Thursday, March 17, 2011

*yawn*

I see that PM Harper has already approved sending 6 fighter jets and up to 200 personnel over to help enforce the UN sanctioned No Fly Zone over Libya.... all of my personal thoughts on the matter aside, I was not surprised to see that attack comments against Harper already appearing on the 20 minute old news bulletin online.....

but here's the thing - are those who are slamming the Conservative PM not thinking about how if a Liberal or NDP PM was in place instead, they would be doing the same thing? Are they telling me that Canada would not be sending people and equipment over there if we had a different party at the helm? Who was in charge when we sent troops to Afghanistan and Iraq? Oh - was that Liberal leader/PM Chretien? Was he the one who sent my mom's cousin over, only to be the first Canadian killed there (alongside a second Canadian soldier at the same time)? Sorry? What was that? A Liberal PM? Oh surely you must be mistaken.

It would be nice to read actual discussion about the issue in those comments, rather than tirade after tirade about Harper trying to gain support for F-35 purchases, or for his 'image', or other such blather. I only saw one comment so far that actually pertained to the issue in Libya. We are a member of the UN no matter what party is at the helm, no matter what PM is in office, and as such we end up going along with the gang. I don't like it personally, but I am aware enough to know that Ignatieff and Layton would be doing the same thing.

4 comments:

  1. The fact that liberals such as Bob Rae are cheering this makes me uneasy. This looks like a UN adventure that Canada has no business getting involved in. Lets look after our economy.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Then there is the I-was-for-peace-before-I-was-for-war Obama.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Your last comment reminds me of when Obama was first elected. I was a member of a discussion forum and saw people posting on election night that they were thrilled because their 'troops were coming home". I thought 'what the heck are they talking about??' because I had just read on change.gov that the 'Obama-Biden Plan' was to divert the troops to Afghanistan instead of Iraq because it was 'clear that the al-Queda forces were in Afghanistan'. I watched everyone babble about finally bringing their troops home, there were literally dozens of messages of joy - and then I slammed them with the link to Obama's own website and copied and pasted the pertinent information.

    Guess what? My post was the very last one in that thread. Not one of them could manage to come in and say 'oh i didnt know that, thanks for the info'. Instead they just hid in the corner, or ignored it, or whatever they chose to do. Out of dozens of members, not ONE of them could come in and save face? Please... it was ridiculous.

    ReplyDelete
  4. And Kez proves my point, that Liberalism is a mental disorder. It is the perception that "What Ought to Be" is reality. Pure and simple. Nutso stuff.

    They hide because "It ought to be so" and when confronted with reality, they have an "episode".

    ReplyDelete

*Disclaimer

These are my views and opinions. If you don't agree or think I am sadly misguided, that is your view. Feel free to share your thoughts but I also reserve my right to moderate content (IE foul language, excessive flaming, etc).

Financial Center Live Stock Ticker