The Shotgun Blog
Thursday, July 08, 2010
A soldier's comment on the police actions at G20
To repeat the warning from Beach: We can't be sure whether or not this person is actually a soldier, or just a really good writer. But, either way, it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter whether or not he's a soldier, since the upshot of his comment -- the argument about how a police officer ought to behave once they don their uniform and how the police ought to have reacted -- rings true to my ears.
(But, assuming for the moment that this is a comment from a bona fide military man, how does the law & order conservative deal with this complication? Do we side with the police, as Ontario PC leader Tim Hudak has done, or do we side with an argument from a military man?)
So here's the comment, in its entirety, from "Eric J," below the fold (with my highlighting):
As a serving member of the Canadian Forces and a combat veteran, I can say with absolute clarity and conviction that i am disgusted by the actions of the supposed "other half" of our nations security, the civilian shield to the army's sword. I managed to fight and win battles while vastly outnumbered, against a heavily armed, mobile, guerilla force with as few as 10 fellow Canadians. 10 Canadian taxpayer funded and trained, government employees fighting and dying to prevent the lawlessness and injustice the so-called Black Bloc seems only too willing to promote. 10 Canadian ambassadors (because that is what you are when your wear and salute your nations flag) that knew their jobs and acted as consummate, trained professionals in all things, which incidentley is why i am alive to type this. The enemy we fought was entrenched within a civilian population and knew only too well the problems that could be created by putting innocent Afghans in the center of the conflict. So as is our duty and our job we let them bait us and let them crow and then when we had a shot we took it WITH NO CIVILIAN CASUALTIES. How could I know? Because we were the medical center for the region and we visited the villages regularly.
Knowing when to apply force and how to apply it can be a very simple thing when you assign value to the thing you are leveraging that force against. Am I prepared to kill the human being who is placing the IED or recoiless rifle that will kill three of my brothers? 3 of my fellow Canadians who have answered the call to defend what we so often take for granted half a world away? Without pause yes, and I will for the rest of my life, I took an oath that does not end with a contract.
When you put that uniform on you are no longer John Smith of Toronto. You are a member of the Canadian Forces, just as you are a Royal Canadian Mounted Police Officer, or an Ontario Provincial Police Officer. A government employee who's mandate and training is to PROTECT the public. Not to protect themselves from threats within the public. It is their job as the civilian arm of our nations security to be the blue line between those that would see our way of life burnt to it's end and the Canadians who see more than a simple flag.
Instead they formed a black wall and responded to WORDS with unrelenting, armed and often random VIOLENCE.
I don't care if Osama Bin Laden himself is hiding on Queen Street like Waldo... you don't just drop an airstrike on the village.
You PARTICULARLY don't do it after the entire village sang Oh Canada in fear.
I understand the effect of an unsuspecting ambush tactics to confuse and demoralize... but when the first three ranks of 'protestors' are waving peace signs standing outside the gap wearing American Apparel and drinking starbucks... I might tailor my tactics accordingly.
People have said that they 'understand' why Police might have been on edge due to the events of the day before...
I understand that i watched friends die and then the next day went out and did my job with the professionalism expected of someone who claims to serve his country and as in holland i gave chocolate to children while the engineers rebuilt.
When you back people into a corner... they will fight and sell their lives dearly to escape.
The 'kettle' is a useful tactic to isolate 'riot ringleaders' but with even minor coordination it can simply be turned into a turnstyle type processing operation as opposed to a way to jack up arrest counts to justify budgets and manpower.
Too little too late from the Police especially after the complete lack of presence as the city they are paid to protect, burned the day before.
A number of extremely reputable journalists and civilian truth mongers have been given unprecedented ability to expose the absolute incompetence of both the police leadership and of the individual line trooper.
This is as sure a black stain on their official colors as it was a death knell to the Canadian Airborne after one of their members killed a Somali boy. I would hang my head in shame if i affected any part of Sunday's riot operation, willing or not.
I have a relative who was caught up in the crowd. Just a student who is young and wants to take inspired photos, and does it damn well. He was detained (not arrested) But I have seen his footage and i am disgusted.
I did not put my life on the line and watch my best friends take their last breath to come home and watch the largest gathering of law enforcement this country has ever seen... cowed to the point inaction as the city and its citizens endure the wanton destruction to their homes and business, only to have it answered by a heavy handed and indiscriminant hammer blow against quite possibly the very same people they so utterly failed to help previously.
I understand that to put a riot line in front of the black block may have caused injuries and violence.
Well... they asked for it. Says so right on their sign.
Guess what else. That's why you took the oath of service to your country. If you don't want to get injured on the job... be a yoga instructor.
Excuses are quite common apparently everyone has one. I would advise anyone reading this to write their local MP and ask what your government is doing to police it's members and policies that have utterly failed in their duty to this country.
I was in the city all weekend and if i had a dollar for every group of 6 police officers i saw sitting on corners shooting the shit... I would probably have enough to hire a ten man infantry section for the weekend to lead the police through some drills, of how to serve the nation they are sworn to defend.
This should not be taken as a sweeping assault on the police as i even have a few relatives and many friends among their ranks. But just as I would not stand for injustice within my own house... I will not stand for it in theirs.
I have met countless officers who uphold our laws with dignity and professionalism. I would gladly give my life for anyone of them.
What will not stand is when under the guise of 'security' police are given sweeping powers with no chance of reciprocity, the need to explain themselves or chance to defend against bullying tactics employed on a peaceful gathering of my country's citizens.
I don't give a flying squirrel if they were threatening, or there were reports of weapons. You have full body armour and shields. Suck it up. Besides, you should be happy. Bricks move a lot slower than bullets.
I support our law enforcement as i support our troops. But my support is not a blank cheque to be held cheaply against the values and rights you trample as surely as you stepped on our flag. You will find me a tenacious opponent and one now who wants to know just how that cheque i did write you was used... and i think after saturdays impotence and sundays ignorance someone has to pay the piper...
and this time, it won't be me.
Friday, January 30, 2009
Southern Avenger: Anti-military conservatives
From Jack Hunter, a.k.a. The Southern Avenger:
For all the yammering by talk-radio nitwits and GOP chicken hawks about “supporting the troops,” it’s quite ironic that these same pundits and politicians have had little to say about the many high-ranking troops who support Obama’s decision to close Guantanamo Bay. Throughout, the Bush presidency, I made the point time and again that thanks to talk radio, being a “conservative” now meant never questioning your government so long as a Republican was in charge. To not support the president in a time of war was not only unpatriotic, but anti-military, we heard time and again. Last week these same pundits and politicians not only refused to support their president and his decision during a time of war, but on torture and Guantanamo Bay – they loudly and boldly opposed the military.
Friday, January 09, 2009
Canadian blogger gets permission to embed in Afghanistan
Over on The Torch, Damian Brooks is reporting that he has received permission to embed himself with the troops in Afghanistan. Brooks writes:
This is a first for a Canadian blogger. A fairly narrow first, but a first nonetheless: bloggers have served, but not really written about it; American bloggers have embedded with Canadian troops; Canadian bloggers have gone over unilaterally. But to the best of my knowledge, a Canadian blogger has never before been invited on a CF-sponsored visit.
Good luck, Damian, and we'll be watching your blog for news from Afghanistan.
Friday, December 19, 2008
Let Iraq war resisters stay in Canada for Christmas and beyond: Green Party
During the recent federal election, in a packed room in the basement of the Parkdale United Church in Calgary, Dennis Young, a veteran of NATO operations in Bosnia and leader of the Libertarian Party, told U.S. Iraq war resister Chuck Wiley to ignore the critics who call him a coward: “What you have done takes courage,” said Young to a roar of applause.
Later in the election campaign, Liberal Member of Parliament and frustrated leadership prospect Bob Rae reaffirmed his party's support for allowing U.S. conscientious objectors of the Iraq war to take up permanent residence in Canada.
Today, the Green Party is urging Jason Kenney, Minister of Citizenship & Immigration to stop the deportation proceedings against U.S. Iraq war resister Cliff Cornell whose proceedings have been moved to December 19th, and to implement the motion adopted by Parliament on June 3rd to allow all U.S. Iraq war resisters the right to apply for permanent resident status.
During the English-language election Leaders’ Debate, Prime Minister Stephen Harper acknowledged that the Iraq war "was absolutely an error.” In a surprising reversal, he went on to say “It's obviously clear the evaluation of weapons of mass destruction proved not to be correct. That's absolutely true and that's why we're not sending anybody to Iraq." Green Party Leader Elizabeth May thinks these statements by Harper on Iraq are relevant to the question of whether or not the Iraq war resisters seeking refuge in Canada should be allowed to stay.
“The Green Party demands that Canada adopts the United Nations Handbook on Refugees which clearly states that soldiers who refuse to take part in wars condemned by the international community must be considered refugees,” said May. [The international community may have condemned the war, but did Harper...really?]
“I find it despicable that this government had not only set Cliff’s deportation hearings for Christmas eve, but has now moved to expedite the process to this week,” decried Ben Hoffman, Peace and Security Shadow Cabinet member for the Greens, “It just shows the true nature of this government.”
"Both international refugee law and compassion dictate that Canada offer refuge to those who enlisted in an army based on a fraudulent contract. Cliff Cornell should be allowed to celebrate Christmas in Canada secure in the knowledge he is welcome to stay,” said May.
Did soldiers like Cornell really enlist on the basis of a "fraudulent contract," or did they just change their minds about the war? And what about Chuck Wiley, a 17-year veteran of the military? Wiley served proudly for years, and wasn't part of the so-called poverty draft. Was he tricked into service by the US government? Unlikely.
The issue of contract is central to this discussion, as May suggests, but libertarian scholar Walter Block thinks this is a case of what he calls “contract fetishism” that misses the bigger point: wars of aggression are morally wrong.
“There are things far more important than mere contracts for libertarians -- property rights and the non aggression axiom. If contracts are compatible with these two basic building blocks of libertarianism, then contracts are fine. If they are not, the contracts must be abrogated,” said Block. “...the recipients of all those US bombs never agreed to this ‘contract’," Block concludes.
Ivan Eland, Director of the Center on Peace & Liberty with the Independent Institute, thinks that if the Iraq war resisters in Canada are, in fact, deported they will not receive the relatively warm welcome home enjoyed by Vietnam-era draft resisters who also sought refuge in Canada:
“In Vietnam, people were shanghaied against their will to serve in a pointless war. The people today signed up freely, in one way or another, for military service. They will generate less sympathy because they either wanted a good military career, or in the case of reserve and National Guard personnel, wanted the extra cash, and then when war broke out they changed their minds. They also knew in advance what would happen if they did change their minds about serving during a war.
It's true that the Iraq invasion was done under false pretences, but that is not the first time that's happened in US history. Also, down deep, despite all the patriotic hoopla, people who volunteer for the US military know they are signing up less to defend the country than to police the empire. The interventionist US foreign policy has been going on non-stop since 1947 and has been no secret. Bush is only carrying on a bipartisan tradition.”
While Eland rejects the “fraudulent contract” argument being advanced by the Green Party and other anti-war groups, he nevertheless thinks the Canadian government should demonstrate compassion by not deporting the Iraq war resisters: “I don't think Canada should deport them....people do make mistakes, and conflict over their fate in the US could be avoided if Canada doesn't deport them.”
Posted by Matthew Johnston
Monday, December 15, 2008
With the Taliban advancing, can the war in Afghanistan still be won by 2011?
What should be done about illegal poppy production in Afghanistan?
In a Western Standard column, "The problem with poppies,” Colby Cosh reports on an answer offered by the Senlis Council to this question :
The Senlis Council, a Canadian-led economic think tank with an office in Kabul, has recently offered a tempting way of solving the dilemma: if we're going to devote Afghan and NATO army resources to annihilating a cash crop, why not try policing it instead and allow legitimate international drug manufacturers to pay competitive prices for the poppies? The logistical difficulties are enormous, but years of U.S. "eradication" in Colombia has hardly taken cocaine out of the industrialized world's nightclub bathrooms.
The Senlis Council is now called the International Council on Security and Development (ICOS), and the organization is making news again with its new report on the “Struggle for Kabul: The Taliban Advance.”
According to the report, the war in Afghanistan is being lost:
The Taliban now holds a permanent presence in 72% of Afghanistan, up from 54% a year ago. Taliban forces have advanced from their southern heartlands, where they are now the de facto governing power in a number of towns and villages, to Afghanistan’s western and north-western provinces, as well as provinces north of Kabul. Within a year, the Taliban's permanent presence in the country has increased by a startling 18%.
Three out of the four main highways into Kabul are now compromised by Taliban activity. The capital city has plummeted to minimum levels of control, with the Taliban and other criminal elements infiltrating the city at will.
Through its research platform in Afghanistan, ICOS determined the Taliban’s presence across the country using a combination of publicly recorded attacks and local perceptions of Taliban presence. One or more insurgent attacks per week in a province constitutes a “permanent Taliban presence” according to ICOS.
You can get the full report here.
Canada’s combat role in Afghanistan is scheduled to come to an end in 2011. Should Canadian troops stay longer with the Taliban advancing? Or should we heed the advice of those who say we should never have gotten involved in the first place?
Posted by Matthew Johnston
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Civil liberties groups celebrate International Human Rights Day at the Supreme Court
The Alberta Human Rights Commission (AHRC) is using the occasion to promote its own efforts to “foster equality, promote fairness, and encourage the creation of inclusive workplaces and communities.”
The AHRC is in damage control mode these days, largely due to Ezra Levant’s campaign to “denormalize” the work of these commissions across Canada. Former Western Standard publisher, Levant successfully defended a human rights complaint against the magazine for our decision in 2006 to re-print cartoon images of the Muslim prophet Mohamed. He continues to fight to remove Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, which prohibits so-called "hate speech" on the Internet.
But while the AHRC is up to no good, the B.C. Civil Liberties Association (BCCLA) is using International Human Rights Day to challenge the Canadian Forces’ practice of transferring detainees apprehended in Afghanistan into the custody of Afghan officials.
(We should put the BCCLA association in charge of Canada’s human rights commissions. While not perfect, the organization opposes Section 13 of the Canada Human Rights Act and intervened on behalf of the Western Standard when we faced our human rights complaint in 2006. Read the Western Standard interview with David Eby to get a better understanding of where these guys are coming from.)
The Supreme Court will hear an appeal today brought by Amnesty International and the BCCLA as part of the court challenge the two organizations launched in February 2007.
According to the BCCLA association, the appeal will address several issues:
How far do the human rights obligations of Canadian soldiers reach? Do they stop at the Canadian border? Or do those obligations extend to the actions of Canadian soldiers carrying out operations outside of Canada? Will Canadian courts step in and require Canadian troops abroad to obey the Charter, and through the Charter to comply with international human rights treaties ratified by Canada?
Amnesty International (AI) and the BCCLA turned to the courts out of concern that prisoners transferred into Afghan custody faced the risk of torture and other human rights violations, particularly at the hands of the country’s intelligence agency, the National Directorate for Security (NDS). According to AI and the BCCLA, the use of torture in Afghan prisons has been documented by the office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, the US Department of State, the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission and the Canadian government. The human rights groups want these prisoner transfers to stop until it is clear that transferred prisoners will not face a serious risk of being tortured.
In March 2008, Federal Court Justice Anne Mactavish ruled that the court challenge could not go ahead because the Charter did not apply to the actions of Canadian soldiers outside Canada. AI and the BCCLA explain that they are pursuing this appeal for two reasons:
First, with the exception of a temporary suspension of transfers between November 2007 and February 2008, Canadian soldiers have been handing an undisclosed number of prisoners over to Afghan authorities for close to three years. Credible reports have emerged indicating that some of these prisoners have suffered torture and abuse.
Despite May 2007 improvements to the agreement governing the transfer of prisoners between Canada and Afghanistan, allowing greater levels of prison monitoring by Canadian officials, the risk of torture remains high, particularly in those instances where the NDS is involved. AI and the BCCLA have argued that handing prisoners over in the face of a serious risk of torture constitutes a clear violation of Canada’s international human rights obligations as well as the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The organizations are looking to the Federal Court of Appeal to recognize that Canadian courts have the power to bring this practice to an end.
Second, the precedent set in Justice Mactavish’s ruling is a worrying one for human rights protection. Canadian officials operate outside of Canada in a wide variety of contexts including offensive military operations, peacekeeping operations, law enforcement activities and national security investigations. These officials operate pursuant to Canadian law, further to policies and decisions of Canadian parliament, Cabinet ministers and senior officials. When their operations directly or indirectly cause or contribute to human rights violations it is vital that there be accountability. As Canada’s supreme law and primary instrument for the protection of human rights, the Charter cannot be interpreted so as to allow Canadian officials to commit serious human rights violations on the territory of another state which they could not perpetrate within Canada’s borders.
Courts in other countries are also grappling with the question of how far their reach should extend in ensuring that military personnel and other officials acting abroad live up to national and international human rights obligations. In the context of a growing number of joint military and security operations in a number of parts of the world, it is increasingly important that courts play that enforcement role. When national courts shirk this responsibility there is often no other effective means of ensuring human rights oversight. The Federal Court of Appeal has a valuable opportunity to demonstrate leadership in this area.
It is not clear to me how these two reasons address Justice Anne Mactavish’s ruling that the Charter does not apply to the actions of Canadian soldiers outside Canada, although the second point has some merit: if we are going to send soldiers around the world in increasing numbers for “offensive military operations, peacekeeping operations, law enforcement activities and national security investigations” maybe they should be bound by Canadian law.
While torture is a repugnant practice that should be condemned by the Canadian government, the rights and values embodied in the Canadian Charter seem hopelessly out of place in the arena of war.
Sunday, December 07, 2008
Three Canadian soldiers killed in Afghanistan bring the death toll to 100
Three Canadian soldiers were killed on Friday during a joint patrol with Afghan National Army soldiers in the Arghandab District. The incident occurred approximately 15 kilometres west of Kandahar City.
The deaths of soldiers Private Demetrios Diplaros, Corporal Mark Robert McLaren and an unnamed soldier brings the Canadian death toll in Afghanistan to 100.
Wednesday, December 03, 2008
Cluster bombs don’t kill people; the government kills people. US refuses to sign Convention
Our bombs are getting smarter, but what about our politicians? Maybe.
Canada today became a signatory to the Convention on Cluster Munitions. Ambassador Jillian Stirk, acting on behalf of Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon, signed the Convention in Oslo, Norway.
“This convention is a significant achievement. Over time, it will save the lives of many thousands of people around the world and will help to end the use of a weapon that has devastating effects on civilians,” said Cannon.
“Canada looks forward to working closely with like-minded states, UN agencies, the International Committee of the Red Cross and civil society organizations to fully implement the Convention, rid the world of cluster munitions, and as far as possible repair the shattered lives of people who have suffered because of them,” added Cannon.
The Convention will prohibit the use, production, stockpiling and transfer of cluster munitions. Signatory nations will be required to destroy their stockpiles, clear contaminated areas and help the victims of these weapons with rehabilitation. Canada will assist in this process primarily through its Global Peace and Security Fund.
Cluster munitions typically contain dozens to hundreds of small, explosive sub-munitions that can have a devastating and indiscriminate impact on civilians, who account for 98 percent of all recorded casualties associated with this weapon.
As for security concerns, it’s Canon’s position that this ban on cluster bombs “strikes an appropriate balance between humanitarian and security considerations.” The Bush administration, however, disagrees and has refused to join the 92 signatory nations.
National security expert with the US-based Independent Institute thinks the Bush administration is wrong to oppose the Convention and that the cluster bomb ban would not compromise US security interests. In an interview with the Western Standard, Ivan Eland said:
"The ban on cluster munitions is a start. Even though the U.S. did not sign the convention, it would not have adversely affected the security of the U.S. to get rid of this weapon. The US military is so vastly superior to any other military that it has many other less indiscriminate weapons that could be used instead.
Even if the U.S. does sign the convention, however, such a development should not obviate the need to reduce US military interventions. Even if you use discriminating, and even precision, weapons in a war that shouldn't have been fought, killing even adversarial soldiers is morally questionable--for example, in the invasion of Iraq. That is to say, these soldiers were killed needlessly in an unnecessary war."
Friday, November 21, 2008
The libertarian case against the war in Afghanistan
In “The libertarian case against the war in Afghanistan,” David Henderson, a research fellow with the Hoover Institution and previously a senior economist with President Reagan’s Council of Economic Advisers, asked this question:
“Should Canada’s government remove its military presence from Afghanistan in 2011, remove it earlier, or keep it past 2011?”
By way of an answer, Henderson makes three arguments against the war:
1) The costs are too high, in terms of the loss of human life, to justify invading Afghanistan on the grounds that the Taliban refused to extradite Osama bin Laden. Besides, the US has refused to extradite a suspected terrorist to Venezuela to face prosecution for an airline bombing -- would an invasion be appropriate in this case? Also, Bush refused to comply with international law in providing evidence to the Taliban of bin Laden’s guilt.
2) It’s hard to keep an eye on government behaviour in a foreign war. Here Henderson relies on the public choice principle of “rational ignorance.” If voters don’t pay attention to their government’s behaviour at home, they are certainly less likely to pay attention to its behaviour abroad. This creates the conditions for the abuse of government power.
3) There will be “unintended consequences” for Canada’s part in the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan. Here Henderson looks at US foreign policy missteps in the Middle East from the 1963 CIA-supported overthrow of the government of General Abdel-Karim Kassem in Iraq that put Saddam Hussein in power, to the 1980s US-supported Afghan resistance against Soviet invasion that brought bin Laden to prominence in the Muslim world.
Henderson concludes his column with another question:
“Wouldn’t it be better simply to regard the 9/11 attackers and those behind them as criminals and to mount a serious attempt to bring those criminals to justice?”
He left this question for Western Standard readers to answer.
(This article originally appeared on C2C: Canada's Journal of Ideas.)
Posted by Matthew Johnston
Thursday, September 11, 2008
U.S. Republican congressman says Russia was right: Georgians started it
Kommersant, a Russian daily newspaper, is reporting the following:
"American intelligence confirms that the latest military actions in South Ossetia were started by Georgia and Russia’s position in the conflict was correct, says Republican California Congressman Dana Rohrabacher. He said the situation reminded him of the Bay of Tonkin incident, which the U.S. used as a pretext for beginning the war in Vietnam.
"The Russians are right! We're wrong! Georgia started it, the Russians ended it," Rohrabacher said at a hearing in the House of Representatives."
I tried to find a different source for this story, but couldn't (I'm not always sure which Russian newspapers to trust--something about being born in Poland under Communist rule...). Can someone verify if Rohrabacher actually said that?
Monday, July 14, 2008
Iran may target Canadians
National Post newspaper reports that the Iranian medium range missiles could target Canadian troops stationed in Afghanistan.
"The BBC has raised the possibility that Iran may target NATO forces in Afghanistan, which include several thousand Canadian troops stationed in the province of Kandahar, with short-range missiles."
Wednesday, July 09, 2008
Ric Dolphin Writes Again
Although loath to use another of those horrible words concocted by the geeks who, sadly, have inherited the world, there seems to be no avoiding it. I now have a "blog" which I shall endeavor to update at least every Monday and which you are
invited to visit at, ricdolphin.com
Be aware that, unlike when I wrote for Western Standard magazine, I am not being censored for language. I am also not specifically writing about politics, although the subject may be broached on occasion. Be assured, however, that I shall never use "blog" as a verb.
Posted by Ric Dolphin on July 9, 2008 in Aboriginal Issues, American History, Books, Canadian Conservative Politics, Canadian History, Canadian Politics, Canadian Provincial Politics, Crime, Current Affairs, Film, Humour, International Affairs, International Politics, Media, Military, Municipal Politics, Religion, Science, Television, Trade, Travel, Web/Tech, Weblogs, Western Standard, WS Radio, WStv | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Tribute to the Canadian soldiers
These are trying times for the coalition forces, especially the Canadian military, in Afghanistan where Taliban has increased its brutality and insurgency recently. Let the Canadian troops know that they're supported...
Monday, June 23, 2008
A great tribute to those fallen Coalition Forces' heroes who serve selflessly to further the cause of freedom and human dignity around the world! [+]
Thursday, June 19, 2008
Will Barack Obama pull the US out of Afghanistan?
Saturday, April 12, 2008
Honouring fallen heroes; Differences in Canada and Britain
The British newspaper Daily Mail tells us how different Canada and Britain each honours their fallen soldiers.
Wednesday, April 09, 2008
If Mr. Nicholls wants meaningful actions . . .
. . . and he's not willing to consider the propaganda bonanza that the Communists will reap from having the Western powers attend the Games, perhaps this Armed Forces Journal (US) story will get his attention:
China has launched more than 36 new submarines since 1995 — far outpacing U.S. intelligence estimates from a decade ago. Additionally, supersonic indigenous cruise missiles, rumored development of an anti-ship ballistic missile, dynamic mine warfare and amphibious warfare programs, invigorated aerial maritime strike capabilities, as well as a variety of new, sleek and modern surface combatants, suggest a broad front effort by the People’s Liberation Army Navy.
If Mr. Nicholls is willing to call for an increase in the Canadian Navy to help combat this threat (I've been asking the U.S. Navy to do this for years), then we can agree to disagree about the meaning of an Olympic boycott.
Saturday, March 22, 2008
France sending more troops to Afghanistan
Seems a lot has changed since French president Sarkozy came to office last year and now 1000 more French troops will be deployed to Afghanistan to help increase the NATO presence in the country:
"A British newspaper says French President Nicolas Sarkozy plans to announce next week that France will send 1,000 additional troops to Afghanistan."
That's good news
Friday, February 01, 2008
European allies can't be trusted?!?
Germany rejects US troops surge appeal and it doesn't sound good for Canada and the English speaking countries that are doing the most of the heavy-lifting in Afghanistan:
"Canada's Prime Minister Stephen Harper has issued both the US and the UK with an ultimatum - that Canada will end its military mission in the dangerous south of Afghanistan unless other NATO countries send more reinforcements."
Unfortunately, many western European countries such as Germany can not be trusted when the security and freedom of the western world is at stake. And I wondered what if Germany had requested for assistance? Canada, US and UK would have rushed to their assistance quickly but when it comes to us asking them for a helping hand they simply refuse it. These so-called "allies" can not be trusted at all.
Sunday, January 06, 2008
Two Canadian soldiers from Quebec were killed Sunday when their armoured vehicle rolled over in rough terrain near Kandahar in Afghanistan, and in the meantime we're also hearing about the rejection of a major plan to send fighter Jets and attack helicopters to Afghanistan by General Hillier.
Let's not forget our brave troops who are fighting for our freedom so we can have debates and posts here on Shotgun. They deserve our support!
Saturday, January 05, 2008
On the GOP race (and Ron Paul's ignorance of Canada)
As I was offering my thoughts on the state of the GOP race right now (here), I discovered that Dr. Ron Paul blithely assumes terrorists don't target Canada.
Take a look at what I mean (and how to contact Dr. Paul's campaign to set him straight) here.
Monday, December 31, 2007
Bravery & Sacrifice
Our thoughts, sympathies and respect go to the family and friends of Jonathan Dion, a gunner from Val d'Or, Quebec, a brave soldier, who made the ultimate sacrifice for his country and our freedom when his light armored personnel carrier hit an IED 12 miles west of Kandahar, Afghanistan. PM Harper released the following statement regarding this incident:
"These brave Canadian soldiers were helping bring hope to a population that has seen much hardship. We will not forget the sacrifice made by Gunner Dion while working to make life better for others. Canada is in Afghanistan as part of a UN-sanctioned mission to help build a stable, democratic, and self-sufficient society. Reconstruction and development in Afghanistan cannot occur in an unstable environment. These Canadian soldiers were working to provide security and help create the conditions needed to improve the lives of the people of Afghanistan."
Tuesday, December 25, 2007
Defense minister Peter MacKay says "Afghan insurgents are getting weapons from Iran" :
"weapons are flowing from Iran into the hands of Afghan insurgents"... "Improvised explosive devices from Iran have been a particular concern for Canadians."
Friday, December 21, 2007
US President Bush and Secretary of State Rice both praised Canada's role in the ongoing struggle against terrorism in Afghanistan:
"I want to thank also the people of Canada for that extraordinary contribution," [...] "I want to say to the families of those who have given the ultimate sacrifice there that their sacrifice is not in vain. It is in the cause of freedom -- a noble cause."
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Christmas gifts for troops
Christmas is a week away and gifts are flooding the Canadian military bases in Afghanistan.
One thing that soldiers always love is to get a pack or a letter from the home front. Canada Post is now delivering packs and letters to the troops for free until January 11th, 2008. Why not sending our brave men and women in uniform some care packages? If you know one, please send him/her care packs or a suitable gift. I'm sure they'll appreciate it.
Thursday, December 13, 2007
Failed NATO Allies
US Secretary of Defence Robert Gates is frustrated with lack of commitment from some European members of the NATO alliance in Afghanistan.
Most of the fighting against the Taliban has been carried out by the British, American, Canadian and Dutch forces and the rest of the members like Italy, Germany and France have done nothing or little when it comes to actual combat. It's indeed frustrating!
Friday, November 30, 2007
Time To Bomb Iran
MacLeans magazine discusses the possibility of bombing the Iranian regime's nuclear facilities.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Allies at work
A very interesting story for the military enthusiasts and defense observers:
"Canadian CF - 18 fighter jets helped plug a hole in U.S. air defences for almost two weeks this month after American jets were grounded as part of a crash investigation."
Monday, November 19, 2007
“Why Sangisar?”, Major Moffet said. “It was a node for the Taliban."
Friday, November 16, 2007
France to step up Afghan commitment
France is going to increase its military commitments in Afghanistan.
France has around 2000 troops in Afghanistan but most of them are located in safer areas of the country near Kabul. Canada, US and UK should ask other NATO partners to agree to a rotation system through out Afghanistan.
That's why they call it war...
And not... "Circle of Friends"
For all anyone knows, these guys are simply probing to see how close an actual bomber can get. Anybody who ignores the warnings and breaches a safety perimeter... they're dogmeat... and rightly so.
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Now, of course, we don't know much about the knife attack in Toronto today. But, if you don't think that the media and authorities have a tendency to either suppress information or be willfully blind when it comes to outbreaks of Sudden Jihad Syndrome, I invite you to read this story.
In brief, a twenty-two year-old Moslem who had been placed on a terrorist watch list drove to a military base, got out, and attacked the guards with knives and crude homemade explosives. Naturally, the authorities and media insist that it was not an act of terrorism.
Update: Never mind, I should add, the hillarious implication that somehow terrorism and suicidal tendencies are conflicting impluses.
Friday, October 05, 2007
While Chrisopher Hitchens has an amazing story of a US soldier and his family, I'd like to think that Canada has its own heroes like Cpl. Nathan Hornburg who died a few days ago fighting the Taliban terrorists:
"I'm protecting our country, I'm protecting the citizens of Afghanistan, to make it a safe place for people there, so girls can go to school"
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Seeking more allies for the mission
Canadian and Dutch governments are asking other NATO members to step up to the plate and increase their activities in the volatile southern Afghanistan:
"Canada and the Netherlands are urging other members of the NATO alliance to send troops to southern Afghanistan to help fight Taleban militants."
It's shameful that NATO countries such as Germany and France are not doing enough to help us in southern Afghanistan while most casualties are from Canada, US, UK and Netherlands. It makes me wonder if old European countries such as Germany and France care to help at all.
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
Quebec voters wanted to WHAT?!?!?
Leave it to Stephane Dion to say something so ridiculous as to bring me back from self-imposed blogging exile.
In his desperate attempt to stop the Iggy-Rae train from running him over, Dion came up with this inventive explanation for his party's meltdown in the Q - it was a protest vote against the Afghanistan mission (G&M): "Most people decided to support the NDP candidate. They thought maybe that it was a clear signal about their disagreement with the current government."
That explains why the only unequivocally pro-mission party (the Conservatives) won nearly 60% in Roberval and came within five points of winning in St. Hyacinthe.
By the way, in case anyone is curious, if the vote swing in the the francophone ridings were played out in a federal election, the Conservatives would win two dozen more seats in Quebec, pass the Bloc for the largest federal caucus in the Q, and come within half-a-dozen seats of a majority.
And that doesn't include the Ontario voters who went Liberal in 2006 because that was the only federal party with strength in Quebec (until, of course, they started counting the votes in the Q on election night).
Quebec voters sent the government a message alright - the message was "four more years."
Tuesday, September 04, 2007
Chinese weapons for Taliban
Chinese weapons are being used extensively against the coalition forces in southern Afghanistan:
"... these included Chinese-made surface-to-air missiles, anti-aircraft guns, landmines, rocket-propelled grenades and components for roadside bombs."
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
War Museum Controversy
"The Canadian War Museum has done an about-face and agreed to rephrase the wording of a Second World War display that has outraged some veterans."
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
A Sad Day
Unfortunately two other Van-Doos troopers have been killed by a roadside bomb in southern Afghanistan.
Our thoughts and prayers with the family and friends of these selfless individuals who sacrificed their lives to make our world a better one.
Monday, August 20, 2007
Sacrifice & Valor
Our thoughts and prayers with the family and friends of Quebec's Royal 22nd Regiment's Pte. Simon Longtin who was unfortunately killed in Afghanistan by a roadside bomb planted by Taliban.
And his comrades want the public to learn more about what they do in that corner of the world.
Saturday, August 18, 2007
Why are we there?
"Why are we there?" is a great reminder posted by the DND about Canada's role and operations in Afghanistan:
"Canada is in Afghanistan at the request of the democratically elected government, along with 36 other nations, and as part of a UN-sanctioned mission to help build a stable, democratic, and self-sufficient society.
About 2500 members of the Canadian Forces (CF) are currently serving as part of Joint Task Force Afghanistan (JTFAFG). They play a key role in the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) mission whose goal is to improve the security situation in Afghanistan and assist in rebuilding the country.
Canada’s continued engagement in Afghanistan helps create the conditions for longer-term reconstruction. All CF operations in Afghanistan are conducted with the consent and at the request of the Afghan government..."
Thursday, August 09, 2007
An Alternative to Arms
An interesting piece by Walid Phares lays out some idealistic alternatives to the recent Mideast arms deal:
"Dedicate some significant funds to support the Iranian opposition, both inside the country and overseas. Establish powerful broadcasts in Farsi, Kurdish, Arabic, Azeri and in other ethnic languages directed at the Iranian population. That alone will open a Pandora's box inside Iran. Realists may find it hard to believe, but supporting the Iranian opposition (which is still to be identified) will pay off much better than AWACS flying over deserts."
Saturday, August 04, 2007
Canada's Mission in Afghanistan
I've been trying to allocate one post, at least, per week on the Canadian mission in Afghanistan and show gratitude to the troops serving overseas. They're actually trying to protect Canada's national interests and help Afghanis live a better and secure life. It's important to let them know they have our full support, regardless of our political affiliation.
"You want to provide security and help people improve their lot, while back home people aren't very receptive to that. They say you're just off to kill people."
Shocking... And this is one of the many reasons that the rest of us must show overwhelming support and gratitude to the troops serving in Afghanistan. Let them know they have our support by writing a nice message. It's the least you could do, so plz do it!
Sunday, July 29, 2007
Support the troops
Thank goodness that Canadian top commander's convoy was left unscathed during the recent suicide attack in southern Afghanistan.
We owe all our brave troops a big 'Thank You' and every one of us, regardless of our political affiliation, can write them and thank them for their service. They're doing an awesome job over there and it is necessary to express our gratitude for their sacrifices.
Let them know they have our full support! They deserve all support and respect they can get from us here at home. Writing them is the least one can do though...
Sunday, July 22, 2007
Supporting the Troops?
Cross-posted at Wonkitties.
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
Gen. Petraeus on Iraq, the surge & war on terror
HH: Now stepping back a little bit from the day to day, General Petraeus, how would you explain to the civilians listening, and hundreds of thousands of them at this moment, the strategic interest of the United States at stake in Iraq?
DP: Well, I think just first of all, we have an enormous responsibility, because of course, we did liberate this country........ So there’s enormous potential implications for some of the courses of action that have been considered out there, and certainly, a precipitous withdrawal would have potentially serious implications for important interests that we have in Iraq, in the region.
Sunday, July 15, 2007
Canadian Troops Vs Insurgency
Our brave men and women are making progress in Afghanistan in many fronts: A) Battling the insurgency B) Training the Afghan military C) Aiding the civilians.
Friday, July 13, 2007
President Bush press conference on Iraq
President Bush does what he is good at: Talking to press honestly
I know some in Washington would like us to start leaving Iraq now. To begin withdrawing before our commanders tell us we are ready would be dangerous for Iraq, for the region, and for the United States. It would mean surrendering the future of Iraq to al Qaeda. It would mean that we'd be risking mass killings on a horrific scale. It would mean we'd allow the terrorists to establish a safe haven in Iraq to replace the one they lost in Afghanistan. It would mean increasing the probability that American troops would have to return at some later date to confront an enemy that is even more dangerous.
President Bush is right on the money. Unfortunately, leftists MSM and politicians can not bring themselves up to understand the stakes.
Oh, by the way, the same can be applied to us in Canada and to those who want to disengage in Afghanistan and do the infamous "cut & run" thing. Just replace the word Canada with America in the above paragraph.
Sunday, July 08, 2007
Two articles have appeared on newspapers by Senator Lieberman and our own columnist to the world Mark Steyn regarding the threat posed to our world by the Iranian regime. Senator Joe Lieberman understands the threat posed by the Iranian regime, as always. He writes :
The threat posed by Iran to our soldiers' lives, our security as a nation and our allies in the Middle East is a truth that cannot be wished or waved away. It must be confronted head-on. The regime in Iran is betting that our political disunity in Washington will constrain us in responding to its attacks. For the sake of our nation's security, we must unite and prove them wrong.
Senator Lieberman, unlike many leftists, is able to understand the grave danger of not responding to Iranian regime bullying us. Mark Steyn has the same opinion as well. That, showing weakness in the face of threat posed by the mullahs will bite us back in the near future. He has a valid point.
Britain got so many things wrong during the Rushdie affair, just as America got so many things wrong during the Iranian embassy siege 10 years earlier. But it's now 2007 -- almost two decades after Iran claimed sovereignty over British subjects, almost three decades after they claimed sovereignty over U.S. territory. So what have we learned?
Let's be serious about the Iranian regime. The only language they're able to comprehend is "the language of force".
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
ChiComs are killing Canadians, too
As some of you may have noticed, I've gone into a blogging hiatus for a while. There are several reasons, all of them personal, for the break I have taken. However, my China e-Lobby partner Curry Kenworthy amplifies Kevin Steel's earlier point on Communist China arming terrorists (emphasis added):
According to a June 15 report by Bill Gertz in the Washington Times, intelligence indicates that China is selling large quantities of small arms and weapons to Iran for use in the Iraq insurgency as well as for the Taliban in Afghanistan. Not only that, but China is even helping to deliver the weapons to ensure that they reach their destinations successfully.
In other words, Communist China is making damn sure their weapons kill Americans in Iraq, Americans in Afghanistan, and Canadians in Afghanistan. I figured that point was worth mentioning.
Meanwhile, feel free to keep checking the China e-Lobby for more from Curry.
Tuesday, June 05, 2007
Included among the weapons the Taliban uses against American, Canadian, and other forces of the free world are none other than NH-5 surface-to-air missiles built by Communist China.