Prime Minister Mark Carney argues the war against Iran was justified because it halted Tehran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons. The evidence, Ted Snider writes, suggests otherwise. Iran was not building a bomb, diplomacy had already achieved major concessions, and the war inflicted immense human, economic, and environmental costs.
Right… I can see the scene now “Well, I wasn’t sure about going to war but then I remembered the disastrous Iran war and how Canada’s Prime Minister said nice things about it so away we go!”
What a silly thing to say. Of course the Canadian prime minister doesn’t shape reality with his words. But his words matter. When Carney stood up in Davos the world listened. It is the same leader, a leader of a G7 nation, that says this. Other leaders are listening, a discourse is taking form.
Yes. Because he had something worthwhile to propose, a framework upon which he has been executing throughout his time as leader.
Complaining about the Iran war, which is already seen by almost all as a failure is not a particularly worthwhile or novel hill on which to die. Remember when donald had a tantrum about Ford’s mean ads and cancelled trade talks? The unfortunate reality that does shape things is the country to which we send 70% of our exports has a man child president.
Not to mention that one of the biggest threats to any sort of peace is literally donald’s ego
Thinking that any leader or any serious politician is taking this as Carney’s actual position is just nonsense. You cannot watch the Collins question and answer in their entirety and say that’s a man who really backs what trump did.