Canada won't retreat, McKay tells Rice

[CHIMO]

STELLARTON, N.S. — U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice praised Canada’s “fierce fighters” in Afghanistan on Tuesday, echoing the Conservative government’s argument that the military’s battlefield sacrifices will help insulate future generations from terrorism.

Rice, invited to Nova Scotia by Foreign Affairs Minister Peter MacKay, delivered her message as she wrapped up a two-day visit that focused on thanking Canadians for their support during the 9-11 crisis five years ago.

Speaking to about 200 people at the Museum of Industry in this small town in northern part of the province, Rice said the freedom that Canadians and Americans enjoy increasingly depends on “freedom in other lands.”

She said the U.S. is now engaged in a “great global struggle to determine what ideas will organize the 21st century.”

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1158054428097&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968793972154&t=TS_Home


Well ya, we used to be best friends you know.

[LynnTheDem]

1. That ain't up to YOU, McKay. That's up to We the Canadian People.

And the majority of We the Canadian People are saying time to get the fuck out.

[Kutjara]

2. I think Canada is behaving the way I'd behave if I had a psychotic...

...next-door neighbor who weighed 300 lbs more than me: just agree with the demented bastard and hope he goes away and beats someone else up.

[Telly Savalas]

3. She's so much better for him than Belinda.

[CHIMO]

4. Are You

Insinuating that he is breaking up Mrs. Rice's marriage. Why that scoundrel bachelor Peter.

Guess you heard it here first folks. Of course it is all speculation, just based on their good friendly smiles and such.

[Telly Savalas]

5. It's wishful thinking.

Because after several months, she'd dump him and become a Democrat.

[Lisa]

6. Condi! You should get together with him!

Dump your current "husband" -- this guy is younger, more athletic, and while his mushy side may be limited to looking mournful and talking to his dog ever since Belinda switched parties ... at least he doesn't get mean and unpredictable when spurned, like Georgie!

And if you simply must hang out at some remote farm, he's got one of those too.

[Hand]

7. That, plus...

He's ignorant, stupid, deceitful, doublecrossing, self-absorbed... oh, and he got his job through his father's influence.

Sound familiar? :grr:

[AlwaysQuestion]

10. Yep, he's a real Canadian special!

Barf bags mandatory beyond this point.

[SixStrings]

14. Paul Martin? n/t

[AlwaysQuestion]

26. Yep, same thing

We don't got no meaningful leadership--no one of vision--no one with the smarts, guts and determination to transform this nation into a bright light among so many dim ones. Instead, we now have Harper, twice as smart as Martin but not smart enough to get out from under the Bush regime. Sounds like he's readying us to fully fall in line with a Bushco type of U.S. administration. Besides, he's a so-called religious man and that terrifies the hell out of me.

[Hand]

27. Well, I was thinking of Chimpy...

but if the shoe fits... :evilgrin:

[Canuckistanian]

8. And look, they're in a Tim Horton's

"Is this really what poor people eat?"

[Lisa]

25. He took her to Tim's for coffee?!!!

If that's his best opening move, no wonder his ex decided to go with the hockey player instead!

[oasis]

9. Mack Daddy should ask Condi why Bush took military assets out of

Afghanistan before the job was done. "Mission Accomplished"?

Bush "cut and ran" from Afganistan.

[Iceburg]

12. I think the correct phrase is "hit and run" wrt the US &Afghanistan nt.

[HuffleClaw]

11. *puke*

the word they dare not use (but that describes their plans perfectly) is CRUSADE. hopefully we can rid our nation of the lapdog harper before he decides to send more of our people in uniform to their deaths.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Minstrel Boy]

20. "the constant lies from Canada's left"?

I don't understand. To support your statement that it was the Liberals who changed the mission you quote an NDP document. So who's lying, and who's "left"?

[SixStrings]

21. Are you disputing the fact it was the liberals who took us there

in 2002 and then switched it to an offensive in 2005?

[Minstrel Boy]

22. Of course not. I'm disputing that the Liberals constitute the "left"

Once more: you quote the NDP to support your contention that the Liberals changed the mission, and then moan about the constant lying from the left.

I hope you can appreciate my WTF?

[Benhurst]

13. Dear lord, if those two get together,

they'd produce some REALLY ugly children, big time!

[mmonk]

16. I'm still hoping the neocon disease that has crippled the US

won't cripple Canada. I need somewhere to take my family and establish a business if these people can't start being turned back here through the ballot box.

[Cha]

17. So Canada's going to follow

the bushlings down into the abyss? Just cause of peter mckay?

[leesa]

18. Well, then Canada will soon be having terrorists attacks on their soil too

I would imagine. Catching the attackers of the crime of 9-11 is one thing. Waging war for years against the sovereign nation of Afghanistan is quite another and we are simply creating more terrorists for those actions.

[happyslug]

19. Reminds me of Japanese Army in 1945, they also did not retreat....

but as the Russian forces were going through them like a hot knife through butter in August 1945, the Army had to "Advice in a rearward direction" and "Learn new Methods and Tactics to handle the current military situation". I.e. the Japanese Army had to retreat or be wiped off the map by the Soviet forces. In many ways the Japanese surrendered on August 15, 1945 do to fear that the Soviets would take ALL of Korea by the end of October and thus threaten Japan at the same time as the expected American Invasion (Given the almost week delay between the last Atomic bombing and the Japanese Surrender it seems the advance of the Red Army through Manchuria was viewed as a bigger risk than the Atomic bomb attacks).

Anyway, the Japanese Imperial Army did not retreat either, they had to "advance in a rearward direction" or "Learn New Tactics" as opposed to Retreating. The Marines right after the red Chinese intervention in Korea also used such phases for Marines also never retreat, but again you hear of "Advancing in a rearward direction" instead of the word "retreat".

How soon will Canada decide to some sort of "re-alignment of forces" that will realign the Canadian Army back to Canada?

[enigma000]

23. The taliban are advancing in a rearward direction in South Afghanistan

Afghan and Canadian soldiers have a last push and weeks of mop-up ahead, but the major battle they expected against hardcore Taliban fighters has dissolved for the moment. For the third straight day, soldiers encountered little resistance as they approached the southern front in this fight.

-snip-

NATO issued an estimate that 65 per cent of the objective territory is now under their control.

http://www.cbc.ca/cp/world/060912/w091252.html

[happyslug]

24. My comment was on the statement Canada will not retreat.

Not what is happening on the Ground. The Taliban are fighting a guerrilla war, thus they have no intention of holding on most of the territory they are operating in. Thus the fact that the Taliban had retreated from 65% of the area is meaningless. What are the areas the Taliban MUST HOLD to be viable? losing those areas would hurt the Taliban, losing 99% of everything else will not.

What would be the "Vital Areas"? Passes to get supplies from, ammunition supply points (But only to a degree), training areas, areas for gathering forces for defense or attack. Most of these will be in the Border region which the Canadians have yet to enter (OR maybe even across the Border which the Canadians may be reluctant to cross).

On top of this limited need for territory by guerrillas, you also have the concept the value of the land taken. I give the example of Iraq, I can control 2/3 of Iraq and if I do not control any part of Iraq between the Rivers I control Nothing. Iraq borders are lines drawn in the sand, but the important parts are the agricultural areas between the Rivers AND the oil fields. The same with Southern Afghanistan, I can control the desert areas of southern Afghanistan and still control nothing. If this is the 65% territory under Control, it is meaningless.

[TrogL]

28. Him again

I dealt with him during the same-sex marriage debates. The man simply cannot think.