Peter MacKay spokesman Dan Dugas has already suggested that no extension is in the cards. Iggy should also make his position known. Let's hope this isn't one of those cases where he decides to try and outmaneuver the government on its right flank.
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Speak, Iggy, Speak
Canada should continue fighting the war in Afghanistan after the mission's scheduled end in 2011, the United States' top military official hinted today.
Peter MacKay spokesman Dan Dugas has already suggested that no extension is in the cards. Iggy should also make his position known. Let's hope this isn't one of those cases where he decides to try and outmaneuver the government on its right flank.
Peter MacKay spokesman Dan Dugas has already suggested that no extension is in the cards. Iggy should also make his position known. Let's hope this isn't one of those cases where he decides to try and outmaneuver the government on its right flank.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
I certainly hope he doesn't do that. What an impossible quagmire. The sooner we're out of it, the better.
Could be Iggy is a little busy working on his response to
(Chretien/Martin) Government broke law on EI financing (used EI surplus to balance books)
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/12/11/scoc-eu-ruling.html
No extension, not no way, not no how.
BTW, I think this Gates thing is being overplayed by the media. He didn't bring this up unprompted. As I understand it, a reporter (probably Canadian) asked him a question to the effect of "do you think it would be worthwhile for Canada to stay after 2011?"
How is Gates going to answer that? "No, it wouldn't be worthwhile, they suck?" Of course he's going to say it would be worthwhile, but I think he also said he understands we've done more than our share.
So rather than US pressure to stay, I think this story is more the media asking a question to create a controversy they can then cover.
We media are crafty that way.
Oh, and Wilson, remember that the Harper government declined to return the surplus funds when they came into government, and decided to continue to fight the court case, so it would seem clear the Conservatives agreed with the position of the previous Liberal government on this issue. So it's nigh impossible for you to spin this one for partisan ends.
However, by all means, don't let me stop you from trying anyways.
Why SHOULD a Conservative government try to budget in
a $54Billion repayment the previous Liberal government used to post surplus'?
Iggy was right, someone cooked the books, but it wasn't this government?
Wilson,
Because its the gov. and if anyone is obliged to do it, it would be them?
Since when has the guy ever given the impression he's going to do anything but run as far to the right as he can?
Good for him if he doesn't, of course, but it wasn't Rae or Leblanc's various proxies you have been talking about abandoning progressives to the NDP and Greens.
(apologies, that should have been "who have been")
It's interesting, through. Obama has been catching flack for his appointments being insufficiently progressive and for possibly selling progressive down the river; and yet here's a case of someone pretty openly saying that that's exactly what he intends to do.
One wonders what a hypothetical Canadian Kos would say to that.
but Iggy is for the Afghanistan intervention, he believes in "robust interventionalism". He doesn't really want to pull out the troops and all you Obama loving Liberals are gonna be pissed when the Big O comes seeking his support.
Next Iggy will telling all the Liberal women folks the gun registry was a mistake, that Marc Lepine's real name was Gamil Gharbi and what's a little torture among intellectuals & Liberals?
The great news about a blowhard like Iggy is that he has written so much in his career as a "Liberal intellectual".
So much to choose from.
Fish, barrel, shoot.
Oh, Fredneck...you're so clever.
Actually Fred, that's your foot.
Post a Comment