"Going against the beliefs and will of the majority is never easy."
Certainly not. But remember that Pierre was in Quebec, surrounded by his fellow anti-conscription, anti-war friends. I think that he would have had a much harder go of it on Juno Beach then jeting across Quebec on his motorcycle.
"In his later years he was equally nationalistic-Canadian."
True. That part of his youth during WW2 seems to be one that he would best like to forget. Many writers go as far to describe him as a bully.
"How many political leaders national and provincial have served in our military?"
Not many. Canada has not been in a serious state of war since the 1940's. Yet just looking at Canadian Prime Minister that were old enough to serve in both World Wars many did. Out of the three Prime Ministers' who were fit for service in either world war two served. Both in WW2. John Diefenbaker and Lester Pearson. The other was Pierre Trudeau. None of our current Members of Parliament list "military" as their privious occupation. But politicians aren't known for their bravery and are not generally admired too much by the public either.
Trudeau was the worst prime minister Canada has ever had. His economic and social policies were totally wrong in my view. His personality was arrogant and certainly left something to be desired. He was not the great intellectual many people think he was. Mila Mulroney once remarked; "How that short pocked-marked little man could ever be considered a sex symbol is beyond me." The only decent think he tried to accomplish in office was that he attempted to get rid of the Indian Act and even then he backed down on that.
I find it a bit odd that someone who like P.E.T. so much would be in
a military news-letter like this one. Considering what he did to the Forces.
Bradley Sallows wrote:
>In short, the guy was not enthusiastic about fighting for his country.Sorry to break the news to you, but Canada's military contribution would have
been a lot smaller if not for the pro-British elements in our society, at least
for the first few years of the war. A view of the war as a "British" one is
correct from some points of view. It didn't help that a few expatriate Brits in
the military tried to make commitments (to Britain) on Canada's behalf for which
they had no authority.>He took the easy way out.
Going against the beliefs and will of the majority is never easy.
>All part of his arrogant, sumg, socialist, anti-British attitude.
Exchange "capitalist" for "socialist", and "pro-US" for "anti-British", and you
could be talking about Mulroney.Exchange "anti-demonstrator" for "anti-British" and you could be talking about
Chretien.>His language was quite nationalistic is his younger days.
In his later days, he was equally nationalistic - Canadian. That much can also
be said for Chretien; maybe some of it rubbed off.>He had very little interest in the military. Too pacifist, mabye that's why he
didn't enlist.How many of our political leaders, national and provincial, have served in our
military?>He is truely one political leader that I really loathe.
He's one I admire. Willingness to bear arms isn't the only mark of a good
citizen. I don't think there was ever uncertainty about where he stood on an
issue, and he has more backbone than anyone since, and many before him.Brad Sallows