layton just makes me want to puke.
reminds of another prick that makes me want to puke - Trudeau, who in the 40's chose not to answer the call, to rise to fight the greatest moral challenge of his generation.
Cut from the same stinky, skanky moral cloth those two.
Well Jack is right about one thing – things have changed; because now Canada is taking a stand, not just standing there. Utopians hate it when their world view that all things are equal is confronted with the stance that no, the Taliban is not equal, in fact it’s evil and we Canadians are going to help kill it, not sit down and negotiate with it so we can’t get another axe in the head.
The utopians aren’t interested in effective results; it’s the plan (preferably centrally planed) that counts. It’s the intentions that count. Always being seen as the “honest broker” by never taking a stand. The art of compromising is actually more important to them than victory.
Victory in war would probably make them feel guilty; because if they were after positive, effective results these utopians would be capitalists. But they are after equality arrived at by the appearance of moral superiority. It’s the appearance of the equality process that makes them feel good. Outcome is irrelevant – unless all outcomes could be equal and of course they can’t be - equality trumps everthing: health care, day care all have to be equal; even War has to be proportionately fought - it's insane.
nomdenet: you must have been snooping into my blogging drafts... you have just outlined my next post.
Fred: doesn't it just kill you how these guys are the ones criticizing "Christian folk" for being the moralizers. There are no bigger holier-than-thou shmucks than utopian socialists. Just attend a university sociology class... the elitist smugness literally hits you in the face before you even open the text.
Smilin'Jack and the NDP talk a good game when it comes too human rights and helping the oppressed, they have neither the moral authority or the backbone to take action to actually protect the people they pretend to care about.
The big moocher wants to negotiate with thug. Good. Since negotiations involve trade-offs what is smiling Jackass prepared to give away? Womens' rights? Freedom of speech? Maybe freedom of religion - that's a big chip. Free thought is already banned in the NDP so that's not available. Bilingualism - English and Arab.
He wants to negotiate? Fine, send him over with a bomb-belt and blow both their asses up when they meet. Two birds, one stone.
What bothers me about the comments & demands from both Layton and Duceppe is that they are providing aid to the Taliban. The attacks by the Taliban stepped up only after there were people in the government (elected) and the media who were calling for our withdrawal from Afghanistan.
The boys fighting in Afghanistan are fighting a war on two fronts, one here at home & the other in a country that wants to enjoy the same freedoms we enjoy.
When I hear all these so-called Canadians talk about Can. values, I must admit to feeling nauseous.
Yawn, more neocon drivel. This blog is typical of what one hears from this failed right wing ideology. All we hear from neocons are lies about 'they hate us for our freedoms,' 'we can't cut and run,' 'anyone who disagrees with Bush is a traitor,' 'if you don't support war, you hate the military' etc etc. Unfortunately, much of this creepy logic has cross the border via Harper and the Conserblicans and their blogger groupies.
Much to your disbelief, Jack Layton and most progressive Canadians back the mission in Afghanistan in theory and support our troops but are rightly concerned about Harper's visionless, aggressive, Bush-inspired agenda, or lack-thereof, in that country. Only a neocon would think by killing everything that moves will result in success. The Taliban is gaining recruits, the drug trade is growing, Afghans are forced to flee their homes and there's no end in sight. So clearly, this neocon strategy isn't working. It's not traiterous to ask questions about this mission and Jack is merely ask the very ones Canadians are asking too. Accuse him of coddling the enemy all you want, but he's representative of most Canadians and if that upsets you, move to Texas.
The anonymous post is mine.
Lou- lou said
"The boys fighting in Afghanistan are fighting a war on two fronts, one here at home & the other in a country that wants to enjoy the same freedoms we enjoy."
That's OUR job!!
NDP_Nadine
congratulations your post just proved the last post "Utopianism: Geopolitical Masochists at Work"
NDP_Nadine: Wow...just a bunch of talking points completely unconnected to reality.
Okay, by the numbers:
1. "Much to your disbelief, Jack Layton and most progressive Canadians back the mission in Afghanistan in theory and support our troops but are rightly concerned about Harper's visionless, aggressive, Bush-inspired agenda, or lack-thereof, in that country."
You're right. I don't believe that Jack Layton backs the mission in Afghanistan. The evidence shows that he does not. He wants the troops out before Afghanistan is secure enough to allow the real development work to begin. Do you honestly think that the Taliban and drug dealers want development to proceed? The only way that they will allow development in Afghanistan is if they are able to use it to gain control of their section of the country.
Security must come before development because development cannot happen without security.
The only ones without lack of vision are the NDP who harbour the delusions that they can somehow negotiate with the Taliban. You do not negotate with guerillas until you convince them that they can gain more by negotiating instead of fighting.
2. "Only a neocon would think by killing everything that moves will result in success."
Actually, that was the socialists that followed that strategy. It's called ethnic cleansing, and the left has been guilty of ethnic cleansing for decades.
3. "The Taliban is gaining recruits, the drug trade is growing, Afghans are forced to flee their homes and there's no end in sight."
What is your source for this? Facts dearie, facts. Do you have access to Taliban recruiting rosters?
I ask since you use that as the basis for your conclusion that "...this neocon strategy isn't working."
Based on battle reports from the region, the Taliban are actually weakening rather than strengthening, and the local Afghan population is quite eager to see the coalition helping to bring security to the countryside.
www.strategypage.com ought to give you some reading material.
4. "It's not traiterous to ask questions about this mission and Jack is merely ask the very ones Canadians are asking too."
No, it's not traitorous (note spelling) to ask questions about the mission, but Layton is not asking what ordinary Canadians are asking. He is advocating the surrender of the mission under the guise of "bringing all parties to the table." I do not accuse him of treason, but I do accuse him of selling out the Afghan people.
5. "Accuse him of coddling the enemy all you want, but he's representative of most Canadians and if that upsets you, move to Texas."
Actually, based on the current breakdown of seats in Parliament, Harper, not Layton would be representative of most Canadians. Layton is representative of Torontonians, Vancouverites, and a few other areas of the country.
And besides dearie, I was here first and I ain't moving. You don't like it--move to Cuba.
NDP Nadine: What Jack has asked for is a slaughter of civilians on the scale of Rwanda or larger. We must assume, that by asking Canada to pull out, he wants all foreign forces out. That, would cause a conflict in which the Taliban, aided by outside Islamic sources, would once again go on a rampage... and the North of Afghanistan would once again fight back. The result... all those who stood up to the Taliban and who chose democracy would be murdered... the Taliban have proven that they can do this... and they would. And, before long we'd be right back to the pre-911 barbarian-fest that started all of this in the first place.
You see Nadine, you are, for a so-called socialist, an unbelievable hypocrite... either that, or you haven't thought out what your beloved Jack's actions would cause. Same goes for Iraq, where millions have chosen to stand with the free world and reject barbarism... if the USA pulls out, the bloodletting will be beyond belief, and those who stood for democracy will be butchered.
Nadine, it saddens me that supposed intelligent people are so stuck on their disingenuous pacifist lie that they can't see that their pacifism leads to the slaughter of innocents.
Nadine... the true socialists right now are our troops. They are fighting for some of the poorest people on earth, and attempting to rid them of the barbarians who literally crave for the dark ages. Nadine... you are not a socialist... you and Jack and your ilk don't even have the slightest idea what fighting for the truly poor is...
That's why I find utopians like Jack to be the most reprehensible fakes around.
Great post.
But I think the comments were even more enlightening.
Socialists are dangerous...
Watched Pacifist Jack on The National last night. His believes we should negotiate peace with the Taliban and yet has no concrete idea about how such negotiations would even be started. What is more, he appears content to allow the Taliban to return to power in Afghanistan as long as the fighting stops.
And that, my neocon friends, is where the immorality of pacifism is thrust into plain view: pacifists like Jacko Layton would rather a totalitarian and oppressive regime like the Taliban rule a nation than shed blood to ensure they do not. In his mind, peace, i.e. the absence of war, is more precious than liberty for millions of Afghans who would otherwise be oppressed and abused by theocratic ideologues. Their freedom -- to worship freely, speak freely, associate freely, attend school, run businesses, enjoy entertainment... the things we take for granted -- is not worth our blood or anyone's blood for that matter.
Temporary stability over lasting freedom is Jacko's mantra. Canadians should recoil at such sentiments and utilize their freedom of speech to level appropriate criticism at his immoral stance.
Commenting by HaloScan
