Mark Carney’s Stance On Iran Throws His Davos Doctrine Into Question (www.readthemaple.com)

submitted 1 day ago by patatas@sh.itjust.works to c/canada@lemmy.ca

21 comments fedilink hide all child comments

“What we’re hearing right now, at a time when it really matters, is … that we’re giving in,” Neve said. “We’re not prepared to be that bold leader in that ‘middle power’ space. Instead, we are capitulating to the ‘might is right’ world that Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu are intent on forging.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] FaceDeer@fedia.io 8 points 1 day ago

Pay less attention to what politicians say and more to what they do.

Canadian troops to be relocated from Middle East operations. Canada is withdrawing troops that were already stationed in the region when the Americans attacked. A few are remaining in place specifically to provide assistance with further evacuations if needed.

[-] patatas@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Edit: The article you linked contradicts your own summary of it. That's not good faith argumentation.

Anyway: Canada’s military chief says allies to talk defending Gulf states from Iran: Canada’s defence chief Gen. Jennie Carignan said allies are in talks about possibly helping Persian Gulf states defend themselves against bombing from Iran. Speaking to reporters at a defence and security conference in Ottawa Thursday, Carignan said a meeting is set for early Friday morning to discuss such a proposal among allied militaries and the Canadian Armed Forces would present a recommendation to the government.

[-] FaceDeer@fedia.io 2 points 1 day ago

Canada’s defence chief Gen. Jennie Carignan said allies are in talks

Emphasis added.

I just said to pay less attention to what's being said and more to what's being done. Talk is cheap, and it's going to result in a recommendation. ie, talk that results in something being said.

[-] patatas@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I notice you didn't pull a direct quote from the article you posted: "About 200 members of the Canadian Armed Forces are deployed in the Middle East on six different operations, but some are being moved to other areas or brought back to Canada as a result of the outbreak of war in the region." (emphasis added)

[-] FaceDeer@fedia.io -1 points 1 day ago

I didn't pull that quote because it's unclear how it makes any difference. As long as the troops aren't deployed in the Middle East how are they going to help the war against Iran?

[-] patatas@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Did you read the quote? Because it shows that your first reply, where you said

Canada is withdrawing troops that were already stationed in the region when the Americans attacked.

was misrepresenting the actual situation. In fact, the article you linked also said that

Six others are being deployed abroad to act as liaison officers in the event that the military is asked to assist in civilian evacuations in the region

which is quite different from what you said:

A few are remaining in place specifically to provide assistance with further evacuations if needed.

Anyway as for the other quote

"About 200 members of the Canadian Armed Forces are deployed in the Middle East on six different operations, but some are being moved to other areas or brought back to Canada as a result of the outbreak of war in the region.”

the implication of the word "some", in this context, is that "most" of the troops that were already there will remain there. And there are discussions happening in a few hours about whether to send more. Are you deliberately trying to misrepresent the situation?

[-] FaceDeer@fedia.io 0 points 1 day ago

You are trying really really really hard to find every possible little way to interpret this situation as "Fuck Carney" fodder. Accusing me of "deliberately trying to misinterpret the situation" is rich.