almost as if on cue, after Stephen Harper and the Conservatives were elected to power Jack Layton and the NDP were calling for parliament to debate Canada's deployment of troops in afghanistan. Jack, of course is simply playing politics with the men and women of the Canadian armed Forces who are currently in harm's way in the Middle East. Nothing that is currently happening regarding our military in afghanistan is the result of Conservative Party policy or actions. The troops recently left Kabul and are now in the much more dangerous region of Kandahar, but these plans were already made long before the recent Canadian election. Foes of the Conservatives would like us to forget the warnings of former Liberal Defense Minister Bill Graham that the troops were being moved and that Canadians should brace themselves for more casualties. They want us to believe that the increase in casualties is as a result of the actions of the new Conservative government. Layton, of course was silent when the Liberals planned these missions; he was too busy writing budgets and telling weakling former PM Paul Martin what to do next.
If some of the signs at last week's anti-war protests were any indication, the pacifist Layton has been somewhat successful in getting many of the little peaceniks to blame Canada's military actions on Scary Stephen, rather than on their progressive buddies that formed the last government.
Harper and Defense Minister Gordon O'Connor have rejected calls for a parliamentary debate, arguing that the mission has been set and the matter should not become the subject of a debate while the troops are in harm's way. That makes a lot of sense, but the associated Press reported a story this week that should have the current government reconsidering its position about whether or not Canada should be in afghanistan and if so, what our mission should be. It's time for a debate.
Forty-two year old abdul Rahman was sentenced to death recently by a Kabul court. His crime--he converted to Christianity. Rahman had been a Christian for about 16 years since he served with a Christian aid group in Pakistan. His daughters were living with his parents and when he returned to his village to try to regain custody his parents turned him in to the authorities. afghanistan is subject to Sharia law and the penalty for a Muslim who renounces his religion for another is death. Rahman was given an opportunity to save his life by reverting to Islam but he refused.
according to the Globe and Mail, the judge who pronounced the death sentence cannot understand what the big deal is. alhaj ansarullah Mawawy Zada was quoted as saying, “In this country we have [a] perfect constitution. It is Islamic law and it is illegal to be a Christian and should be punished. In your country, two women can marry. I think that his very strange.”
as many Canadians, but not all, know Canadian troops are not in afghanistan on a peacekeeping mission. Nor are they there to fight the Taliban and al Qaeda. Canada has sent troops to that Middle East country primarily to help afghanis rebuild their war torn country even though the rebuilding in the Kandahar region involves some combat with the Taliban and other terrorists.
as with the coalition forces in Iraq, the negative is always stressed by those who oppose the deployment of troops. How long will the troops be there? Why are these bad Western governments going in and occupying these countries? What is the exit strategy? The issue that should be debated by parliament is not what will happen if things go wrong but what will happen if they go right and Canada and the other countries whose forces are helping to rebuild are successful in bringing a stable government to afghanistan.
What should be debated in parliament is not whether or not troops should be put in harm's way or how sending the armed forces to afghanistan is in Canada's best interest, but whether or not we should risk Canadian lives to build a stable country that is will be governed by sharia law and will put Muslims who convert to Christianity to death. Executing those who convert from Islam is not only against Canadian values (which in this country have come to mean Liberal Party values) but is against the norms of civilized society. We should be deciding whether stabilizing such a country is worth even one Canadian life.
It's time for a debate.
Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Views are those of authors and not necessarily those of Canada Free Press. Content is Copyright 1997-2024 the individual authors. Site Copyright 1997-2024 Canada Free Press.Com Privacy Statement