Harper wants Canada to go on airstrikes on Iraq. That’s right. Canada. The nice ones, the peace keepers, the polite people, the bastion of warm-gooey-joy-joy feelings, the “we’re awesome because we can solve problems without bombing people” great white north. He wants us conducting air strikes. We have to tell him ‘No.’
Elizabeth May of the Green Party spoke against the airstrikes (video below) and I think she did a good job. There’s a big part of me that wishes she didn’t tread so softly, that she went for the jugular and tore them a new one. That said, I recognize that her overly tactful and diplomatic manor probably has a much better chance of being considered than the enraged reaming I figure Harper needs. In any event, May has one seat while Harper has a majority government. We citizens need to help out on this one.
I have drafted a template letter anyone is free to copy, paste, edit, amend, and send to their MP. Please share it, send it in, or even write your own. Spread the word. Say ‘No’ to airstrikes.
Dear [your MP’s name] ,
My name is [your name] and I am a resident of [your riding], a voice you are supposed to represent. I cannot express strongly enough how much I am against Mr. Harper’s proposal to join in the airstrikes in Iraq against ISIS. My opposition to the airstrikes can be summarized in three points:
1) It’s un-Canadian. We are, first and foremost, peace keepers and have a history of peace keeping and are supposed to be the good, nice country. Nice people don’t go on airstrikes.
2) It’s ineffective. The U.S has been running airstrikes against the region for who knows how long and terrorism persists. It doesn’t work.
3) However much we might hurt terrorist organizations with airstrikes (again, history shows it won’t be much) we will hurt innocent civilians much more.
For the good of the people of the world and for the integrity of our nation I ask you to do all you can to convince Mr. Harper that this is the wrong course of action and, at the very least, vote against joining in the airstrikes.
What is ad block? It is an application that, at your discretion blocks out advertising so you can browse the internet for content as opposed to ads. If you do not have it, get it here so you can enjoy my blog without the insidious advertising.
Rest assured our special forces are already over there doing the real damage to ISIS and as for our planes, they’re likely more symbolic than anything so I wouldn’t worry too much about the damage they’re doing. They’re so old they probably can’t even make the trip.
I do think the airstrike strategy is largely ridiculous anyways but regardless, it’s at least fighting back in some form rather than the liberal pacifist approach of sitting idly by while ISIS lobs off more heads, rapes more women,and cuts more little kids in half.
It’s also better than the other typical liberal pacifist approach of letting someone else do the dirty work for them so that they can once again enjoy doing nothing except safely and self-righteously judge from their high moral perch on the sidelines.
I’m glad Canada is standing to ISIS and giving these clowns the same message that we hand-delivered to the Nazis – that they deserve to be blown up into tiny little pieces and I’m glad our Canadian pilots are getting the chance to do our “fair share”.
Your two points, 1) Canadian airstrikes would be useless and 2) It’s better than doing nothing, don’t really mesh. Just on that alone I would say airstrikes is a very expensive kind of useless to be doing, so it would be worse than doing nothing.
Further, I am not advocating doing nothing. I am speaking out against ineffective methods which are very likely to harm the wrong people. That means I also don’t want someone else to do the ‘dirty work’ of bombing innocent people because of some misguided notion that it will somehow reduce terrorism.
But.. but… consider the utopias created in Afghanistan and Libya and Iraq through bombing. Obviously what is needed is more bombs, we just need to kill the right number and right type of people enough – and this problem will go away too!
3 comments
October 7, 2014 at 8:32 pm
VR Kaine
Rest assured our special forces are already over there doing the real damage to ISIS and as for our planes, they’re likely more symbolic than anything so I wouldn’t worry too much about the damage they’re doing. They’re so old they probably can’t even make the trip.
I do think the airstrike strategy is largely ridiculous anyways but regardless, it’s at least fighting back in some form rather than the liberal pacifist approach of sitting idly by while ISIS lobs off more heads, rapes more women,and cuts more little kids in half.
It’s also better than the other typical liberal pacifist approach of letting someone else do the dirty work for them so that they can once again enjoy doing nothing except safely and self-righteously judge from their high moral perch on the sidelines.
I’m glad Canada is standing to ISIS and giving these clowns the same message that we hand-delivered to the Nazis – that they deserve to be blown up into tiny little pieces and I’m glad our Canadian pilots are getting the chance to do our “fair share”.
LikeLike
October 7, 2014 at 10:50 pm
Mystro
@VR Kaine
Your two points, 1) Canadian airstrikes would be useless and 2) It’s better than doing nothing, don’t really mesh. Just on that alone I would say airstrikes is a very expensive kind of useless to be doing, so it would be worse than doing nothing.
Further, I am not advocating doing nothing. I am speaking out against ineffective methods which are very likely to harm the wrong people. That means I also don’t want someone else to do the ‘dirty work’ of bombing innocent people because of some misguided notion that it will somehow reduce terrorism.
LikeLike
October 8, 2014 at 10:04 am
The Arbourist
@Mystro
But.. but… consider the utopias created in Afghanistan and Libya and Iraq through bombing. Obviously what is needed is more bombs, we just need to kill the right number and right type of people enough – and this problem will go away too!
Oh wait…
LikeLike