]]> By: Anon Liberal http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/12/08/the-commons-support-for-the-troops-if-necessary-but-necessarily-support-for-the-troops/comment-page-1/#comment-221302 Anon Liberal Wed, 09 Dec 2009 06:14:09 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=96883#comment-221302 Funny they didn't feel that way about the sponsorship scandal. How curious! Funny they didn't feel that way about the sponsorship scandal. How curious!

]]> By: Anon http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/12/08/the-commons-support-for-the-troops-if-necessary-but-necessarily-support-for-the-troops/comment-page-1/#comment-221299 Anon Wed, 09 Dec 2009 05:13:42 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=96883#comment-221299 Laurie Hawn is an idiot. Today, on Power Play, he argued against a Public Inquiry because it costs too much and are witch hunts. When pointed out that Harper called one against Brian Mulroney, Mr. Hawn proceeded to use it to support his thesis. I guess he feels the Gomery Inquiry was also a witch hunt. Where does Harper find these clowns? Laurie Hawn is an idiot. Today, on Power Play, he argued against a Public Inquiry because it costs too much and are witch hunts. When pointed out that Harper called one against Brian Mulroney, Mr. Hawn proceeded to use it to support his thesis. I guess he feels the Gomery Inquiry was also a witch hunt.

Where does Harper find these clowns?

]]> By: madeyoulook http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/12/08/the-commons-support-for-the-troops-if-necessary-but-necessarily-support-for-the-troops/comment-page-1/#comment-221307 madeyoulook Wed, 09 Dec 2009 04:51:53 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=96883#comment-221307 <i>You could spend the rest of your life attempting to parse the differences between those statements.</i> Go crazy, Aaron. The rest of my life has other plans. You could spend the rest of your life attempting to parse the differences between those statements.

Go crazy, Aaron. The rest of my life has other plans.

]]> By: Ted http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/12/08/the-commons-support-for-the-troops-if-necessary-but-necessarily-support-for-the-troops/comment-page-1/#comment-221306 Ted Wed, 09 Dec 2009 03:35:13 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=96883#comment-221306 How's about we go for “credible, sustained information and evidence”? How's about we go for “credible, sustained information and evidence”?

]]> By: Tceh http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/12/08/the-commons-support-for-the-troops-if-necessary-but-necessarily-support-for-the-troops/comment-page-1/#comment-221305 Tceh Wed, 09 Dec 2009 03:28:17 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=96883#comment-221305 Next the Clownservatives should send in Senator Duffy to weigh in on this and help is fellow Maritimer Peter. Duffy should be wearing Canadian Army fatigues for dramatic effect. Next the Clownservatives should send in Senator Duffy to weigh in on this and help is fellow Maritimer Peter. Duffy should be wearing Canadian Army fatigues for dramatic effect.

]]> By: TJCook http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/12/08/the-commons-support-for-the-troops-if-necessary-but-necessarily-support-for-the-troops/comment-page-1/#comment-221304 TJCook Wed, 09 Dec 2009 03:25:42 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=96883#comment-221304 "I say to the Leader of the Opposition, why can he not trust General Walter Natynczyk?” Why the hell should we have to trust the unverified testimony of any one person, no matter how sterling his credentials? I want to see documentation - I'll decide on my own who to trust. "I say to the Leader of the Opposition, why can he not trust General Walter Natynczyk?”

Why the hell should we have to trust the unverified testimony of any one person, no matter how sterling his credentials?

I want to see documentation – I'll decide on my own who to trust.

]]> By: ADBass http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/12/08/the-commons-support-for-the-troops-if-necessary-but-necessarily-support-for-the-troops/comment-page-1/#comment-221303 ADBass Wed, 09 Dec 2009 01:39:21 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=96883#comment-221303 It occurs to me that our government could have solved its problems regarding transfer agreements, by simply releasing any Canadian captured prisoners (I mean people they had questioned) at points suitably close to Afghan police patrols, who could then make an arrest, all by themselves. It occurs to me that our government could have solved its problems regarding transfer agreements, by simply releasing any Canadian captured prisoners (I mean people they had questioned) at points suitably close to Afghan police patrols, who could then make an arrest, all by themselves.

]]> By: knick http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/12/08/the-commons-support-for-the-troops-if-necessary-but-necessarily-support-for-the-troops/comment-page-1/#comment-221301 knick Wed, 09 Dec 2009 00:58:25 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=96883#comment-221301 "Why are the Conservatives attempting to discredit these two front-line Canadian soldiers? Why are they calling them liars?”" About time the opposition started calling the Harper mob for hiding behind our troops by pretending to defend them from non-existent criticism. "Why are the Conservatives attempting to discredit these two front-line Canadian soldiers? Why are they calling them liars?”"

About time the opposition started calling the Harper mob for hiding behind our troops by pretending to defend them from non-existent criticism.

]]> By: terren http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/12/08/the-commons-support-for-the-troops-if-necessary-but-necessarily-support-for-the-troops/comment-page-1/#comment-221300 terren Wed, 09 Dec 2009 00:32:54 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=96883#comment-221300 uh, Alberta? uh, Alberta?

]]> By: doug_rogers http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/12/08/the-commons-support-for-the-troops-if-necessary-but-necessarily-support-for-the-troops/comment-page-1/#comment-221298 doug_rogers Wed, 09 Dec 2009 00:06:31 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=96883#comment-221298 <a href="http://dougsamu.wordpress.com/2009/12/08/split-em-while-you-still-got-em/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://dougsamu.wordpress.com/2009/12/08/split-em...</a> http://dougsamu.wordpress.com/2009/12/08/split-em…

]]> By: tobyornottoby http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/12/08/the-commons-support-for-the-troops-if-necessary-but-necessarily-support-for-the-troops/comment-page-1/#comment-221297 tobyornottoby Tue, 08 Dec 2009 23:51:34 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=96883#comment-221297 The general cited by the dishonourable minister is now compromised because he is willing to pretend, in order to cover for the government, that someone who was beaten while wearing Canadian Armed Forces flex cuffs was not a detainee. This ridiculous splitting of hairs (and hoping we don't read the details in the testimony) has crossed the line into partisanship and now he needs to go along with Mackay. The general cited by the dishonourable minister is now compromised because he is willing to pretend, in order to cover for the government, that someone who was beaten while wearing Canadian Armed Forces flex cuffs was not a detainee.

This ridiculous splitting of hairs (and hoping we don't read the details in the testimony) has crossed the line into partisanship and now he needs to go along with Mackay.

]]> By: Jack Mitchell http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/12/08/the-commons-support-for-the-troops-if-necessary-but-necessarily-support-for-the-troops/comment-page-1/#comment-221296 Jack Mitchell Tue, 08 Dec 2009 23:49:52 +0000 http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=96883#comment-221296 Peter Laurel and John Hardy . . . Peter Laurel and John Hardy . . .

]]>