quote:

---

Bloc Québécois Leader Gilles Duceppe vowed Thursday — in the wake of the deaths of three Quebec-based soldiers this week — to bring down the Conservative government if it does not commit to a full troop withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2009.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joshua Kubinec:

A real leader would be calling for immediate withdrawal...

---

Yes, but this is an excellent development - because it shows the intense pressure the Bloc has been facing since Duceppe began his cowardly vacillation on the issue - pressure from the far more consistent NDP stand, and most important, pressure from his own constituents in Québec.

Liberals won't support Bloc call to bring down Tories over Afghanistan: Dion

Liberal Leader Stephane Dion says he won't support the Bloc Quebecois in bringing down the federal government over Canada's role in Afghanistan.(CP PHOTO/Tom Hanson)
OTTAWA (CP) - Liberal Leader Stephane Dion says he won't support the Bloc Quebecois in bringing down the federal government over Canada's role in Afghanistan.

Bloc Quebecois Leader Gilles Duceppe says he's ready to bring down Prime Minister Stephen Harper's Conservative government this fall if there's no firm commitment to withdraw Canadian troops from Afghanistan by February 2009.

Dion says he wants the same thing, but he wants the commitment now, not in the fall.

And he adds he won't commit to bringing down the Tories without seeing what the prime minister includes in a throne speech expected this fall.

Dion says he's not in the business of making "threats."

A Quebec military base is grieving after the deaths of two of its soldiers in Afghanistan.

The pair from Valcartier were killed by a roadside bomb on Wednesday, the same day the body of another Quebecer, Pte. Simon Longtin, was brought back to Canada.

quote:

---

Canada is a country that honours its commitments, but the time has come for our NATO allies to take their turn as part of a normal rotation of troops. NATO’s Secretary General has asked Canada to extend the mission in Kandahar and we must be clear about our answer. The Prime Minister must explain to our allies that Canada’s deadline of February 2009 is final to allow NATO to plan for our replacement.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by fellowtraveller:
Maybe Gilles should contact the Taliban and broker a deal to power share and bring this war to an end. Such an initiative would really raise his profile domestically.

---

quote:

---

Maybe Gilles should contact the Taliban and broker a deal to power share and bring this war to an end. Such an initiative would really raise his profile domestically.

---

quote:

---

He can only do that in the context of an independent Québec. Are you serious about your suggestion? It's quite an interesting notion, using the Afghanistan war to clinch a "yes" vote in a referendum. I see where you're going with this, but I really have my doubts. I'm still a federalist, although I agree with you, sometimes it hurts.

---

quote:

---

Now wouldnt that require a merger with Taliban Jack?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:

Yes, but this is an excellent development - because it shows the intense pressure the Bloc has been facing since Duceppe began his cowardly vacillation on the issue - pressure from the far more consistent NDP stand, and most important, pressure from his own constituents in Québec.

I'd love to see as many parties as possible fighting over which one is more serious about getting out of Afghanistan. It can only solidify our chances of actually ending Canada's dirty war.

---

I completely agree that this is forward progress, but I'm not interested in half the glass, I want the whole thing!

but have no doubt, though the recent soldiers' deaths may have forced his soft and fleshy hand, this is all about the by-elections.

immediately, the position shift does three things:

1. it gets the bloc all over the anti-war issue that muclair and jacko have been trying to own. watch as the separatist sympathisers in the media take their cue; before long, it'll be bloc-heads on t.v. and newspapers reporting on the bloc's position, creating a quebec v. canada issue on the war (via the proxy bloc v. government issue) upon which the bloc can campaign.

2. it creates a wedge issue to hit the cpc with in the two rural by-elections. very convenient, considering that there's not a whole heck of a lot else to hit them with (given the bloc's recent capitulations and disarray).

3. it brings the separatist party into line with the feelings of its hardest core militants. i'm sure marois said something to grouchy about this during their recent retreat.

all in all, this move suggests that they're really feeling the heat - from the militants, from the dippers, from the cpc and probably even from dion a little.

quote:

---

Dion says he wants the same thing, but he wants the commitment now, not in the fall.

And he adds he won't commit to bringing down the Tories without seeing what the prime minister includes in a throne speech expected this fall.

---

I don't know if this is the reporter, or Liberal bafflegab, but I don't know what is being said.

I think Duceppe is calling for a complete withdrawl of the troops in Feb 2009. Correct?

That would seem to be something the Liberals could not support, because they have just called for an end to the current mission, not a complete withdrawl, Correct?

When Dion says "he wants the same thing" he means he wants you to think he is calling for the same thing. So that statement means nothing.

Then he says he wants the commitment [leaving aside which commitment he is really talking about] now not, the fall.

But he is talking abou not bringing the government down until the Fall.

And, I bet Layton still gets tagged for opportunism!

Come on - how principled are these two (Duceppe and Dion)? Layton, the NDP caucus, and the party membership all took a clear position on the Afghanistan mission over a year ago. They have been consistent and principled throughout. In that time, the Bloc and Libs have held how many conflicting positions?

quote:

---

Originally posted by NDPundit:
So, Dion and Duceppe come out the day after two Quebec soldiers are killed and start talking tough against the mission and sabre-rattling about the government.

And, I bet Layton still gets tagged for opportunism!

Come on - how principled are these two (Duceppe and Dion)? Layton, the NDP caucus, and the party membership all took a clear position on the Afghanistan mission over a year ago. They have been consistent and principled throughout. In that time, the Bloc and Libs have held how many conflicting positions?

Those who've watched Liberals for decades, especially Liberals in opposition, should not be surprised. But, the Bloc is really embarrassing itself.

---

Be careful where your stepping... Bullshit is everywhere.

Seriously though, this isn't really going to be seen as opportunism, so much as it's going to be seen as the lost flock returning home.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joshua Kubinec:

Seriously though, this isn't really going to be seen as opportunism, so much as it's going to be seen as the lost flock returning home.

---

Your scenario is much more likely, Joshua.

Anyway, it's the right move on the Bloc's part for damage control purposes, whether it works or not. The alternative is just to sink further into the CPC/Liberal morass.

When confronted by a journalist about the fact that Jack Layton and the NDP want an immediate Canadian withdrawal from Afghanistan, Duceppe accused Layton of "playing politics with the death of Canadian soldiers"!!!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:

Can someone please remind me of why we are all supposed to have a soft spot in our hearts for a worthless piece of shit like Gilles Duceppe???

---

Careful, Stock, my sources tell me Gilles is mooting a leap to the NDP.

quote:

---

unionist wrote:

And from the non-partisan viewpoint of the people of Québec and Canada, the more anti-war talk there is (even if it's opportunistic and hypocritical and half-measures), the better - compared to the alternative.

---

I agree that the more anti-war talk there is, the better, but I wonder if Duceppe and Dion aren't just signaling Harper that they want a 'fig leaf' sentence inserted into the throne speech to cover the shame of their shared support for the status quo policy of ongoing war.

If the Cons take the hint, one or both of the Libs/BQ could vote to support the government and its current war policy, while claiming that they've extracted a serious concession from Harper in his Throne Speech.

Meanwhile, all Harper would have to do would be to find some appropriately ambiguous language codifying his already stated position of 'no extension beyond Feb 2009 without a parliamentary consensus.'

In fact, this news story about Duceppe and Dion may be nothing more than their response to Harper's earlier signal.

One final point, regarding the Liberal position on Stephen Harper's government: here's Stephane Dion, from his victory speech at the Liberal leadership convention:

quote:

---

"Stephen, if you're listening, we are counting the days until the next election."

---

And here's the same Stephane Dion, eight months later, from the CTV story reporting on his criticism of Harper's Afghanistan position:

quote:

---

"Everybody knows there's a possibility of a ... confidence vote where the government can be defeated," he told reporters at a news conference Thursday. "I'm not saying today that's what I want."

---

Apparently the days until an election are no longer being counted with eagerness by Stephane Dion.

Since his leadership victory in December, then, Stephane Dion seems to have grown a spine made of marshmallow, as measured by his own rhetoric: what else explains his refusal to challenge Harper and his government on the most crucial issue of the moment?

And yet columnist Lawrence Martin can still write nonsense like this in the pages of today's Globe & Mail:

quote:

---

But what has always made him [Dion] unexpectedly successful are his internal qualities: Integrity. Unbending resolve. Power of intellect. Depth of character.

---

On Afghanistan, among several other issues that could be mentioned, Stephane Dion has shown the 'unbending resolve' of a weathervane, and the 'power of intellect' to match, frankly.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but Stephane Dion's 'Internal qualities' are being measured by every single, countable day he effectively supports Stephen Harper's continuation of Liberal policy on Afghanistan and much else.

And that measurement leaves him wanting, by far.

[ 24 August 2007: Message edited by: sgm ]

[ 24 August 2007: Message edited by: Briguy ]

But it is looking like there is quite a bit less here than meets the eye- as was and is the case with the Liberal reposition. And that may limit what comes of this.

quote:

---

Gilles Duceppe said he will support an eventual Speech from the Throne this fall only if it includes an end date for the current combat mission.

---

Which is exactly what the faux Liberal motion in the House was about.

I don't think it can even be said that Duceppe is deflecting pressure to the Liberals- he's joining them behind the wall.

As sgm said, he's just serving notice to Harper that there will have to be a fig leaf for them to keep propping up the government.

I expect Duceppe and Dion will stay there hiding behind the wall- shuffling out at times like yesterday to faux differentiate themselves from the government.

From where I'm sitting, Harper is in a position where he is about to get some serious reprieve on the Afghanistan position, while the NDP is about to come to a point where some serious fractures amongst grass roots supporters and the federal caucus could potentially arise.

The reason is simple. Everyone knows that Canada is going to cope out and weasel their way into a cushy job to the south while some other patsies are going to be sent down to make their sacrifices to the altar of American imperialism.

At this point, Canada will effectively begin what the NDP politicians had always asked for in Afghanistan: Reconstruction and aid work.

This is going to leave a lot of those NDP MPs who had been talking about the things I just mentioned in a very vulnerable position because their arguments were based (at least if my memory serves me right) on the need to "rebuild" Afghanistan.

Will they then be satisfied with the position the Canadian government has taken, or will they continue to do the right thing and push for our country to take their leave of service to the American empire?

I think we're going to have a lot of people showing their resolve on the anti war front in the coming months, so I think that it would be wise for all of us who desire to rid ourselves of a place within the empire to be prepared for what is coming down the pipes.

[ 24 August 2007: Message edited by: Joshua Kubinec ]

IE, if the NDP manages to manouver the Liberals into making a clearer choice then the shit will hit the fan in the Liberal Party. A great deal of the Caucus is only willing to stand against the mission where they are now.

While there is a difference such as you poin to within the NDP- there really isn't any reason for it to come out. The reasons for that are somewhat more esoteric than I want to get into.

For one thing- the 'rebuilding mission' more in line with Canadians notions of 'peacekeeping' is a delusional fantasy in Afghanistan.

I don't know how much Jack Layton and others think such a potential role really exists, and how much is widhful thinking [mouthing the words allows them to be suuportive of the military as an institution, etc].

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joshua Kubinec:
Linky Linky

A real leader would be calling for immediate withdrawal...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by BitWhys:

a real leader would respect the democratic process

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joshua Kubinec:

Explain.

---