I personally believe that Stephen Harper should not shoulder every bit of the blame but him pushing Canada into the fight has obviously had some drastic downsides. Him not even flinching in interviews kind of makes me sad because why would he continue talking about Isis after the terrible things that happened he should have waited a little bit longer before trying to pull Canada into the war.
I think the author of this question should reword it. The question itself implies that somehow, Stephen Harper, an American journalist, was soley responsible for the attacks in Canada. No, he was not soley responsible for the attacks. He was just at the wrong place at the wrong time, and was used as propaganda for the ISIS cause. It is that propaganda which may have invoked 'long wolf' terrorist attacks as seen in Canada a few days ago.
Also, just to clarify, I do not condone the United States' approach to foreign policy in the middle east.
After the recent shootings, lock-downs, deaths, and other terrorist-like activities, one would believe that ISIS is starting to have supporters in Canada to attack the Canadian government. Yet what many people don't realize is that it is actually Harper's own doing that caused those supporters to hurt Canadians in the first place. I have come to start this debate to argue that all of these recent tragic events in Canada involving shootings, deaths, and terrorism is a result of Harper attempting to involve Canada in world affairs of other nations when Canada actually has no place in.
I declare that if Stephen Harper never decided to launch air-strikes and send the Canadian Military to go attack ISIS in Syria, Iraq, and other parts of the Middle East, none of these Muslims supporting ISIS would have attacked. I say this because Harper was actually stupid enough to involve themselves in international affairs in which Canada had absolutely no reason or authority to do so. Even the members of Parliament completely disagreed with such an irrational decision.
Like I said before, since Harper actually did do this, this has angered ISIS even more. Now that ISIS is angry that more of their members are dying and that they now have more enemies to deal with, they want to seek revenge in order to ease such suffering. So with revenge in mind, they decide to do so by indirectly attacking Canada by contacting or convincing the Muslims here to start the revenge plan.
Although revenge is stupid and makes them doubly wrong, they are only doing this since Canada started it first. Not only starting it first, but also got themselves in an unnecessary conflicts. You shouldn't snoop in and get involved with other peoples' businesses unless you are involved. That is a moral after all taught by many religions and people of all races, correct? Since Canada did, ISIS has now begun to take revenge, And they aren't done, they only begun to toy with us.
So if it wasn't because Canada stupidly decided to get involved in others' businesses that ISIS decided to get revenge, then why did they do it? Was it because they were insane? Clearly terrorists are not insane; they are unmerciful, radical, and cold-hearted,but they are not insane. They do not kill at random like the way serial killers do to get revenge or to satisfy their psychotic/sadistic personality.
If they were, then 9/11 would have happened due to Osama Bin Laden's insanity and not because the US was recklessly killing terrorists in the Middle East in the 90's just for the heck of it and using "but they're criminals" excuse as a scape-goat, right? You don't see them attacking Muslims who dislike ISIS, now do you? You don't see them attacking countries that don't get involved like China and Russia, now do you? You don't see them attacking nearby countries that are neutral with all parties, now do you?
As far as I can see , no evidence has been found on ISIS linkage. I don't know if the ISIS strategy is rational or irrational . Given that western countries always have wars in other countries while keeping their civilians safe , it could be a good strategy , if the stake are huge and war has already started . But in this case , it does not make any sense. And who is giving all those weapons to ISIS . Saudi Arabia ? I don't think so unless they are planning their own suicide
I have entered this debate to counter to the disgustingly absurd proclaimations of progressive ideology that would dare to suggest that Islamic totalitarian jihadists carrying out a brutal campaign of genocide and conquest with global aspirations is totally exempt from any military challenge by other countries in the world today and further that it's religious mandate to murder and kill infidels anywhere in the world is of no fault of their own but the head of state of any attack carried out in another country. It defies logic, reason, morality, and reality.
I declare that it is a disgusting assertion to suggest that a large terrorist organization that has engaged in genocide, ethnic cleansing, mass summary executions, televised beheadings, rape, and a 21st century slave market proclaiming a desire to establish a worldwide Islamic caliphate by means of exterminating any opposition should be opposed and destroyed with extreme prejudice. The apologists for this horrific evil would have you believe such a monsterous ideology have, contrary to all the evidence, that they have any regard for the lives of any people they count among the enemy, which is apparently any non-Muslim and any non-Sunni Muslim, and that we should leave them be to carve up the world and pile up the bodies.
This progressive infant doesn't seem to be aware of the fact that British Islamist Abu Sayfullah outlined ISIS' view - Every Muslim believes in Jihad. Jihad is part of Islam just like praying is part of Islam. Today, the infidels want us to delete this aspect of our religion. You can understand why, just in the simple fact of what the definition of Jihad is. If you understand who you do Jihad against... You don't do Jihad against Muslims. Jihad is against the infidels. So does it come as any surprise why they don't want Muslims to believe in Jihad? Because they don't want us to do Jihad against them. As Jordanian Islamist lawyer Majed Al-Leftawi, a supporter of ISIS, explained "the reason for the war against the Caliphate is that it has a plan to conquer the world, starting from here, from the Levant. The Levant is the head, and Egypt and Iraq are the wings. The conquests will begin here and will encompass the whole world."
As to the assertion that Canada can have no international role, is a self-proclaimed progressive really going to argue the case for Canadian isolationism? And surely you aren't so ignorant as to not know that Canada's parliament voted to join the air strikes, which amounted to a whopping six CF-18 fighter jets on October 8, 2014. You don't mention through a spokesman, Abu Muhammad Al-Adnani, urged ISIS supporters to kill Canadians. "Rely upon Allah, and kill him in any manner or way however it may be. Do not ask for anyone’s advice and do not seek anyone’s verdict. Kill the disbeliever whether he is civilian or military, for they have the same ruling."