15

In other news


 

Last evening, after four hours of debate, the House unanimously approved the following motion.

That, in standing in solidarity with those seeking freedom in Libya, the House welcomes United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973; that the House deplores the ongoing use of violence by the Libyan regime against the Libyan people; acknowledges the demonstrable need, regional support and clear legal basis for urgent action to protect the people of Libya; consequently, the government shall work with our allies, partners and the United Nations to promote and support all aspects of UNSC Resolution 1973, which includes the taking of all necessary measures to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack in Libya and to enforce the no-fly zone, including the use of the Canadian Forces and military assets in accordance with UNSC Resolution 1973; that the House requests that the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development and the Standing Committee on National Defence remain seized of Canada’s activities under UNSC Resolution 1973; that should the government require an extension to the involvement of the Canadian Forces for more than three months from the passage of this motion, the government shall return to the House at its earliest opportunity to debate and seek the consent of the House for such an extension; and that the House offers its wholehearted support to the men and women of the Canadian Forces.


 

In other news

  1. We didn't really have much choice on this one, seeing as R2P is our baby, but it's already going badly wrong.

  2. I believe a similar motion in the British House of Commons was passed by 557 to 13 votes against.

    I have very mixed feelings about our involvement in this military action (not that I'm saying that it is wrong) and so I am a little surprised that not one Canadian MP felt able to vote against this motion.

  3. oh really? how so?

  4. Countries breaking ranks squabbling about whether they should target Gadaffi or not, the discovery that some of the 'rebels' are known terrorists, the cost is already astronomical, and the US just lost a plane….etc etc

  5. Losing one plane to mechanical error in a shooting war is hardly a disaster. Have you ever read about all the stuff that went wrong on D Day?

    I agree that there are significant problems with the political and command construct of the coalition, but the important thing at this point is that a wholesale slaughter of civilians in, e.g., Benghazi by Gaddafi's forces has now been prevented. That is huge, and that's what R2P is supposed to be all about. You have to weigh the costs against the benefits, and so far this is a net winner.

  6. I guess the NDP is taking the position that the Security Council endorsed it, so it's ok?

  7. Yeah, Americans have lots of 'mechanical errors'.

    Been happening since Vietnam

    YOU may consider this a win….but millions do not

  8. I wonder, why did we get involved in Lybia, but failed to lift a finger when thousands got slaughtered in Darfur?

    I support the principle of R2P. I only wish that it was used in a consistent manner and not simply for a cover when we want / need a countries resources.

    Further, have we not learned anything from Bush's infamous "Mission Accomplished" photo op – you can't win a military fight without boots on the ground.

  9. Or the arguments for this action during the 4 hours of debate were unanswerable?

    Or perhaps our elected officials are not giving this issue their full attention?

    I've no idea if MPs were whipped on this vote, but I find it hard to believe that there was no one prepared to register even a token negative vote.

  10. I didn't say it was a "win". I said that on balance, it was the right thing to do. I don't have any illusions about the costs or downside. Practically everything in life has a price.

    So what's your view? That we should not have imposed a no-fly zone?

  11. The panel discussion about this on last night's CBC The National was pretty good in this respect. There were no illusions about this, and the discussion was fairly balanced.

    I agree the risks and potential potholes are significant, but are you going to sit there and watch Benghazi get massacred, especially in light of the homicidal threats that Gaddafi was making?

    Re Darfur, there is a huge problem with R2P, and that is that if you implemented R2P in every instance where it's called for, we would probably have troops on the ground in many, many more countries than we already have. Of course it's rather capricious where we tend to send troops and where we don't. And it's a shame that we tend to send troops to places which have more economic and strategic importance than to places that do not. It's one of the big flaws of our current international system. Still, I agree with the panelists on CBC last night, ie., that if we helped prevent a huge massacre in Benghazi, then at least we did good there.

  12. I already said that politically we didn't have much choice on this, because R2P is our baby.

    But it'll end up being a mess anyway.

    There are 'plans' and then there's execution…and we make the same mistakes over and over again.

  13. wholesalekk
    Dear friends, do you want to have some different

    things? Whether you want to give your relatives and

    friends, take a few different exotic gifts? Whether you

    want to buy some cheap benefits of thing? So please,

    let us begin now!

    Click on our website

    wholesalekk

    Will bring you different surprise

  14. we hope no war,the world need peace

    Dear friends, do you want to have some different

    things? Whether you want to give your relatives and

    friends, take a few different exotic gifts? Whether you

    want to buy some cheap benefits of thing? So please,

    let us begin now!

    Click on our website
    wholesalekk

    Will bring you different surprise

  15. Going "badly wrong" is hyper-critical at this point. Talk to me about "badly wrong" if the coalition bombs a mosque full of non-combatants in downtown Tripoli, or evidence of a plan to invade with ground troops and make Libya protectorate of Exxon is found, otherwise save the Cassandra act.

Sign in to comment.