'An attack on Israel would be considered an attack on Canada'

**Sol Invictus** · 02-16-2010, 11:51 PM

February 16, 2010 | The Globe and Mail

Junior Foreign Affairs minister Peter Kent is suggesting Canada stands ready to throw its full military weight behind Israel, telling a Toronto publication that “an attack on Israel would be considered an attack on Canada.”

His office says Mr. Kent, the minister of state for Foreign Affairs of the Americas, was merely “paraphrasing” what Stephen Harper has said in the past regarding Israel.

“It’s not too far from what the [Prime Minister] has said,” Norm McIntosh, Mr. Kent’s chief of staff, told The Globe.

But the junior minister’s statement would appear to be evidence that the Harper government is shifting to an ever more solidly pro-Israel stance.

Read More Here

**Loki** · 02-16-2010, 11:53 PM

Why?? How bizarre.

**~~Aemma~~** · 02-17-2010, 12:00 AM

Originally Posted by Loki

Why?? How bizarre.

In order to *not* be at odds with US government policy. It is counterproductive for both of our countries to not have similar policies with respect to such things as this.

**Grumpy Cat** · 02-17-2010, 02:28 PM

It doesn't have as much to do with US policy as you think. Canada has really only been staunchly pro-Israel since Stephen Harper took office.

**Puddle of Mudd** · 02-17-2010, 02:39 PM

“an attack on Israel would be considered an attack on Canada.”

Eh, that would be up to the Canadian people to decide.

**Grumpy Cat** · 02-17-2010, 02:53 PM

Originally Posted by Declara

“an attack on Israel would be considered an attack on Canada.”

Eh, that would be up to the Canadian people to decide.

Yeah it should be, but Mr. Harper doesn't care much what the Canadian people think. He doesn't represent us at all.

**anonymaus** · 02-17-2010, 03:23 PM

This is rhetoric in line with the talks and sanctions regime; an attempt to show solidarity with Iran's supposed target should they eventually build the bomb. Nothing more.