Signals.Cpl

Yes, but when 99 out of 100 claim torture, and the media has played the role of judge, jury and executioner against the military and the government basically stating that a terrorist need only cry torture without any sort of proof and will be thus believe while the government cannot be exonerated because no amount of proof is accepted. And you honestly think that this will change anything? Nothing will change, the people who support and believe the terrorists will believe the torture and the people who support the government and military will support the government. Yes, it should. If they are intact committing a warcrime than it has everything to do with the detainees.

So you believe that there were laws broke, prisoners were tortured simply because someone said so? Care to share those sources and what they provide as evidence to support your accusation? how does Guantanamo stink of injustice? I What makes those sources credible? Taliban and al-Qaeda don't qualify for PoW status because they are no legal combatants, they are definitely not civilians and they tend to kill medical personnel therefore I wouldn't put them in that category either. - Source? Yeah, and many prison systems use the exact same tacts. Define forced position, if it is the same as stress position there are perfectly legitimate reasons for us of that tactic. Considered it, it was not US government policy nor was it sanctioned by the US military. It was a bunch of idiots who screwed up the the whole Iraq mission and cost the US forces all the goodwill they had gained. You can use this as evidence, or whatever you want as long as you provide proof that is was government sanctioned event rather than a bunch of idiots. considered it, at 16 he is perfectly capable of determining and understanding right from wrong. Being 16 is not an excuse, otherwise every 16 year old could go on a crime spree, rape and plunder their neighbourhood and get of scot-free because he was 16. Over 10 years for what? I would say the first year was more of trying to bring the POS back to health. When you provide proof that the US has done all of those things you accuse them of , then you can talk about how bad they are. No proof therefore no value to this statement. Few times in history has there been a consensus in the west, there was a divide before this, and there will be a divide after this. Really is that so? Yeah, give them due process but not to the women in their country. Don't be so naive, they kill females for ridiculous and idiotic reasons that would embers a 13th century European and you think that a "double standard" is pissing them off... What a women does in Canada would get her killed in Afghanistan, so forgive me if I don't buy this bullshit line. BS! It matter if its true, once a terrorist is captured the first thing they are taught to do is claim torture, so taking their word and claiming that the US is doing something wrong because the media takes the word of a bunch of extremist religious murderers over a legitimate government is saddening. Because the detainees did not follow the laws of war and thus disqualified themselves from being classified as POWs. Then none would qualify as POW's and I don't think the US courts should handle terrorists captured from a foreign battle field. As long as they meet the requirement then they should be classified as POWs, if they don't fit in to any category as prescribed by international law, I don't see how the US could be blamed that the other side exclude themselves don't follow the rules and thus fall in to a proper category.

How does the war of 1812 "militarize" Canada? Maybe we should stop teaching World War 1, and World War 2 history in school lest we "militarize" our youth.

You know those French Speaking people in Lower Canada, who fought side by side with the militia of Upper Canada and the British Regulars. You know the French people who live in Quebec, AKA French Canadians but hey I know that whatever the Conservative government says you must automatically oppose and thus rewrite history to fit your agenda. You seem to criticize but you present your fail to present the evidence that Lower Canada fought on the Side of the US. Your lack of knowledge amazes me...

So we have to wait until someone else buys equipment before we purchase it? Should we wait for more Cf personnel to die in preventable helicopter crashes because we don't want to be the first?

Neither does the War of 1812 discussions but hey as long as it furthers YOUR agenda its ok right? And I never hid my dislike for the dear leader nor did I ever hide my disapproval for the waste of tax payer money for his completely undeserved state funeral.

The French Canadians? They were on our side but hey I wouldn't expect you to know that.

I don't think the cuts went deep enough...

Chinooks,Sikorsky CH-148 Cyclone's, Ships have been ordered, Improved Infrastructure on bases,C-17's, CC-130J's, UAV's, MSVS, Leopard 2's, Cougar's, Buffalo's, Husky VMMD's, Rebuilding the trades that were nearly destroyed by the Liberals... I could go on but it gets boring after a while.

so now you double-down on your juvenile tirade by calling the late Jack Layton a 'nobody' and labeling him as, 'Dear Leader'. He was the the GG nor was he the PM...guess what he wasn't even a Cabinet Minister he was nobody deserving or needing a state funeral. Its funny how you can insult conservatives left,right and centre but god forbid someone dislike Layton. As for the Dear Leader...that is well deserved. You seem to be the one who cannot accept criticism, all I'm asking is what was the cost for the funeral and what did it do for Canada? The 1812 bicentennial is and important historical event that shaped our country, while Layton's death and subsequent state funeral did not do anything to shape or improve Canada, it was simply a political move sort of a pacifier for the NDP.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Supreme court deals with domestic laws right? And please provide proof.

Which once? ? Once again where is the proof? His word? Was he sleep deprived? Because if thats the case I have been tortured as well, many times at work and even more while in school. What was denied to him? He was charged and plead guilty to murder, case closed right? I don't consider Guantanamo Bay "outside the law", if it was truly so the Marines would be using the detainees as moving targets, give them no access to food, medicine, lawyers etc... Change the law, add new once where if you do not abide by the laws you will be prosecuted and held accountable for you actions. When they don't abide by the laws of war, once captured put them on trial, if found guilty execute them, kind of like what we(the allies) did at Nuremberg. If they don't qualify for POW status they don't get POW status. You want to abide by the laws? No POW status for illegal combatants, you don't meet the criteria you don't get the protection. 1)When a terrorist is captured and promptly cries torture knowing full well that some bleeding heart fool in the west, will pick up the cause to liberate them. 2)Using that fact that we have to abide by Laws of War while they don't, which means they hide in the civilian population and fire from civilian locations There are more but I am tired and will continue this tomorrow.

What were they elected to do? Twists the facts until they fit the NDP fantasy?

Well come on, you don't trust the department responsible just because the information just does not agree with your position, so it makes me wonder who would you trust? Any source as long as they support your argument?

Someone the NDP trusts, so probably the Taliban.

Those civil servants are loosing their jobs because their jobs are no longer required.

A lot less broken promises than the Liberals, a lot more delivered to the troops than any government in the last 30-40 years. We can go to a lot more places, and be more independent. Exchange to RM, British Army, US Army, RCN assets in the Persian Gulf who assisted the USN, hundreds of CF personnel posted to USCENTCOM, thousands of Army Reserve soldiers being enemy force for American troops deploying to Iraq. It;s our history, part of what makes us Canadian. I don't know why he offered a state funeral to a nobody, he was the PM and he made the decision. As for the cost, I really want to know, but it seems that when its questioning any government expenditure it is perfectly legitimate to demand and criticize but when asking for the cost of the funeral for the Dear Leader it is nonsensical. I see more value to Canadians knowing our history and celebrating said history than paying for the state funeral of someone who did not deserve one.

Rebuilding what the liberals almost destroyed?? Gives us more freedom to act with or without the US And yet with all the posturing and insulting that was done, CF members still ended up in Iraq. So what? We need a reminder of our history. How much did Layton's funeral cost?

How many of them killed a western soldier?

He is not nor was he ever a PoW, and how was he tortured?

Are we talking about International laws or American laws? How is the west no following the law? Elaborate on that, I consider the west following the law as much as possible considering that the enemy in this case intentionally uses child soldiers, does not wear a uniform or distinguishing symbols, hides within and fires from crowds of civilians using them as a shield. Any suggestions how to do this? The laws that we adhere to are the same laws that are used against us by our enemy. us

Having a military has ALWAYS meant people are trained to kill, otherwise it is just boy scouts with guns.

Yes, both cases are against the law but the group that breaks the law is the one who are using those child soldiers. As I said, one is forced while the other is volunteering to go so its not similar at all. I agree with you, but there is a point where we should reassess the laws that govern us and adapt to the situation when it becomes obvious that our actions are severely restricted because the opposition is using the laws that govern us against us with absolute impunity. Now I'm not saying we should throw away the rulebook, but at least in my view we should do our best to hold the enemy to the same standard and when they break the laws that govern warfare they are held accountable and punished when captured instead of being made out to be a victim of western aggression or something. I see the fact that we don't hold the enemy to the same standard as a hinderance, if a terrorist is captured he should be held accountable for his actions and lack of adherence to the laws of war, which in my mind means a public trial and a stiff sentence. Look at the US Army soldier who snapped and shot all those civilians in Afghanistan, he will be held accountable for his crimes while at the exact same time if a Taliban fighter is captured after committing such a crime he will not be held to the same standard. We need to hold captured enemy combatants to the exact same standard as we hold our own soldiers.

Nope, your entire position is based on asking more and more from the government and demanding more from people that work for their money, this is rampant in people who are too lazy to work and thus expect someone else to give them whatever they want. On the other hand making disgusting, idiotic and unfounded accusations is not exactly based on sound reasoning nor can it be backed up but hey I don't expect you to understand that.

1)Reported 2)Every policy you support is about the government giving you something for nothing.