I was not going to write this every day but the gods do conspire and this is a pretty good election we have going in terms of ideas. I can't believe I wrote that. I can't believe I could actually write that with some basis in fact. Do you remember foreign policy? That means that your government considers what its role in the world is. All of a sudden, after almost years of some action but not much thinking about what we should be, the stumps are hearing some thoughts about what we might be to others and not just ourselves.
First, the Prime Ministers has gotten into a shouting match with the US over global warming policy. This was inevitable. Maybe the administration just realized that Rick Mercer was making fun of them on the government's own broadcaster. Hey! There is nothing wrong with making a few pence off the CBC and having something to say as well I've always said. Anyway, it is a good bit of finger-pointery over issues that the Liberals do disagree with the Bush administration so why not have an argument. And I don't mind if the US ambassador to Canada says something like this:
"It may be smart election-year politics to thump your chest and criticize your friend and your No. 1 trading partner constantly," Wilkins said, "But it is a slippery slope, and all of us should hope that it doesn't have a long-term impact on the relationship."as long as we get to say back that in under a year there is a very good chance that the relationship will be with a very lame duck president given the polls in the US.
Apart from the US relationship, the Conservative party has announced the first bit of its defence policy. The Babbling Man, Canada nicest and best informed amateur military commentator, has a good review of the four proposals all of which I agree with except for the resurrection of an airborne group. As far as I can tell, it is our superduper secret commando capacity of JFT2 that has been most effective in the war on terror. I'd say add another 650 of them rather than make a political move like paratroopers. What next? An aircraft carrier? Better also to consider simply another 3,000 to 5,000 infantry like the kind we are relying on in NATO's work in Afganistan.
Then, the Haavaad man considers the sensible position of Michael Ignatieff, Liberal Star candidate and brain...such a brain, as to when it is right to use these sorts of troops. People thinking about foreign policy. Amazing.

Comments
Damian - December 14, 2005 11:21 PM
The problem with expanding elite units like JTF2 is that at some point they cease to be elite. Better to develop a separate unit with more men and a different focus. And the nice part about calling it Airborne is the boost to Army morale that comes from standing up a once-proud and distinguished unit.
ry - December 14, 2005 11:31 PM
I don't understand the greatness of Ignatieff. Okay, so you've got a situation where Country X is a threat to his neighbors security and world security, but isn't a human rights nutcase. According what little I saw of Ignatieff's 'test' you wouldn't go. Maybe there's an element of this I'm missing being in the lower 48 and it isn't covered as much?
Alan - December 14, 2005 11:35 PM
That is true I suppose but I understand that there are still plenty of these guys out in the field from little NZ's 250 and the US's gazillions. Canada could specialize like we do in communications or Norway does in winter ski war fought on cliff faces with only fish bones, spit and string as weapons. That is not a slur, by the way. If all the ramblin' neo-cons dream falsely of a home in the USA, I dream of Norway living the <i>vida Norge</i> - land of the free.
Alan - December 14, 2005 11:37 PM
Ry - we are told we have a weakness for a seeming smarty-pants out of the UofT. He may go either way as yet.
ry - December 15, 2005 12:23 AM
I'm just wondering if he's trying to do what John Kerry wished he could have in the last US election cycle, actually have a useful test(I guess they want something like the Reasonable Man test or the other tests in law) about when to go or not go. I'm also wondering if there's more on this test out there I can look at.
A test, or the desire for one, makes sense(particularly if you think the world is rational). I just wonder if the one he's proposing is practical.