Saturday, October 4, 2008

Harper: Iraq War Was a MIstake.

It is nice to know that unlike Bush Harper thinks the Iraq war was a mistake now. At the time it was started however he was of a different mind and a gung-ho supporter of Bush and Canada sending troops. However no one in this discussion notices that Canada actually helped quite a bit in the Iraq war sending several generals and also our now chief of defence Lt. General Walter Natynczyk who was even awarded a medal by the Canadian government for his service in Iraq. Everyone forgets that for some unknown reason. I wonder if Natynczyk thinks the Iraq war was a mistake. Someone should ask him.
Lieutenant General Walter Natynczyk is now our vice Chief of Defence Staff. Trained by the US worked for the US in a war we opposed and he went there while a Canadian govt. opposed to the Iraq war was in power. Subsequently he was rewarded with a medal for his valiant service for US imperialism. In Iraq Natynczyk was a deputy commanding general of the multi-national forces not exactly a minor role. Perhaps the US suggested to our govt. that he should be recognised for his service.



Iraq war a mistake, Harper admits

OTTAWA — Stephen Harper admitted Thursday that the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq was a mistake - one that Canadian troops would have been plunged into had he been prime minister in 2003.
The grudging admission came during the second televised leaders debate as the five leaders discussed the Canadian mission in Afghanistan.
Bloc Quebecois Leader Gilles Duceppe needled Harper about the embarrassing revelation that whole sections of a speech about the Iraq war, delivered by Harper as opposition leader in 2003, were lifted almost word for word from a speech delivered two days earlier by Australia's prime minister at the time, John Howard.
A Conservative speechwriter resigned Tuesday after taking the blame for plagiarizing Howard's speech.
Duceppe said the Afghan mission has proved longer and more dangerous than anticipated because U.S. President George W. Bush diverted American troops to Iraq.
"If the situation is so tough in Afghanistan, certainly a large part of that is because of the error made by George Bush by going in Iraq," he said to Harper.
"Do you realize today that you were making a huge error by supporting Bush and Australia ... and would you make the same decision today as you were proposing Canada to do in 2003?"
The prime minister initially tried to dodge the question.
"I've made it very clear Canada is not going to Iraq. Obviously you know the answer to that question," he said.
But Duceppe continued to badger him as Harper tried to steer the discussion back to Afghanistan: "This is not the question I asked. . . I want to hear it. Do you admit it was an error of George Bush and you made the same error?"
Harper finally answered: "It was absolutely an error. It's obviously clear the evaluation of weapons of mass destruction proved not to be correct. That's absolutely true and that's why we're not sending anybody to Iraq."
Green Leader Elizabeth May shot back: "We're only not sending anyone to Iraq because you weren't prime minister at the time."
Harper's admission was in stark contrast to the speech he gave in the House of Commons - much of it cribbed from Howard - on the first full day of the Iraq invasion in March 2003.
"Alliances are a two-way process," he said at the time.
"We should not leave it to the United States to do all the heavy lifting just because it is the world's only superpower."
Harper urged Canada to join Bush's "coalition of the willing" in Iraq, relying heavily on American assertions that Iraqi strongman Saddam Hussein had stockpiled weapons of mass destruction.
"As the possession of weapons of mass destruction spreads, the danger of such weapons coming into the hands of terrorist groups will multiply, particularly given in this case the shameless association of Iraq with rogue non-state organizations," he argued.
"That is the ultimate nightmare which the world must take decisive and effective steps to prevent. Possession of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons by terrorists would constitute a direct, undeniable and lethal threat to the world, including to Canada and its people."
Harper was not so verbose on Thursday.
He had little to say beyond his admission that he and Bush were mistaken. Asked about it after the debate, Harper immediately changed the subject.

1 comment:

zigi said...

the first problem, with all that, is, of course, the use of the term "War", when it comes to Iraq

Iraq never WAS a "War" - that was B.S. terminology, employed at the time - and still being used - to instill maximum support FOR the illegal, immoral military adventure

& secondly, Mr. Harper's calling it a "mistake" is a LIE, since the invasion, and ongoing Occupation of Iraq was fully intended! http://bit.ly/bush_planned_iraq_attack_before_he_was_Pres

Harper is merely hiding that fact

it's all here http://www.heavendwellers.com/hd_neocon_imperialisim_or_apocalypse_now.htm

- google " PNAC Iraq " to learn more... (here's the latest: http://bit.ly/PNAC_activist_downplays_role

and to see where that "project" is today, there's this:

http://bit.ly/Bush_policy_alive_n_well

and M. Ignatieff doesn't fare much better at all, since he practically echoes the PNAC doctrine, in this 2003 NYT article, on Iraq:

http://bit.ly/ignatieff_pre_Iraq

Mr. Ignatieff recently called British MP George Galloway "a clown", after he'd been denied entry to Canada by Stephen Harper,et al, who were suggesting that, far more than being "a clown", Mr. Galloway was "supporting terror"...

Is Galloway guilty of "supporting terror"? Or is that just another device, employed to stifle George Galloway's honest and open dialogue, re: increased U.S. mil. activity in
Afghanistan, and NATO's (Canada's so-called "mission" there?

Is Galloway "a clown"?

Or is that just Iggy's way of handlily dismissing any credibility he might have, in the minds of Canadians, before his message could hit home here?

I'm sure it's the latter. Iggy and Harper are both lying, at both ends of the spectrum.

And don't be fooled by Obama's pronouncements that he's "pulling out" of Iraq.

THAT ain't gonna happen for generations - if ever....

Bush did say he would "LOCK IN" the U.S., to Iraq, and that appears to have been effectively ensured. http://bit.ly/forget_US_exitting_Iraq

They're lying folks, and anyone who claims that the U.S. invasion of Iraq constituted "War" OR that the invasion, undertaken by Bush, was a "mistake", is either clued-out or complicit