Breaking: Six years ago, Alexandre Boulerice questioned purpose of World War I - Macleans.ca
 

Breaking: Six years ago, Alexandre Boulerice questioned purpose of World War I

While we’re at it, let’s refight the Conscription Crisis


 

Sun News reports that six years ago NDP MP Alexandre Boulerice wrote a blog post that expressed doubts about World War I. Steven Blaney, Peter MacKay and Christian Paradis are profoundly saddened.

Here is the blog post in question. The Journal de Montreal, part of the same company as Sun News, noted Mr. Boulerice’s comments in June 2011.

If Mr. Boulerice does indeed oppose World War I, he would join the likes of Pope Benedict XV, Bertrand Russell, Helen Keller and Henry Ford in opposition. In Canada, World War I also precipitated the Conscription Crisis of 1917.


 

Breaking: Six years ago, Alexandre Boulerice questioned purpose of World War I

  1. Oy! I wrote a term paper about the Boer War back at McGill….my life as a politican is DOOMED!

    For the record I supported Laurier in NOT purchasing the two dreadnoughts from Great Britain.

    I feel so, so free of the weight…….

    • YOU MONSTER!!!

    • You’re probably safe, six years from now the Sun News Network will be nothing but a slightly queasy memory.

    • Strictly speaking those were cruisers not dreadnoughts , . . yet another example of the Liberals not equipping our forces with the tools they need to do the job!

      But anyways why don’t you support the sailors? I mean, they would look pretty silly not being on a warship and all.

  2. Honestly, he’s probably more right than he is wrong.

  3. Boulerice also sniped at Canadian soldiers involved in the Battle of Vimy Ridge with his claim that “thousands of poor wretches were slaughtered to take possession of a hill.”

    That is a missread of the intent of the message due to poor translation, probably on purpose too.

    • I paused on that one too… I can’t speak to the quality of translation, but in reading the English quote, my sense is that if Boulerice was sniping, it wasn’t at the Canadian soldiers, but at the generals in charge.

      • From the blog:

        À ce moment, des milliers de pauvres bougres se sont fait massacrer pour prendre possession d’une colline. Fauchés trop tôt, enlevés à la vie et à leurs amours.

        My translation: At that moment, thousands of bougres were massacred to take possession of a hill. Slaughtered too early, taken away from their lives and loved ones.

        I don’t have a direct translation for bougres but in this case it refers to individuals who can’t help their misfortune.

  4. I believe Henry had an opinion or two about WWII as well…

  5. “Expressed doubts about WWI”. Really??? Is that what he did???

    “…a purely capitalist war on the backs of the workers and peasants.The only ones to have refused this butchery, to have rejected the call of the ‘sacred union’ within each nation, were communist activists”…

    Hey, wait just a freaking minute? Isn’t the NDP in the midst of its own identity crisis about whether socialism is part of its raison d’etre or not? Isn’t a bozo eruption praising communism like this kind of…I don’t know…RELEVANT to that discussion today? Maybe even part of (gasp)…a NARRATIVE? Does the NDP have a hidden communist agenda (note to stupid Canadian journalists…”hidden” and “conservative” are not synonyms)? Does Mulcair have a comment? Does he agree with this guy?

    Boulerice also sniped at Canadian soldiers involved in the Battle of Vimy Ridge with his claim that “thousands of poor wretches were slaughtered to take possession of a hill.” Almost 3,600 Canadians died in the battle to take the strategic Vimy Ridge from heavily
    entrenched German forces on April 9, 1917. The costly but successful capture of the ridge is widely considered the moment Canada came of age on the international stage.

    So no…he didn’t “express doubts about WWI”. He expressed sympathy for communism and trashed the memory of 3,600 Canadian soldiers who fought and died to help preserve his freedom to be this stupid.

    Honestly Aaron…ignoring this codswallop is a new low. How can you write this drivel basically ignoring this guy trashing one of Canada’s most historic, heroic, costly, and glorious battles, and still wonder at the accusations of bias? I don’t even know what to say to this. If this was Rob Anders or Dean Del Maestro or Pierre Poilievre it’s all you’d write about for a week. It’s time to look in the mirror. If all you care about is attacking Conservatives and you are willing to deflect idiocy like the above from every other party that might mount a challenge to them, it’s time to ask if practicing journalism at a news magazine is really for you, or if you’d be better served writing press releases for the NDP or Liberals, or blogging at rabble.ca.

    • It must be difficult to sustain this level of outrage, ad nauseum.

      • It helps to be passionately in thrall to a mythological drama. I wonder if John G can explain how the assassination of an arch-duke from a minor nation, by Anarchists, led to a world war between all of the great nations. It would be interesting to see what he believes.

        • Wow, you need to do some research regarding ww1. The assassination was the spark that started the war due to all the treaties in Europe at the time.

          • That’s a very simplified explanation that ignores a whole long series of decisions that were made, by a number of different actors, in getting from cause to effect. But I wasn’t asking about your beliefs, I was curious about John’s.

    • I can’t tell if this is sarcasm or not. Certainly, no one thinks the battle of Vimy Ridge was anything other than a tragedy? WWI wasn’t exactly about freedom either, that was the other world war.

    • His blog is in French and it was poorly translated to misrepresent his message. The interpretation makes it sound as though he’s blasting the soldiers when what he was really saying is that they were sent up Vimy to be slaughtered like cattle by under British authority.

      For the record, the Brittish didn’t want to got up Vimy ridge because it was both a suicide mission and strategically moot. The Germans were not advancing further. Once the ridge was captured nothing else came out of it. We sat on top and watched the Germans move their front elsewhere. This is what 3600 Canadian soldiers and 20 000 German soldiers died for. Nothing else but a point of pride for our military.

      Yes, is it an important battle for the Canadian Military. We did what was considered impossible. But we should not confuse this for an important battle for the war. From this perspective, its conceivable someone would feel our soldiers have been wronged, sent as cattle to be slaughtered.

    • Wow. Feeling a wee bit brittle today, are we?

  6. Clearly, WWI had to be fought. Archduke Ferdinand was assassinated! Don’t we go to war every time a member of the noble classes gets murdered?

  7. And when it came time for the final assault, some of the soldiers who chambered a fresh round from the magazines of their.303 Lee Enfield rifles went to their deaths. Some ranking officer, observing the action through a set of field binoculars, gave the order. The soldiers either obeyed it or would be sent to face a firing squad for cowardice and dereliction of duty. It was better to die by a German bullet than by one from your own side. The dishonor brought to one’s family would have been unforgivenable.

  8. Does the Sun have anything that is not from the Paleolithic era?

  9. i thought we had freedom of speech in this county.oh,that was before fascism.

  10. He is absolutely correct! WW1 was because countries and the people who ran them were aching for a war. I was disapointed with Thomas Muclair’s decision to distance the NDP from this. Once again the NDP moves away from its history of opposing war. Sigh.