Thursday, March 27, 2008

Today marks the fifth anniversary of Harper's "let's invade Iraq" call to arms


Maybe we should celebrate today with a nationwide distribution of bumper stickers that read: Support the troops, by not supporting Harper.

After all, it was five years ago today that Stephen Harper foolishly proclaimed that Canada should blindly follow the US and Britain into the invasion of Iraq. He made that proclamation in the Wall Street Journal no less.

How very appropriate, since we now learn that this war will cost the US three trillion dollars, the equivalent of $30,000 for every single American household.

In deceivin' Stephen's Wall Street Journal piece below, notice how he tries to pawn off the mission as a "multilateral coalition of nations". What complete BS, since the Iraq invasion was anything but a "multilateral coalition of nations". It was done without even receiving UN sanction, for crying out loud. More like a "unilateral coalition of raiders".

Even worse is how Stephen Harper tries to falsely link Saddam Hussein with 9-11. Even the Penatgon has since fessed up to that conflated piece of George Bush propaganda. Sort of like how Harper went on to falsely conflate income trusts with tax leakage, although he has yet to admit to that exercise in utter falsehood and fiscal mismanagement, which only cost selected households in Canada $30,000, and up. Many of those who could least afford it. Seniors on fixed incomes whose nest eggs he promised he would never raid.

Stephen Harper certainly is scary. Imagine if Canadians were ever to extend this guy a majority. I shudder to think. Hang on to your wallets and first born children, the man is not to be trusted. This kind of "leadership" can only lead to ruin:

Wall Street Journal |
March 28, 2003
Canadians Stand With You

By STEPHEN HARPER and STOCKWELL DAY

Today, the world is at war. A coalition of countries under the leadership of the U.K. and the U.S. is leading a military intervention to disarm Saddam Hussein. Yet Prime Minister Jean Chretien has left Canada outside this multilateral coalition of nations.

This is a serious mistake. For the first time in history, the Canadian government has not stood beside its key British and American allies in their time of need. The Canadian Alliance -- the official opposition in parliament -- supports the American and British position because we share their concerns, their worries about the future if Iraq is left unattended to, and their fundamental vision of civilization and human values. Disarming Iraq is necessary for the long-term security of the world, and for the collective interests of our key historic allies and therefore manifestly in the national interest of Canada. Make no mistake, as our allies work to end the reign of Saddam and the brutality and aggression that are the foundations of his regime, Canada's largest opposition party, the Canadian Alliance will not be neutral. In our hearts and minds, we will be with our allies and friends. And Canadians will be overwhelmingly with us.

But we will not be with the Canadian government.

Modern Canada was forged in large part by war -- not because it was easy but because it was right. In the great wars of the last century -- against authoritarianism, fascism, and communism -- Canada did not merely stand with the Americans, more often than not we led the way. We did so for freedom, for democracy, for civilization itself. These values continue to be embodied in our allies and their leaders, and scorned by the forces of evil, including Saddam Hussein and the perpetrators of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. That is why we will stand -- and I believe most Canadians will stand with us -- for these higher values which shaped our past, and which we will need in an uncertain future.

Messrs. Harper and Day are the leader and shadow foreign minister, respectively, of the Canadian Alliance.

14 comments:

Dr Mike said...

"When Ralph Goodale tried to tax Income Trusts ... don't forget, don't forget this ...they showed us where they stood. They showed us about their attitudes towards raiding seniors hard earned assets and a Conservative government will never allow either of these parties to get away with that" Stephen Harper on Global TV, December 02, 2005

So how do you reward a liar??

You make him Prime Minister.

Dr Mike.

PS---maybe we should fire him.

PSS---when does "never" mean 10 months from now.

Robert Gibbs said...

"In the great wars of the last century -- against authoritarianism, fascism...", says Stevie.

I guess then, Stevie, Canadians should lead the way in the great war against your authoritarian & fascist regime, eh?

Robert Gibbs said...

When Fat Bastard Deceivin' Stephen is asked how he likes his daily three-course meal of:

1) Corruption,
2) Lies, and
3) Deceit

his response is invariably:

"Super Size Me," Georgie W.

Robert Gibbs said...

CON WAR PIGS

Generals gathered in their masses
Just like witches at black masses
Evil minds that plot destruction
Sorcerers of death's construction

In the fields a body's burning
As the war machine keeps turning
Death and hatred to mankind
Poisoning their brainwashed minds

Oh 'Lord' ya!

Johnathon said...

It was a "coalition of nations".

Here are the countries that have sacrificed to make Iraq a better place for the Iraqi people who the Liberal Party of Canada still wishes was ruled by Saddam Hussein.


There have been 4,312 coalition deaths -- 4,004 Americans, two Australians, 176 Britons, 13 Bulgarians, one Czech, seven Danes, two Dutch, two Estonians, one Fijian, one Hungarian, 33 Italians, one Kazakh, one Korean, three Latvian, 22 Poles, three Romanians, five Salvadoran, four Slovaks, 11 Spaniards, two Thai and 18 Ukrainians -- in the war in Iraq as of March 28, 2008, according to a CNN count.

That would be 21 "NATIONS" that have shed blood in Iraq.

Are you too ignorant to acknowledge that?

When you "proudly" tell people you're a member of the LPC, don't forget to remind those people that Jean Chretien did EVERYTHING he could to keep Saddam in power.

As a matter of fact, he said it was the "greatest moment in his political career".

His greatest moment was trying to keep Saddam in power so he could continue his reign as the most brutal dictator in the last 60 years?

You and you party should be ashamed of yourselves.

The 21 nations that have helped the Iraqi people should be applauded for the sacrifice.

Anonymous said...

Johnathon:

You seem fond of invoking the Iraq people in your lame comment, however at the same time, you left out the 100,000++ Iraqis whi have died or don't their lives matter squat to your math?
How many Canadians lives do you suppose would have been lost by this point in time under Harper's scenario of "let's invade Iraq"?

What cost in dollars would have been incurred by Canadians at this point in time under Harper's scenario of "let's invade Iraq"?

What tangible gains would have been realized by Canadians under Harper's scenario of "let's invade Iraq"?

How many more years would canada be committed to preserving peace (if you call it that) in Iraq under Harper's scenario of "let's invade Iraq"?

Johnathon said...

Well lets put it this way,

How many BILLIONS of dollars was spent to fight the first world wars?

How many MILLIONS of lives were lost during ALL wars?

How many INNOCENT people died to get rid of HITLER?

When you talk about any war, you weigh the PROS and the CONS.

So, will Iraqi's be better off in 25 years without Saddam Hussein?

My answer is "of course", so the cost in money and lives is worth giving the Iraqi people a chance to govern themselves, however they choose.

SINCE NO-ONE CAN SAY IRAQ WAS BETTER OFF WITH SADDAM IN POWER, your argument is ridiculous to say the least.

I can understand how Americans or the other 20 countries who have helped Iraq might be concerned with the situation, but for a Liberal like yourself who supported the Hussein regime, I think your opinion means fuck-all.

Anonymous said...

Johnathon:

You are showing your true colours and blindness all at the same time.

What possible proof do you have that I am a Liberal. Perhaps I am a Progressive Conservative for all you know. Perhaps I am in the military for all you know.

As for your true colours, perhaps you might take a moment and reflect on your comments about fascism and your comment about "I think your opinion means fuck-all."

Please also be advised that there is a slight difference between the Iraq invasion and the First and Second world wars. Iraq was an invasion by the West at the West's provocation. Whereas Canada's involvement in the First and Second World Wars was in response to another country's aggression.

Evidently that distinction means absolutely nothing to you, just like my opinion which, evidently "means fuck all".

Have a nice day yourself. Heil Harper.

Johnathon said...

What about the Bosnian war in 1999 by none other than Bill Clinton?

That was an act of aggression.

If your not a Liberal, then why is this blog on LIBLOGS.ca?

Any good reason?

Why your opinion means nothing is because if it was up to you, Saddam Hussein would still be in power.

Someone who supports Saddam doesn't deserve an opinion.

This is a new era we are in right now.

One where the West has to strike "first" and fight them "over there".

By the way, it was your hero Bill Clinton who in 1998 proclaimed that the Hussein regime must be toppled.

Bush did the job for him.

In 25 years you will look back and see a peaceful Iraq and understand your support for Hussein was misguided.

Tell me again why this blog is on Liblogs.ca.

Dr Mike said...

Johnathon

Perhaps you are forgetting what the cost of any war is to Canadians at home.

Lost lives can never be replaced no matter how noble you think the cause.

The cost in dollars & cents means that someone here has to go without things like medical care because we don`t have the dollars to fund the programs anymore--I personally know a patient in our community who requires a medication which the gov`t cannot afford to fund & which he cannot afford to buy--tell him the a war in Iraq or Afghanistan is a noble cause when his quality of life has turned to crap.

Very few wars are a truly noble cause--this war in Iraq is not one of them--George Bush pushed his nation to war under false pretenses--ask any American on the street & most will say the should not be there either.

When Stephen Harper finally comes down from his ivory tower & actually asks Canadians what they really think on any subject , then I may give him some modicum of respect.

At last glance , he is still up there & won`t deign himself to come down & play with the rest of us mere citizens.

So Johnathon , the turkey you support is not worth your aggravation--as far as I am concerned the things that he has done to this country are totally indefensible.


Dr Mike--former Conservative.

Anonymous said...

Although I agree with the premise of attacking the enemy, this is so old news. We, as Libs have bigger things to deal with. Can we start doing that, please?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said:

"We, as Libs have bigger things to deal with. Can we start doing that, please?"

Speak for yourself. This is not a partisan blog. Income trust investors have the Green Party to thank as much as the Liberal Party. Don't cast your narrow political leanings on others, thank you very much.

And whatever bigger things you had in mind, are for you to worry about. Don't need you instructing this blog about what is and what is not relevant.

Brent Fullard

Dr Mike said...

I am a pissed-off former Progressive Conservative that no longer has a party membership in any party in this country.

The present day Conservatives have mercilessly creamed the trust investors---they kissed my vote goodbye with that move.

The Liberal Party of Canada has offered to help the trust investors recoup some of their losses--however , the Liberal party`s MPs are more difficult to organize than a herd of cats.

Happy jack Layton & his group of Dippers are virtually useless & as such , deserve no-ones support.

The Green party has offered the trust investors what support they can & have shown themselves to be trustworthy & hard working.

So where does an old PC party supporter go to live out his remaining days.

Tough one.

All I can say is , it won`t be Conservative.

Dr Mike.

Robert Gibbs said...

dr mike said...

"Happy Jack Layton & his group of Dippers are virtually useless & as such , deserve no-ones' support."

Mike:

Gotta agree with that statement 100%.

--------------------------------

dr mike said...

So where does an old PC party supporter go to live out his remaining days?

Tough one.

All I can say is , it won`t be Conservative.


Mike:

Although I've voted PC and Liberal in the past, in the interest of income trust investors, I'd have to say the best way to vote in the future is to do so strategically, so as to toss out the present CON gov't.

To me, this means voting Liberal, as they have the best and only chance at forming the next (opposing) gov't.

Just my two cents worth.