War In Iraq Debate
- Thread starter scm77
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
scm77 said:
Yeah it's amazing how the "estimated" number is always 100,000. During the first gulf war, it was "estimated" that the US forces "slaughtered" 100,000 Iraqis on the Highway of Death. Turned out to be less than 50,000. In Kosovo, it was "estimated" that the Serbs "slaughtered" 100,000 Kosovars. Turned out to be roughly 3,000. Most of the time when you hear someone quoting an "estimate" of 100,000, it turns out that their method of estimation was something along the line of "well, 100,000 seems like a good number, let's use that".
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
So dogboy you admire people that cut the heads off of people and shoot women in cold blood. You must be a lot of fun at parties. :
S
Storm
Guest
48Highlander said:
I would be. It's not like this parliament was forced on us. We, the Canadian people, elected it of our own free will. With democracy people get what they ask for, even if it isn't what's best for them, but at least they get the choice.
It's also important to note that in the event of any successful invasion of Canada, a large number of the people who post here (the people that would benefit from better equipment) would not be around to see any of the results. There's that little issue of taking an oath...
Equating the invasion of Iraq to a hypothetical invasion of Canada is just stupid. One nation was forced to suffer under a tyrant that it didn't choose, so invading to give them a choice eventually gives them something better in the end. The other voted for it's tyrant and gets to pick a new one every few years anyway, so invading gets them... the exact same thing, but with lots of people dead and a few years of no choice at all.
Oh yes, and regarding "propper" democracy, I much prefer our system, warts and all, over that of the US. Ours may need a bit of overhauling, but switching to their system would definitely be a step in the wrong direction.
edit: spell check aparently causes more typos than it fixes
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
BOTH of you who were involved in this post should grow up. You should be ashamed for saying such a thing if your a member of the CF and it's sad that your one of the soldiers that swore an oath to protect our people.
Go move to the USA and buy a shotgun and chew on some grass and hang out with Bush's pals if you want it so bad! No one is stopping you are they?
I find a statement like that absolutely ridiculous from someone in the military and on this website. It disgusts me and that's my opinion. You shouldn't even bother being in the CF if you honestly believe+think like that!
It truly makes me sad.
PS> Why? Why would you say such a horrible thing? PM me a response since I don't want to clutter this thread with a verbal backlash if that's what you feel must justify your words for an excuse.
- Reaction score
- 18
- Points
- 530
There are Americans on this site. My wife and child are American. I served my country for over 13 years, cupcake. I was the founder of New Brunswick's ANAVETS Unit...I was and am a proud Canadian citizen that happens to live in the US.
Quite frankly, I am growing weary of the anti-American rhetoric, and as a Moderator, will start treating comments like this the same as I would treat a comment that was offensive to a religion, colour, gender, orientation, etc. We have rules of conduct here, and have rules regarding the substantiation of posts/opinions. Stick to facts.
There are many, experienced posters here that demonstrate and back-up their positions against US actions and policies without sounding like a 23 year old Michael Moore wannabee.
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 7,191
- Points
- 1,040
The oath is one of allegiance to the Queen; there's surprisingly little in it about defending the institutions, government, or people of Canada. Call me a heretic, but it would not surprise me if there was very little enthusiasm among the combat-capable members of the CF to risk death facing down the US on behalf of a government and people that has treated its armed forces and responsibilities of security so lightly. That is probably a test of loyalty we really don't want to test; there is an old axiom of leadership about never giving an order that can't or won't be obeyed. However, come the day, I suppose lawful authority might give a lawful command to fight to the death. And, come the day, one might see lawful and honourable surrenders arranged in the field under flags of truce. Under traditional rules of jus ad bellum, a hopeless cause is an unjust cause for which to make war. Of course, were the government of the day and the people who adore Canadian Values to flock to the budget estimates and the recruiting centres to fervently equip, man, and sustain armed forces capable of defending the nation against any reasonably foreseeable US incursion, the cause of defending Canadian Values would certainly not be hopeless.
I fear I do not place much hope in the strength of oaths; life and limb are rarely at risk in marriage yet those oaths are cast aside for much lesser conveniences than the imperative of survival. Such are the wages of social progress and the dogged pursuit of the primacy of license and privilege.
However, since I suspect most Canadians would be inclined to vote Democrat, we need not fear invasion until Democrats control the US institutions with the lawful authority to make war.
I speak for no-one; it's just something for you (collectively) to mull over in your own minds.
I fear I do not place much hope in the strength of oaths; life and limb are rarely at risk in marriage yet those oaths are cast aside for much lesser conveniences than the imperative of survival. Such are the wages of social progress and the dogged pursuit of the primacy of license and privilege.
However, since I suspect most Canadians would be inclined to vote Democrat, we need not fear invasion until Democrats control the US institutions with the lawful authority to make war.
I speak for no-one; it's just something for you (collectively) to mull over in your own minds.
S
Storm
Guest
Pte (R) Joe said:
I'd have to agree with Muskrat here. Try "Go move to the USA
Crewing grass with a shotgun in hand can be done just fine in Alberta :dontpanic:
Brad Sallows said:
The Queen is a figurehead representing the Canadian people. As such, I view my oath to the Queen as an oath to the Canadian people, implying an oath to serve the government chosen by the people to represent them.
Brad Sallows said:
"The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature..." John Stuart Mill
People choose how they live.
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 7,191
- Points
- 1,040
>The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety
That's my point. What would there be about exchanging masters in Ottawa for masters in Washington that would motivate you to die fighting?
That's my point. What would there be about exchanging masters in Ottawa for masters in Washington that would motivate you to die fighting?
- Reaction score
- 5,642
- Points
- 1,360
Actually thats NOT the reason, Pea Brain Warrior was banned, one of his by-lines was horribly distasteful, and I echo Muskrat's sentiment,...I will not stand for anti-Americanism[or anti-anyone] UNLESS you have facts to back it up.
NOW HEAR THIS........I am starting to lose patience with some of the racist/sexist/etc...attitudes that are starting to surface, we have cleaned house before and will do it again, if you are in doubt about your post, then refer to the "Conduct Quidelines"
Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
Bruce
NOW HEAR THIS........I am starting to lose patience with some of the racist/sexist/etc...attitudes that are starting to surface, we have cleaned house before and will do it again, if you are in doubt about your post, then refer to the "Conduct Quidelines"
Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
Bruce
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Fair enough warning indeed, I suppose my post was too broad, the fixed suggestion of:
With added that I meant only that it was the "bible belt" and southern states that backed Bush up for the most part. I could have left out the insulting part and I will go so far as to understand if the moderators give me a "verbal" on my account if they feel the necessity.
In response to this:
That is exactly how I view the situation as well.
Joe
PS> Apologies to those offended for my earlier post. The post
:-X
With added that I meant only that it was the "bible belt" and southern states that backed Bush up for the most part. I could have left out the insulting part and I will go so far as to understand if the moderators give me a "verbal" on my account if they feel the necessity.
In response to this:
That is exactly how I view the situation as well.
Joe
PS> Apologies to those offended for my earlier post. The post
really hit a "soft" spot for me. Again, please accept my apologies!
:-X
Private Joe, you shot yourself in the foot again. I happen to live in the north and don't bible thump and I backed my President. And my liberal next door neighbor who voted for John Kerry owns 4 shotguns, is an avid hunter, lives in a rural area and happens to be an IT Director of a public school system. So, here's your opportunity to bash Americans and bash my President. yet again. Let's get it right this time. But you may want to move your other foot or at least check your ammo.
- Reaction score
- 5,642
- Points
- 1,360
Quote,
I happen to live in the north and don't bible thump and I backed my President. And my liberal next door neighbor who voted for John Kerry owns 4 shotguns, is an avid hunter, lives in a rural area and happens to be an IT Director of a public school system.
Karpovage, ...come on whats up with that? How can we ever pin you guys down if you won't stay in sterotype. Sheesh
;D
I happen to live in the north and don't bible thump and I backed my President. And my liberal next door neighbor who voted for John Kerry owns 4 shotguns, is an avid hunter, lives in a rural area and happens to be an IT Director of a public school system.
Karpovage, ...come on whats up with that? How can we ever pin you guys down if you won't stay in sterotype. Sheesh
;D
Moving targets are harder to blast ;D
Bruce, I do appreciate you clamping down on some of the negativity and baseless allegations. These Forums are both informative and very entertaining and you guys do a great job of flushing the toilet when it overflows.
Bruce, I do appreciate you clamping down on some of the negativity and baseless allegations. These Forums are both informative and very entertaining and you guys do a great job of flushing the toilet when it overflows.
Well, looks like the topic moved from the war in Iraq to canadian sovereignty. Well, as a canadian, who feels that the queen is most important to canadian sovereignty and our history. This country is very left. I dont see much for nationalism in canada, and its a shame. Not trying to sound like a facist, but citizens take pride in their country through their military. Now, when you let ingore your military, national pride ussually drops. Today, as a young person, its hard to be proud of canada in the past 50 years. I find reading canadian history from 1900 to 1960 is when canada truly shined.
I also believe anti americanism fuels canadian nationalism. Many people in my hometown resent americans, but they arent necessarily proud to be canadian either. What i mean by canadian nationalism is people actually singing "O canada" and "god save the queen" and knowing all the words, and saying it loudly, not under their breath. I do believe the liberal goverment is making attempts to establish a canadian culture and a canadian way of life.
I also couldnt believe the Liberal goverment banned fox 24 hour news from canadian television.
I also believe anti americanism fuels canadian nationalism. Many people in my hometown resent americans, but they arent necessarily proud to be canadian either. What i mean by canadian nationalism is people actually singing "O canada" and "god save the queen" and knowing all the words, and saying it loudly, not under their breath. I do believe the liberal goverment is making attempts to establish a canadian culture and a canadian way of life.
I also couldnt believe the Liberal goverment banned fox 24 hour news from canadian television.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Sorry Joe, I've been gone for a few days, but since I'm the one who made the horrible horrible comment that so upset your delicate sensibilities, I figgured I'd clarify a few things for you now.
1) It was a joke. Go to www.ebay.ca and look up "sense of humour".
2) I said that not too many of us would be complaining if the US had invaded, replaced Johnny, etc. I didn't say that I wouldn't follow orders. My personal beliefs are irrelevant. If my chain of command orders me to pick up a rifle and defend our borders, that's what I'll do.
3) If the US for some unfanthomable reason did decide to invade Canada, both American and Canadian soldiers would be equaly reluctant to take up arms against eachother. I've worked with US soldiers, I know they're good people, and I consider quite a few of them to be my friends. If they invaded, I'd do my best to follow orders, but I know I'd have one hell of a hard time killing people who have been our friends and neighbours for more than a century. I'm sure that YOU on the other hand would have no problem blowing away those shotgun-toting wife-beater wearing trailer trash american rednecks, so I guess we'll stick you on the front lines. Put OCAP and "homes not bombs" on your flanks. If we throw enough of these anti-American types in the front, the US forces might turn around before ever reaching Ottawa. Mission accomplished, grab some Canadian beer for the trip, let's go home.
And just to be on the safe side and avoid death-by-Muskrat, I'm going to emphasise here that the line abour rednecks was pure sarcasm and not intended to insult any group. If any of the mods still have a problem with it, feel free to change it or let me know and I'll do it.
One thing I noticed quite recently is that those who ARE proud to be Canadian are also a lot more likely to be tolerant of or even friendly to our friends south of the border. Those whom I think of as militant anti-americans tend to be quite proud of belonging to some group or another, but don't seem to have much pride in being Canadian.
1) It was a joke. Go to www.ebay.ca and look up "sense of humour".
2) I said that not too many of us would be complaining if the US had invaded, replaced Johnny, etc. I didn't say that I wouldn't follow orders. My personal beliefs are irrelevant. If my chain of command orders me to pick up a rifle and defend our borders, that's what I'll do.
3) If the US for some unfanthomable reason did decide to invade Canada, both American and Canadian soldiers would be equaly reluctant to take up arms against eachother. I've worked with US soldiers, I know they're good people, and I consider quite a few of them to be my friends. If they invaded, I'd do my best to follow orders, but I know I'd have one hell of a hard time killing people who have been our friends and neighbours for more than a century. I'm sure that YOU on the other hand would have no problem blowing away those shotgun-toting wife-beater wearing trailer trash american rednecks, so I guess we'll stick you on the front lines. Put OCAP and "homes not bombs" on your flanks. If we throw enough of these anti-American types in the front, the US forces might turn around before ever reaching Ottawa. Mission accomplished, grab some Canadian beer for the trip, let's go home.
And just to be on the safe side and avoid death-by-Muskrat, I'm going to emphasise here that the line abour rednecks was pure sarcasm and not intended to insult any group. If any of the mods still have a problem with it, feel free to change it or let me know and I'll do it.
Canuck_25 said:
One thing I noticed quite recently is that those who ARE proud to be Canadian are also a lot more likely to be tolerant of or even friendly to our friends south of the border. Those whom I think of as militant anti-americans tend to be quite proud of belonging to some group or another, but don't seem to have much pride in being Canadian.
J
jmackenzie_15
Guest
okay, to clear something up, all the guys saying "the us is about oil not humanitarian aid" and the ones saying "what about somalia and kosovo etc"
those were totally different administrations.I know ltos of americans, theyre alright. The clinton government did some good things.You would far more accurate in saying
the Bush administration is all about oil and money and not about humanitarian aid.Look whats happening in darfur.Any money there? nope. what about korea? nope, none there.
ukraine? no wait, no money.Just different cabinets man.Dont judge their entire country on the decesions and greed of a handful of monsters.Canada has its own monsters.Everybody does.
those were totally different administrations.I know ltos of americans, theyre alright. The clinton government did some good things.You would far more accurate in saying
the Bush administration is all about oil and money and not about humanitarian aid.Look whats happening in darfur.Any money there? nope. what about korea? nope, none there.
ukraine? no wait, no money.Just different cabinets man.Dont judge their entire country on the decesions and greed of a handful of monsters.Canada has its own monsters.Everybody does.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
jmackenzie_15 said:
So let me get this straight....
Yugoslavia (a soverign nation) moves it's army into Kosovo (a "state" within the country of Yugoslavia) in order to stop the KLA (Albanian terrorists living in Kosovo) from killing Serbian civilians who reside in Kosovo. The UN and various "officials" estimate that 100,000 Albanians are being "ethinicaly cleansed" by the Serbian army, so Clinton bombs the capital of Yugoslavia and arms the KLA. After the war, only 3,272 civilian are found to have "dissapeared" in Kosovo, both Kosovar Albainans and Kosovar Serbs amongst them.
And Clintons war is a good thing?
Meanwhile, Sadam kills off 300,000 of his own people, develops chemical and biological weapons, defies years of UN resolutions, and sponsors terrorism....and when Bush decides to take a swing at him, that's a bad thing.
Give me a break.
It's also rather interesting that the war on Iraq generated so much more opposition than the bombing of Serbia. The only explanations I can see, given the figures I just quoted, are that either people are really REALLY confused, or the lefties only like protesting when a Republican is in power.
Similar threads
