blevkog

I'm not proud to be Canadian because some PM went to visit the troops, I'm proud because our government has come out in support of our troops, something that has been missing the last few years. I'm proud of what Canadians are doing there and I'm glad that the PM appears to be succesfull in articulating that and getting the population on board. We need the government to lead on issues like this.

And Harper did fly 16 hours on a Herc. That deserves at least some credit. ;-)

I haven't flown on one, but little bro is in the Army and he has a few times. I hear that they're a pain in the a$$.

I didn't post this to single you out, by the way. Nor did I do it to demean patriotism; I am very patriotic in my own way. I posted it because of the 'cheaply bought' bit. I want to make sure that people keep their eye on the ball and not get fooled by what I think are cheap stunts.

Yeah - he flew 16 hours on a Herc - he flew 16 hours on the Herc that was supposed to fly my Squadron back from Exercise in Virginia! This meant that they had to spend 2 extra days bef.ore getting home. This meant that they missed school and work committments and this meant that my unit's blown it's budget for the rest of the year and had to cancel training for the rest of the month. If doing this as a publicity stunt rather than flying Air Canada is 'supporting the troops' - no thank you.

I should add that I'm not blaming Harper for this - this decision was made at some mid-level bureaucratic echelon, and it's unlikely that the PM knew this decision would inconvenience the troops. But, on the other hand, his office didn't make much effort to find out if it would. So he shouldn't get any of the blame, but he shouldn't get much of the credit for it either. Post it as a slight positive.

Actually, I didn't take it personally, I agree. I was just responding here as the original comment was directed at me in the comment thread of another post and it was easier to just comment here.

Cheers

I'm proud that we have a PM that will fly in there, meet the troops, and come out with on the point statements that tell us and the world exactly what Canada's place in the world is.

He isn't pussy footing around, play semantics with reporters, and trying not to scare the public with notions that our soldiers might actually be... soldiers.

Its about time a politician in this country did that.

Jeffery Simpson's column in todays Globe and Mail (15 mar.) sums up what the Afghanistan debate quite nicely. It's worth the read. Tom, I'm glad that you're proud of what our troops are doing. You should be. That and the belief that a politician is finally giving them some positive attention are, I think, something that we both agree on. My complaint is that I've seen far too many political types at first hand who come out to get their ego's stroked by forcing some service personnel onto a parade so they can feed them the party line and look for stuff to score political points back home. I'll admit that this is likely proof of my own bias. I remain convinced that politicians visits to the troops are invariably done for self-seving reasons. My worry is that Harper's trip to Afganistan is primarily to defuse the admittedly uninformed opinion of the mission amongst Canadians. The mission there has changed and we need our leaders to admit and adapt to that fact so that our Army isn't left high and dry, watching their buddies get shot for no real return. To me it looks like he's trying to hard to prevent a debate that could actully help the military do their job there. Actually If anyone wants a prominent figure in all of this to be proud of You don't need to look any further than Gen. Hillier. Anyone at his level who will state up front that the military's job is to kill people without concern for opinions of the peacekeeper junkies has obviously got the military's needs foremost in his mind.

Pete,
For the record, I am proud of the work the military is helping out with there as well, but I do not Harper has not been as straight-spoken or clear as you imply that he has. I am not sure whether it has to do with semantic games or not, but I'm not really sure that he knows why we're there - his comments the other day began to start having a rather familiar, Bushian ring and I instinctively doubt the sincerity behind them.

Of course, as you can tell from other posts here, I just don't trust the guy and will put everything he says to the smell test.

Paul: As I said, I'm not blaming Harper - heck I'm a Reservist, getting screwed over is part and parcel of the territory. And seeing someone who just wants to get home to his wife from a week in the field get screwed over by someone from Disneyland North is all too common. I'm not even pissed off that the budget crunch means my hours are getting cut. What browns me off is being told that I'm supposed to be 'grateful' for this, and that the guy doing it should get 'credit' - that's too much like getting raped and being told I should be thankful for the sex.

Pete: To echo Kev, for the record - I have always been proud to be a Canadian and I have always been proud to serve. That patriotism exists simply by virtue of my existing - I have never, do not, and will never need to have that pride validated by the actions of whatever politician happens to be sitting in office, nor do I appreciate being told I have to prove that loyalty by jumping through some political hoop. Just as a point of information - no Canadian Soldier ever swears loyalty to the Prime Minister, our Oaths of Allegiance are to Queen Elizabeth, her Heirs and Successors and our Commander-in-Chief isn't the PM, it's the Governor-General, who - in the case of the last person of Adrienne Clarkson, the last person to hold the job - got my respect, because not only did she visit the troops, but she did it over the Christmas holidays, both in Bosnia, and in Afghanistan, and managed to do it without hauling an entire Press Corps around.

As for Harper's statements, yeah - Harper says he's supporting the troops, and that's nice. Chretien said he was supporting the troops, and he screwed us. Mulrooney said he was supporting the troops, and he screwed us. Same with Martin. If you want to read this as support, then I'm happy for you, but as for me - to quote Alford Korzybski ,"The Map is Not the Territory" - Perception is not Reality, Style is not Substance, and a Dog and Pony Show is not 'Support'. Harper wants to support me and the Troops, he can give us the tools we need, get out of our way and let us do our job. Anything else is for his benefit.