cut and run from cut and run

So it turns out that if you use Bush-like rhetoric people start to believe that you also share in his goals, aims and methods. And, given the president’s popularity is somewhere in the 20’s or 30’s in America, he’s almost certainly the most unpopular person in the world for Canadians.

Little wonder that Canadian support for the Afghan conflict has waned.

This is a serious problem, because contrary to what the NDP would have you believe, this is an important mission, one that benefits from the skills and experience a country like Canada brings to the table. Changing the rhetoric will be a good start, but the real question remains, are we prepared to tell the Americans how the mission should be run? Will we imprint a Canadian approach on the mission?

2 thoughts on “cut and run from cut and run

  1. Canadian Tar Heel

    So it turns out that if you use Bush-like rhetoric people start to believe that you also share in his goals, aims and methods.

    Euf. The rhetoric need only have the faintest of similarities for folks to paint an individual with the Bush/neo-con brush. Ask anyone involved in the Iggy race for the Lib leardership. The fact that one’s world-view significantly differs matters little. The tar sticks as the substance of the debate goes out the window.

    … but the real question remains, are we prepared to tell the Americans how the mission should be run?

    So true. Chayes notes that the US would do well to listen to its allies, if it’s not too late (NYT).

    But I wonder … even if the Americans are ready to listen and take some direction, are other NATO members willing to step up? The bloggers at FP Passport don’t seem very optimistic. Nor do I.

    Reply
  2. Canadian Tar Heel

    So it turns out that if you use Bush-like rhetoric people start to believe that you also share in his goals, aims and methods.Euf. The rhetoric need only have the faintest of similarities for folks to paint an individual with the Bush/neo-con brush. Ask anyone involved in the Iggy race for the Lib leardership. The fact that one’s world-view significantly differs matters little. The tar sticks as the substance of the debate goes out the window. … but the real question remains, are we prepared to tell the Americans how the mission should be run?So true. Chayes notes that the US would do well to listen to its allies, if it’s not too late (NYT). But I wonder … even if the Americans are ready to listen and take some direction, are other NATO members willing to step up? The bloggers at FP Passport don’t seem very optimistic. Nor do I.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.