Shuriken

Idealism is what conservatives had in the U.S. about Iraq being transformed into a peaceful democracy. Realists were saying that the country was likely to be itching for a civil war before working to cooperate in government. Who do you think the realists were? And do you think that Cheney was right when he said the insurgency was coming to an end? Idealistic or realistic? Leftists believe in the UN.

You serious?

Congradulations on showing everyone that you have no idea what is going on in the middle-east.

It would have meant that he was freeing a military plane in accordance of Defence department guidelines on rescuing Canadians. http://cjob.com/news/index.aspx?dir=nation..../n0720103A.xml They had already been rescued from Lebanon, as it was rather impossible for him to take the plane into Lebanon proper where they needed rescuing. What he was doing was using his plane to transport the rescued people back to Canada. Also, I'm curious if you just linked to that article hoping I wouldn't read it? Nowhere does the article say that all assets of the Defense Department (military planes, which I don't believe his is classified as) need to be used to rescue people. It says that it is that the Government has a responsibility to rescue its nationals, which is what it is doing. They had the planes for all the people from the ship, and his wasn't taking all of them. The planes were not crampped up. Those were the boats. I guess the PM could have taken a commercial flight back to Canada, but that would have meant we had that much extra to pay, and nothing extra out of it.

What difference would it have made if he'd gone commercial?

The UN is a self important organization and does not have the power to do that.

The media has its uses, and is a very good source for raw information. It is when the media attempts to tell you the implications of that information that people are unfortunetly conditioned to trust them.

They want the government to compensate them for being morons. Honestly, if I had been in Lebanon (or Israel)I would have gotten the hell out when Summer Rains began.

Giving back the kidnapped soldiers now isn't going to make a difference, nor should it. Hezbollah crossed the Rubicon and shattered the fragile status quo. Israel is not going to stop until Hezbollah is wiped out. Rather ironic when you think about it.

The CBC long for their Liberal handlers.

I try to discuss things in a rational manner. I've never been impressed by emotional snivelling. He reminds me of the peace protester who assaulted a friend of mine.

When a leader completely backs one side right out of the gate doesn't that sort of ruin the diplomacy angle and get us involved? Uh no. Taking sides is part of diplomacy. This recent "neutral" crap isn't diplomacy.

Do link to the story with the F-16's blowing babies to pieces.

That is one of the stupidest things I've read all day.

So people like you?

Yes, but the supercomputers are estimating the probability of this event occuring as 0.0000000000000000001% with a margin of error of +/- 0.0000000000000000001%. My point was not to show reality, but to show how little I support either side. I don't watch CNN. Sometimes I watch Global or Newsworld, but it's mostly there for background noise. I don't trust the media, and the media doesn't trust me. We seem happy with this arrangement. I am sure Israel is quite aware of what they are doing. The longer this goes on, the less hope of Lebanon avoiding another civil war. I doubt the Christian and mainstream Sunni population (The majority) are going to put up with being bombed for long because of an Iranian puppet. Even those who would like to see Israel pushed into the sea don't want to feel the the brunt of Israel's kick.

Because its better to kill civilians with tanks, bullets and cruise missiles? The man whose house collapsed on his family, killing all - is he immoral - did he get what he deserved? Clarify your comments for me. I fail to see this 'moral edge' of which you speak. The Israeli bombs are killing civilians as collateral damage, not as the targets. This gives them a slight moral edge over the willful targeting of civillians. You seem to have ignored the part of my post where I said neither deserves to exist as a state. A much better solution would be to give the land to Ethiopia or the Republic of China.

The only difference between Israel and the Palestinians is that the Iraeli's haven't been strapping bombs to their citizens and blowing up buses. Neither really deserve states, but for now I'll go with the one that has the slight moral edge.

Ontario 24 seats-12,541,400 people Quebec 24 seats-7,598,100 people New Brunswick 10 seats -752,000 people Nova Scotia 10 seats -937,900 people Prince Edward Island 4 seats -138,100 people Newfoundland and Labrador 6 seats -516,000 people Alberta 6 seats -3,256,800 people British Columbia 6 seats-4,254,500 people Manitoba 6 seats-1,177,600 people Saskatchewan 6 seats -994,100 people Northwest Territories 1 seat -43,000 people Nunavut 1 seat -30,000 people Yukon 1 seat -31,000 people Total 105 seats Canada 32,270.5 people I don't think so. Right now Atlantic Canada has more seats for it's population and size than any other region of the country. If anything they should be giving up some of their seats in the senate,or the government should increase the seats for some of the other provinces. If we wish to keep with the whole "Equal representation" cherade then Atlantic Canada needs to give up 6 seats so that the regions have the same number of seats each. Personally senate reform is the only area where I lean towards the NDP possition. Same net effect as the Tory reform idea, but much cheaper.

It's rather doubtful. I have no idea what her real powers are but I don't think if she did anything other than act as a figurehead, it would be the end of the Royal Family. It was a rhetorical question.

3rd world?!? Maybe Atlantic Canada might not be as prosperous as Alberta or Ontario but to say third world is pushing it beyond the lines of extreme. With oil and gas in Nova Scotia and Newfoundland, the nickel and iron ore mines in Lbarador, a revamped fishery that doesn't have have to deal with the federal goverment of Canada, argiculture especially in the Maritimes, potential hydro in Labrador and a possible revamp of the bad Lower Churchill deal with Quebec. And this is just off the top of my head. Africa is one of the most resource rich continents in the world. Saskatchewan has more resource wealth then Alberta. Stuff in the ground or in the sea means dick.

Wow, this is the first time I've ever seen Gore refered to as "conservative". Anyway, the mans a nutjob. Which wing he's a nutjob on doesn't matter. He should wear a gag at all times to prevent him from saying stupid things. Then it's gone down quite a bit, which is one thing Klein has been working on.

Ottawa could never represent us properly. We need equal representation since our trade relations with the US are so important to both our own well being, and to a lesser extent, Canada as a while.

Could the queen do any of that without facing a mass revolt?

So they are against a car that can go 75 miles on a litre of gas, but they are pushing the Kyoto protocol?