|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Are you against the War?
Posted: 1/4/2006 4:47:35 PM |
BTW grog why is it you alway want to insult people. Didn't I just read on another thread how for your new years resolution you were going to change your ways?
Is it possible for you to debate rather than belittle?
To truly learn how nasty and negative a person is, read their last 25 messages. | |
|
| Are you against the War?
Posted: 1/4/2006 11:11:56 PM | "BTW grog why is it you alway want to insult people. Didn't I just read on another thread how for your new years resolution you were going to change your ways?
Is it possible for you to debate rather than belittle?
To truly learn how nasty and negative a person is, read their last 25 messages."
No kidding!! Sad, isn't it, how some people take any challenge of their ideas as a personal attack; and then try to undermine those who actually DO have something to say by accusing them of being "negative" or "belittling."
Sort of, dare I say it, bush league.
Oh well, if you can't take the heat... | |
|
| Are you against the War?
Posted: 1/4/2006 11:21:58 PM | Correction
If Great Britain jumped off a cliff would Canada? Canada's claim they declared war on Germany was because of something to do with their loyality to Great Britain.
Such loyalty. You not helping in Iraq.
1. It's obvious, that the UK is in Iraq, atm, so the cliff question is just...pointless.
2. Iraq wasn't occupying another country...Germany was.
3. We have an even clearer defensive alliance, with both the UK and the US, today. The key word, being "defensive". Which, led us into Afghanistan, after Osama...remember him?
4. In WW2, the UK had a defensive alliance with Poland...which they felt obliged to honour. As it was a defensive posture, Canada felt obliged to help it's ally. Canada was still a Dominion, within the British Commonwealth. Canadians were still considered British citizens, then. The military did, and still does, pledge allegiance to the Queen, our head of state.
There is nothing, that compares to Iraq. Iraq was no threat. No WMDs. No Al Qaeda ties. Nada.
P.S. Thanks, for implying Canada is disloyal. Glad you appreciated what we did on 9/11, on following into Afghanistan, on trying to help get a war resolution out of the UN, on transfering extra troops to Afghanistan, and our reaction to Katrina. lol
Peace  | |
|
| Are you against the War?
Posted: 1/5/2006 5:57:50 AM | "Iraq wasn't a threat to you."
msquared...I be interested in how you know what was in Saddams mind and what his intentions were towards the US.....
"Iraq wasn't occupying another country...Germany was. "
open.....time to wake up...it's a new world and the terrorists do not work overtly.....terrorists are already occupying the US and Canada | |
|
| Are you against the War?
Posted: 1/5/2006 6:04:08 AM |
msquared...I be interested in how you know what was in Saddams mind and what his intentions were towards the US.....
I don't have to know what was in his mind, I just have to realize what his military capabilities were.
open.....time to wake up...it's a new world and the terrorists do not work overtly.....terrorists are already occupying the US and Canada
Terrorists living in the US and Canada is quite a bit different from an occupation. | |
|
| Are you against the War?
Posted: 1/5/2006 6:23:47 AM | "I don't have to know what was in his mind, I just have to realize what his military capabilities were."
msquared....and you are confident in what you know is the extent of Saddams capabilities?...what are your qualifications?
Terrorists living in the US and Canada is quite a bit different from an occupation."
so because since the terrorists blend into the surroundings and don't dress in military attire and disrupt your day to day living you don't consider them to be an ocupying force? | |
|
| Are you against the War?
Posted: 1/5/2006 6:26:54 AM | "In WW2, the UK had a defensive alliance with Poland...which they felt obliged to honour. As it was a defensive posture, Canada felt obliged to help it's ally. Canada was still a Dominion, within the British Commonwealth. Canadians were still considered British citizens, then"
open....I think you need to read up on the history of that period....Britian had a treaty with Poland....Canada was independant of Britian.... | |
|
| Are you against the War?
Posted: 1/5/2006 6:36:25 AM | I don't have to know what was in his mind, I just have to realize what his military capabilities were.
MS:
The US knows military capabilities fairly well. What we don't know is the terrorist next door assembling the truck bomb.
So you saying Saddam loves America so much that no terrorist were in his country.
Hell the US had like 75 sleeper cells in its country probably Canada had close to the same number. So don't you think it is a bit naive to think an American hating dictator had no involvement with terrorist? It is so refreshing to know you guys are not in position to dictate US National Security and a Kum Ba Ya morning to you. | |
|
| Are you against the War?
Posted: 1/5/2006 7:14:51 AM |
P.S. Thanks, for implying Canada is disloyal. Glad you appreciated what we did on 9/11, on following into Afghanistan, on trying to help get a war resolution out of the UN, on transfering extra troops to Afghanistan, and our reaction to Katrina. lol
Don't put words in my mouth. I didn't say Canada was disloyal to the US. You don't owe the US any loyalty. What I'm saying is you pledge your loyalty to Great Britain Canada isn't fighting along side Great Britain in Iraq.
BTW the US appreciates your help tho. | |
|
longte
|
Joined: 10/18/2004
Msg: 1211 | |
| Are you against the War?
Posted: 1/5/2006 7:30:22 AM | Yes there were terrorist cells in the USA
Only problem is that most of them were linked directly back to Saudi Arabian money, and were not funded by, or using Iraqi manpower
Yes there would have been some terrorists in Iraq, but there are a whole lot more potential terrorists now
Every innocent son or daughter, husband or wife, who has watched their loved ones die, supposedly by accident, at the hands of Coalition Forces, is now a potential terrorist
Yes Sadaam had limited links to terrorists
But Saudi Arabia had definite, already well proven links, both through money and manpower
..
. | |
|
| Are you against the War?
Posted: 1/5/2006 7:38:06 AM | "Every innocent son or daughter, husband or wife, who has watched their loved ones die, supposedly by accident, at the hands of Coalition Forces, is now a potential terrorist"
longte....there are many more civilian deaths caused by the insurgents so are they taking up arms against the insurgents?
and I would luv to know who you have making up your intellegence reports that enable you to make your conclusions.. | |
|
| Are you against the War?
Posted: 1/5/2006 7:45:19 AM |
"Every innocent son or daughter, husband or wife, who has watched their loved ones die, supposedly by accident, at the hands of Coalition Forces, is now a potential terrorist"
longte....there are many more civilian deaths caused by the insurgents so are they taking up arms against the insurgents?
and I would luv to know who you have making up your intellegence reports that enable you to make your conclusions..
I am not sure what part of Long's statment you are implying is made up. I do not think it is unreasonable to assume that innocent people have died as a result of Coalition Forces. Further, I do not think it is unreasonable to assume that those same people may want to 'hit' back so to speak.
With respect to the "insurgents / terrorists / whatever is the proper name" I would think the same mentality applies. I suspect that Iraqi civilians who lose family members as a result of suicide bombings want to 'hit back' at those responsible. | |
|
| Are you against the War?
Posted: 1/5/2006 3:57:53 PM | [QUOTE]With respect to the "insurgents / terrorists / whatever is the proper name" I would think the same mentality applies. I suspect that Iraqi civilians who lose family members as a result of suicide bombings want to 'hit back' at those responsible[/QUOTE]
Exactly
so hopefully soon they will step up and quit tolerating these suicide bombings. Hold the terrorists responsible for the terrorist attacks!!!! | |
|
| Are you against the War?
Posted: 1/5/2006 4:10:58 PM | "so hopefully soon they will step up and quit tolerating these suicide bombings. Hold the terrorists responsible for the terrorist attacks!!!!"
notaliberal....it would be nice but reading most of the posts in here and reading newpaper articles no matter who is responsible the US and Bush is blamed....I have no doubt the insurgents have seen the unrelentess Bush bashing and use that to their advantage by killing as many civilians as they can without the blame.....and the insurgents kill many more civilians than the US unintentionally does | |
|
| Are you against the War?
Posted: 1/5/2006 4:25:34 PM | Yea the insurgents can kill as many as they want and never get blamed.
To truly learn how nasty and negative a person is, read their last 25 messages.
Whew! File under approach with caution. | |
|
| Are you against the War?
Posted: 1/5/2006 4:37:41 PM | ^^
and why because the US liberal media is going to report the next we hate Bush headlines | |
|
| Are you against the War?
Posted: 1/5/2006 5:53:52 PM | Yeah, I'll bet FOX news will get right on that one .... if they ever can find their way out of Bush's posterior region.
Xobella - | |
|
| Are you against the War?
Posted: 1/6/2006 12:24:41 AM | From the Dallasguy, (where else?) "To truly learn how nasty and negative a person is, read their last 25 messages."
- That's great, coming from the "guy" who jumped in like a dirty shirt on the "Paris is Burning" string (post #2 I think it was) and let fall these immortal, if unoriginal, words: "Burn, baby, burn". How's that for nasty and negative, eh Guy? | |
|
| Are you against the War?
Posted: 1/6/2006 1:22:29 AM |
open....I think you need to read up on the history of that period....Britian had a treaty with Poland....Canada was independant of Britian....
I guess that would be the same treaty with Poland, that I mentioned? This was part of our constitution (which was still still in the hands of Britain) at the time...
III. EXECUTIVE POWER.
9. The Executive Government and Authority of and over Canada is hereby declared to continue and be vested in the Queen.
10. The Provisions of this Act referring to the Governor General extend and apply to the Governor General for the Time being of Canada, or other the Chief Executive Officer or Administrator for the Time being carrying on the Government of Canada on behalf and in the Name of the Queen, by whatever Title he is designated.
11. There shall be a Council to aid and advise in the Government of Canada, to be styled the Queen's Privy Council for Canada; and the Persons who are to be Members of that Council shall be from Time to Time chosen and summoned by the Governor General and sworn in as Privy Councillors, and Members thereof may be from Time to Time removed by the Governor General.
12. All Powers, Authorities, and Functions which under any Act of the Parliament of Great Britain, or of the Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, or of the Legislature of Upper Canada, Lower Canada, Canada, Nova Scotia, or New Brunswick, are at the Union vested in or exerciseable by the respective Governors or Lieutenant Governors of those Provinces, with the Advice, or with the Advice and Consent, of the respective Executive Councils thereof, or in conjunction with those Councils, or with any Number of Members thereof, or by those Governors or Lieutenant Governors individually, shall, as far as the same continue in existence and capable of being exercised after the Union in relation to the Government of Canada, be vested in and exerciseable by the Governor General with the Advice, or with the Advice and Consent of or in conjunction with the Queen's Privy Council for Canada, or any Member thereof, or by the Governor General individually, as the Case requires, subject nevertheless (except with respect to such as exist under Acts of Parliament of Great Britain or of the Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland) to be established or altered by the Parliament of Canada.(7)
13. The provisions of this Act referring to the Governor General in Council shall be construed as referring to the Governor General acting by and with the Advice of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada.
14. It shall be lawful for the Queen, if Her Majesty thinks fit, to authorize the Governor General from Time to Time appoint any Person or any Persons jointly or severally to be his Deputy or Deputies within any Part or Parts of Canada, and in that Capacity exercise during the Pleasure of the Governor General such of the Powers, Authorities, and Functions of the Governor General as the Governor General deems it necessary or expedient to assign to him or them, subject to any Limitations or Directions expressed or given by the Queen; but the Appointment of such a Deputy or Deputies shall not affect the Exercise by the Governor General himself of any Power, Authority, or Function.
15. The Command-in-Chief of the Land and Naval Militia, and of all Naval and Military Forces, of and in Canada, is hereby declared to continue to be vested in the Queen.
16. Until the Queen otherwise directs, the Seat of Government of Canada shall be Ottawa.
Peace | |
|
| Are you against the War?
Posted: 1/6/2006 1:54:05 AM | I have been reading very carefully the posts to this blog. Some very interesting comments on both sides of the issue.
For we who are stateside it is a discussion. For our brave troops fighting and dying it is real. I just pray each day that they come home soon and the killing stops.
| |
|
| Are you against the War?
Posted: 1/6/2006 2:03:44 AM | just got a call from the government...this blog is now declared out of bounds. The discussion ends now.
from your governmental spy
| |
|
| Are you against the War?
Posted: 1/6/2006 3:25:31 AM | If I had a draft card, I'd burn it.
If I had a bra, I'd burn it.
If I had a copy of the DVD "Born on the Fourth of July." I'd burn that.
But there are no large collective rallies, just fringe groups from Farrakan to Obie Wan.
The scoreboard says 2176, not over 50,000
Mary from Peter, Paul & Mary, ...now LOOKS like Puff the Magic Dragon.
No one cares, no one dares...
This ain't the sixties. Pass the cheetos and turn on Jerry Springer please.
We shrug and say "Aw, hell, it's only a few more years....the Democrats will take it back."
Then, horror of horrors, I read that Kerry is considering making another run at the office.
I shudder to think what we will become in the next ten years. As Jim Morrison used to sing...
"The Blue Bus....is calling us.....driver where you taking us?"
Toon | |
|
| Are you against the War?
Posted: 1/6/2006 3:45:42 AM | Don't put words in my mouth. I didn't say Canada was disloyal to the US.
Sorry. So, you were answering your own question then? "If Great Britain jumped off a cliff would Canada?"
What I'm saying is you pledge your loyalty to Great Britain Canada isn't fighting along side Great Britain in Iraq.
Besides, we now have a defense pact with the US, as well. I guess we decided that the neither was acting defensively. Unlike WW2, when Britain declared war, based on a defense pact with Poland. Canada did agree that the US was attacked by a militant group, living in Afghanistan.
Peace | |
|
| Are you against the War?
Posted: 1/6/2006 7:44:21 AM | Remember all the talk in this thread about how the recent elections would lead to the lessoning of the US military presence in Iraq...how the violence would decrease...
I think it was 138 killed yesterday, including 11 soldiers...I don't think the end is nearily as close as most would like. | |
|
|
| Page 49 of 54
|
14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54 |
|
Home
login 
