When was the last time Canada was involved in two wars simultaneously? And when has this country been involved in a war for the better part of a decade? The latter is the case in Afghanistan, a war that is already 50% longer than WW2. Some would say that our involvement in Libya is a "military action," not a war, but dropping bombs on the territory of another nation is a de facto declaration of war, from my perspective.
A lot of people, myself included, view Libya's Gaddafi as a terrible dictator who deserves to be overthrown. But where were we during the past forty years.? He has been a despot all during his regime and until recently Canadian interests were doing billions of dollars of business with him. He is well known for torturing his opponents and one of the Canadian companies in Libya was building a prison for him. Why weren't the countries of the no-fly zone coalition bringing pressure to bear on Gaddifi through the years, and equipping the resistance in that country for non-violent regime change?
A series is beginning on CBC radio which argues that non-violent change requires preparation and diligence, but is nearly always more successful in the long-term than violent revolution. Blessed are the peacemakers. Didn't Jesus say that? Didn't he live non-violent change? Jesus was the ultimate regime-changer.
What are your thoughts about our silence concerning the tyranical regime in Libya during the past forty years, and what we are doing now?
3 comments:
David, I find myself in agreement with much of what you say in your daily blogs, however today's blog is superb. I can't add another word, and I love what you say in the second paragraph.
If we are going to use violent conflict against countries with dictators and tyrants, then we better prepare to attack virtually every african country. Oh, wait a second, we don't need oil or anything else from those countries...
I wonder how much of what we're doing has been affected by the widespread notion of "regime change" that seems to be sweeping the middle east.
Are we now interested because democracy might finally take root in Egypt, Libya and others? Or, perhaps (more cynically) is it because our own government become more hawkish?
I'm late to chime in again, but today there is another procession travelling the "Highway of Heros". Yannick Scherrer has made the ultimate sacrifice fighting for freedom from oppression.
God bless him and keep him.
I feel for the peolpe of Afganistan, but I can't see how anyone will ever be able to claim a victory. There is such a large percentage of the population fighting for the Taliban, and how do you know who's who? It would be like walking through Quebec trying to figure out who's a sepertist??
The Soviets had to give up on their long campaign, and it's just a matter of time before we do as well.
Change has to come from within. we can help, but sending in an army is an invasion. It can tip those who were on the fence over to the wrong side.
The American revolution was a bloody chapter in American history, but it was the power of the people that broke them free from the British. Our ancestors were somewhat more patient and ultimately more peaceful in gaining our independance. So what if we maintain the Govenor General for no more purpose than tradition.
Post a Comment