Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Iran....Mali Next?

Except that Mulcairs party will have the opportunity to make each Canadian of voting age exactly equal to one vote at the ballot box every four years.

Which of your two corrupt old line parties in Ottawa supports electoral reform toward a fair voting system besides neither.

FPTP was adequate when there were only Whigs and Tories to vote for. Things have changed since that era just before electricity was invented, and when FPTP was considered a fair electoral system favouring landed aristocracies, colonialist agendas and the like.

A lot has changed since then, though. Women, indigenous people and those of us owning no land can vote now. Its legal even.

I know conservatives are generally intolerant of change among other things, but we cant remain stuck in the 19th century forever. For the rest of us with higher aspirations for the country and advanced democracy, remaining stuck in the Napoleonic era would be hellish.

kropotkin1951 wrote:

I hope you are right. 

I wil note that no NDP government after tasting the forbidden fruit of a FPTP phoney majority have been able or willing to chop down the FPTP tree.

You just wanna see the NDP wiped out in the prairies altogther. We know.

Which of the Whigs or Tories in Otttawa support electoral reform besides neither party. Ièll give you three guesses, and the first two dont count. wink

They had STV in Alberta and Manitoba. Didnt fly for very long.

The NDP has fair voting covered nationally and in Canadas largest province.

Andrea Horwath said: "If we were to form a government, we would start having that conversation again," she told Gail O'Gorman. "The last conversation, it was scaremongering, and nobody understands it."

Anyway I can see youre more interested in spewing your usual venom against the NDP than discussing real issues. Discussing the real Canada is not your style I find

Imperialism thrives in countries with both PR and FPTP so to me it seems logical that it is not a big factor in determining foreign policy. Other factors seem to far outweigh the effect of the voting system. 

In the meantime all the parties that are capable of forming the next government of this country support the imperial projects that are being rolled out by Canada's NATO allies.

This country has been quite a bit further to political right than very many OEDC capitalist countries. It doesn't have to be this way. Canada could easily be in the top five most competitive economies in the world. We don't have to be run by bankers and bond salesman. Not if we don't want to be, and that is what frightens them - to know that Canadians don't really need to continue nourishing the parasitic appendage known as the financial sector.

As for the NATO terror, it's been this way since WW II with the stay behind armies and supporting terrorism around the world. The U.S.A. was born of terror campaigns since the sons of liberty. And the Brits and French,  Germans, Belgians etc are pursuing modern day colonialism in Africa, Middle East and expanding deep into Central Asia.

Economist Michael Hudson says that we won't be seeing too many Vietnam style conflicts anymore. Too expensive. Imperialists prefer aerial bombing campaigns to land wars as a result. They are trying to revive the cold war glory with surrounding Russia and China militarily. They want China and Russia and India to continue funding U.S. military buildups around their own countries through a system of petro dollar recycling in place since the 1970s, but it doesn't appear feasible in the long run. The vicious empire is running out of time and credibility. They know that their high tech militaries can not win against even the most desperately poor and backwards nations of people, like Afghans. What they will continue doing is funding and supporting right wing extremists and militant Islam as a way of destabilizing countries they are interested in corrupting, indebting, and controlling by way of marauding international capital. They are reduced to bluffing and bullying small and defenseless nations to gain street cred that is hanging by a thread today.

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Here is a map of the region.  I am not sure that air power will be much good particularly in the sparsely populated north. In Libya they had an army to bomb not an agile guerrilla force.

Someone, I think it was Former Soldier, posted an article describing how imperialism`s military goals are not always to bomb a country into submission for the purpose of invasion, occupying and takeover. And I`ve read it elsewhere that by aerial bombing the goal is oftentimes simply to destroy valuable infrastructure as a way of retarding progress. It`s a strategy of the newer disaster capitalism and wiping the slate clean. Regime-friendly corporations winning lucrative taxpayer-funded contracts to rebuild Iraq without legitimate bids are an example. Corporate welfare capitalism and closed economy Keynesian-militarism has many faces. They basically copied Nazi Germany`s model for Keynesian-militarism and globalized it.

Guerillas and anyone else they can recruit to play the role of enemies are part of the plan since the Sovs stabbed them in the backs and ceded the cold war by 1989. They are still fighting "Al Qaeda" (who were formerly rabidly anticommunist "freedom fighters" and heroic warriors for Allah as recently as 1992) while, and at the same time, funding and arming the same invisible army of darkness which doth not exist. Charade they are. Conspiracy theory is just code for the unspeakable truth, and their lapdog newz media play right along.

To sum it up, this is colder war baloney. The NDP didnt have the manpower or resources to counter the right wing propaganda then, and they still don't. That is partly to mostly why they voted to disallow military flights over Libya which the Gladio Gang promptly violated themselves with airstrikes on defenseless women and children and valuable infrastructure. The NDP's vote meant absolutely nothing to NATO terrorists who would have done what they did regardless.

I actually received an email reply from Jack stating that the NDP would not be supporting long-term military occupation of Libya. Since formation of the UN and Nuremberg trials, the international community is obligated to condemn any and all reports of countries attacking their own people regardless of how accurate the reports are. Moscow and beijing have since called them liars and perps of false flag terror. Like I said before, the Gladio Gang is overextended on their foreign relations capital with these blatant military aggressions since arming/funding the Mujahideen and drug barons in Afghanistan and bombing Yugoslavia to smithereens after deliberately transforming Bosnia into a hangout for Qaeda and militant Islam.

NDPP wrote:

No matter how much some here may wish to decouple the NDP from their unanimous endorsement of  NATO's  'No Fly Zone' slaoughterfest, the contention that the result was somehow not known by all the cognoscenti is unsupportable. Furthermore, there was never any outrage or regret expressed by the ndp warparty afterwards, but hearty, ringing praise for our military's participation. Please stop trying to convince us they didn't know what they were up to. They did. And did it anyway. Mali is the same.

What if it is 1997, and there are reports of a genocide in progress in the Congo? Are you going to speak out against it  or sit idly by for months and wait for official confirmation?

The NDP can't stand up in Parliament and start talking about Gladio terrorism or western support for proxy armies or any of the cold war history as evidence that it is probably ongoing.

The Mujahideen were such good guys, remember? That's just some of what Canadiana and Americans were propagandized into believing by lapdog newz media over the years. Neither you, nor the NDP, nor a perfect party standing on principles shared by some 10% of the voting public would win that propaganda battle.

Christ, we don't even have a consensus on who perp'd 9/11 never mind the ongoing NATO Gladios. You can be sure that some babblers still don't believe the U.S.-led NATO could possibly be so evil as to murder 3000 white people on 9/11/01. How would you possibly believe that you could convince even a phony majority of Canadians of the cold truth about NATO's ongoing terror campaigns around the world? Here is a hint: WHen they tell you it's conspiracy theory, they will not understand that conspiracy is code for the unspeakable truth.

If you are like very many on the left who still believe Elvis bin Laden orchestrated 9/11, then it will surely be just a matter of time before 19 or so desperately poor Malians and Libyans will travel to America to gain revenge on 3000 white people in a trade tower in some bizarre act of "revenge." I can see it all now, ruthless "Qaeda"  mercenaries and killers for hire trained by the US Military and British SAS since the 1980s,  band together to fight for social justice  against their own long-time employers. Because rabid anti-communists and murderous opportunists will always bite the hand that feeds them before switching allegiance to social democratic values. Yeah right. You won't see any political party including Marxists or even the precious Quebec Solidaire telling it like it is and taking on the Gladio Gang and their globalized executive death squads. And I'm sorry but you won't see the Gladio Gang falling on their swords the same as youre demanding that the NDP do.  Not soon. This is just an online forum not the halls of electoral power - their halls of power.

"It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen."

There's little difference between this and the grocery store security guard, or the mall cop. In this case, the protection of corporate assets is remunerated through taxation and program spending instead of being passed along to the consumer as inflation, and they're also likely applying slightly different rules of engagement in Mali than what we'd normally encounter here at the grocery store. Once all the idealism is stripped away to its naked essence, this is what police and military forces are in Canada and elsewhere, mercenaries for capitalism. In this country we have the misfortune of there being quite a broad representation of anti-imperialist predicates, with no corresponding mouth at the federal political level through which their concerns might be sounded from. We live in a country where the cop, the soldier, the special operations assaulter, the politician, and the media each accept in turn a series of tasks to accomplish within an overarching capitalist framework. The only visible difference is in the wide assortment of uniforms and accoutrements they all come with, such as a microphones, teleprompters, guns, warplanes, public relations, etc.

These are not 'foreign' matters, because the corrupted hearts and minds capable of such decisions live among us.

bravo to Mulcair,

funny watching, on the one hand, the Malian crowds cheer as troops entered Timbuktou yesterday and all the long faces above, here in North America ...

No long faces here.  My assessment indicates there is quite enough evidence on record to remove even the thickest scales from the eyes of the truly anti-imperialist elements within the NDP, if any still remain, and that those who continue in their support for this party are likely, and have been all along, to set sail aboard any old bucket that will float their own ambitions, at any cost.

DaveW might not believe this is an imperialist mission. Does that mean he can't take a supportive stance? Not that I agree with it, however.

Yes, I remember the discussions here on Libya, and how many of the arguments regarding the western powers, the insurgents and Khadaffi all seemed to fade to black and white.

For that matter, I also remember similar arguments regarding the motives of supporters of the Arab Spring which were rightly called as bullshit on this site. So the line on what is and is not imperialist isn't all that clear.

I don't know all that much about this situation, but my gut says our involvement, and that of the Europeans is not a good thing, and likely being done primarily for corporate and western political interests. On the other hand, I can appreciate that there are many on the ground there who have a very different perspective, and I'm glad that at least DaveW mentioned it.

Just as the real world is not black and white, complex political and social systems can't just up and turn on a dime. Or at the very least, when they are forced to do so there is often way more misery and suffering as a result.

So sorry, I don't pretend to have the single right answer to this one. But I don't see anything wrong with pointing out some of the differences in the colours we are seeing.

6079_Smith_W wrote:

Yes, I remember the discussions here on Libya, and how many of the arguments regarding the western powers, the insurgents and Khadaffi all seemed to fade to black and white.

For that matter, I also remember similar arguments regarding the motives of supporters of the Arab Spring which were rightly called as bullshit on this site. So the line on what is and is not imperialist isn't all that clear.

I don't know all that much about this situation, but my gut says our involvement, and that of the Europeans is not a good thing, and likely being done primarily for corporate and western political interests. On the other hand, I can appreciate that there are many on the ground there who have a very different perspective, and I'm glad that at least DaveW mentioned it.

Just as the real world is not black and white, complex political and social systems can't just up and turn on a dime. Or at the very least, when they are forced to do so there is often way more misery and suffering as a result.

So sorry, I don't pretend to have the single right answer to this one. But I don't see anything wrong with pointing out some of the differences in the colours we are seeing.

Ah yes, we White Christian Civilized Westerners must calmly debate every situation in the world, because it's all so confusing and complicated. And let's hear from "those on the ground" (code word for the soldier boys, whose opinion we should follow, not the other way around).

Then, when our debate is over, we invade. Or not. But make no mistake. It's our decision. And sending troops and equipment to bomb and kill isn't a matter of "black and white". There are nuances so deep that the deepest pile of shit will pale, ashamed, in comparison.

It's shit like post #83 which can justify any monstrous crime. It's how they justified, to themselves, sending tens of thousands of Canadian youth to die fighting against the Kaiser. It's not black and white. Every case is different, to be judged on its merits. Oh... and we can condemn the monstrosities of the past, without feeling the slightest compunction to point the finger at our war crimes of the present. That's the White Christian Civilized way.

And Unionist. I'm not the one arguing that the real issue here is the fortunes of the NDP, speaking of civilized westerners and their motives.

Unionist, I said none of those things, particularly that shit about growing up. On the other hand, the CIA thing was floated, if you care to look back.

And your first statement is a perfect example of that black and white thing I was talking about. Fact is, I agree with you on the basic question.

(edit)

In fact, I answered it already.

On the other hand, I can understand that some people over there were glad to see some intervention. So, while not excusing it, I think it is entirely in order to acknowledge that. Better than pretending it didn't happen.

*shakes head*

Sorry.... I don't agree that WE must troop off in a gang and be of one mind about this any more than we must be in absolute conformity about anything.

At least I'm not jumping on that fucking bandwagon.

Can we back off a bit? I am just saying that if the rest of us can be allowed all this high rhetoric I don't think DaveW was all that out of line. Again... I'm glad he said it.

The CIA and Gladio helper nations are the ones floating "Al Qaeda in Mali" not any of us. Get it straight.

If you people can't deal with the ruse that the invisible army of darkness is there in Mali and representing a threat to "peace and democracy", how do you expect the NDP to counter the ultra right wing propaganda in Parliament? Speak up now or forever hold your peace. Forget about taking mere potshots at Mulcair and the NDP - this is your chance to shine.

"crickets"

Unionist wrote:

Is there no room to tell Mulcair to take the same stand on Mali that we took (5 years late) on Afghanistan? Maybe remind him that even after all the Taliban Jack crap, the NDP still miraculously managed to become official opposition? Or would that be a waste of breath?

At first glance that appears to be a good point.  And if you remember all people could talk about, no thanks to lapdog newz media and the Harpers,  was Jack advocating talking to the Taliban. Period. The truth was that Jack was demanding they talk not only to the Taliban but to ALL of the democratically elected opposition in Afghanistan not just the Taliban representing a mere one-fifth of the quote insurgency.

But this time it is not the Taliban in Mali - it is that invisible army of darkness, that one which all of us knows without saying, does not exist. The Gladio Gang are looking like heroes for helping Malians get rid of a bunch of mercenaries and extremists funded and armed by U.S. taxpayers, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan etc.

Quote:

I'm not very hopeful. They horsewhipped a whole caucus of new enthusiastic MPs into supporting war crimes in Libya.

The NDP supported a no-fly zone over Libya. That was all. You can conflate that into the NDP supporting war crimes all you want, but proving it is another thing altogether. The NDP's support for a no-fly zone over Libya came at a time when the NDP's leader was dying of cancer, and none of us knew then just what was happening in Libya. lapdog newz media certainly were't saying anything about the Coming Oil War with "Al Qa'eda" then.

It was a gallant effort, Unionist. But I think our head vicious toadies on the government side would have a field day explaining to you how Al Qaeda are a global terrorist threat cut from the same cloth as them who orchestrated 9/11. They hate Americans and all infidels for their many freedoms, remember?