[Guy_Fawkes]

Interesting comment piece in the National Post, its worth a read:

Canada’s non-election to the UN Security Council is a disappointment to Canadians and a real loss to the UN system. But the greatest disappointment of all has been the exploitation of the disappointment by partisan groups advancing narrow agendas.

Read more: http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/201 ... z12LmuKtq5

[andyt]

I don't really get it. Harper and the Reformacons have no use for the UN, yet they're all bitching about it. You didn't get invited to party held by people you say you have no use for - get over it.

[martin14]

Quote:

One logical answer to the EU bloc voting problem is to transform France’s permanent seat on the Security Council into an EU seat. That would appropriately recognize the EU’s power and importance: Only permanent members of the Security Council have a veto, after all..

This was good for a giggle



someone smoking wayyyyyy too much dope.

[DrCaleb]

andyt wrote:

I don't really get it. Harper and the Reformacons have no use for the UN, yet they're all bitching about it. You didn't get invited to party held by people you say you have no use for - get over it.

They are bitching about it, because they see the impotence of the UN as a issue that people can 'gather around' so to speak, and draw closer to the Reformacons for being against it.

As Guy's article points out, it has nothing to do with what they are bitching about. It's about bloc voting in the UN. But the truth to me is somehow worse than the Reformacons whining.

[andyt]

DrCaleb wrote:

andyt wrote:

I don't really get it. Harper and the Reformacons have no use for the UN, yet they're all bitching about it. You didn't get invited to party held by people you say you have no use for - get over it.

They are bitching about it, because they see the impotence of the UN as a issue that people can 'gather around' so to speak, and draw closer to the Reformacons for being against it.

As Guy's article points out, it has nothing to do with what they are bitching about. It's about bloc voting in the UN. But the truth to me is somehow worse than the Reformacons whining.

What is the truth?

[DrCaleb]

andyt wrote:

DrCaleb wrote:

andyt wrote:

I don't really get it. Harper and the Reformacons have no use for the UN, yet they're all bitching about it. You didn't get invited to party held by people you say you have no use for - get over it.

They are bitching about it, because they see the impotence of the UN as a issue that people can 'gather around' so to speak, and draw closer to the Reformacons for being against it.

As Guy's article points out, it has nothing to do with what they are bitching about. It's about bloc voting in the UN. But the truth to me is somehow worse than the Reformacons whining.

What is the truth?

I can only assume you have not been paying attention again. This is a matter at the intersection of politics and diplomacy. There is no 'truth', only situations where one looks better than others to the people they 'represent' and that is accomplished by the myriad ways to spin the facts of the situation so they do look better than they really should.

The EU started Canada as their supplier of high quality furs. Now all they do is bitch about our fur trade, and cut us out of the world body we helped to build. I say f- 'em, and they can take the UAE whiners with them.

Thanks UAE, for giving us some space for the last 10 years so we can send our soldiers to die to protect your whiny asses, but that doesn't entitle you to dictate what we can do with our own commercial airspace. Now they've backed themselves into a corner. We can't capitulate without looking like we are caving to blackmail. And one thing we never have done, is surrender to an aggressor. Good luck with your own grain farms, aircraft manufacturing and metal mines!

And Harper has screwed us royally on the world stage. No wonder everyone thinks they can come and have a piece of us, because we will just sit here and take it. We have no choice but to sit here and take it.

[andyt]

Honest, I'm trying to pay attention. But I'm still not clear of what you mean by the truth that is worse than Reformacon whining? It sounded like you had some inside dope about what went down?

As for the UAE, they just wanted to make a deal. I see their point, since we've never paid for use of that airbase. In fact apparently a lot of the cabinet, including Peter McKay, were all for giving UAE those slots, but Harper pulled the rug out from under them.

[DrCaleb]

andyt wrote:

Honest, I'm trying to pay attention. But I'm still not clear of what you mean by the truth that is worse than Reformacon whining? It sounded like you had some inside dope about what went down?

I was referring to the bits in Guy's articles about how the Reformacons have whittled down the Foreign Affairs department and consequently the number and quality of negotiators we have to broker such deals with the UAE, that they've left us once again irrelevant on the world stage. Much worse than whining about a UNSC seat we were unlikely to be able to do anything with, because teenagers with a .303 rifle and a snowmobile are our cheap ass answer to counter Russian and Norwegian icebreakers.

But the Reformacons hide that little fact by implying that the big meanie UAE kept the Defence Minister's plane from landing in retaliation, when in fact Foreign affairs can't handle renegotiating overflight allowances and the UAE got sick and tired of waiting for us to fix the problem.

andyt wrote:

As for the UAE, they just wanted to make a deal. I see their point, since we've never paid for use of that airbase. In fact apparently a lot of the cabinet, including Peter McKay, were all for giving UAE those slots, but Harper pulled the rug out from under them.

I see their point too. I doubt two or three Emerates flights a weeks would have mattered to Air Canada either. Just they are the government's little baby, and are not permitted to operate in a free market for fear they would have to grow up and make a profit.

[ASLplease]

andyt wrote:

I don't really get it. Harper and the Reformacons have no use for the UN, yet they're all bitching about it. You didn't get invited to party held by people you say you have no use for - get over it.

I dont understand. Afghanistan is a UN mission isn't it? Harper and the reformacons support the Afghan mission, why would you think they have no use for the UN?

[redhatmamma]

What are 'reformacons' is that a disrespectful slur not really adding anything to an intelligent debate? Maybe I should refer to Liberals as Liebrals or the Libranos !

I would think it would be better to be at the negotiating table rather than away from it, but the real reason for not getting the seat was because of the bloc voting, Canada didn't have a chance, even though they were lied to about support.

As for UAE landing rights, the negotiations have been going on for some time, even before Harper and why should we be blackmailed into giving them more rights.

[andyt]

redhatmamma wrote:

What are 'reformacons' is that a disrespectful slur

Absolutely. It shows that the CPC is a coalition of reform and conservatives, that they are all neo-cons and that they try to con the Canadian public. Pretty neat to get all that in one word, huh?

[Lemmy]

I don't understand why the UEA is in such a twist over this. Their entire economic history has centred around giving away money. When did Western greed all of a sudden replace generosity as a national economic strategy?

[2Cdo]

andyt wrote:

As for the UAE, they just wanted to make a deal. I see their point, since we've never paid for use of that airbase.

Wow, completely wrong. We've been paying since shortly after 9/11 for the use of the airfield, as well as trying to keep it from public knowledge at the request of the UAE.

So their real point is blackmail to get more flights for their heavily subsidized national carrier.

[andyt]

2Cdo wrote:

andyt wrote:

As for the UAE, they just wanted to make a deal. I see their point, since we've never paid for use of that airbase.

Wow, completely wrong. We've been paying since shortly after 9/11 for the use of the airfield, as well as trying to keep it from public knowledge at the request of the UAE.

So their real point is blackmail to get more flights for their heavily subsidized national carrier.

Well you must have insider knowledge, since the newspapers are reporting we never paid for it.

[2Cdo]

andyt wrote:

2Cdo wrote:

andyt wrote:

As for the UAE, they just wanted to make a deal. I see their point, since we've never paid for use of that airbase.

Wow, completely wrong. We've been paying since shortly after 9/11 for the use of the airfield, as well as trying to keep it from public knowledge at the request of the UAE.

So their real point is blackmail to get more flights for their heavily subsidized national carrier.

Well you must have insider knowledge, since the newspapers are reporting we never paid for it.

Links to those newspapers?

The reason I ask is I haven't seen any mention one way or another about the cost of us using the airfield in the press.