To the Editor:
For centuries (1648 - 1999) internal affairs were not considered reason for countries to attack another country.
In 1999 without sanction by the United Nations NATO attacked Serbia. In 2011 the United Nations agreed to intervention to protect civilians - NATO extended this to air attacks ensuring the defeat and then the death of the Libyan ruler.
The words of those governing Canada indicate they are uncritically following the direction United States "Harper and Obama want 'firm response' to Syria attack"
In that a "Syria strike needs Security Council approval, UN says" questions arise: Will action be taken against the present government of Syria?; Will it be with or without United Nations sanction?; Will the basis on which action is taken be soundly based or of the same nature as that which led to Iraq being attacked?; Will Canada be committed with or without the approval being given by a majority of Members of Parliament through a vote in the House of Commons?
Most importantly: Will Canada and Canadians be rightly viewed by other peoples as nothing more than the U.S of A' northward extension?
Joe Hueglin, Niagara Falls, ON.
