Wild Bill

Israel has a valid fear! It's not as if some Arab country hasn't invaded her before, more than once! It's not as if Hamas lobbing rockets into residential areas isn't a daily occurrence, along with bombs in buses and supermarkets. It's easy for YOU, living here, to make light of Israel's fears! Chances are really good that you are never going to have to go down to a morgue to see if one of some bodies from a terrorist act belong to your son or daughter! You don't intend to be callous, I'm sure, but your lack of empathy shows very strongly much of the time! However, I would agree with you about the potential for the 'Arab spring'. It's to early to tell if it will be hijacked by the radical, primitive fundamentalists but it clearly shows a widespread desire for peace, security and modern freedoms amongst the general populace of the Arab middle east. The mullahs are obviously shaking in their boots, as witness how the reactions of governments like that of Syria are getting more and more harsh and cruel. I don't really have a lot of confidence that the Arab spring will win out, at least in the majority of those countries showing upheavals and public protests right now but there is a true chance for at least a few of them. If it happens in Iran and the ayatollahs are deposed in favour of a more modern and progressive government it would change everything! Overnight we would see the chance of an Israeli strike morph into tourism and commerce between the two countries! It would stop the religious barbarians in their tracks! Perhaps that would be a more dangerous situation, come to think of it. Barbarian wingnuts would do anything to keep power...

The OP of this thread makes an interesting dichotomy! One side of the issue is not mentioned, however. It's true that as we get older we tend to get more impatient. That's because our experience often makes things more clear. We've seen them before! The fact that younger folks don't seem to get it and waste time diddling around with it can be frustrating. The unspoken converse is that it can take some years past adolescence for the human brain to develop enough to see and envision the consequences of actions. This has been very well documented and amongst other things, is much of the reason that crime is a young man's game. It's also why young men are most in demand as soldiers. They can lack the vision to understand they can die! This can make them more fearless warriors. As ordinary citizens go, young folks tend to support solutions that aren't always well-thought out as to their feasibility or unforeseen consequences. In a perfect society, there would be cooperation and teamwork to take advantage of both points of view. Today, we seem to see such arrogance on both sides that things tend to bumble along the longest and most inefficient path.

Eyeball, we actually agree on much of what you said. I didn't vote conservative for this sort of crap either! However, you seem to forget something. You're against this crime approach. For a lot of it, so am I but what am I supposed to do when to me THE OTHER GUYS ALL SEEM WORSE! Just because I'm against this one factor am I supposed to chuck pretty well any and all other values I have and vote for the Liberals or the NDP? That's flat out absurd and I WON'T do it!

Why should the leadership of Iran give a damn? Nobody can react fast enough to prevent their launching a first strike on Israel. At that point, it becomes a fait accompli. Israel is GONE! No western power will retaliate with nukes on behalf of Israel. That would only escalate the problem and kill not just the nutbar ayatollahs but perhaps millions of innocent Iranians who had nothing to do with deciding to nuke Israel. They don't get to vote to choose their leaders so how could they be held responsible? There might be an invasion and/or a forced regime change but to the mullahs, they themselves have already said such a scenario would be worth it! Iran might suffer damage but over the years would rebuild. Israel would be dead and gone! As for any nearby Palestinians, the Iranian leaders have never given a damn for them before so why would they care now?

Why do we have to increase taxes? Couldn't we spend less? How about a bit less in subsidies for that financial sinkhole of Toronto?

Exactly! That's my point! That's NOT the way you presented it! And now you say there's something wrong with MY thinking! More nerve than a bum tooth! Did anyone ever teach you English or how to think when you were in school? Why do I keep bothering? Another yammerhead for the 'ignore' list.

You're mixing models here and ignoring points! An attack on Iran would not be made simply in the hopes of triggering an internal revolution. It would be made to wipe out its ability to make nukes and the missiles to deliver them! Triggering a revolution would just be a bonus. Also, it would seem that the younger demographic in Iran wants to be far more like the west than fundamentalist Islamic. I still haven't heard an answer to my question about why we should take it as fact that after an attack Iranians would rally round their ayatollahs! Might they blame the fundamentalists for CAUSING the attack? As for "literally killing people because you "think" it may be the right thing to do", that makes no sense as an immoral act unless the people doing the killing believed YOUR position that Iran is no threat! If they were sincere then they were acting morally. If Israel or whoever believes that Iran is a nuclear threat decides to launch a strike, it would be to PREVENT deaths on THEIR side! In Israel's case, one first strike by Iran means total destruction of Israel! It does NOT mean the same for Iran! After such an act, what should the western powers do? Nuke Iran and kill people who were mostly innocent of the decision to destroy Israel? It's not like the ayatollahs would hold a referendum to get their opinion! Do you seriously think an American president would take such action? Not bloody likely! So a nuclear counterstrike would be out. A conventional invasion might happen, if the other powers had the stomach and the money for it. Canada would no doubt send some snipers and a canteen boat. Of course, they would be very GOOD and brave snipers, as if that would make any difference. Some ayatollahs have already been quoted as saying that such a scenario would be worth it! Iran would no doubt suffer some death and damage but eventually would recover. Israel would be a radioactive wasteland for hundreds of years. Some Palestinians who live close by would no doubt also be killed but why should Iran care? They've never cared before! It's always a cheap price to have SOMEONE ELSE be the sacrifice! Sadly, I think Israel has been backed into a corner and has no choice but to launch a strike SOON! They have good reason to fear for their very existence! Any "school teacher" opinions about turning the other cheek are frankly illogical if not suicidal, in my opinion!

Hey Jack! Oskee WeeWee! Didn't those A's suck? :lol:

How long might it take to use up all the Arab oil? Maybe a century or two? What's more, there are some scientists who have a good argument that oil is NOT a finite resource! The pools might become depleted but would slowly refill since new oil is continuously being created. Production would be much slower but not completely finished. Whatever. We could become self-sufficient very quickly if we wanted but we need to export more, for the money! Balance of trade, you know. How else are we going to afford those Chinese toasters in WalMart?

How do you know this? You state it as if it's an absolute fact but of course it's just an opinion! If there are truly so many younger Iranians chafing under the Mullahs' harsh regime, perhaps if there was a foreign attack they would use it as an opportunity to revolt? After all, internal revolutions rarely succeed on their own. History shows that the successful ones virtually always had external help. So tell us! How is your premise that Iran's citizens would all support their government a known fact?

HAHAHA! Derek, the man doesn't even know the answer! He's so full of assumptions and biases, while almost completely empty of any documented history! He seems to have a good heart but if this is how they're teaching his generation to think in schools today then Canada is doomed! We won't have anyone qualified to keep the lights working! This thread is actually becoming a comedy!

You really don't know your history very well, do you? You have shallow, cartoon impressions of your "heroes", unable to see their faults - only their virtues. Tommy Douglas was also a big supporter of eugenics. I hope you don't or never will have a family member born with a physical or mental birth defect. Tommy Douglas would have had it "euthanized", which is a nice word for "killed". Don't believe me? Go look it up for yourself, which is a habit you really should practise more often.

No problem! A cite is usually better than my old memory! Here's one from 2003, when it all started: http://www.problemgambling.com/gambler_sues_casino_over_his_downfall.htm "A lawsuit says former Copps Coliseum boss Gabe Macaluso led a double life as a business executive on the one hand and a compulsive gambler at Casino Niagara, above, on the other. A high-profile Hamilton official who lost his job to a gambling addiction is suing the Ontario government and Casino Niagara for allegedly sending a limousine to take him back to the blackjack tables following a $500,000 loss" Another from The Toronto Star in 2007: http://www.thestar.com/News/article/243348 "Gabe Macaluso, the former head of Hamilton's Copps Coliseum, sued for $2 million, alleging he lost so much that he mused about suicide and was banned from Casino Niagara, only to be welcomed back two months later." A simple google will turn up lots more for you. I thought he had won a wrongful dismissal suit, thinking I had read it some years ago in the local paper but I went to the paper's website and a search turned up nothing. Either I'm mistaken or the paper doesn't keep records from 8 years ago. So I can't prove the suit against his employer, the City of Hamilton. However, the suit against the casino and the government for "letting him gamble" is documented. If you have the time and interest, you might want to also google the case of Dr. Jackman, late head of Hamilton's hospitals, who voluntarily quit and moved to another position in a different city yet collected almost a million dollars from Hamilton as severance pay! http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/house-proceedings/house_detail.do?locale=fr&Parl=37&Sess=1&Date=2000-10-05#P128_55366 "In Hamilton a few years ago, the former head of the Chedoke-McMaster Hospitals, Dr Jennifer Jackman, was offered $1.8 million in severance when she left that job. Public sector employees, when they voluntarily leave a job, are not entitled to severance. But with weasel words, with very clever lawyering, whether you leave on your own volition or are asked to leave, you get a hefty severance package when you're in this elite group. That amount of Dr Jackman's was eventually capped at $818,000 and payments have since been stopped, pending litigation. This litigation, by the way, is also paid for by taxpayers' dollars. It also left a very bitter taste in the mouths of taxpayers in the Hamilton region." But what else is new? It's just "situation normal".

CC, I would agree with you that most people have no choice about contracting mental illness, or receiving such bad luck and experiences as to beat them down to the point where they can no longer cope. However, I think we still have to factor in at least SOME sense of personal responsibility or we will never keep a lid on such problems, or truly help people to bear them and grow through them! We DO seem to be ultra-quick to excuse everyone for poor choices these days! Here in Hamilton a few years ago we had a highly placed civil serpent abuse the finances of his position to blow about a million dollars of taxpayer money on gambling at the casinos. He was caught eventually and fired. He then promptly sued the city, claiming that gambling addiction was an illness and the city as his employer was obligated to HELP him, not fire him! They settled out of court and he walked away with another couple of million! I've since met the man personally and if he was mentally ill he has recovered quite well. 'Course, nothing like all that money to take the stress off. We ARE responsible for our own actions and choices! This argument is not an all or nothing scenario but both sides here seem to be presenting their POV as such. One seems to say that no one should catch a break and the other one is saying that EVERYONE should be given a break! Life is just not that black and white. Both 'solutions' would do more harm than good.

Michael, I invite you to go to any construction site, perhaps a building going up in your downtown and peer through the fence. Watch the workers and see for yourself! Best to also get a picture or something of yourself at the site to put on the 'Net. Without some kind of cite some people here will say that your personal observation is worthless. Still, it should give you some kind of an idea to satisfy your own curiosity. My own experience has been that there are many visible minorities working as civil engineers and inspectors but tradesmen seem to be very scarce from that demographic. I don't really know why. It could be that tradesmen require a specialized accredited education that these folks would lack. It might be worth a thread of its own to chew that one over. Whatever, again I suggest you take a look for yourself first to give yourself a baseline from which to argue.

You know, we can all chew on this bone all we want but the fact remains, I have never known a poor man to give someone a job!

We've covered this a number of times in other threads Wyly but people just don't want to hear it, it seems. They would much rather dream up conspiracy theories involving racist doctors running some sort of guild system to keep their incomes up. Once again, the situation is DELIBERATE GOVERNMENT POLICY! In Ontario. Bob Rae started it but all governments since have done nothing to change it. Every doctor gets a billing number to get paid from OHIP. More doctors means more billings, since a doctor can only do so much in any given day. So you limit the number of doctors who can apply for a billing number. The biggest factor is limits on the number of doctor students in university. You also cap how much a doctor can charge, so that once he limits out he would be working for free! That puts a limit on how much each individual doctor will charge. There are exceptions for specialists, like heart and brain surgeons but overall the system works very well to keep the health care budget within the government's control. Certainly, there is no way a government will allow a big influx of immigrant doctors to be accredited so they can start adding to the billings! Governments obviously feel that they can't afford any such increases, or we would see more doctors in practice. The inconvenience to the populace and even a few deaths are considered an acceptable price. If the system went broke EVERYBODY suffers! The greatest good for the greatest number. Isn't that the motto? Since most Canadians have no idea of the cost of health care and prefer to think that it's free anyway, no sensible politician will ever talk plainly about the situation. Still, it doesn't matter what people believe. Follow the money - it doesn't lie!

Well, that's never been MY sentiment, BC! And I would approve of strong military action against any aggressive move by Iran. That being said, if it happens during Obama's watch, I don't share your faith that America would take decisive action. Remember what Clinton did? Blowing up an aspirin factory in the Sudan with a cruise missile as a retaliation for attacks on US embassies? And he did NOTHING about the USS Cole! With Obama, I think we'd get more of the same.

London, and now Halifax! It looks like the wave is starting...

Thanks for correcting me on the Nebraska/Nevada thing. I admit I'm not that good on foreign geography, AW! It does seem to boil down to each party having to decide what's best for themselves. America is going one way and Canada will go another. Still, there's one unanswered question. If the balloon does up in the middle East, like Iran nuking Israel or closing the Straits of Hormuz, what ARE you Americans going to do? Reserves are just that, reserves. Sooner or later they run out. Meanwhile, the price of oil at your pumps will go through the roof almost immediately. Do those voters against the pipeline properly understand this? Or do they think that somehow Obama will wave a magic wand?

I had a good friend who had come to Canada from Russia, after the fall of the USSR. He used to joke about what he called "aircraft degrees". By this he meant that no matter what level of schooling the Russian emmigrant passengers had when they boarded the plane in Russia, when they landed in Canada they were all PHDs in every sort of area you could imagine! He personally was really an electrical engineer but maintains that there were so many phony diplomas that could be bought cheap that they might as well have been sold on the plane along with the snacks and drinks! I have no proof of course but I never saw any reason to discount his personal experience. Who in Canada would even bother to check academic credentials from most of these countries, particularly if no contact was able to speak English? Or the contact was a phony, set up as part of the service from whoever forged the credentials? Seems absurdly easy to commit such fraud! And as long as those supplying the forged documents never set foot in Canada what possible retribution could they face?

Here's one existing pipeline that didn't seem to bother them none! http://www.rubypipeline.com/ "Ruby includes approximately 680 miles of 42-inch natural gas transmission pipeline, beginning at the Opal Hub in Wyoming and terminating near Malin, Oregon. Ruby has an initial design capacity of up to 1.5 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d) and traverses portions of four states: Wyoming, Utah, Nevada, and Oregon. The project utilizes four compressor stations: one near the Opal Hub in southwestern Wyoming; one south of Curlew Junction, Utah; one at the mid-point of the project, north of Elko, Nevada; and one in northwestern Nevada." Here's another: ftp://ftp.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/natural_gas/analysis_publications/ngpipeline/western.html "The Kern River Transmission Company system (1.8 Bcf per day), which begins at Opal, Wyoming, and extends through Utah and Nevada to Kern County, California, is currently the primary source of supply for the area, providing over 80 percent of the natural gas consumed in southern Navada." Here's a list of pipeline companies in Nevada: http://www.manta.com/mb_44_E326Y_29/crude_petroleum_pipelines/nevada A simple google shows lots more going on, AW. Nevadans don't seem to have worried much up till now! So again, what makes THIS pipeline so special? Either they like Saudis more than Canadians or Obama is playing political games. That's his privilege, of course. It's also Canada's privilege not to wait around for him. Of course, it's not looking like he's going to win a second term anyway, unless the Republicans really blow it.

Good points, I'll admit! Still waiting for those unbiased, objective words from WWWTT...

Once again you revise history to give a slam at your hated conservatives. Once again you show that you can't even pronounce objectivity, let alone practice it! First off, the present CPC is NOT the Reform Party! Despite outnumbering the PCs overwhelmingly at the time of the merger, the PCs have successfully succeeded in gaining control and stamping out virtually any trace of the old Reform platform. The present CPC is merely a clone of the old Mulroney party. As I keep saying, I no longer have any idea why Manning and those of us who followed him even bothered! We wasted our time. Second, you imply that Reform was against the idea of a GG, period. That's crap festered in ignorance! If you were of age at that time or had made even the slightest effort to research the history you would have known that Reform railed against the EXTRAVAGANCE of that particular GG! Not only did she spend money on trips, parties and diplomatic receptions like she was the Queen herself but on several occasions she made comments in the media that assumed she had the powers of the Monarch herself, when she didn't! We saw her as an arrogant woman appointed and supported by the Liberals, with an unlimited credit card that Canadians had to pay. If you truly believe that Reform was against the very position of a GG, which is hard to believe since you so obviously pulled the very idea out of your butt, then give us some reputable cites to prove it! We're waiting...

This is perhaps the best point made in this entire thread! If the balloon goes up in the middle East, America is screwed for oil! The entire country will grind to a screeching halt! Can America NOT plug in to Canadian oil? A 100% secure resource? And what's all this talk about the danger of leaks from a new pipeline? America has thousands and thousands of miles of such pipelines all over its land already! What's the big deal about adding one more? Why would it be such a bigger risk than any other pipeline? Wouldn't it be less of a risk, being new and built to more modern standards? I think Americans have confused refusing Canadian oil with not burning fossil fuels for energy, yet they still show no signs of cutting back anyways! So that only leaves continuing to buy from the Arabs, leaving themselves vulnerable to any silliness that might happen over there and putting money into many of the same hands that are building bombs to attack them! Countries that just don't practice the human rights that Canada and the US share! If they went on a crash course to reduce their oil consumption to the point where they didn't need Arab oil then I could understand why they wouldn't buy ours. However, that's not at all what they are doing. To me, that means that they must like the Arabs better than us! It's the only logical explanation.