Yaro

Im not saying that we shouldn't change the way the system works, but as far as the money aspect its like dealing with the pinhole next to the huge gaping one thats actually causing a problem.

Your clearly unaware of the politics that go on in most countries between the military and government, I don't want to see Canada turn into one of those. Canada's military leaders have very much traditionally maintained a distance from the decision making process I would like that to continue. I am saying that it is easier for Canadians or any people to make up there minds if emotionally charged rhetoric isn't thrown there way constantly. Its called being mature and intelligent about the decisions we make. I don't like rhetoric from my politicians either, but it is part of there job to represent Canada as a whole. That is not the Generals job. As for having the support of the people on this board, well that hardly means anything 3/4 of the people on this board are conservatives (check out the poll on the front page). Conservatives make up about 1/4 of the countries population so you do the math. While you and I may agree that there scumbags, it’s unnecessary. Rhetoric does nothing but obfuscate the honest debate of ideas. As for what Canada has done, well that’s a fairly long list(and Canada has been considerably better then most nations). Do you know who the Black Watch are/were? Well in WW2 they were mostly Canadian and Scottish troops (mostly Canadian pig farmers from sask. actually). They were without a doubt the most feared Infantry unit of WW2. The reason they were the most feared infantry of WW2 is because they didn't take prisoners, they slaughtered them, thousands of them. When faced with the prospect of going up against the black watch many German units would surrender to units from other countries because of this. But if what you want to hear is that Canadian units have a comparatively benign history, then yes your absolutely correct comparatively few stories of Canadian butchery exist so long as you don't count complicity with the US. If it will make you happy, I will withdraw the vast majority, and state that I believe it is a simple majority. However I ask you this question, could you kill a man without thought, and without regret? As to your knowledge of our military I would suggest that regardless of your service it is EXTREMELY doubtful you know more then a taper in my tornado about militaries in general or the Canadian military in specific. Although I will bow to your knowledge on most day to day issues of infantry life. I have dealt with just as many soldiers as you have, probably more. I would note also that Anti-social behavior is rarely immediately apparent or obvious and its doubtful you would even be aware of such tendencies in your unit. Define biggest fan? I want to spend almost 3x as much as we currently do to equip our soldiers with the best equipment, I want to give them the best opportunities at training, the best healthcare, and I want them to have very good pay. I also take the matter of turning someone into a sociopath isn't something I take lightly nor would I do it without serious thought and consideration for there psychology. I also wouldn't ever put our troops in harms way if its not absolutely necessary. So I don't know exactly what you would want from your biggest fans but I think my beliefs are pretty damn supportive. First off, Afghanistan is very different from Rwanda, who says I want our boys in Bosnia, or the Golan heights? What’s going on in Afghanistan is not our problem, its a US problem, they created it, and Canadian troops shouldn't have to die cleaning up the mess they made. Remember that the exact same people that the US is fighting now were the same ones using the exact same tactics against the Russians. They were trained by the US, they were funded by the US, and now they have turned on the US (not completely without cause I might add). This isn't our fight plain and simple. First of all, if your saying we should have gone to Iraq I would just LOVE to hear your reasoning. As for bad press about Afghanistan, I really didn't have that much of a problem with the initial mission in Afghanistan. I think that we could have done allot of good there, before the US all but abandoned it to head over to take control of Iraqi oil. In many ways playing politics with the US is like dancing with the devil, no matter how much they may seem to be on your side there really only on there own. As for the governments position on military funding, I really don't think that allot of people want to accept our financial situation. We are still very much in debt to a very large extent, some estimate place our cost for financing our debt at 40% of our total government cost. We don't have the advantages that the US has had when it comes to military spending (homegrown defence industry, merc contracts, borrowing advantages of having the world’s reserve currency, etc...). All of the departments in the government are working on a comparative shoe string. People are tired of having there belts tightened, and with so much third world competition life for most Canadians that don't live off of investment income has steadily gotten more difficult. So while I agree, and I personally would certainly apply a much larger budget to the military its unfair to say that either the people of Canada or the government of Canada don't care. I realize that English isn't your first language, so I am going to tell you just this once. If you want to have an intelligent conversation on this or any other topic with me please don't make stupid statements like, IS THAT A THREAT ON MY LIFE?? Because obviously no its not a threat on your life, its a warning that in debating circles it could reasonably be called putting your head in my propeller and hopping that I don't turn on the engine. For the rest of your post, no I wouldn't say I support suicide bombers, but I understand there grievance and I understand the fact that they simply have no other way of fighting back. As for the London bombings, no I don't "support them" but I do understand them. The same goes for 911, I don't "support them" any more then I support the actions that caused them. But when I see a group of people fighting back in the only way they can I am not going to turn around and say, hey you don't fight dirty, I know that there 10x your size and they have been abusing you for 50 and you have no chance to win a conventional war that’s no reason to do these things regardless of how justified you might be. That’s just stupid and unrealistic. At the end of the day, anyone that wants to be able to claim they live in a democracy has to take some responsibility for the actions of there government, in the west we stopped doing that a long long time ago.

Ya, I know the present situation. I also know that because of the closure of there main airbase in the area they will be building at least 4 permanent bases and have plans for 4 more. There is also increasing tension with Pakistan due to the US's strategic alliance with India (when are people going to learn not to trust India?). Thanks for the links, not really anything I didn't know though.

See this time of stuff I just don't get, I see people here getting mad a the supposed waste of the office of the GG but I never hear anyone talk about the bank of Canada or any of the dozen other systems/institutions that waste 100x as much money as the office of the GG.

No actually the government has never come out with the position that we were there for any other reason then to create a stable environment. Anything else beyond that is his fabrication. His job is to do what he’s told. It is irrelevant whether his statements were targeted at his troops he shouldn't be saying anything but facts to a camera for public consumption. What this really comes down to is facts vs. rhetoric, we don't need that crap give the people the unedited truth and let them make up there minds. And I would suggest you read up on Canada's exploits in WW2, I suggest you read up on the US's exploits in South America, on the Japanese exploits in Indochina, and the Philippines, the British exploits during the Boer war(quite frankly I could go on for days). The fact of the matter is that every nation on the planet has at one time or another done or supported things on par with what the Taliban did. I am not saying these people aren't scumbags, I am saying that I don't want a general feeding rhetoric to the public, which is what his statements were all about. I said MOST first off so no I haven't painted them all, it’s not a racist remark because the military isn't a race. It could perhaps be loosely described as a culture but I have no problem being called a culturalist (not a word I know but you get my meaning). While it is theoretically possible that someone on this board knows more about the military then me, its remote at best. If you want to have a go on military history its your funeral. I have stated a fact, people who join the military aren't soft cuddly types, I am sorry that it offends you but the reality is that military training is largely designed to create a sociopath. Don't like that fact? to bad, facts don't change because you don't like them. As for supporting the military, I very much support the military. I have no desire to put the military unnecessarily in harms way for political gain. Our presence in Afghanistan at this point is all about scoring points with the US administration. That to me is not a good reason for being there; we could far more effectively spend this money on better equipment, better pay, and a general upgrade for our militaries capabilities.

Which information? The information about the military bases? I read this in a report out from the pentagon, I will try to find an online version a little later. However this has been in the works for some time and the fact that Uzbekistan is evicting the USs primary air base in the region has fast tracked US plans for the bases.

You would be very hard pressed to actually prove this. I did read it, and the south is EVERY BIT as bad as any European nation when it comes to anti-Semitism. Which I followed up with by saying that the violence that is layed at the feet of these religions is based not on the nature of those religions but on there capacity for making war and the potential gains. Just like any other excuse for war. It’s very simple, religion isn't the cause of war, and it’s an excuse a method of invoking the masses that would naturally be against war into action. Not for there own gain but for the gain of whichever group is doing the invoking.

Thats external debt which is a very different stat then national debt, which is something that is almost impossible to actually calculate with any real accuracy. But the CIA method is a rather twisted one to say the least.

The US has bases in about 80% of the world’s countries, that’s not even remotely relevant. The US is setting up house in Afghanistan in a way that is completely outside the "war on terror". If the US wants to setup 8 bases to contain Russia and China, that’s fine but I don't want to be anywhere near it. I don't think it’s a good idea to get involved in a cold war that we can't possible come out ahead because of.

I agree that were going to wind up with nuclear energy being nessecary at the top of whatever process we come up with. I think that Bio-Desiel is still the most practical and likely solution, a properly tuned turbo desiel hybrid would be virtually zero emisson to boot.

Define Bike, motorbike or actual bicycle? I agree that cell phones while driving should be banned, it stuns me how poorly people drive while on the phone. I just don't get it, what is so complex about the practice?

So just out of morbid curiosity did you actually read up on the roots of Wahhabism? Or did you just assume this position based on intuition? This statement makes no sense, please rephrase. Actually it is largely true, the fact of the matter is that for the last couple of hundred years we in the west have systematically suppressed every other region on earth. This has been done not out of maliciousness but out of self interest; there are two ways to maintain dominance over another nation, by raising yourself and by pushing them down. We have done both, there are thousands of examples of this to many to discuss here but I can suggest some books if you like. I am not talking necessarily about the settlers; there is a significant minority of the Israeli population that believes that they should rule over about 80% of the Middle East, the area described biblically as the Promised Land. I would also like to point out that I am certainly not saying in any way shape or for that Islam is any more a religion of peace then Judaism or Christianity, I am saying just the opposite that they have all been and all are used as a tool for various groups of aristocracies in various wars using various methods including terrorism. Who said I do? There are and were Jewish extremist groups that have made terrorist attacks on various public groups very similar to what has been attributed to Muslim and Christian groups. One must also keep in mind that the world wide population of Jews is pretty insignificant next to either Christians or Muslims. There are 2.1 billion Christians, 1.3 billion Muslims, and only 15 million Jews worldwide. This has nothing to do with tribal conflict, is the India/Pakistani conflict tribal? There is no difference here. There is no anti-Semitism in the US? Are you kidding me? The American south is a hotbed of anti-Semitism. As for abortion clinic bombings and assassinations, the happen often enough that they are quickly forgotten that hardly makes them less common. Once again, this isn't about Muslim aggression, we all agree that there is and has been Muslim aggression. What I was correcting wasn't that there was no Muslim aggression just that there was just as much Christian and Jewish aggression. The aggression historically has been far more accurately based on the individual nation’s ability to wage war and the perceived benefits of waging war then on a comparative difference of ideology. Kind of funny, you may not know this but the CIA evaluation of Bin Laden used to call him agnostic. It wasn't until he started to attack the US instead of the USSR that they started calling him a Muslim fanatic. Bin Laden is a very well educated man, religion to him like religion to most educated people with a grudge is a means to an end, he can attract and manipulate a great many people with religion. It has been done before and it will be done again. Riiiiiiight, you have pretty plainly displayed your ignorance on a multitude of subjects on this board, I would say that your fairly a-typical of the talk radio crowd and I would guess that’s where you get a great deal of your information from. Let me tell you a little secret, they lie to you, allot. Don't believe me? Ask yourself this, do you know what happened to the Kursk? Ask yourself this, why was the US military allowed to hand pick the reporters that were allowed into Iraq? And why did they have to submit all of there articles to the military for fact checking before they were released? Unlike you I have critical thinking skills, I don't believe everything everyone tells me and doubly so when they have something to gain from lying to me.

Hilliers job isn't to make policy or to represent Canada's philosophical position to the media, he’s a general and like everyone else in the army his job is to shut up in public and do what he’s told. What he states a private citizen and what he states in his official capacity as a general are two very separate things. What you and I think the purpose of the armed forces is is irrelevant as is his opinion of it. As for what exactly terrorists are, I would suggest that you be careful what you say because every country on earth has at one time or another supported terrorist actions. If what he stated he stated straight to the troops in private I would have no problem with it, he didn't do that he stated it in a public address. And yes I think the vast majority of the people in the military have violent and anti-social tendencies. That is the nature of any military; it doesn't attract gentle or peaceful people.

Big deal? Bio-Desiel has been around for years and is much easier to produce. It takes 900 degrees to change the wood to oil, that wouldn't be done in the car. Oh and all the laws of thermodynamics are wrong, we have known that for a while now. Not that it makes much of a difference, its not like theres a massive overabundance of wood in the world right now.

The US is currently setting up 8 permanent bases in Afghanistan, 6 of these bases are going to be set up for strategic air defence. Now unless the Taliban recently aquired some advanced fighter jets those bases don't have anything to do with Afgahanistan there completely aimed at the Chinese and Russians. I wan't nothing to do with any cold war that the US wants to start to distract there population from there economic problems.

This mission is total crap. The first mission in Afganistan had a reasonable premise, this one is about nothing more then American empire building, there is no way we should be there.

Honestly I am not going to bother, the fact is that I don't like Canadian restrictions on free speech. I largely agree with you on this issue about everything except the fact that you believe that it is better in the US where as I think it is worse. Since its a debate with a comparitively small group of examples on each side of the border its difficult to argue. What I don't understand about the Marijuana issues at the end of the day is why there hasn't been a referendum on this, there isn't anything about this issue that doesn't make it suitable for a referendum and yet we seem to be avoiding the popular will on the issue at all cost. And please don't bring up what the US wants, I don't care what the US wants, I have nothing against them but this is Canada.

ahhhh, clearly I misunderstood the the definition of a cent. Thanks

Hardly irrelevant, Israeli Zionist roots and the not insignificant portion of the population there that believes in the Jewish right to rule the promised land makes up just as large a percentage as terrorists in the Muslim nations. Jewish Terrorism in France There are many examples of Jewish terrorism, just because you rarely hear about it because it’s not fashionable to pick on the Jews doesn't mean it does not happen. As for the Christians, while religion has been marginalized in the west enough that such religion based terrorism are rare I could easily point to one of the many abortion clinic bombings or assassinations, the rather substantial anti-Semitism in much of the US south that persists to this day. But lets ignore the west and focus on the few sects of Christianity in the east such as the substantial Christian population in the north east of India where ongoing terrorists attacks have killed thousands in the last century. There have been similar attacks in China, Russia, and pretty much everywhere Christians are found to be worshiping with significant fervor. This of course ignores the Ku Klux Klan who is at their heart a protestant organization. When you consider the objectives of Christian terrorists and the conditions and comparative wealth of these people its pretty hard to argue that there is anywhere near the justification coming from Christians and Jews. This is of course all delightfully ignorant of the fact that the primary philosophy that has been attributed to the rise in terrorism has its roots in western politics. (Wahhabism) Of course someone willing to really go back some time would quickly come to the conclusion that Christianity is easily the most violent of these related religions as no other group can lay claim to terrorism on the level of the crusades alone much less he inquisition... Religion isn't the motivating factor for the leadership of any terrorist organization, it’s a tool used by that leadership to recruit the uneducated and desperate foot soldiers that fight any war. In this they are no different then any group fighting any other type of war. The IRA is most certainly about religion, it was a fight against having a new religion thrust upon them, that is the central theme regardless of what it has evolved into. Clearly you have a baseline bias against Muslims feed to you by the main stream media. Congrats your a sheep.

You want me to start linking examples of Jewish and Christian violence? How far back should we go? How about just to the IRA for Christians, and to early Israel for the Jews? Would that do? Christianity and Judaism have just as violent (far more violent in the case of Christianity) a history as does the Muslim faith and certainly just as exclusionary one.

So it was under voter rights that the Supreme Court interviened? I thought that this right didn't extend to actual interference in cases only to review? or are you saying that they used this as the opening to interfere? because I don't see how thats possible. Certs (if Im not mistaken, and I am not a lawyer) don't provide for the certification of fact only for review on legality? Not that Im a lawyer mind you.

Jews and Christians can live in peace together? Are you serious?

Is the principle decision making process in such a case the same? How and to what extent does presedence and common law play a role?

You’re not talking about efficiency, your talking about outcomes. There’s a very substantial difference, and I agree that both are important but it’s absolutely not efficiency. Speaking from pure standpoint efficiency is measure in man-hours and resources consumed/occupied and outcomes. Nothing else is consumptive and thus nothing else has to do with efficiency. There is no such thing as a definitive study on the matter unfortunately. Any institution that commissions a report is likely to be at least somewhat biased. The closest I think I can think of is the 1998 US governments evaluation of the Canadian system which spelled out pretty distinctly that the Canadian system was far more efficient then the US one. I certainly agree with you that even privatized our system wouldn't be as bad as the US's because we tend to have more sanity with adjacent issues but no, generally speaking there is no evidence to suggest that private systems are more efficient then public ones, more cost effective yes, more efficient no.

I am aware of the case and I know most of the pertinent facts surrounding it. Yes there needed to be changes but the current situation is almost as inequitable. No there isn't Child Custody Clearly Biased Link but references relevent studies and has a great number of them. The fact of the matter is that Canadian family court is extremely anti male. The statistics are very very lopsided in this regard. What the hell do any of these have to do with race or sex? are you saying that black female can't get stock options? This is just sad. So you’re saying that the Mormons are racist? Do you have any non-anecdotal evidence of this? Because I would love to hear it. Same with any other religious groups. This is funny indeed, maybe it’s the fact that I live in Vancouver but I don't think I have been to an all white restaurant in years. As for the notion of token minorities what a ludicrous statement, there are still many parts of the country that are upwards of 95% white, do you understand the statistical connotations of that? How often have you seen a white person working in a sushi house? You know I eat sushi at least twice a week and I don't think I have ever seen one. No I’m not talking about family owned businesses, I am talking about corporations that have upwards of 200 employees that are uniformly Chinese or Indian. Men get paid more because there more valuable employees, they work more hours, more days and breakdown less. It’s not superiority its difference. Men dominate families because there more aggressive, again not superior just different. Your once again misrepresenting my position, I don't think the government should have anything to do with marriage. If people want to get married then they should make whatever legal contract they want and have whatever civil ceremony they want, but there should be no special laws governing marriage.