COLUMN: Coren – Canada, a warrior nation

- January 14th, 2012

Canada must be Canada: We are not the North American version of Switzerland

by Michael Coren

It was mid-January, back in 1943, when Canadian troops arrived in North Africa.

They were to go on to fight the Nazis and Italians valiantly in the desert, and then move on to Europe, take care of an entire beach at the Normandy landings, and end the war with one of the most powerful navies in the world.

Canada established itself as a great military power.

And there is nothing pernicious or dark about being a military power. It is what a nation does with its military that defines a state as moral or immoral.

The pacifist idea is, frankly, bankrupt. It is one thing to turn the other cheek and forgive someone who wrongs us, but quite another to turn away when someone else is attacked.

We would, for example, surely admire someone for their peaceful nature, but condemn them if they walked past a rape or an assault and did nothing to intervene.

Canada is the former.

We have long taken the ethical high road, but intervened when others were attacked. German fascism threatened Europe rather than Toronto, Chinese communism invaded Korea and not Calgary.

We became involved because terror and evil have to be resisted.

Similarly today, we support the forces of righteousness — the U.S., Israel, Britain, and so on — and give them all the backing we can against ideologies and people who would destroy freedom and democracy.

So why is it some Canadians want to emasculate our military, pretend we are not who we are, and create this revised, foolish history of the country as a North American Switzerland, sitting out conflicts no matter how obvious the necessity of intervention?

It is not because they want peace and pacifism; it is because they want neutrality and, ultimately, the triumph of our enemies.

We saw this during the Cold War when, in the guise of peacefulness, various fellow travellers and leftist agitators actually wanted the Soviets to dominate.

Today we see something similar in the struggle against Islamofascism.

From special interest groups, to writers at the Toronto Star, to commentators on the CBC, we are drenched by waves of anti-American propaganda, explaining the war on terror is a costly failure, and we should be the honest broker in all this and not take sides.

If only we understood Islam, we are told by patronizing dullards, all would become clear.

Well, I do understand Islam, and the Middle East, and unlike these extremists I also understand the U.S.

It’s not about Canada taking sides, it’s about Canada being Canada.

Just a few days before Christmas, I was given a handful of spent bullets and some metal particles once packed into a bomb.

They were from an attack on a church in Baghdad, where 58 people were murdered in an attack by a Muslim gang.

Not take sides?

Good God, of course we have to choose sides.

If we stand in the middle of the road, we will get run down, not by a car but by the massed tanks of oppressors, armed by Canadian writers and activists with an agenda red with blood and red in politics.

Categories: Contributor Columns

Subscribe to the post

3 comments

  1. Bill Elder says:

    I concur Canada should place a greater emphasis on maintaining a strong modern mechanized defensive military capability. Our north is open to Russian imperialism expanding their borders, our oceans open to Asian and European resource rape and both Russian and Chinese naval incursion. But we needn’t shoulder the expense of keeping a large standing force like the US. We can learn from Switzerland – the key to a cost effective and ready defensive force is a large militia or reserve system.
    Military is for one purpose only, defending the nation against hostile invasion – not for deploying all over the globe as world policemen butting into other less stable nation’s affairs. Seeing how the chance of Islamist terror/fascists forming a legitimate/effective military invasion of Canada is next to nil, and seeing how we are a civil and free nation who should not follow the US in declaring a martial surveillance state domestically as a response to nebulous anti-west terrorists, our real first defense of our borders against Islamic terror/fanaticism is the immigration office.
    When the enemy hides behind civilian guises the only way to invade is posing as a legitimate immigrant/visitor. Tighten up security here (immigration) and you save billions on pointless after-the-fact domestic security and aimless foreign military misadventure fighting phantoms. We have millions of unaccounted illegal immigrants in this country. How many are agents of Islamic terror? Our immigration department should be a second CSIS with intel on terrorists and should have a force of officers actively apprehending those who have broken the immigration laws by lying or sneaking in. This is where you will find the terrorists who have potential to damage Canadians, not in a cave 2000 miles from here. The terror in both the US and Canada walked in the front door. Time has come to put a watch dog at the door.

  2. Alain says:

    I agree that the “war on terror” has been a costly failure but for very different reasons from those cited by the Left. To begin with it was misnamed and totally failed to identify the enemy preferring to identify just one tragedy of the enemy – terrorism. The enemy is the ideology of Islamism whose roots exist in Islam itself. This does not mean that every Muslim accepts this and is a terrorist or terrorist supporter, but it does mean that it is not an ideology alien to Islam or Islamic tradition. When we ignore the truth in the name of political correctness (a tool of the collectivists/Left), we ignore other tragedies of the same enemy. Pushing for the acceptance and implementation of Sharia is another one; just as using the tools created by leftist governments (HRCs, hate speech laws, affirmative action, censorship of dissenting ideas , etc.) against us. Another example continues to be our inability to deport such people when they are actually apprehended. We have become a laughing stock of the world in this area, where all kinds of lawyers and judges making silly decisions can prevent the deportation of foreign criminals and terrorists.

  3. ken m says:

    We dont have a reputation of sitting out conflict, but we also have a reputation of not blindly jumping in.

    We didnt jump in to Vietnam and we didn’t go in to Iraq. The right choice in both cases.

    This isn’t about pacifism. Pasifism is always the best strategy. But pacifism doesnt mean inaction. It just means thinking long and hard, and exhausting all other options before deciding to have people die.

Comments are closed.