Exactly three weeks after our election in Canada the US will elect a new President. At the time of this writing polls in the United States are showing John McCain with a lead over his Democratic challenger (source). It might seem that having Harper as a Prime Minister would be safe, since he is more ideologically aligned with McCain and his Vice Presidential nominee Sarah Palin.
However there is a significant problem with this idea. John McCain has indicated a willingness to go to war with Iran and has even been rattling US sabers in the direction of Russia.
A US War with Iran (we won't even get into Russia for the moment) would be far more dangerous, costly and bloody than the war with Iraq. Iran is larger, has a bigger population and is better armed. It would also send a signal to the rest of the Middle East that the United States has designs on the entire region, pulling aid to Iran (and Iraq and Afghanistan) from quarters still unknown. The US will push much harder for allies to join them in Iran than they did in Iraq and many of their Iraq allies (Spain, the UK, Australia etc) will be far more reluctant to join them this time.
Although he denies it now, there can be little doubt that had Stephen Harper been prime minister in 2003 that Canada would have joined the Iraq invasion force.
“I don't know all the facts on Iraq, but I think we should work closely with the Americans.”
- Stephen Harper (source)
“Canada remains alienated from its allies, shut out of the reconstruction process to some degree, unable to influence events. There is no upside to the position Canada took.”
http://www.quotesdaddy.com/author/Stephen+Harper/2(source)
But, so far Stephen Harper has made no real statements on the prospect of a US attack on Iran even though the possibility of such an attack has existed for some time and has been discussed by US politicians and media at every level.
"Certainly Prime Minister Stephen Harper has said virtually nothing about the subject. He has not revealed whether he agrees with the U.S. analysis of the alleged Iranian threats, he hasn't commented on the revelation that the U.S. is considering using nuclear weapons, he has said nothing regarding what he or the foreign affairs department think the consequences would be." - from the TyeeMany Canadians seem happy, for the moment, that Harper has said that he will remove Canadian forces from Afghanistan by the end of 2011, but he has not said where else he might send those forces.
The right will, no doubt, call this conspiracy theory. It is not really a conspiracy theory though, call it a 'preemptive strike' if you like. It is largely hypothetical, but not hypothesis based on nothing. I'm sure that Harper has not been asked at this point to send Canadian soldiers anywhere and McCain has not been elected yet. All I'm saying really is that a promise should be extracted from Harper, and from all party leaders in this election that they will not send Canadian forces into any combat zones that we are not already in without first calling an election on the matter.
1 comment:
Why President Bush and Senator McCain overstates threat posed by Iran’s nuclear fuel cycle?
The Bush administration is good at inciting fear, stirring up a false hysteria only to give cover for missed steps the administration has taken in national-international issues affecting my family, my children and grand children. He used the same technique prior to attacking Iraq. Can we allow him to do this once more?
The issues are poor economy, broken infrastructure, exported professional jobs, lack of medical insurance for many Americans, homelessness, and over burdened borrowing from other nations. McCain, who has stated he has voted 95% of the time in support of the administration, now would like to extend the passed 8 years once more.
Iran and its nuclear fuel cycle are not the issues.
Post a Comment