Wilber

Andrew When we deal with other countries we deal with the legitimate governments of those countries, we do not pick and chose which factions of those governments suit us and ignore the rest. We expect no less when other countries deal with us. You seem to feel that we do not have to abide by these courtesies because we are somehow superior and know what is good for them.

Because you choose to do so. No one is forcing you.

Again... some US states have decriminalized small amounts of marijuana -- has the US federal gov't stopped "trading" with these states? Hmmm..... They need our resources (they don't buy them out of charity!) and so I highly doubt if they would stop importing oil or lumber or raw logs from us if we legalize this harmless herb. Again - why would the US have a problem? The problem is not with the USA - the problem exists only in the minds of those Canadians who cower at the face of the elephant next door. I'll say it one more time. I am not about to risk my standard of living, that of my family or fellow Canadians, just so you can get stoned. I am not about to risk a trade war with the US even if they need our resources because we are not going to stop exporting them anyway. There are a lot of Canadian manufacturing and high tech companies that rely on the US market to survive more than they need us. I don't think there are many of them would want to put their business in jeopardy, just so you can get stoned. Call it cowering in the face of the elephant if you want but those who spit in the face of an elephant are just plain stupid.

Of course the people of Lebanon are to stupid and corrupt to elect a government that can be supported with international aid. Much better to give it to a foreign sponsored terrorist organization who is responsible to no one. What a condescending, arrogant attitude. Of course every penny will be spent on aid but not a nickel on arms because Hezbollah will submit to an independent audit at the end of the year. Man oh man, what are you on?

Up until the early nineties we used to pick up our mail at the village post office and then it was closed. The upside was that we now had a mail box which is much closer to our home and not dependent on post office hours. The function of the post office was taken over by the village store but Canada Post insisted that the store keep post office hours year round so the store soon told them to get stuffed. The downside is that it is now four miles to our nearest post office which is located in a pharmacy. Abbotsford now has one actual "Canada Post" post office for a city of 140,000 people.

If organized crime is rampant in Canada because of US laws, how is that not a Canadian problem?

Over 70% of BC Bud is exported. Decriminalizing it in Canada would have no effect on organized crime. I have mixed feelings on the subject of decriminalization but this is one argument that won't stand up as long as it it illegal in the US. It then becomes the US's problem. Why are we so concerned about their laws? If weed were legal here and illegal in the US (which it is NOT in some states) it would have no effect on me personally at all. Unless I am stupid enough to take it across the border. The argument that we can't legalize it because of our puritan (not so puritan, as some states have decriminalized the possession of small amounts) neighbour is simply ridiculous. Legalize it so I can grow a few plants or (being I don't have a very green thumb) so I could simply purchase it at a government controlled liquor store. I'm don't wish to be an apologist for the US position on marijuana but considering that 80% of our trade is cross border, our economy is hugely dependent on the US and we have about 5000 miles of it, if you depend on that trade or have to cross that border yourself, it would be very much your problem as well. Call me a wuss but personally I am not willing to jeopardize that just so some folks can get stoned. That is what I would call ridiculous. It's their choice and they are on their own as far as I'm concerned. I would not expect you to put your standard of living in jeopardy because of lifestyle choices I make.

Hezbollah does not represent a country, it represents itself and the states to which it owes it's support, Iran and Syria. It therefore does not have to accept the responsibilities that go along with being the legitimate government of a country. I can't fathom why so many people think it should be treated as one. If Hezbollah can give financial aid to the people of Lebanon to rebuild, you know damn well where the money is coming from. If Syria and Iran really want to help the Lebanese people, why don't they do it through Lebanon's legitimate government instead of through their own proxy army which they maintain on someone else's soil?

Over 70% of BC Bud is exported. Decriminalizing it in Canada would have no effect on organized crime. I have mixed feelings on the subject of decriminalization but this is one argument that won't stand up as long as it it illegal in the US.

Home delivery was grandfathered for those addresses which had it some time in the 80's was it not? Since then delivery has been to neighborhood mail boxes and around here that is done by contract, not by Canada Post employees. Same goes for most post offices. The ability of all citizens to send physical mail at the same rates has been looked upon like health care, a basic service that all citizens require. Maybe now that physical mail is becomming less important than it used to be when it comes to normal communication, attitudes will change but there are many who still depend on it.

Why else would he refer to going after them worldwide? Part of the terrorist patter - we can get you anywhere - you cannot hide from us - be afraid, be very afraid. Maybe so, maybe not. They said the same about Hitler and 12 years after he came to power there were 50 million dead. So take them at face value and act accordingly.

Really? Angels in YVR

Why else would he refer to going after them worldwide?

“If they [the Jews] all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide.” Hassan Nesrallah Sounds like something Hitler might have said. Wait a minute, I think he did, or words to that effect.

The B747 freighter is a great aircraft, I've flown them but they were never designed as a military transport. The US military had another aircraft, the C5 Galaxy built for that purpose. It has kneeling landing gear and can be loaded from the front and rear by merely driving on and off. The 747 cargo deck is over ten feet off the ground and requires specialized gear to load and unload its cargo that require hard surfaced areas to use and is not capable of handling the weight of heavy armored vehicles. The C5 can carry two Abrams battle tanks. This doesn't have much to do with the C17 but it gives you an idea of why the 747 is not used by the military as a heavy lift transport. The C17 was originally designed and built by McDonnell Douglas before they were absorbed by Boeing and is the replacement for the C-141. It is by far and away the most capable and versatile military transport in the world. It can carry just about anything the military needs (including one Abrams battle tank) into most places a C-130 can go and carry them farther and faster than any aircraft of its type. The question is not whether it is the best aircraft but whether Canada really needs them. I'll leave that to the pros. We definitely do need newer C130's, also the best aircraft of its type. Thats why different versions of it have been in continuous production since the 1950's and it is used by the military of more countries than any other transport. The fact is, if you are in the market for military transports and want the best, there are only two choices, Boeing and Lockheed.

No, I'm not naive to think the Taliban might let them set up bases again if they were the government. But I'm also not naive enough to think that we might win a civil war there either. We can't win a civil war there by ourselves but we would be stupid not to support the side that is most likely to act in our best interests, rather than leave the place at the mercy of those we know will try to attack us. That alone is a reason to be there, never mind trying to protect the average Afghani from these people and helping them to rebuild their country.

The Treaty of Versailles was also unjust and made possible the rise of the Nazis, so should we blame the Allies for the atrocities committed by the Nazis. I don't think so, they dreamed those up all by themselves, just like radical Islam. While they may have some valid grievances, they alone are responsible for what they do about them.

Prior to WWII it was a British protectorate. Up until the end of WW1 it was part of the Ottoman Empire for a few hundred years. How far do you want to go back? The last time there was an independent state with Jerusalem as its capital was under the Israelites in 700 BC so that argument isn't very helpful on either side. One way or another these folks are just going to have to figure out how to get along or our grand children will be having the same debate.

It's not who they took a stand against, it's the stand they took.

I agree with your thrust, but you can be sure that Pakistan's "cooperation" was overlayed with some kind of tribal intrigue. Does it matter? The point is, if it had been a Taliban government, we would have found out about it when the bombs went off.

What does this mean?

Which Taliban attacked the U.S. on its own soil? And isn't Pakistan based al Qaeda responsible for the latest attacks and attempted attacks? Al Qaeda aided abetted by the Taliban, operating out of bases in an Afghanistan ruled by a Taliban government. Are you naive enough to believe that the same situation wouldn't exist if the Taliban were to rule Afghanistan again? The situation in Pakistan is not a good one but at least the government is giving some help. What do you think the chances are of a Taliban government in Afghanistan giving the same kind of assistance as the Pakistani government in uncovering the recent UK plot?

Neither Lebanon, Vietnam or Somalia attacked the US on its own soil. The people being fought in Afghanistan did and will do again if they get a chance. That is one reason this is a NATO operation. An attack on one member is an attack on all. Maybe some members are not willing to keep that commitment but I am glad Canada is.

When it comes to trade, the great majority of protectionist Senators in the US are Democrats.

The Israelis know they aren't invincible. The Yom Kippur war was a pretty close run thing for a few days because the other guys got in the first shot. The Israelis don't have much territory to lose before they no longer have a country, so a preemptive war will always be their first choice. I doubt the people on the receiving end of those rockets care about their strategic value and care even less about what makes Hezbollah more comfortable.