Leaderboard

How was invading Iraq, "fighting terrorism"? How is selling weapons to Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, the countries that fund ISIS and Al Qaeda, "fighting terrorism"? How was attacking Libya, "fighting terrorism"? How is pushing a democratically elected government out of power in Egypt, by supporting Mobarak's military in a coup, "fighting terrorism"? How is shooting missiles from drones, with a 40:1, civilian:terrorist kill ratio, "fighting terrorism"? I would appreciate a discussion and replies based on substance, rather than empty, shallow accusations.

Oh yeah, I forgot the good ol' "we deserve it" argument...and you know, at one point in my life, I might have bought into that too - I even used to believe in the idea of "oh hey man, if only they knew us better, we'd all get along" - man was I stupid to believe that crap. The fact is; It's not us...it's them. As you people keep saying, it's homegrown terrorism, and many of these people are from countries that England, France, Belgium etc have never done a solitary thing to. The Islams have waged a religious war and the west is terrified to accept that fact. I don't care who started it, but I know what side I'll be on when it comes to my country. The way we win is the same way we ended Japan's threat - plain and simple.

Through your observation and calculations of what has transpired since 911, have you ever taken into consideration West's foreign policy and actions as part of the equation? Everything from supporting dictators to installing dictators to selling weapons that are used to kill innocent people and of course the military interventions.

All "other" governments are foreign...including Canada/Canadians, which also tried to influence the U.S. election. Sorry...it ain't treason...doesn't meet the elements of the offense. But does make for great drama ! Even Edward Snowden is not charged with treason....just espionage.

I am generalizing. I don't know what or how each of these individuals can justify killing innocent people. Much like I am unable to understand how a Western soldier can drop a bomb from an airplane, or press the red button on the drone joystick, knowing many innocent people will die. I suspect many use revenge and anger and the whole 'us vs them' mentality to justify their actions.

You are not taking US foreign policy into consideration when trying to figure why these attacks are happening. This is one of the biggest flaws when approaching this conversation.

Killing random people has already been done in various countries by airplanes, helicopters, drones and handheld weapons.

I get your point, but out of the things in your list, getting rid of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt was one of the best things to occur in recent years in terms of reducing future terrorism. As bad as Syria / Iraq currently is, at least we don't have the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood in power in Egypt trying to spread radical Sunni Islam and working with Turkey to create a new Caliphate. Also, the Egyptian military got rid of the Muslim Brotherhood without US support. Obama was naively pro-Muslim Brotherhood and to an extent betrayed liberals in Egypt during the Arab Spring.

So basically, everything that I listed which have happened in the past 15 years are not "fighting terrorism". A few points about your comments: - The information about Iraq's WMD was made up by the administration. The reason given to attack Iraq was not just an "oops". It was a lie. - Saudi and the Gulf States DO fund ISIS and Al Qaeda. It's important that you learn and acknowledge this fact. - Libya was causing "a lot of trouble"? What? Lots of countries kill people and have killed a lot people than Gaddafi did. This policeman attitude is a perfect example of fanning the flames of terrorism. - Egypt: You didn't respond to the comment I made. What I said was that, after the Arab spring and after the democratically elected government was elected by Egyptians, U.S. was involved in a coupe in Egypt to re-install the Mobarak military back into power. Essentially, helping another dictator come into power. - Drones: When you kill thousands of innocent people for the sake of getting a few so-called terrorists, that's another example of fanning the flames of terrorism. Every single action above in the past 15 years has not been about "fighting terrorism". In fact, every one of those acts have nurtured terrorism and animosity towards the West. It's important for you to acknowledge what we have helped to create, instead of empty, superficial claims that we are "fighting terrorism".

Ya, blame it on Trump again even though he had nothing to do with what has happened in the past but who now will have to take on and try to clean up the swamp that those wonderful little snowflake leftist liberals brought to western countries with their multicultural dreams. When Canada had an immigration policy that accepted their majority of immigrants from Britain and Europe there were no need to concern ourselves about race and culture. Now that is all we seem to get these days is more races and cultures, traditions and religions that must now all be protected and promoted. One day a Canadian prime minister might have to speak four languages in order to become the PM of Canada. Hey, you never know. This is Canada, don't you know. Anything goes.

Isn't this just the old Star Chamber with a do-over, or have I got my conspiracies mixed-up?

It turns out that it was an Israeli-American teenager, living in Israel who had sent at least 100 bomb threats to Jewish Centres around the world. His lawyer says it's because of a tumor. Link

I understand the snowflakes were outraged because they believed this guy was a white supremacist. However, by the time you're in university you ought to at least know enough to check things out for yourself. And when it really comes down to it, it doesn't matter. Even if he was saying that white were superior to Blacks or whatever, he has a right to say it, and people have a right to come and listen to him. There are a lot of moronic hatemongeres out there giving speeches I don't like, but I don't believe they should be shut down, let alone beaten up. The leader of the Toronto BLM movement being one example of a racist rabble rouser.

I think many people are going to have egg on their faces or eat crow when all this comes out. I do know some of it...apparently the CIA and or FBI have been spying on 600 Americans, some business people, actors news reporters, politicians and the FBI has been sitting on it for the last 2 years plus the fact the "Russia" thing is a scam. The purpose of the is to push Trump out of office and put the committee hearings on stall mode. Fox news ..Hannity is going to open this up tonight.

The rate is 40% and not 80% as you said earlier. Nearly 40% of Muslim world’s population unable read or write: IINA Report Which is pretty low compared to the average rate in the world, but it's not at the ridiculous number you made up earlier.

Can you show something to back the following comment you made?

If hypocrisy is what gets your goat the fact the shiniest beacons on the planet for democracy, justice, liberty and freedom also embrace tyrants should do the trick. I find its just about impossible to give a damn about anyone who would apologize for or defend that or get pissed off when that grotesque contradiction is rubbed in their faces.

The stock market would have risen regardless. The only thing the election did was bring some clarity to things since it gave the Republicans the ability to actually govern, and, the market thought, eliminated the deadlocked condition of the government Now, as it looks like the deadlocks will continue, the market is slowing.

I agree that your Quran is drivel...however, Allah orders Muslims to fight the Unbeliever until all religion is for Allah. All it takes is a small percentage of your cult taking this order to heart to ruin one's day.

First off I really don't appreciate being called names when you don't even know me. Second of al If you want to discuss the merits of "jihad terrorism" as you put it open anorher thread and let's discuss. However, it has no context here as the suspect in UK is believed to have been a 'home grown' terrorist.

Because the people who are doing the violence make it about their religion. Saying Allah Akbar before committing an act of violence is an indication that Religion is factor.

Why are some people wanting this to be so much about 'religion' and not just accept the simple fact that we have been, for so long, been fucking with people around the world and now we're experiencing the consequences? A guy gets in a car and drives through people. Then gets out and starts stabbing. This sounds like a guy who has lost the plot, most likely created by rage. Where is this rage coming from? Is it because Muslims have this unique rage and thirst for revenge? People who subscribe to other religions do not have this rage?

So the Cold War was a fabrication?

You are very naive if you think that it would change anything in the mind of a terrorist. Think about it. The guy is ready to commit an horrible crime and deal with all the consequences that go with it. Do you really think that losing its canadian citizenship weigh anything in the balance? Picture this... "I will kill alot of people, I will end up in jail for life, or I will suicide myself, I will be know as a terrorist anywhere on this planet... but at least I will not lose my canadian citizenship, so let's do it. Oh wait, what? Now I can lose that citizenship, ahhh shoot! ok I won't do it then." Is it how you think it will works? What garanty you have the terrorist will be considered terrorist in its native country? Yes in some countries the terrorists will have a really hard time, but in some others not. One thing for sure, the family of a potential terrorist will fear to reveal information to the authorities if it means that it can lead to citizenship revokation. To me, this weigh way more than anything else.

The US is far and away the biggest terrorist nation/group in the world. Has been for well over a hundred years. It replaced the UK after WWII, although the UK still supports these mega-terrorists. And all the "christian" churches supporting these worse than Nazis don't share the blame.

Arab World? Do you mean all the land Arab Muslims captured in the conquests of Mohammad and his Companions? Does that include Spain and France? Or anywhere Islam sets it foot? Poor Islam...always misunderstood. All it wants is everything. What's wrong with that??

He's opposed, and rightly so, to the war for dictatorship that the west has waged in many parts of the world. What was that supposed to solve again? Oh right, tyranny.

It's never too late to remove these illegal criminal so-called refugees from Canada. It just takes you know what on the part of our politicians to summon up enough courage to do the job. If I were a politician and allowing this criminal act to continue than I should not be a politician at all. After all as a politician is it not a part of your job to defend and protect Canada from people who enter Canada illegally? By encouraging and accepting them and allowing them to shout refugee is a joke. They already have shown that they have contempt for the law. Sad indeed.

Perhaps you're unable to distinguish between what is fighting against terrorism and what is fighting for oil, territory and feeding the military industrial complex.

I really do not care what my opponents think is effective.

I think he's taking it on faith that all religions are ultimately good and peaceful. ...and there it is.

I can see how the consequences of what a grand-father did would blowback in his descendants faces if what he did was especially awful. In the case of a really beloved and honoured grand-father where the grand-kids just can't bring themselves to condemn or reconcile the awful things that grand-dad did I can easily see how those consequences would continue blowing back for generations. I like your analogy that a nation is like a person. Recall how I often point to big powerful nations that diddle with smaller powerless ones as being an awful lot like an adult who sexually abuses a child. What's most comparable is how the dysfunction that such depravity causes can persist and reverberate down thru the generations. Most people also have a really tough time facing the fact their grand-dad was a disgraceful pervert, especially in the case of a grand-dad that's regarded as a moral pillar of a community - a Shining Beacon so to speak.

Islam, from the start, was spread by the sword. It was sort of like the guy on the beach getting sand kicked on him...it's about revenge and sticking it to the unbeliever. It's basic history starting with Mohammad and carried on by his Companions. Your denying it doesn't make it disappear. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Muslim_conquests

It's a little ironic you talk about history and talk about things you have no clue about.

Sorry...history disagrees with you.

TSS made no such a link to Nowruz. He just talked about anniversary in belgium attack.....it's in your own imaginary mind. First if all for your information Nowruz is a zoroastrian tradition celebration not islamic. If anything this invalidates your argument to link anything to islam Second of all Nowruz this year was on 20th march. Today is 22nd march. Why are you making things up?

Dude....Nowruz was on Monday....Are you gonna somehow link this to this event?

So? You get nutjobs in any religion. Why should I gamble on the whole lot?

Not when this is coneniently blamed on 1.5 billion people practising that religion....

You're free to let your racism cloud my bigotry towards your preferred cult. No matter to moi. However, those that did follow this...errr...story...know what the first descriptions of the event were (two masked men yelling Allahu Akbar)...and how they evolved to become a a single White Nationalist Trump Supporter...even though there is zero evidence of THAT. He also 'liked' Tommy Douglas and Jack Layton...but that doesn't fit your narrative...Mr CJPME.

What about parents who raise their kids in dangerous war-torn dictatorships, shouldn't they be faulted and charged with child abuse too? And what about people who arm and fund dictators, what do you think they should be charged with and why?

Well then you should have no complaints when native people start talking about nationalism. A few native people I've mentioned the Earthling thing to don't laugh at all. They don't like what it implies one little bit.

I think the biggest reason why he was elected was that Americans were tired of getting screwed over by the corrupt political establishment in the GOP and Democrat parties, and he promised to fix problems no other candidate has really ever talked about. The issues he cared about appealed to older white men, which is a very big (and powerful) demographic.

We could just give them their country back but people get all pissy about that and say they never had a country...so instead I suggest we all just become Earthlings and do unto others yadda yadda but people get even more pissy when you talk like that. Round and round it goes. I have little doubt people will still be all pissy about this a 1000 years from now.

Aborting sperm is just as appalling. Every single one is precious.

Good luck with that.

No. It's because they volunteered to go do something I and many other Canadians find reprehensible and despicable. And spare me the sob stories about all the poor little school girls - as I told you years ago you guys should have stuffed every single empty cargo plane that left Afghanistan full of little school girls. I wonder what became of all the little boys that were being raped nightly that Canadian soldiers were ordered to ignore at the behest of our politicians? Like Khadr they've probably all got beards and machine guns now so fuck em'. Does that sound about right?

Everything violates egalitarianism. Being born to better parents gives you a huge leg up compared to being born to worse parents, and there isn't a thing anyone can do about it. That a few people out of tens of millions get to do some mostly ceremonial duties in an official capacity is hardly a big violation of egalitarianism compared to everything else. The violation of secularism is also largely symbolic. Again, there are far larger violations of secularism that actually impact people's lives and the nation's economy, like preferential treatment of religious institutions, rulings that put religious rights ahead of individual rights, etc. Further, one can make the argument that the religious duties of the monarch are separate from their state duties, and so not really a violation of secularism. I'm a firm advocate of both secularism and egalitarianism but the monarchy doesn't bother me. That's a dumb argument and the fact that some people may have made it doesn't mean that it had any bearing on how decisions were actually made. It seems unlikely that courts would consider past agreements null and void simply because Canada decided to no longer have a monarch. It is likely that court decisions about first nations issues would be unchanged, and they would consider continuity from the "crown" referred to in old treaties to whatever new Canadian government existed. Militaries in republics take oaths too, just not to a monarch. Don't think you'd save much money there. SJWs don't use any logic or facts in their arguments. They'll be describing Canada as a white supremacist patriarchy long after every white guy is long dead.

Math is only boring to boring people.

Here's a list of the largest private charities: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wealthiest_charitable_foundations These charities typically spend about ~10% of their current endowment yearly, meaning that the largest ones each spend $1-4 billion yearly on their programs. In comparison, here's a list of foreign aid by governments: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_development_aid_country_donors Only the top 7 governments outspend private charities. How does the "average" government's contribution compare to the "average" charities contribution? You're doing the very same thing that you accuse me of doing - pointing to an "exceptional" government (the US government) and stating that the work it does can't be equaled by private charities. And yet there are many charities that do far more than an "average" government does. Your comparison to a silly claim that "everyone is a billionaire" is not in any way analogous and is not worth responding to further. As for your claim about "ability to focus"... care to elaborate? Many charities have a laser-like focus on the specific issue(s) they are trying to address, whereas the same obviously cannot be said of government which are always dealing with thousands of different priorities and trade-offs, and where programs can be cut or modified at any political whim, making them in many ways less reliable than private institutions which exist only to address one specific issue or set of issues and have endowment funds with sufficient funds to carry them through years or decades of continued work even as donation income fluctuates from year to year.