Trudeau ponders risking soldiers' lives to gain UN seat

[Rwede]

John Ivison: Liberals’ African peacekeeping plan unlikely to offer easy wins


OTTAWA — Harjit Sajjan is heading to West Africa this month on a fact-finding mission impossible.

The defence minister will search for an elusive United Nations peacekeeping mission that will maximize Canada’s chances of winning a seat on the UN Security Council but minimize the potential cost in Canadian lives and resources.

“That’s hard to find in Africa,” warned a senior military source.

Justin Trudeau’s belief in the United Nations as an effective institution runs from the top of his perfectly coiffed head to the tips of his stripey socks, and he is apparently prepared to send Canadian Forces into action to test it.

At a time when people like former UN assistant secretary general Anthony Banbury are lamenting an organization he called a “black hole into which disappear countless tax dollars and human aspirations, never to be seen again,” the Liberals are exploring a role in an African trouble-spot like Mali or the Central African Republic.

Trudeau and his team feel obliged to do something in the world. There was the small deployment to Latvia, as part of NATO’s mini-surge in eastern Europe, but these Liberals have a Chrétien-like aversion to being aligned too closely with U.S. foreign policy and they see the UN as much more sound ideologically than NATO.

A mission in Africa would bring about the happy coincidence of winning acclaim from the developing nations who will decide which country gets the “Western Europe and Others” seat on the UN Security Council in 2020 (Canada is in the running against Ireland and Norway).

Snippage


Protecting civilian populations from rape and abuse; winning the acclaim of emerging nations; avoiding cost in blood and treasure — that would be an ideal trifecta for a government launching its first peacekeeping mission.

It must seem such a no-brainer to the Liberals that they see no need to hold a parliamentary debate, or “consult with Canadians,” normally their favourite pastime.

“It seems anything labelled ‘peacekeeping’ gets a free pass,” said one defence source. “But given the destination, that’s a very bad idea.”


Full story of PM's callous ego here: http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comme ... -easy-wins

[maryjane48]

But when harper was lipoing off putin it was all good ? More hypocritical drival

[hobbyguy]

Yes, PM Trudeau thinks that Canada should play a bigger role in the world. And yes, the Liberals have always been great believers in the UN.

It is quite possible that the preoccupation with Iraq/Iran/Yemen/Afghanistan/Syria is allowing Al Qaeda and others to build strength in Africa. Groups like Boko Haram, Mujao, and AQIM have not had much opposition - except for the French - and could grow into a serious threat for the west. It already is a difficult problem for Europe as a fair chunk of the refugee/illegal immigration/people smuggling is from conflict regions in Africa.

Is there anything we can do to try to head off this growing problem? Not sure. But the difficulty is, as we have seen with ISIS, that these groups (especially AQIM) have their eye on the destruction of western societies. Thus there is an argument that sooner or later we must deal with them. Better now than later?

I have lots of questions, few answers.

Certainly it is logical that our defense minister should travel to the area and answer some basic questions. Do they want our help? Can we make an impact if they do? What would the mission involve?

The isolationist streak in me says "stay the heck out", but the pragmatist side says "if these guys are allowed to grow and fester, there will be significant consequences for western societies".

[Gone_Fishin]

The isolationist streak in me says "stay the heck out", but the pragmatist side says "if these guys are allowed to grow and fester, there will be significant consequences for western societies".

Is it worth the deaths of Canadians to get a seat at the corrupt UN? I don't think it's worth the life of anyone to fulfill some off-the-cuff election "promise." I know it's important to Trudeau, though, so I wonder how many lives it will take so that he can say "Look what I did" to his giddy supporters.

[hobbyguy]

That's just sour grapes.

I don't care if we get a seat on the security council, but there are advantages to that. Enough that many countries actively compete for the rotating seats. The primary reason it will benefit Canada is that it provides an improved chance to promote Canada's interests on the world stage. That matters more to others than it does to me, but I also say that can't hurt.

I don't think, however, that it is in Canada's interests as a "western" country to ignore the festering situations in Africa. IF they want our help, AND we can feasibly be effective, should we participate in the fights against jihadist forces that are growing in Africa? I admit that is a tough question.

My guess, given Harper's eagerness to jump into the fight with ISIS, is that he might lean that way. Not sure.

That is the important issue here. Do you think we should get involved in a military venture against the growing threat of jihadists in Africa?

[Rwede]

Is it worth the deaths of Canadians to get a seat at the corrupt UN? I don't think it's worth the life of anyone to fulfill some off-the-cuff election "promise." I know it's important to Trudeau, though, so I wonder how many lives it will take so that he can say "Look what I did" to his giddy supporters.

Trudeau seems quite willing to kill Canadians in his clammering to cozy up with the rest of the socialists at the UN.

The Liberals gravitate toward corruption, and the UN is rife with it.

[hobbyguy]

You mean a la Dean Del Mastro... oooops.... a Con(man)

[FreeRights]

Trudeau seems quite willing to kill Canadians in his clammering to cozy up with the rest of the socialists at the UN.

The Liberals gravitate toward corruption, and the UN is rife with it.

What has Trudeau done to demonstrate that he's "quite willing" to kill Canadians? If anything, he's shown quite the opposite.

[Rwede]

What has Trudeau done to demonstrate that he's "quite willing" to kill Canadians? If anything, he's shown quite the opposite.

How many lives were lost on air missions against ISIS? None.

How many lives will be lost with Trudeau's ground missions against ISIS, a move Trudeau made to gain Muslim votes?

[FreeRights]

How many lives were lost on air missions against ISIS? None.

How many lives will be lost with Trudeau's ground missions against ISIS, a move Trudeau made to gain Muslim votes?

Replacing an air mission with a ground training mission (which you likely intended to leave out) is also more effectively using our military in that area. Any Muslims or others who actually appreciate the situation in that area would applaud the move. You know, like our allies did.

[Rwede]

Replacing an air mission with a ground training mission (which you likely intended to leave out) is also more effectively using our military in that area.

Please, tell us exactly how your military training and expertise leads you to that conclusion.

[FreeRights]

Please, tell us exactly how your military training and expertise leads you to that conclusion.

Explain how yours concludes the opposite.

The US in particular applauded the move.

[The Green Barbarian]

The US in particular applauded the move.

So did ISIS.

[FreeRights]

So did ISIS.

Source?

[ferri]

*let's not start the back and forth bickering stuff. stay on topic.*