Wednesday, August 15, 2007

Harper endangering lives: 'analyst'

I don't believe that, but that's the impression one analyst leaves. In a CanWest piece looking back at Gordon O'Connor’s legacy in DND, two defence analysts try to put forward the view that, while he was a poor communicator, O’Connor was still a helluva minister.

I could take the time to pick that apart, but O'Connor is gone so no need to dwell on the past. I did, however, want to highlight this ridiculous comment from Brian Reid, executive director of The Ruxted Group, a Canadian military think-tank:

"He should not have been moved. We are in the midst of a counter-insurgency war. Lives are on the line. O'Connor had a grip on the department. Now you need to bring someone else up to speed, and no matter how smart that person is, there's a lot of learning required."

Indeed, how dare Harper move O’Connor when there’ s a war on? Lives are on the line! Follow that statement to his logical conclusion and he seems to be saying by moving O’Connor now, Harper is endangering lives. Indeed, changing governments until the troops come home is probably a bad idea, so let's cancel the next election too.

That's just crazy. I think the Army will be able to soldier on through this difficult transition period.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers


Oldschool said...

The same generals are in charge . . . replacing the Minister is irrelivant. One would think you would be more concerned about how we wound up in Kandahar Province, the last remaining area and the most dangerous . . . it was because of the diddling of the previous Liberal govt. Had they had any brains whatsoever . . . we could have been sitting on the sidelines like the French and Germans wataching the excitement. Once again, like the bogus Kyoto deal, the Libs got us the most difficult task.

Jay said...

Whatever Oldschool. If Harper had is way we would be in Iraq, Afghanistan and preparing for Iran so don't use the bullshit line that this missions failure is the liberals fault. There was support during and at the end of the previous liberal government for the war by Canadians. Harper took a supported war and put a brain dead old fart defence lobbyist in the portfolio and killed the chances of us succeeding in Afghanistan.

As always you illustrate how completely stupid and unversed in what you speak of.

I can only hope you are nearing the end of what little mental capacity you have left and will soon be bed ridden.

Burton, Formerly Kingston said...

Jay, What oldschool said is factual. I live this life my friend. The LPC dithered while all the safe PRT's were gobbled up in the north and west of the country. All countries major troop deployments went to whatever area you signed up for to deploy your PRT. When Canada finally made a decision our choice was Kandahar or Kandahar. You may want to throw out insults concerning his post but what he said is factual. Having a bad day are you.

burlivespipe said...

And now that Harpor and his crackshot economic mental spoon-bending abilities have tacked on billions of dollars of our future on being in Afghanistan (or somewhere else with similar terrain), we can look forward to a lot of dodgeball by Harpor and his trolls on just what's up the big oaf's sleeves.
At least he continues to keep his cabinet bound and gagged, working the black felt pen on future 'secrets from the drawer of Canada's New Government.'

Jeff said...

The fact is the Liberal government wanted Canada to play an important role in Afghanistan. Also, the military wanted Kandahar, and the chance to make a real contribution. Someone had to step-up, and Canada did. That's nothing to apologize for.

However, we have now done our part, any further extension would be inappropriate. It's time for other countries to step-up too.

Burton, Formerly Kingston said...

Actually the military wanted nothing to do with "Kabul" at the time we sent by PMJC. If you remember the change to Kandahar happened later under PMPM. The military was caught between a rock and a hard spot on what to choice or advise the govt because if we had gone anywhere else we would have had to come up with our own choppers, close air support and base infrastructure like the French and Germans and others had to provide in theirs. By going south we could continue to piggy back as required on our allies who were co located there. Please also acknowledge that one of the primary reasons for going to Kabul was that Canada had to be seen to doing something in the "War Against Terror" and the CF was in no shape to go to Iraq even if PMJC has wanted us too. We would of been a hindrance, equipment wise at the time to the rest of the "Coalition of the Willing".
PS. Coalition of the willing is such a dumb name.

Jeff said...

I said Kandahar, not Kabul. And I don't think the fact Canada wanted to take on a bigger role is something that needs to be admitted, nor is it something to be hidden.

Anyway, we've veered sharply from the original point of this post, which was that it is pretty silly to contend changing the defence minister will somehow endanger lives.