Gimbol's diatribe and screed

Question for those opposed to the war in Afghanistan

I've heard many use the term "I support the troops but not the mission" most notably those that inhabit the liberal and ndp ranks and their inherent entourage.

But I have a question....and if you're a candidate in the next election you best be prepared to answer it.....if DND said they needed more equipment to fight the war in Afghanistan, would you as an MP support the troops then or will you maintain your non-supporting role of the mission and refuse their request by voting against any such budgetary expense?
You know, support the troops and support the mission?

Here's another.

If you want our troops to only be engaged in so-called peacekeeping, does that mean if they get attacked while on said "mission" will they be allowed to fight, or do you insist they defend themselves with a tersely worded memo released by the UN general assembly? If you have trouble with that one ask Romeo Dallaire how effectively that would have worked in Rawanda.

Lastly.

I've heard some nonsense about negotiating with the Taliban. Please explain what you plan to offer to the Taliban, an orgnaization which has clearly demonstrated it has no intention of negotiating in good faith?

Labels: eliminate terrorism now, Justin Trudeau, useful idiots

posted by gimbol @ 4:05 AM