Dear Gerrard Kennedy, there is no equivalence here...

In today's National Post, Gerrard Kennedy performs mental gymnastics trying to link Vietnam draft dodgers with the current batch of deserters.

In your own words....

It would create grounds for humanitarian consideration for permanent residence in Canada. The narrow grounds would be a finding of genuine moral or conscientious objection to leave the armed services in a war not sanctioned by the United Nations (such as the Iraq War), and subject to compulsion by way of return to service or stop-loss (a controversial U. S. measure that forced military personnel back into war zones even after their service was concluded).

I have a few questions here.

1. Anyone who is in an armed service who is involved in actions not sanctionned by the U.N. can apply? Logically, it could be argued that those who are on the other side of a UN 'peacekeeping action' should be allowed to seek asylum under this law since they are involved in a war not sanctionned by the UN.

2. The UN cachet is the gold standard and all other wars are illegitimate? You would surrender Canada's sovreign right as a nation to determine their own foreign policy with respect to conflicts to a group of corrupt, unelected plutocrats? For all of the Liberal party's scare mongering about Canada becoming states 51 through 63, you would have us subject to the whims of that group?

3. What constititutes a "genuine moral or conscientious objection to leave the armed services"? How do you judge this? What standard do you use?

Gerrard, you're supposed to be a reasonably smart guy. Could you explain to me how conscript = volunteer?

con·script (kən skript′; for adj. & n. kän′skript′)

transitive verb

1. to enroll for compulsory service in the armed forces; draft
2. to force (labor, capital, etc.) into service for the government

vol·un·teer (väl′ən tir′)

noun

1. a person who chooses freely to do or offer to do something
2. a person who chooses freely to enter naval or military service, without being compelled to do so by law

As defined, conscription is coercive, whereas volunteer is, well, voluntary. In case you were unaware, the United States ceased using conscription in 1973, ergo anyone who is part of that nation's armed forces is there of their own accord. What kind of person signs up to join a military organization, knowing that it is the nature of military organizations to be deployed as the government deems necessary, and then goes...oops, I didn't think we were actually expected to go into a war zone? At the best it's disingenuous, and at worst dishonest on the part of those individuals.