His response was insolently stupid. Of course at some point in almost any war someone staggers forward to sign an instrument of surrender, but other obvious historical examples of major conflicts that ended by crushing victory include World War I, the Napoleonic Wars and the Cold War. I didn't have time to make this point, but it didn't matter because most other journalists present, including from francophone media, were openly incredulous about Mr. Layton's proposal. They might not support the Afghan war. But even the press grasp that you can't sign useful treaties with people who dream of waving your severed head at a cheap webcam.
John Robson waves other Jack Layton body parts in the Ottawa Citizen.
Comments (9)
Poor Jack, not only is he a coward he is a stupid coward.
Posted by john | July 6, 2007 11:20 PM
Posted on July 6, 2007 23:20
Olivia and Jack are made for each other....dumb and dumber.
They were on Toronto City Council for years and look at what they did there....zip....collected a paycheck, that's all.
All of the NDP are out to lunch. They have got to be the dumbest MP's on the block, and putting them lower than the liberals is saying much.
Posted by anonymous | July 7, 2007 3:19 AM
Posted on July 7, 2007 03:19
Ouch. It almost makes you feel bad for Jack Layton. Only Jack Layton could try to sell bad history lessons like one tries to sell a bad used car.
There is one theory that would somewhat support Layton's assertions, and that is Hannah Arendt's law of the conservation of violence. In short, this theory tells us that violence, historically, always returns as more violence.
Historically, this can be demonstrated to a certain extent: the Ottoman genocide of Armenians returned as the slaughter of Muslims in Bosnia. The Franco-Prussian war returned as WWI, then as WWII.
But the law of the conservation of violence doesn't really take into account that there are some things that can't be solved diplomatically. Terrorism -- as well as the threat posed by states that harbour it -- can't be solved diplomatically, because they know they can always use terrorism to leverage further demands.
Let's also keep in mind that some countries tried to use diplomacy to deal with Hitler. Today, we remember that as "appeasement". It didn't work.
Posted by Patrick Ross | July 7, 2007 11:57 AM
Posted on July 7, 2007 11:57
For your information,
[url=][/url]
Posted by examiner | July 11, 2007 10:09 PM
Posted on July 11, 2007 22:09
For your information,
[url=][/url]
Posted by examiner | July 11, 2007 10:10 PM
Posted on July 11, 2007 22:10
For your information,
[url=][/url]
Posted by examiner | July 11, 2007 10:10 PM
Posted on July 11, 2007 22:10
Thnx to all.
[url=][/url]
Posted by examiner | July 11, 2007 11:15 PM
Posted on July 11, 2007 23:15
Thnx to all.
[url=][/url]
Posted by examiner | July 11, 2007 11:15 PM
Posted on July 11, 2007 23:15
Thnx to all.
[url=][/url]
Posted by examiner | July 11, 2007 11:15 PM
Posted on July 11, 2007 23:15