: Canada is not joining in the invasion of Iraq!

used to be jwoodget
Mar 17th, 2003, 04:27 PM
According to Jean Chretien on Monday, Canadian forces will not participate in the invasion force unless it is supported by the UN. Since the US today has said that it will act without a further UN resolution, Canadian forces will not be engaged in the coming actions (apart from the handful of "exchange" personnel).

Freedom bacon, anyone? I just wish the US would ship their French champagne up here rather than pour it into the sewers..... Not that there is anything to celebrate.

Mar 17th, 2003, 04:33 PM
Does that mean it's called "Freedom kissing" now?

re: Freedom bacon

And, the best selling ginger ale in the U.S. is now "Freedom Dry?"

And a certain whiskey is called "Freedom Club?"

Freedom Geese?

used to be jwoodget
Mar 17th, 2003, 05:09 PM

Our French-Canadian members may be in for some extra special treatment by the Department of Homeland Security... That's if they can find Quebec (or Canada) on a map.

Mar 17th, 2003, 05:21 PM
While Canada may no be participating, individual members of the CF will be attached to US or UK forces.

Seems that some want to fight so badly, they will volunteer.

Mar 17th, 2003, 05:26 PM
What of the Canadian Forces naval frigates? Under whose control/authority would they serve?

used to be jwoodget
Mar 17th, 2003, 05:41 PM
Britnell, Harper asked Chretien about the fate of the CF personnel in the exchange/training program and he said the 17 people in place won't be put into combat situations but maintain "surveillance duties". They are certainly in harms way though. It must be difficult for them since their US colleagues may regard them differently and they probably want to be involved (battle comraderie being an imutable force).

The frigates will probably not be engaged in combat operations - defensive mode only.

CNN is reporting on the Canadian stance.

Mar 17th, 2003, 06:00 PM
So... hypothetically speaking, if the U.S. unit to which a Canadian soldier is attached commits an illegal act ("warcrime" - a specific one, beyond the simple fact that the entire war is illegal), will the Canadian soldier be at risk for prosecution under the new International Criminal Court (http://www.icc-cpi.int)?

Since Canada is a signatory (and a Canadian is the first appointed head, Philippe Kirsch (http://www.diplomatiejudiciaire.com/UK/ICCUK7.htm)) and the U.S. is not, could we end up with a Canadian up on charges while the rest of his American unit goes scot-free?

What a wacky world...


Mar 17th, 2003, 08:32 PM

Mar 17th, 2003, 09:05 PM
I don't care if they did it because of lack of resources or what. HOORAY, I say!

I hear that Bush said, in the middle of his speech today, that burning barrels of oil will be considered a war crime. w00t.[/random]

Mar 17th, 2003, 09:43 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by RicktheChemist:
Maybe it's the fact that Canada's military is **** and that they cannot even think about going to IRAQ regardless of if they wanted to go or not.. ever think of that...



Whoa Rick.

Not sure what you are implying here, but having first hand experience in the Canadian military I can assure you that our military is not "****". Albeit a lack of resources compared to our American neighbours, yet ready and well trained to stand in any conflict. Heck....Canada earned its prowess through the battle of Vimy Ridge!

used to be jwoodget
Mar 18th, 2003, 12:31 PM
True, iLaBmAn but I think RtC was refering to the overall scale of the CF and the fact that in sending a significant contingent to Afganistan (which the US troops are pulling out of in a big way - lets not underestimate the mess that that country is still in) essentially precludes an significant contribution to the middle East. I'm with Kuni on this one. I'm glad we didn't fall into line, even though it'll certainly have consequences in terms of relationships with the US. But principles are principles. Bush has bent his principles to fit the moment and Blair is straddled so much that his pants are in danger of ripping.

Canada isn't burying its head in the sand, but nor is it willing to be seen as an aggressor. The US and UK are clearly taking aggressive action with highly dubious justifications.