Anti-War Demonstrations - Halifax

[SeaKingTacco]

So next time you see a protestor, give'em a hug and thanks.

Maybe... but only if they promise to start showering regularily and fer gawds sake lay off of the patcholi oil 

My problem with protests such as yesterday's "worldwide day against US agression and imperialism everywhere", is the unthinking onesideness of it all. 

"US Imperialists out of Iraq!"  Ok great.  Where the hell were the protests for the 30+ years that Mr S. Hussein ran his country like a petty thugocracy?

To some people's credit there actually was a small outcry against the Taliban and how they handled Afghanistan- after they blew up some thousand year old Buddist Statues.

Not many people marched in the streets in the 60's, 70's and 80's decrying the Soviet invasion of Czechslovakia, stomping on Poland and the Solidarity movement and then invading Afghanistan.  Too busy, I guess.

China catches only small, scattered protest in the West for her invasion and occupation of Tibet and for trying to stomp out Falon Gong.

I can't remember ANY peace group taking to the street, heading to the nearest Iranian embassy and protesting the crap out of the recent call for Israel to be wiped off of the face of the Earth.  I mean, that sounds like aggression to me.  Should it not be protested with the same vigour as the US in Iraq?  I guess they were too busy agreeing with a bunch of 9th century mullahs that Islam has faced a "fatal insult" with some cartoons, and every Christian (and Jew, just for good measure)  now needs to pay in blood for that.

Do you see a pattern developing?  It is pretty cool and hip to be critical of "the West".  And I suppose that there are legitimate issues about our culture and way of life that are not perfect and deserve to be protested.  I just wish the average professional protester had a little more academic rigour in them and thought a bit more about what they are doing.  I actually would have a fair bit of respect for someone who put as much effort into protesting China, or Iran or North Korea or Russia as they do the US.  At least (although we would disagree on many points), they would be consistent in their world view.

Cheers

 

[Fractux]

In talking about demonstrations and people voicing their opinions, there was a very interesting debate last week on Cross Country Check-up last weekend. There were some very informed opinions and some very uninformed opinions voiced. There was one issue that arose that I wish to bring up, and ask about since I’m still somewhat ignorant about many aspects of our operation.

But first, let me state my opinion at this time, since this is my first time taking part in a discussion here.

I personally believe that we should be in Afghanistan. The UN and the international community supported these actions. The intent is to give this country a chance, and the world has a opportunity to try to right as many problems as we could.

I’m not one to judge or belittle the efforts made to date, but we realised that no process is going to be flawless, yet that no matter what, we are going to have to persevere. We’ve taken the plunge, and now we need to keep on swimming until the race is over.

There were opinions voiced on the radio that no historical conflict has even been "won" in Afghanistan, and that our forces have jumped into a very bleak quagmire. I find this argument to hold little ground, as our presence in the region, and our intentions, are for the betterment of Afghan society. We knew going in that the fight would be difficult, and that the social and political situation in Afghanistan is so complex that we cannot solely focus on combat missions. We also knew that not every Afghan would be happy to see foreign troops on their soil again.

We are not making Afghanistan become like us, but rather giving them the chance to be able to control their own destinies. Is this in any way a straightforward process? I think everyone would agree that no one knows how things will turn out, but we have to help finish what we started.

Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for the rest of his life. In this light, I’ll say this: give Afghans a small taste of being in control, and they’ll only ever get a glimpse of what could be, and nothing more. To help teach an entire country to pick itself up and move forwards someone is not going to be easy process. Teaching them does not mean that we force them to follow our instruction, but that we give them the chance to learn, and that we do everything we can to help on their way.

Our forces will be constant targets by those who wish to see these efforts fail, which means we have to fully support their combat capabilities. On top of this, we need to do everything we can to make sure that the work we are asking our troops to do will eventually lead to success. We place them in the line of fire everyday, and demand that they always take appropriate actions. We have to make sure that while they are out on the front lines, the sacrifices they have made, and will make, are not being undermined by failing to get the people to see that we are trying to help them. (Don't ask me about where we need to start, because I'm not well informed enough at this time and I don't understand Afghan culture well enough).

The public in Canada seems to be far too apt to jump on soldiers when they hear the story of a civilian being shot in the pretext of a tense situation. I’m not, in any way, trying to say “accidental shootings are just an inevitable consequence, and we should not be saddened when we hear of this unfortunate situation.” What I am saying is that all we can do is find out what went wrong, and correct any mistakes that we can. If procedures were followed, then look at the procedures and try to fix them as best as we can. If the fault lies with the civilian, then we can look at how we are getting the word across. If we have done everything we can humanly do to prevent these occurrences, then what can we say?

I’ll get on to asking my question before I keep rambling.

Right now, in Afghanistan, a concern was voiced as to how much autonomy Canadian troops have in making recommendations and decisions with regard to the areas in which they operate. Some individuals commented on the radio show that all international troops in Afghanistan are being seen as all flying under an American flag.

My question is if anyone can explain [or point to resources about] the current top-level command hierarchy that our troops are working under and if anyone is aware of how much input we have in helping move Afghanistan forward? Are reconstruction plans and recommendations that the Canadian military proposed being examined? Basically, how much say do our forces currently have?

I realise that our presence is part of a joint NATO effort, but how much say do we have? Is it purely a numbers question (the more troops you have, the more we can have)?

My reason for asking is because I would like to know if we have a fair share in voicing our opinion about how our forces will be used in Afghanistan. 

Cheers!

 

[Rory]

I can't imagine what soldiers over seas think about their jobs some days when ignorant protests such as these are allowed to continue, I mean call me a closet commie for this but until people can organize an informed intelligent group of protesters I let loose the riot squad on them and force em home until they could accomplish an informed protest.

This anti West viewpoint is also blatantly retarded beyond words. I have a question/statement for those people who support the anti West standing, do you not like the freedom you have? Do you not enjoy sleeping in and enjoying a life free from pressures such as violent acts on your step every day? If you do, stop protesting and get informed. Still think the West is all that bad? Pack up and leave if you still do.

The point of American Imperialism is also a very very extreme viewpoint. I didn't hear anything about Iraq becoming an American satellite nation, I also don't see many Americans making plans to move and setup in Iraq the supposed 'American Imperialist Annex'. I have always stood by the fact that now a days anything involving a situation outside your breakfest table is in the gray zone, the protesters are trying to operate with the black or white scenario on how the world works.  This is not possible you will always need to embrace that gray zone and find the best of both worlds with in it, nothing is clear cut anymore.

Just my little opinion in a world filled with em.

 

[Long in the tooth]

There was a protest here in Winnipeg consisting of all of 200 people (about .3% of the population).  A spokesman absurdly stated that "it's obvious that we represent most Canadians".  I did a quick add of the numbers in Vancouver, Toronto, Montreal, Halifax and Winnipeg and got less than 5000.  Gotta do better than that, folks.

Now, I'm preaching to the choir here, but these imbeciles have their heads in the sand.  No other way to put it.  The Taliban have threatened attacks on the US, UK, Spain, France, Italy, Australia and CANADA.  Thousands have died and we are the only ones yet to take civilian casualties.  Call me crazy, but when a man with his past says he's going to burn my house and kill my family, I believe him!

The actions by protesters sullies the memories of our war heros.  They didn't whine "it's too hard" and cut and run.  The irony is that if Sharia law is instituted anywhere it won't be most of the conservative fuddy duddies like myself inconvenienced, but all the liberal blow hard protesters.

Thanks, my blood pressure is back down now.

 

[HDE]

I'd be far more impressed with the protests if they could actually get a few more people to  show up.  I do understand that 30 people in 20,000 is proof positive that they speak on behalf of what "people believe", however the visuals are all wrong  :

Then you add what appears to be considerable confusion of the ones who do show  Hint: Haiti isn't Iraq which isn't Afghanistan.

Then a dollop of "I don't think womyn (sp.) should have to live under the Taliban either.  I do think that the answer is..."  Generally things kinda run out of steam at this point.

Enough of what you don't want; what would you do if you really had to do something!

 

[tomahawk6]

While I agree our citizen's have a right to protest, it seem's to be anti-government in nature. You dont see the folks out protesting the outrages that occur in the world - like Saddam's mass murders. Or Milosevic's slaughter of innocent people. Or the outrages perpetrated by the islamic radicals. It is definitely a one way street. When you look at the organizations the protestors represent its a hodgepodge of leftist extremists and they openly side with the terrorists. Essentially they use the freedom's of our democracy to overthrow the system as we know it. There is a fine line between what they do legally and sedition.

http://www.stopwar.org.uk/

http://www.wsws.org/

http://www.newswithviews.com/Lamb/henry8.htm

http://www.worldsocialism.org/usa/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page

 

[teltech]

Ahh yes, but don't forget, some people protest because "it's the thing to do"
"Mom and Dad did it during Vietnam"
"I just saw Michael Moore's film"
"My friend is going, c'mon!"
ad nauseum.
Yes there is a right to protest (through freedom of speech and freedom of peaceful assembly), but when there is no debate, and nothing but meaningless catch-phrases being spouted out, the media is the only thing that stands between true discussion and propaganda. In that case, the true power lies with the editorial staff or publisher, which then shapes public opinion, which then shapes government policy.
I think the ol' Chinese curse is upon us...

 

[a_majoor]

A bit of ammunition if you ever get engaged by the anti war crowd. Remember, catch their attention, steady breathing cycle then let them have a fact in the centre of visible mass!

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2006/03/three-years-of-dragging-democrats.html

Three Years of Dragging Democrats Through Their Iraqi Quagmire

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction... Saddam may well hide his most lethal weapons in mosques, schools and hospitals. If our forces attempt to strike such targets, untold numbers of Iraqi civilians could be killed."

    Senator Teddy Kennedy
    September 27, 2002

And, so... After the "paralysed" UN body failed to hold Iraq accountable, America and it's 30 nation Allied Coalition took action on March 19, 2003.

But, the war has not been without its critics from the Left...

* German politicians predicted: "Millions of people in Baghdad will be victims of bombs and rockets."
What happened: The antiwar Iraqi Body Count site lists an estimated 4,000-6,000 civilians and fighters were lost in the startup months of the War in Iraq.

* Ted Kennedy predicted:"A war on Saddam might also cause an unprecedented humanitarian crisis with an estimated 900,000 refugees, a pandemic and an environmental disaster as Saddam lit the oilfields on fire."
Actual Result: The oil fields were not set ablaze, no pandemic.

* The UN predicted... It is also likely that in the early stages there will be a large segment of the population requiring treatment for traumatic injuries, either directly conflict-induced or from the resulting devastation. Given the population outlined earlier, as many as 500,000 could require treatment to a greater or lesser degree as a result of direct or indirect injuries.

What happened: Again, the antiwar Iraqi Body Count site lists an estimated 4,000-6,000 civilians and fighters lost in the startup months of the War in Iraq.

* Ted Kennedy also predicted: "The U.S. could run through "battalions a day at a time" and that the fighting would look like "the last fifteen minutes of 'Private Ryan.'"

Actual Results: Although each fatality is a tragic loss for America, this is still one of most successful military campaigns the US has ever fought.

* Medact Global Health: "A more contained conflict could cause half a million deaths and have a devastating impact on the lives, health and environment of the combatants, Iraqi civilians, and people in neighbouring countries and beyond."
Actual Results: Antiwar Iraqi Body Count says that 35-37 thousand deaths including bank robbers.

* Hans Blix argued: The Iraqis were better off before the war

The harsh truth: Before the War in Iraq, Saddam was filling his mass graves and keeping state hired rapists on his payroll. In those 20 years about 5% of the people of Iraq were killed or mysteriously disappeared. The red area in the graph above shows the estimated average deaths in Iraq under Saddam Hussein from 36 average deaths per day from mass grave discoveries, to 137 deaths per day from a different source. The yellow area shows estimated total fatalities since the beginning of the War in Iraq from Iraq Body Count, an antiwar website.

* John Kerry insisted... "There are no-go zones in Iraq today (September 2004). You can't hold an election in a no-go zone."
Results: Iraq held a very successful democratic election in January 2005.

* Jimmy Carter predicted... "The Carter Center did, our 52nd election. All of our elections have been in troubled countries where the outcome was doubtful. But in every case there has to be a central government that can set up the constitution and bylaws and rules so that an election can be held peacefully. I don't see that happening as long as the terrible violence continues in Iraq."
About those election results: Former President Jimmy Carter, who predicted that elections in Iraq would fail and in the past year described the Bush administration's policy there as a quagmire, this week ended 10 days of silence to declare the historic Iraqi vote "a very successful effort." (February 11, 2005)

* Madeleine Albright observed... "It has long been obvious that the Bush administration lacks a viable plan for success in Iraq. The hardest political job — drafting a constitution acceptable to all factions — has not even begun..."
Results: Iraqi Constitution drafted and accepted by 78% of the voters.

* Madeleine Albright accused... The "coalition," never robust, is shrinking.
Reality: There Iraqi Allied Coalition consists of 30 nations. The Afghanistan Coalition consists of 35 nations.
Bulgaria announced that it will be sending troops back to Iraq. (February 24, 2006)

* John Murtha exaggerated... "Many say that the Army is broken. (Murtha did later, actually!) Some of our troops are on their third deployment. Recruitment is down, even as our military has lowered its standards."
Reality: The Army Guard is surpassing its goals and growing in strength despite Rep. Murtha's campaign against military recruitment.

And now they say this is a Civil War...
We will see.

Pajamas Media is covering these missed predictions.

Donald Rumsfeld today in the Washington Post had this to say on what we've gained from our three years in Iraq:

    Consider that in three years Iraq has gone from enduring a brutal dictatorship to electing a provisional government to ratifying a new constitution written by Iraqis to electing a permanent government last December. In each of these elections, the number of voters participating has increased significantly -- from 8.5 million in the January 2005 election to nearly 12 million in the December election -- in defiance of terrorists' threats and attacks.

 

[monika]

... I constantly see posters saying things like "Stop Imperialism at Home and Abroad!" I swear to God, they had a picture of the Canadian soldier facing off with a Mohawk at the Oka crisis from years ago. These posters link all of the following things together: Oka, Native rights, Iraq, Afghanistan, and even...get ready for it...Haiti! Apparently Canada is part of an imperialist plot to control the oppressed people of Haiti.

What the hell does Oka have to do with Afghanistan? If you're going to protest(and yes I have) stick to the topic at hand, make sure it's current, and be informed!(I'd like to think I was but I'd obviously be biased)

Imperialism? One could argue that dictatorial despots such as Hussein and Taliban are Imperialist; the empire they seek is not land but control of people's thoughts and actions.

Who am I to talk though? I guess I am just one of those weird people who think that Iraq was wrong but Afghanistan was, and is, very right. Am I alone? Probably! I am hated by hippies and soldiers alike. That's why I won't post my name 

You are not alone; most people I speak with in detail were against Iraq but as they get more info, are for Canada in Afghanistan.

Hated by hippies and soldiers alike? I consider our soldiers professional enough to channel their hatred for when they need to use it in training or battle. Hippies? I can't be a hippie - I like shaving my legs and am gainfully employed. Mind you I do like my granola. Seriously though I have managed to retain friendly terms with both military and leftie; I'd like to think it's because my association is with what we have in common not what divides us(geesh, that's hippie talk right there!) Yes, there are jerks in all walks of life, but I refuse to let that colour my opinion of an entire group.

My name? Just call me the squaddie huggin' tree hugger. Don't ever, ever call me a Commie though; my parents escaped the Iron Curtain and I have no love lost for Communism.

 

[HDE]

I'd love to see a breakdown of the so-called "Iraqi Body Count" broken down by who actually did the killing.  I'd wager those killed by the so-called "resistance", either in reprisals or as "collateral damage",  during attacks on U.S. forces would far outnumber the number actually caused by the Yanks.  It appears that Iraqi lives are far less valuable when ended by other Iraqis. 

 

[clk320]

Well to reply to Mack674 and I don't want to fuel the debate.  I am serving overseas at the moment and don't feel one bit offended by the protest that happen back home because it's   where everyone one of us can express our opinion freely.  Some of the folks don't agree with the CF being over here that's OK but some of them do.  If they feel strongly about it to pull us out well they can request the gvt to do so of course because we live in a democracy : i.e.quote a form of government in which the people have a voice in the exercise of power, typically through elected representatives unquote (oxford def.).  And personally this is the reason why I am here when I see this happening (ref. to a post: quote Afghan man faces death penalty for converting to Christianity unquote).  We are here to make a change for the better and will do everything we can to do it sadly there is a cost to it but that's why I signed on the dotted line and will do so for the next fifteen years or so.  So if they want to protest go right ahead but I know that I am supported by my family, friends and a lot of your folks on army.ca.  Why get excite and bend out of shape for a few minority if we do they win.  Long live the CF !!!  :warstory:

 

[SHELLDRAKE!!]

The major problem these days, Canadians are making uninformed opinions and taking a stand on them. If Joe Blow loves to exercise his right to protest anything, overhears some misguided idea that the CF is in Afghanistan to steal there oil or because they want to be more American, he will not put a second thought into fact checking and the next thing you know, he's on CBC with a picket sign acting like he's an expert on all things military.

Im all for the right to protest but atleast show you know what your talking about before taking a stand.

 

[HDE]

SHELLDRAKE!

    Exactly!  I have nothing against a person expressing an opinion, however I'd like to think they are offering a thoughtful opinion.
I heard a newsclip today where a woman stated that the money being spent "fighting the war" should be spent on "reconstruction"
Reconstructing a nation without having much idea who'll be running it when we're done does seem a bit dodgy. 

 

[jmackenzie_15]

SHELLDRAKE!

     Exactly!  I have nothing against a person expressing an opinion, however I'd like to think they are offering a thoughtful opinion.
I heard a newsclip today where a woman stated that the money being spent "fighting the war" should be spent on "reconstruction"
Reconstructing a nation without having much idea who'll be running it when we're done does seem a bit dodgy.   

Perhaps someone should point this woman in the direction of our Provincial Re-Construction Team that's been working in Afghanistan for years ?

You also can't re-construct anything when as soon as its built, Joe Taliban comes in at night and burns it down, and kills any locals who helped build it for "supporting western imperialism."

I applaud CBCs latest efforts during the last couple weeks, particularly the coverage from inside Afghanistan itself, for attempting to show the public what is really going on over there. I think that helped educate and inform alot of people that the mission is noble and necessary and in every way embodies what we as Canadians stand for: not oil or land... democracy, peace, and human rights.

The Afghan people deserve better lives, and they need us there to help them get back on their feet, and our troops need the support of the country to get the job done.

 

[scoutfinch]

To paraphrase Voltaire:

I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend with my life your right to say it.

Free speech is the corner stone of democracy.  In Canada, we have a democratically protected right to protest and speak our minds on government policy and activity -- even if what we say is stupid or inane. 

I don't know why you may have joined the military.  I signed up with the intent to contribute to the defence of this nation and to participate in the implementation of Canadian foreign policy as determined by Parliament.  I don't have to agree with the decisions of government but I do have to abide by them, even should it pose risk to my own life.  That is the life (and sometimes death) of a soldier. 

Let the jackasses protest.  Let them make ridiculous and fallacious public statements.  They are their own worst enemy... their farfetched accusations and stories will ultimately fall on deaf ears as their credibility is ruined.  We, as soldiers, become our own worst enemy (politically) when we make short sighted comments about acting violently against someone exercising their constitutionally protected rights.

If a poorly informed protestor wishes to portray military personnel as undisciplined *killers*, why feed into it with stupid comments??? Correct the misstatements with facts, not fury. Otherwise, we appear exactly as they claim.

 

[ArmyRick]

It was interesting that I overheard a conversation from two "educated people"  : who were going on and on about how Harper came into power and then committed us to Afghanistan. WTF? Did these guys just start watching the news a week ago or what? Has anyone seen the blatant anti-harper, anti-military, anti-anything right going on in some media lately? I watched with some disturbance This hour has 22 minutes last friday and I shook my head.

The Truth. get ready for it. CANADIANS ARE F*CKING IGNORANT !!! We have no business calling down Americans when we are pretty ignorant ourselves. Our people whine about Harper's "hidden agenda" and the military in A-stan when gun violence in Canadian cities is on the rise, as is violent crime in general and Canadians STILL refuse to acknowledge the criminal misappropriation of our tax payers money during their twelve year of terror.

Hey Canada, the world does NOT need more of us. What they really need is for our country to WAKE UP and smell the coffee.  Maybe we, as Canadians, should acknowledge the real world and the truth. Yeah, we are such a great nation that how many of our people live in poverty? How taxed are we? We have an UNELECTED senate and the man who wants to change all that is being challenged by left extremist.  Or maybe its the Left wing politicians feeding at the tax payers trough?

Wake up, Canada.  Lets sort ourselves out and start acknowledging reality. 

Before the world puts us on show parade.

 

[a_majoor]

Wake up, Canada.  Lets sort ourselves out and start acknowledging reality. 

Before the world puts us on show parade.

All Canadians will be lined up by their bunks at 0500 Zulu for Rick's inspection.........

 

[Brad Sallows]

I'd rather they vent their frustration by protesting openly, than conspire in secret to effect change by force.

 

[Franko]

To paraphrase Voltaire:

I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend with my life your right to say it.

:

No left wing nut is worth any life being laid down by any soldier.

If they want to defend their right to free speech...throw on a uniform and prove it, otherwise shut up.

Besides Voltaire was a egomaniac....and seems to me there was something about his mother as well    ;D

Regards

 

[TCBF]

If we are waiting for Larry Lunchbox ans Suzy Sewingkit to suddenly grasp the truth about what is going on in this country, then we are overestimating their pickled IQs by about 400%.

Give your average Canadian couple a case of beer, a bag of dope and an NHL game to watch on the idiot box, and the sheeple won't give two shoots about us.  Never did.  Never will.

Interfere with either of the three above pleasures, and things start to unravel.

Remember the hockey strike?  Not being able to bitch about the Leafs, the masses accidentally saw a news clip about gun control?

"What? When did this start?"

Well, 1934 or 1978, depending on your poison, but the newly alerted became outraged, until some mandarin in Ottawa told the NHL "Get the bloody league up and running - the friggin peasants are starting to pay attention to us, and that's the last thing the gov't or you owners want!"

So the strike got sorted out.

Tom