Friday, February 17, 2006

Harper Moving to Mud Hut

So. Stephen Harper wants to go to Afghanistan. Well, I for one, couldn't think of a better place to send him. My only question is "for how long?" I knew he supported the military. But I don't think anyone thought he was going to join the military. Especially after that hard fought election he just won. However, since going through the first couple of weeks being pumelled by the press and even his own caucus, it just makes sense.


Photo: The mud hut where Stephen Harper will
live with his host family in Afghanistan.

4 Comments:

Anonymous Howard Roark said...

Maybe he is going because the last government forgot to have a debate on the whole mission in the first place. His government has to catch up with the info vacuum. I will bet one in ten Canadians doesn't have a clue what we are doing there. There has not been one debate in Parliament on either of the missions (yes we have had two--can you name them?). In fact there has not been one discussion in Parliament as registered in the Hansard since June 2001--before 9-11. Who woulda figured?

2:56 PM, February 18, 2006  
Blogger K-Dough said...

But there doesn't need to be debate on such missions. It was an executive decision. Not to mention, why would the opposition have disagreed, since they jumped on the Bush & Bullets Bandwagon as soon as their republican parents told them there were scary terrorist monsters in the corners...

The whole mission is pointless and a failure. The only reason the damn yanks went there in the first place was to find Bin Laden.They shoulda had the fucking sense to leave when they didn't - but you know those charming American invaders.

4:31 PM, February 18, 2006  
Anonymous Howard Roark said...

I'd agree that the mission in 2001-02 should have been an Executive Decision, there was no time to do anything but, so immediate action was necessary. But leading NATO in there in 2003 and diverting nearly every foreign aid and DND dollar into one country (one that has very little to do with our national interest, other than to support Georgie-boy) is why a national debate should have been happened, not done on a whim by Chretien when he needed political cover for his Iraq reversal (and there was a reveral--read Celluci). To state that there should never be a parliamentary debate on these sort of missions, and in particular one like this where we are likely going to be there for a good 10 years now, and with many a body-bag coming back as well, is pathetic.

5:17 PM, February 19, 2006  
Blogger K-Dough said...

K-Dough Shrugged. You are truly a fountain head of knowledge and I am clearly just a Durdinay Yudku.

8:59 PM, February 19, 2006  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home