The first speaker, Robert Fowler, began by saying he had strong words. (And he was right -- I try to reproduce them as best I can without comment).
He said the Liberal Party has lost its way in foreign policy. Liberals don't stand for much in the way of principle and are focussed solely on power. Liberals are prepared to embrace an infinite array of special interests. The Liberal Party is not the Liberal Party of the past. Liberals have yet to present a vision of where they stand and what they stand for.
Canada's engagement with Africa is not an unhappy one. But our heritage is being squandered. Africa is being ignored. The current government has turned away from Africa.
Canada has not contributed much internationally in the last few years. Canada has turned inward and adopted a "me first" attitude. As of February 2010 Canada ranks very low (57th) in UN peacekeeping -- just behind Uganda. Our role in Afghanistan is incoherent and we will not prevail against the Taliban. The role in Afghanistan is not peacekeeping. None of Canada's vital interests are engaged in Afghanistan and Canada should leave.
Where is Canada's vision in the world stage? What about leadership? Where are Canadians?
Non-peace in the middle east is causing turmoil around the world. Any reference to this leads to claims of anti-Semitism. Canadian politicians have sold out our position to lock up the Jewish vote. Canada's reckless middle eastern policy has caused endless problem. There must be a two state solution with Jerusalem as the capital to each. Israel right or wrong is consistent with Liberals supporting Tamil Tigers or Shikh terrorists. It is domestic politics taking over foreign policy. Liberals must stop pandering to ethnic extremists.
Canadian aid to Africa, and aid generally, is low. Canada ranks 16th of 22 of developed countries foreign aid. OECD average levels are not being met and this failure comes from both Liberal and Conservative governments. Islamic radicals are a growing menace in Nigeria, Somalia and every north African country.
Unless we assist the African nations now they will fall under the sway of radical Islam. We cannot afford to ignore Africa -- it will become the next Afghanistan if we do. Canada's investment in and trade with Africa is healthy. But absent aid and development that will achieve little.
8 comments:
Just because they are invited to speak at a Liberal fundraiser does not mean you cannot challenge their statements.
Fowler was never anything more than a renegade backbencher for the Liberals who granted did have passion for African aid.No amount of aid will ever be enough for him.
His view that Canada has turned "inward" is insulting.There has been a financial crisis in every democracy on Earth and all of us are trying to fix it.That does take some energy.
We are 57th on peacekeeping just behind Uganda? Nonsense!
A little rich, when it was the LPC that drained our military of funding,
and then threw them into a war we were ill prepared for,
emotionally, strategically and financially.
Now saying we must do more, when the military is stretched to the max....while criticizing the Harper government for a deficit which has a large military spending component.
Anon, I don´t agree with everything he said -- I am just reporting what he said. And it was very harsh -- and much against the Party.
I understand that James. It was not directed at you personally(although I recognize that it seemed that way). He at least should be allowed to finish his speech before he is challenged.
I have however noticed that virtually all Libs. have been unwilling to challenge the speakers going back to Friday morning.It is like suddenly the Lib. party has erased all of its philosophies and members are waiting for someone to tell them what to think or believe.
Anon, Fowler spoke the truth. Your dismissal of him as a "renegade backbencher" is curious. Care to elaborate on that? Fowler was foreign affairs advisor to three prime ministers and served as our country's ambassador twice or three times. Just how does that translate into renegade backbencher?
His view is "insulting"? To whom? To you? It isn't insulting to me and I don't find it insulting to my country.
If you dispute the assertion that Canada is currently 57th on peacekeeping, back it up. Just where do we stand? Just because you may not like this assessment, which I'm sure you find insulting, that doesn't make it "nonsense."
Fowler is right. The Liberal Party of today is not the Liberal Party of Laurier, Pearson and Trudeau. A lot of progressives have left the party precisely because of that. We don't believe Canada needs two conservative parties, even if one is conservative-lite.
Wilson, you can't absolve Harper's deficit on the strength of military spending. That's a crock. The LPC did cut military spending, just as it cut almost every other source of spending, when that was needed to pull Canada back from the brink of insolvency where it stood when Mulroney was finished with it. That was a tough and painful struggle and everyone had to sacrifice, the military included. Only a fool would find that offensive.
Fowler wants to relive the good old days of the 70's and Canada's role as a peacekeeper.
Too bad that the need is for Peacemaking.
Fowler dreams of a time when he envisioned thing were much better - too bad they weren't as good as he thinks they were.
The world has moved on from the glory days that Fowler wants to re-claim.
new problems need new solutions, not the tired old policies of yesteryear.
Fowler is yesterday's diplomat.
Fowler wants us to abandon Afghanistan, the same day Obama wants to win.
I'll bet Fowler would have advised Bush against the surge.
I am not a Jew, but I am damn proud of Harper by standing with Israel.
That country is being roasted world wide by undemocratic despots.
Its being vilified at home by the hard left with so called "Israel apartheid week".
Anyone who listened to CFRB today between 4-5 PM. That host (Jack Berkovits) lost both his parents in the Holocaust, he gave the listening audience a real lesson on Israel, antisemitism and the Middle East. HE needed to be speaking at the conference.
Mou8nd of sound;
If Fowler speaks the trurh than you must be angry with Ignatieff who stated that he disagreed with Mmost of what he had to say.HMMM
who is the liar Iggy or Fowler?
Post a Comment