George Wallace
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 99
- Points
- 560
Good2Golf said:
For which you were entitled to the Canadian Peacekeeping Service Medal (CPSM).
Media Bias [Merged]
- Thread starter Cloud Cover
- Start date
For which you were entitled to the Canadian Peacekeeping Service Medal (CPSM).
- Reaction score
- 4,159
- Points
- 1,260
You da MAN - thanks for the digging/sharing.Good2Golf said:
- Reaction score
- 21,765
- Points
- 1,360
milnews.ca said:
Milnews.ca, you're indeed welcome, but if by 'digging' you mean, "clicking on a few links on the official UN website and typing a bit," it wasn't that hard...the data was all there readily accessible to the entire public...well, the public that doesn't have a closed mind and is willing to investigate even a little...unless of course their mission is to deliberately deceive. :nod:
Cheers,
G2G
- Reaction score
- 4,651
- Points
- 1,160
Fantastic data diving, milpoints inbound.
- Reaction score
- 4,159
- Points
- 1,260
Dare to dream .... milpoints inbound (once I figure out why I can't award any).Good2Golf said:
- Reaction score
- 146
- Points
- 710
Keep in mind that the CF's big peacekeeping contribution during the first half of the 1990s was to UNPROFOR in former Yugo; in 1995 and on into mid-2000s that simply morphed in NATO missions in B-H, Macedonia involving significant number of "peacekeeping" ("peace enforcement"?) personnel: IFOR, SFOR, KFOR:
1) http://www.veterans.gc.ca/eng/remembrance/history/canadian-armed-forces/balkans
2) http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/news/article.page?doc=canadian-forces-operations-in-bosnia-herzegovina/hnps1u07
3) http://www.cmp-cpm.forces.gc.ca/dhh-dhp/od-bdo/di-ri-eng.asp?IntlOpId=96&CdnOpId=110
Mark
Ottawa
1) http://www.veterans.gc.ca/eng/remembrance/history/canadian-armed-forces/balkans
2) http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/news/article.page?doc=canadian-forces-operations-in-bosnia-herzegovina/hnps1u07
3) http://www.cmp-cpm.forces.gc.ca/dhh-dhp/od-bdo/di-ri-eng.asp?IntlOpId=96&CdnOpId=110
Mark
Ottawa
George Wallace
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 99
- Points
- 560
How soon we sweep Somalia under the rug. >
- Reaction score
- 8,200
- Points
- 1,160
Forgot a couple Mark (you beat me to it George)
http://www.veterans.gc.ca/eng/remembrance/history/canadian-armed-forces/somalia
http://www.veterans.gc.ca/eng/remembrance/history/canadian-armed-forces/rwanda
So:
In 1991, under the UN Mulroney sends Canada into Yugo.
In 1992, under the UN Mulroney sends Canada into Somalia.
In 1993, under the UN Mulroney sends Canada into Rwanda
In 1993 the Medak Pocket (doesn't) happen and Shidane Arone is killed and Chretien becomes PM
In 1994 Rwandan massacres occur
In 1995 Chretien decides to pack up and go home and disbands the Canadian Airborne Regiment in disgrace while sucking back from Yugo, Rwanda and Somalia and anything that looked like them.
In 1999 under the UN Chretien goes to East Timor
In 2001 Chretien goes to Afghanistan under the UN and with NATO (UN authorized but not commanded)
In 2003 Chretien is retired and Martin continues in Afghanistan
In 2005 Martin shifts Canada to Kandahar
In 2006 Harper becomes PM
In 2011 Harper withdraws from Kandahar
In 2014 Harper withdraws from Afghanistan
http://www.veterans.gc.ca/eng/remembrance/history/canadian-armed-forces/somalia
http://www.veterans.gc.ca/eng/remembrance/history/canadian-armed-forces/rwanda
So:
In 1991, under the UN Mulroney sends Canada into Yugo.
In 1992, under the UN Mulroney sends Canada into Somalia.
In 1993, under the UN Mulroney sends Canada into Rwanda
In 1993 the Medak Pocket (doesn't) happen and Shidane Arone is killed and Chretien becomes PM
In 1994 Rwandan massacres occur
In 1995 Chretien decides to pack up and go home and disbands the Canadian Airborne Regiment in disgrace while sucking back from Yugo, Rwanda and Somalia and anything that looked like them.
In 1999 under the UN Chretien goes to East Timor
In 2001 Chretien goes to Afghanistan under the UN and with NATO (UN authorized but not commanded)
In 2003 Chretien is retired and Martin continues in Afghanistan
In 2005 Martin shifts Canada to Kandahar
In 2006 Harper becomes PM
In 2011 Harper withdraws from Kandahar
In 2014 Harper withdraws from Afghanistan
- Reaction score
- 146
- Points
- 710
Kirkhill,
East Timor: "UN-authorized, Australian-led multinational force", i.e, not "UN peacekeeping" as such:
http://www.veterans.gc.ca/eng/remembrance/history/canadian-armed-forces/easttimor
Then there was Eritrea, "real" UN peacekeeping, six months 2001-2:
http://www.veterans.gc.ca/eng/remembrance/history/canadian-armed-forces/ethiopia
Those do fall within the post-1995 period I was considering. By the way NATO did not take over ISAF until 2003:
http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_69366.htm
And our six-month 2002 regular forces Kandahar mission was only loosely, not specifically, UNSC-authorized--"Following the terrorist attacks on the United States on 11 September 2001, the United Nations Security Council adopted Resolution 1368 condemning the attacks and supporting international efforts to root out terrorism in Afghanistan."
http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/operations-abroad-past/cafla.page
Mark
Ottawa
East Timor: "UN-authorized, Australian-led multinational force", i.e, not "UN peacekeeping" as such:
http://www.veterans.gc.ca/eng/remembrance/history/canadian-armed-forces/easttimor
Then there was Eritrea, "real" UN peacekeeping, six months 2001-2:
http://www.veterans.gc.ca/eng/remembrance/history/canadian-armed-forces/ethiopia
Those do fall within the post-1995 period I was considering. By the way NATO did not take over ISAF until 2003:
http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_69366.htm
And our six-month 2002 regular forces Kandahar mission was only loosely, not specifically, UNSC-authorized--"Following the terrorist attacks on the United States on 11 September 2001, the United Nations Security Council adopted Resolution 1368 condemning the attacks and supporting international efforts to root out terrorism in Afghanistan."
http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/operations-abroad-past/cafla.page
Mark
Ottawa
- Reaction score
- 146
- Points
- 710
Kirkhill: Quite, but keep in mind that the complainers are bemoaning the large decline in Canada's contributions to UN-run operations, which for them ideologically are the only ones that count.
Mark
Ottawa
Mark
Ottawa
- Reaction score
- 21,765
- Points
- 1,360
MarkOttawa said:
:nod:
Yup, the UN missions seem to have to be of the blue ball-cap wearing, handing out candies and caring for babies type missions. UNSC resolution-approved isn't warm and fuzzy enough, it would seem.
- Reaction score
- 146
- Points
- 710
Kirkhill: Thee hee--but not "isolationist", rather "militarist" 
,
Mark
Ottawa
,Mark
Ottawa
- Reaction score
- 146
- Points
- 710
Kirkhill: Just putting things as those who decry lack of UN peacekeeping should do if had any intellectual consistency (bombing Kosovo/Serbia with NATO and no UNSC mandate, quelle horreur!)--JC abandoned UN for, gasp, NATO! And then PM Martin took us into, gasp. combat (though JC did that briefly in 2002 though not much action).
Mark
Ottawa
Mark
Ottawa
- Reaction score
- 5,959
- Points
- 1,260
David Akin, in a column in the Toronto Sun which is reproduced here under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act, excoriates the CBC for not broadcasting leaders' debates not hosted by the so-called consortium:
http://www.torontosun.com/2015/09/30/shame-on-cbc-brass-for-debate-failures
I agree with Mr Akin.
http://www.torontosun.com/2015/09/30/shame-on-cbc-brass-for-debate-failures
Shame on CBC brass for debate failures
BY DAVID AKIN, PARLIAMENTARY BUREAU CHIEF
FIRST POSTED: WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 2015
Even as their reporters were proving once again Monday night that CBC journalists are as good as any in the world by winning an international Emmy for coverage of the Ebola outbreak in Africa, CBC’s management was letting them — and the Canadian public — down once again by failing to broadcast yet another leaders’ debate in this election campaign.
Monday’s debate has been universally praised as one of the best campaign debates in more than 50 years. But CBC chose to put Coronation Street on its main network. On its news channel, there was chit chat about commodity prices.
Meanwhile on CPAC — god bless it — Stephen Harper, Thomas Mulcair, and Justin Trudeau engaged in two hours of lively, informative debate about some of the most important foreign policy, defence, and development issues of our time.
If Trudeau wins this thing, that debate will be seen as a turning point.
The organizers of the debate had offered the broadcast feed free to anyone who wanted to use it. And yet, CBC shrugged.
There’s one more debate in this campaign, Friday night from Montreal, hosted and broadcast by the biggest French-language privately-owned network in the country, TVA. But CBC will skip that one, too.
And so, by campaign’s close, CBC’s sorry record will be broadcasting just one debate out of five, and that was a French language one only offered in translation to its English-language viewers.
Many blame CBC’s failure to broadcast these debates on the Conservatives for that party’s decision not to participate in any debate hosted by the so-called broadcast consortium of CBC, CTV, and Global. That’s a separate issue. Yes, the Conservatives could have done a “consortium” debate as well as others.
But even if there was a consortium debate, the public broadcaster should have committed to airing all debates regardless and done so on its main network.
Others say CBC should be under no obligation to put something on its network over which it has no editorial control. Except, of course, it does that all winter with its most most watched program, Hockey Night In Canada. It is Rogers Communications, not the CBC, who decides on the talent, sets, lighting, direction and so on for HNIC.
CBC also (rightly) broadcasts hours a week of the unedited, unfiltered live-to-air speeches and media scrums of campaigning politicians, more content over which CBC has no editorial control.
When they return to Parliament, MPs should do something about this by requiring CBC to broadcast all leaders’ debates. This is not an argument for threatening CBC’s funding. But its political overseers are well within their rights to insist CBC spend some of the nearly $1 billion a year it gets from Canadians on what even CBC executives itself have said is a vital public service.
In May, CBC editor-in-chief Jennifer McGuire said, “It's important that Canadians across the country, in both French and English, have an opportunity before they cast their vote, to see party leaders, live and face-to-face, debate the future direction of the country.”
I agree. But it’s not so important, apparently, for McGuire and the CBC brass if Canadians can’t see them do it on CBC.
When they get back to work, MPs ought to change that view of things.
I agree with Mr Akin.
