this post was submitted on 04 Mar 2026
27 points (90.9% liked)

Canada

11683 readers
611 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
top 6 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 0 points 4 hours ago

I assume the Liberal MPs will put forward a No Confidence Motion for this massive back pedal.

[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 9 points 15 hours ago

After his Davos speech, I expected a bit better. Instead, he decided to put the sign in the window:

“Canada supports the United States acting to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and to prevent its regime from further threatening international peace and security.”

Carney had prefaced that endorsement with a description of Iran as “the principal source of instability and terror throughout the Middle East, [with] the world’s worst human rights records.” He added: “[Iran] must never be allowed to obtain or develop nuclear weapons.”

If Carney were a better politician, he would have said "I don't have a position yet - we don't know the specifics of what is happening."

[–] DarylInCanada@lemmy.ca 6 points 15 hours ago

I am not sure he shifted his position. His first statement was full of weasel words to allow him to take almost any position that was necessary in the future. Thar is, his first response was not a position at all, but a placeholder for a future position.

[–] IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works 16 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

So as events unfold, the government updates its position. Why is the author presenting this as a bad thing? It's not surprising that the Canadian government would initially be generally supportive of strikes; they had already declared the IRGC a terrorist organization after all.

[–] sveltecider@lemmy.ca 5 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Agreed. What did people expect a centrist economist to say initially?

[–] pilferjinx@piefed.social -1 points 4 hours ago

I expected to him to shut his damned mouth instead of fully endorsing illegal wars and "IsRaEl'S rIgHt To DeFeNd ItSeLf"