SpankyMcFarland

Where might one need a stiff drink more? No problem with that at all.

Interesting list of demands here: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jun/23/close-al-jazeera-saudi-arabia-issues-qatar-with-13-demands-to-end-blockade Can the US support the closing of Al Jazeera?

Because they are the big cultural magnet in their part of the world with little fear of absorption, at the moment anyway. In contrast, we are the ones at the edge of a great whirlpool pulling us relentlessly in. The Ozzies are also more stroppy about authority and hierarchy in general, e.g. Ned Kelly, Waltzing Matilda, a bit like our American neighbours. The fact that we don't have intense sporting rivalries with the British attenuates the relationship as well - we are vaguely friendly.

Good. Absolutely nothing wrong with it.

No, I was a bit confused.

Are you referring to yourself in the third person there?

For whom? For us immigrants it has worked well enough.

Many indigenous people see the Crown as a protector of their treaty rights - so another reason to leave the Windsors in place.

Catholicism is a religion, not a country. Many people are adherents to religions with a hierarchy outside Canada. That is different. By keeping a British Anglican as head of state, we have chosen to mix religion and politics which is no longer a good idea if it ever was. We saw what happened when the Brits suddenly decided to change their laws on succession despite Harper's public misgivings - he was forced to do the same. That's not the way a country like Canada should operate. Anyway, we have a dwindling band of monarchists who are fanatically devoted to the current set-up, a larger cohort of (dare I say mainly female) celeb watchers who think it's vaguely neat, a growing apathetic group and a small gang of republicans like myself. The monarchy is probably too much trouble to get rid of but we should elect the GG.

And in other KSA news, a son is named heir. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/21/world/middleeast/saudi-arabia-crown-prince-mohammed-bin-salman.html Sounds like what happened in Jordan. You'd think this would be a natural thing for a father to do if he could swing it.

Interesting development: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/20/world/middleeast/qatar-saudi-arabia-trump-tillerson.html The Qatar boycott did seem a tad abrupt and I think we have yet to see specific allegations from the Saudis, of all people, on the terrorism front. It's probably futile to speculate from here but I will anyway - the M Bros and Al Jazz are probably bigger irritants to Egypt and KSA respectively than the occasional terrorist

Every account of a war is biased but always interesting. Here is one from a former member of the Viet Cong who did survive: http://www.cracked.com/personal-experiences-1562-8-facts-about-vietnam-war-i-learned-as-viet-cong.html

Oh, dear - imagining things now.

I don't think one has to hyphenate the name. Kinda beside the point.

There are people in every country just like you, convinced that all their nation's enemies are uniquely evil.

If you were on the North Vietnamese side in any capacity, you'd still be going on about the US imperialists and forgetting your own country's wrongs. There's a symmetry to tribalism.

I don't do that. I haven't done that.

Cajun land among other fine locales.

This is why i can't see you as the forgiving type. If you'd been in the VietCong you'd still be steaming about those Yankees.

I know one of those guys. Expelling populations isn't something new e.g. our own Acadians.

Were there any really good guys? Maybe some of the smaller tribes caught in the crossfire.

If some foreigner bombed your country and caused mayhem like that, would you be forgivin' and forgettin' in a hurry? The historical record says no, generally. BTW we've had boat people in our history and tribes who didn't survive at all.

South Vietnam's leaders were odd birds, Catholics in a Buddhist country who couldn't shoot straight. You've got to take a really close look at prospective allies before joining a war with them. The Vietnamese today seem remarkably forgiving about the war; grief dominates over rage and anti-Americanism does not seem to be a big problem at all.

The mullahs are in a grim endgame. They are supported by the old and poorly educated. One day they may face not violent overthrow but something even worse - laughter and ridicule.

An anti-American regime tends to increase the number of pro-American citizens. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/05/opinion/those-friendly-iranians.html?_r=1