Gordon O'Connor stands up for Canada:
Canada's defence minister says he hopes the United States won't shift any of its troops from Afghanistan to boost its war in Iraq.
Gordon O'Connor says he doesn't object to U.S. President George W. Bush's plan to send 21,500 more troops to Iraq, provided it doesn't mean the Americans "draw any troops from Afghanistan to reinforce Iraq." He says that's the only aspect of the U.S. decision he's thought about.
O'Connor also says he's not aware of any U.S. resources leaving Afghanistan to participate in Iraq.
Apparently, Gordon O'Connor doesn't read the newspaper:
"Already, a U.S. Army infantry battalion fighting in a critical area of eastern Afghanistan is due to be withdrawn within weeks in order to deploy to Iraq."
Tune in next week when Gordon O'Connor tries to explain that what he said is not at all what he meant and, besides, he was being quoted out of context, yeah, that's the ticket.
7 comments:
Well,
That's a shame. When did we hear about the US pulling at least a battalion out of Afghanistan? 2, 3 days ago? Wasn't it in the paper? I mean, come on.
After Vic Toews, Gordo was my first choice to be shuffled. It was a mistake not to, methinks.
Is it picky to point out that he said he's not aware of any forces leaving, while the other quote says they are due to leave? As in, "have not yet left"?
Finely-split hairs, to be sure.
Is it picky to point out that, on Jan 12, O'Connor stated that (emphasis added), "My hope is they won't draw any troops away from Afghanistan to reinforce Iraq ..." when, on Jan 8, the Winnipeg Free Press reported that an entire U.S. infantry battalion had already been scheduled to be transferred?
That's not hair splitting, hooligan. It's just you being illiterate.
Let's see...on Jan.8, the Winnipeg Free Press says the U.S. intends to move a battalion of troops....on Jan.12, O'Connor says he hopes they won't do so. According to you, this is proof he was unaware of the reports? Good thing you're not a lawyer, CC.
But I'm just illiterate.
Yes ... yes, you are, so let's discuss your tortured semantics.
As you can read in that Free Press article, the U.S. battalion is "due to be withdrawn," the word "due" meaning that it has already been scheduled and that this event is now expected to happen. That's what the word "due" means. With me so far? No? Fuck it ... I'll continue for the entertainment value of my intelligent readers.
Combine that with Defence Minister O'Connor's claim that he's "not aware of any U.S. resources leaving Afghanistan to participate in Iraq," and you have the picture of a defence minister who is a total imbecile and is utterly out of the loop.
Now ... what part of the above is giving you trouble? 'Cuz my regular readers, not being morons, will be glad to help, I'm sure.
By the way, hooligan, I'm starting to see an ugly trend developing here, in which you post something stupid, defend it vigorously, then have to eventually apologize for it.
Are you sure you don't want to rethink this position of yours, and perhaps back away quietly before you embarrass yourself further?
Just asking.
Wow, you sure worked hard to avoid admitting that someone can "hope" that soemthing "expected to happen" doesn't actually happen.
Post a Comment