Know your Enemy
I have been in a lot of discussions on terrorism and tactic recently. I thought I'd lay down a little background over at Political Write.
Have a look and feel free to comment here or there.
posted by Mike @ 3:45 PM
12 comments
12 Comments:
Mike Park, I don't see your comments there. What is it you want us to respond to?
Given the pussification of Canadian schoolchildren - see recent findings that Ontario "zero tolerance" policies are anti-black male - if the "war on terrorism" is to be won in the schoolyards of Scarborough we are pretty much fucked.
I am proud to support the only party that is serious about restoring dignity and funding to the Canadian Forces: The Conservative Party of Canada.
Fantastic article, Mike. I look forward to many more.
Jeff: His post is now available.
Anonalogue: I didn't realize there was a "war on terrorism" taking place in Ontario's schoolyards. I also fail to see the link between anti-black policies and this "war on terror."
And are you suggesting that the Canadian Forces should "move in" to our schools and take control of this gravely dangerous "war?"
To be honest, none of your comment really made sense, other than the plug for the Conservative Party (well, that doesn't actually make much sense, either).
"And are you suggesting that the Canadian Forces should "move in" to our schools and take control of this gravely dangerous "war?""
Notice the weak reading comprehension and poor historical grasp so typical of The Left.
The schoolyards comment was an allusion to the quote attributed to the Duke of Wellington: "The Battle of Waterloo was won on the playing-fields of Eton". See how it all makes sense now?
We are pussifying our children, and assuming we are to engage third world terrorists in the "war on terror" we are going to get our asses kicked.
Well, Anonalogue, I won't comment on your "pussification" stuff because its just silly.
As for the CPC being the "only party that is serious about restoring dignity and funding to the Canadian Forces", you are wrong. The policy of the NDP, believe it or not, is also to strengthen and modernize our Armed Forces with more spending and increasing the size of the forces. Even the Libs boosted Defence spending in the last two budgets. I 'm sorry you saw this as a partisan issue.
If you read my post, you'll see I see fighting terrorism as a non-partisan issue. We must fight terrorism in the best and most effective way that doesn't also give the terrorists what they want - the destruction of our pluralistic, democratic society.
I'd love you to comment on that.
My Special New Left Wing Friend Mike disseminated: "If you read my post,...fight terrorism... democratic society, etc."
I don't even use the phrase "fighting terrorism" let alone endorse it, to let you know where I stand on the War On Abstract Nouns. The military people I know laughed at the recent small funding increase as "more money to fix the trucks". Morale is not especially high.
I commented because it annoys me to see an NDP supporter talk up the "war on terror" when the NDP refuses to make federal issues like defence a priority and chooses to spend our $9 billion surplus on union-friendly social initiatives and provincial matters instead.
It is entirely reasonable to state that the CPC are the only party serious about restoring dignity and funding to the military and if Layton was serious about it he would've gotten Buzz Hargrove to make the Liberals agree to it instead of a bunch of union construction jobs in "social housing". Layton had his chance to speak up for The Canadian Forces and he had other priorities.
A vote for the Martin-Hargrove coalition government is a vote against the military. They prefer to spend money on other things.
I've received a mass-mail householder in the mail from the CPC on military issues; nothing from the Libs or NDP yet. They seem preoccupied with provincial issues; ever notice that?
"The policy of the NDP, believe it or not, is also to strengthen and modernize our Armed Forces with more spending and increasing the size of the forces."
lol
Anonalogue,
Are you saying you make descisions based on the number of mailings you receive? I would have thought you would actually read the party platforms before you decide.
You have actually read the NDP defence policy and costing from the last election, right?
As for priorities, need I remind you how many amendmants the CPC made to the budget during the debate to give more money to the Armed Forces: 0.
Stephen Harper had his chance and didn't take it. Jack Layton did. If defence was really that urgent for the CPC, instead of pressing for an unwanted election for 3 months, they could have sat down and negotiatied their support to get something good out of a bad situation. But he didn't. He decided to act like a child in parliament. Harper had a chance to speak up for the Canadian Forces and didn't. He didn't take the chance before the Brault testimony broke, when he called the budget a "Conservative budget". He could have.
We'll see who has the more sensible defence policy in the next election.
"Are you saying you make descisions based on the number of mailings you receive? I would have thought you would actually read the party platforms before you decide."
Notice the weak strawman argument so typical of the left. Don't bother putting words or ridiculous arguments in my mouth because I will mock you for it.
I've read 6 party platforms at least once, though the once prominently displayed NDP platform seems well-hidden on their site today.
"He decided to act like a child in parliament. "
Oh come on now, this innovative interpretation of reality - you know, the leader of the opposition is kinda supposed to oppose the government - leads me to think you aren't debating in good faith. You can spin it all you want but I don't think "NDP=pro-military party" is ever going to be an accurate presentation of reality.
Lesson #1: It's OK to make decisions based on incomplete and even anectdotal information. And yes, the fact that the CPC actually mailed something to my house is relevant. Huge scientific sample? No. Relevant? Yes. Bayesian inference is the new truth, Mike.
Mike, national defence is my next agenda topic, and you may be interested in a spot i did on Harpers speach in washington today. Also, I have required a copy of the NDP policy for the upcoming election, and you are right, I was surprised at the NDP policy on defence, but the new conservative agenda may also surprise you as well. I could mail you a copy of the NDP agenda if you like, it is much more detailed than what is on the web....
Good article Mike, well researched and put together. More should read it, it might help them understand terrorists a little better, and as we talked about before, I found this article interesting as well....
http://www.time.com/time/archive/preview/0,10987,1077288,00.html
Post a Comment
<< Home