Trudeau's Response To The Paris Attack

The news piece deals with the Canadian government’s response to the Paris Attack which occurred on Friday November 13th. Burman paints a picture of how challenging it is to restore, accomplish or create peace on an international level. Even in the 21st century, it is astonishing and unfortunate how backwards world leaders can be with their line of logic. Although it is tempting to fight guns with guns, violence should not be ‘Plan A,’ and this is the whole essence of Burman’s article. I agree with Burman on the grounds that Canada should “return to diplomacy” by stopping its military action and welcoming refugees because otherwise, our nation accomplishes nothing. There are three types of metrics which can be connected to the article which are democracy, participation and responsiveness. Burman touches on democracy as he says, “It appears we live in a democracy that is respected by our national leadership, and not undermined. How incredibly novel” ( XX). This is an interesting point since, presently, the world is at war against ISIS. It raises the question of how exactly is Trudeau’s government strengthening Canadian democracy by choosing to strike against ISIS? Although Canada is not a complete democracy, it strives to be in many ways. Therefore, choosing violence is going against …show more content…
Bystanders are equally as guilty as the bully, unless they take action. This statement matches Canada’s case, since it is a major state which cannot simply ignore what ISIS has done. There is no disagreement about whether or not Canada should take action, since the UN has declared the beginning of World War 3. Further, because the US has decided to fight against ISIS, it is expected that Canada will follow the US’ lead. A reason for this and a commonly held perception is that the US is Canada’s ‘big brother.’ That being said, even though there is a strong need for Canada to participate, it needs to opt-out of using