blevkog

I suspect that lump is a bolus of vomit. Is that guy for real? I wonder what color the sky is in his world.

I'm willing,if it can be proved to me, to believe that this isn't the cheap publicity grab that it looks like. However I'm pretty sure that's all it is and if there's one thing that puts me through the roof from anger it's people hitching a ride on the militarys back to serve their own ends. Trying to prove that he likes us doesn't negate the need for a parlimentry debate on our mission in Afghanistan. The prevention of which I think is Harpers primary reason for going there.

So was he proud when Chretien did the same thing in 2003?

Just wondering....

You forgot to mention bouncing an artillery shell off of his manly chest and leaping over a tall building in a single bound. Hey, give him credit - at least he didn't land on a Canadian Aircraft Carrier and proclaim 'Mission Accomplished". I'm with Doug here - this is nothing but a stunt; although I'll be honest and say that I'm prepared to change my mind if I find out he flew there in a Sea King, I don't think Chretien or Martin ever set foot in one during their tenure.

The only credit I will give him is that he didn't walk off the plane wearing a flightsuit.

Course, he knew that there are fewer people in Canada for whom shit like that would have flown. Though, it appears htere is at least one.

PS - Doug, I posted this one just for you.

Personal safety at risk my ass - Harper toured the base, visited a military hospital, and took a quick helicopter ride to visit the centre of the city. The only risk Stephen took was getting a paper cut. Of course, I'm guessing the closest 'ExpertTom' has ever gotten to the military is wanking off to Rambo videos on a Saturday night - anyone who calls himself 'A Canadian Jedi' needs to move out of his parents' basement.

Interesting lump kevvyd.

As a deployed soldier, there is no bigger pain in the ass than a visiting dignitary. It causes all senior officers to get so wound up (they see their careers advancing with every photo op) that they loose sight of the real reason they are deployed. It is dangerous to morale and definitely increases the hazard to the poor sod that has to protect his sorry ass.

Just my thoughts.

Hey, we've got soldiers and lefty cynics commenting, how about some slighted Tories?

Harper should start to worry, Larry Zolf thinks it's a good idea.

He's simply awesome, our PM; I read this morning he defused a roadside bomb and pulled a live grenade out of a cat.

...and then put he on a top hat, slipped into a unitard and tap shoes, jumped up on the stage and entertained our guys 'n gals in uniform. Who knew Harper had such great legs?

*sniff* I'm so proud.

Anything that is making all you Progressives get in such knots can't be all bad. Well actually, everything gets you angry these days. Now to clear up a few points:
1) Also Canadian is the 'Canadian Jedi' I am just a 'team' member. As a blog with 5 members, you think you would have noticed that.
2) I was proud to be a Canadian when Chretien went over. He wasn't an isolationist like most of you seem to be here.
3) You guys seem hard pressed to get anyone who isn't a team member to actually comment on your blog. Good luck with that.

Tom,
If I misIDed you in the post. My mistake, I'm new to the game. As for the number of commentors, it doesn't concern me; in any case we've only been at this a month or so, but thanks for the concern.

If you actually took the time to read some of the posts here you will find that most of us are in favour of the Afghan mission, just not it's use as a political tool by any of the parties. Are we partisan, sure.

The fact that we went into the war without an actual vote in Parliament kind of bugs us, too, but that's mainly technical and not germaine to the actual mission - I don't think there are any of us involved in this blog that would vote against it given the chance.

Though I would like that chance.

As for isolationists, I won't speak for anyone but myself. I suppose that I am a limited interventionist. Again, if you read our posts you'll probably find stuff on either side of that fence.

Tom,

" I was proud to be a Canadian when Chretien went over. He wasn't an isolationist like most of you seem to be here."

Clearly you don't know me..I'm a Dipper that supports the mission in Afghanistan and always have. I am not an isolationist. Mind you, I think we should be very careful where we go and I am also against the Iraq War and I am glad we didn't go there.

Now how is that "isolationist"? Or are you just a nother right-whinger who is llooking for any ooportunity to paint all us lefties with the same tired brush.?

I painted you the same way you painted me. I guess its only painting when you get painted not when you are wielding the brush.

"I'm guessing the closest 'ExpertTom' has ever gotten to the military is wanking off to Rambo videos on a Saturday night" - enough said.

Anywho, sounds like we have similar views on Afghanistan and we should both have been a little more open minded. I guess the difference is I actually think that Harper wasn't doing this as a publicity stunt, I think he honestly thinks its the right thing to do. On this we can all agree to disagree.

btw, I just might start reading your blog. Cheers.

Agreeing to disagree is a very Canadian thing.

Welcome.

I'm speaking from a fair bit of personal experience when I say that visiting dignitarys are invariably there to boost their own PR with some phototops and just get in the way of the troops on the ground. The extra parades just fuck up morale. Wanna know what we think of the bootlickers that like this stuff. Expert Tom, you may have been proud when Chretian went to visit the troops but if all it takes for you to be a proud Canadian is to watch a politician get his photo taken with a soldier while surrounded by hidden security then your patriotism is too cheaply bought.As an aside,whatever your views on Chretian's visit to the troops in 2003, he wasn't proud enough of us to actually fly in a Sea King to visit the Navy ship we had there. That got sent to HMCS Preserver and we had to ask the yanks to ferry him around.

Okay Tom, I'll admit that my statement was overly broad - I was confusing you with the right-wingers in the States, an awful lot of whom managed to find ways to avoid serving in the same military that they say we have to support - Dan Quayle, for instance. If that's inapplicable to you - I apologize.

I'm not attacking Harper for making this visit as a photo op - it's in the nature of politicians to do this - heck, it's in the nature of most Generals - ask me sometime to explain the concept of 'CFB Visits' we came up when I was working the Visits Cell in Wainwright in '87. What I'm denying is that this in any way shape or form means he's 'supporting the troops'. If Harper wants to support the troops, he can give us the Airlift Package that General Hillier asked for, and the Liberals approved, instead of letting his former-lobbyist Defence Minister work behind the scenes to scrap it so we can trade the tried and proven Hercules J design for an untested Airbus model, just because he used to work for Airbus. The same Minister of Defence, BTW, who complained that Rick Mercer's Afghanistan Tours were 'a waste of taxpayers dollars' - I can guarantee you that a visit from an entertainer like Tom Cochrane, Dahmhait Doyle or hockey players like Cam Neely and Tiger Williams does a lot more for troop morale than a visit from any PM - to illustrate, former MGen Lew MacKenzie was on the last tour - and he reported that the Regiment that Gerald O'Connor former Commanded was in Afghanistan at the time, and they were talking about hanging him in effigy for that remark. If Harper wants to support the troops, instead of just saying 'we're going to increase the numbers' how about giving us a plan and a budget that will actually allow us to train them? Base Gagetown was short over 600 beds for the numbers they ran through last summer, and with 2 training areas closed because of Dioxin contamination, it's only going to get worse. And before you go and say it's the Liberal's fault because they closed all the other bases - no, that was Mulroney. Of course Mulroney also gave us the POS LSVW Truck, because it was built by Western Star in Kim Campbell's riding. Which brings me to the other thing Harper can do if he wants to 'support the troops' - quit using the Military to score political points! If there's a military reason to station a 650 man Rapid Response Battalion in Goose Bay, Labrador, well and good. If, however, it's being done because to keep the base open and the civilian population of Goose Bay employed, then it's a waste of military resources.

I'm not saying Harper visiting Afghanistan wasn't a nice gesture - it was, and he deserves some credit for staying overnight on the base, even if it was in the VIP suite, instead of just flying in, posing for the 'grip and grin' photo op, and flying back out. What I'm saying is if that's all there is - it's not enough. Photo shoots, and empty rhetoric press conferences are not substantive support, and anyone who buys into that propaganda is not helping.

BTW, "Isolationism" is hardly the province of 'progressives'. At least in the States, it's pretty much exclusively used as an argument by the Right - it was what the Republicans were advocating prior to World War I, and World War II. For that matter, check out Pat Buchanan's writing sometime - I'd hardly describe him as a 'progressive'.

All that being said, to repeat Kevvy's statement - Welcome

Dan,
I hadn't heard about the Rangers in Goose Bay. That's interesting - CHS has been instructed to begin preparing a Goose Bay branch CHS office. Good idea, that - try to run survey launches out of a port that his iced in for about 8 months of the year.

Oh no, they're not the Rangers - the Rangers are actually one of the better success stories of the North - and the least appreciated. This is a Regular Army Battalion - the Tories want to place 5 - in Comox, Trenton, Greenwood, Bagotville and Goose Bay - the idea being that they'll be there to deploy in case of emergency - either domestic or international - because these are all Air Bases. Of course that means the Army units there will have zero facilities for training areas - but hey, what does that matter - it's all about the optics...

Hey, guys...

Although you are right bout "Expert" Tom (on both the military backround and the Rambo movies) others here at alsocanadian have served. Dan, you n me chewed the same dirt, and those girls in the Wainright hotel kinda make you want to get yer rock off to a Rambo flick instead...
Training with them Rangers was fun, but all I can say is dont go drinking with them afterwards...
So, anyways, youz guyz seem like a good bunch, cept for yer polititcal leanings...they're just not right!

Welcome AlsoCanadian! Actually I have no memory of the Wainwright hotels - either because I never went there, or I've blocked that mental image out of my mind. We'll just go with the first one for the sake of my sanity. Actually, I was on Rendevous Exercises the two times I was in Wainwright - the first time we went into the field straight from the plane and the second time I didn't even get paid till the end of the exercise, and then they shipped me off to Suffield for 4 more weeks. On the plus side they did give me 48 hours leave in Calgary between exercises then, 6 of which I can honestly claim to remember - and I can say that Calgary girls well and truly rock.

As Kev's said, our politics are pretty much over the board - on separate elections I've voted Conservative, Liberal, NDP, and even Rhinocerus Party on one occasion. If pressed, I'd describe myself as a Rational Anarchist - I'll admit that Government has to exist, but at best it's a necessary Evil, and anyone who wants political power over me is a potential danger and should be watched carefully.