Sir Bandelot

Neutered, more likely.

Yes it is, thank you, and I do not mind your ramblings!

Fine, we are on the same page with that assessment. I agree completely. Obama is not a bringer of peace and good tidings, as so many thought he would be during the elction campaign. What was it called? Obamania? The masses were swept up in a giddy euphoria, believing in a messiah. That is why I titled this thread "The wrath of Obama". But for some reason, today I get a PM from the moderator saying, this title is inflammatory and misleading. How is that an inflammatory title? I have no idea. The word "wrath" is inflammatory? So he changed it to what it is now. But I did not intend it to be specifically about "Operation Khanjar", whatever that is. Proof is in the posting #5, where I say, "I'm not even talking about Afghanistan". They could at least ask or give a poster a chance to explain, before editing threads. Oh well, no big deal

If I am mistaken, I would love to hear your explanation. There is no contradiction in what I'm saying here. With Obama, its the "same old same old". And this is not surprising, just needs to be pointed out to the people who believed he would reach out and make efforts to reconcile with the enemies. Actually, his reaching out, especially to republicans renders him impotent. To me so far, it looks like the Obama presidency will be the one that shows how a president really has no power. He will be told what to do, and then he will sell it to the public. With a smile

Questions are emerging as to whether Obama is slipping slowly into his own quagmire, in another guerrilla war. Obama is taking combat troops out of Iraq, but increasing them in Afghanistan, with questions arising as to whether there is a concrete end to our involvement. The 21,000 troops that Obama is adding brings the total of troops in Afghanistan to 68,000. Obama told Newsweek in May that “My strong view is that we are not going to succeed simply by piling on more and more troops. The Soviets tried that; it didn’t work out too well for them. The British tried it; it didn’t work. We have to see our military action in the context of a broader effort to stabilize security in the country.’’ At the same time, the Obama administration is awaiting a midsummer assessment from Afghanistan commander Stanley McChrystal. Anti-US resentment is building in Afghanistan after air strikes and firefights in which American forces are killing many innocent civilians. A United Nations report found that the killing of 828 civilians by US and Afghan forces last year is not all that far behind the 1,160 civilian deaths attributed to Taliban. A New York Times story last week reported a district council leader in Helmand Province as saying, “People are hostages of the Taliban, but they look at the coalition also as the enemy because they have not seen anything good from them in seven or eight years.’’ That terrible tension is straight out of the legacy of Robert McNamara. A quagmire for Obama Can someone explain again why this war is going on, and what the mission objectives, ie. definition of "victory" is? It seems to me that there is no way to win, if the objective is to create a democratic pro-western society, by killing people and making more enemies. Even McNamara eventually figured that one out. The way Obama is capitulating to everyones demands, be they republican or democrat makes me think this man has no real power at all. Whatever he wants and thinks does not matter. The emperor has no balls.

"They have packed the religious courts with ultra-orthodox judges." Who is Israel.

It matters that Canada tried to be diligent in paying its deficit under previous governments, while other countries such as the US did not take this responsible approach. Canadian taxpayers had to ante up the money from their pockets to balance the budget. As a result Canada was supposed to be better off than most of the others, and maybe it really is. But our economy is small compared to the big powers. When they take a nosedive, down we go too, despite all the years of careful budgeting. All that work and sacrifice for nothing, and I want to know why that is. Despite all that good advice, Harper will be ignored by these guys.

Harper seems to be against it, but Obama wants it. As does Gordon Brown- Harper urged leaders to complete the stimulus initiatives that are already underway, before committing new funds. "My own thought is before there's talk of additional stimulus, I would urge all leaders to focus first on making the stimulus that's announced actually gets delivered," Harper said. "That's been our focus in Canada and I would urge the same priority elsewhere." Harper's position may clash with some other leaders, including U.S. President Barack Obama and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, who appear to be in favour of committing further funds to the recovery effort. http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...?hub=TopStories In other words, done deal.

Haven't seen any around here yet. Its frikkin 10 Deg. C. outside at night. About 18 here, inside the house. If my furnace were switched on, it would be running right now. But the thought of running my furnace in July, does not site well with me. Global warming? Bring it on... There should be a basic personal exemption for the carbon tax. That way people would have an incentive to use less, and would get a tax break for doing so. I almost never need to drive my car, as I am lucky enough to walk to work from my house. Figure I have saved a lot of carbon on that alone.

Pope blasts capitalism ahead of G-8 meeting Pope Benedict XVI, on the eve of a global economic summit, lashed out at modern capitalism for being shortsighted and short on ethics. "Today's international economic scene, marked by grave deviations and failures, requires a profoundly new way of understanding business enterprise," the pontiff said in his third encyclical letter, "Charity in Truth," which was released Tuesday. "Above all, the intention to do good must not be considered incompatible with the effective capacity to produce goods," Benedict said. "Financiers must rediscover the genuinely ethical foundation of their activity, so as not to abuse the sophisticated instruments which can serve to betray the interests of savers." The world financial crisis and the downturn in markets took a big chunk out of the retirement savings of millions of people. What a novel idea, ethical banking and investing. Hey Mr. Pope man, can I get a loan from the Vatican Bank...

Why has this segregation been in place for years then? If it was not allowed, wouldn't they put a stop to it? It has been a known problem for years now- Israel's 'modesty buses' draw fire 24 April 2007 Naomi Ragen says the buses are just part of a wider menacing pattern of behaviour towards women in parts of the orthodox Jewish community. "They've already cancelled higher education in the ultra-orthodox world for women. They have packed the religious courts with ultra-orthodox judges. "They throw paint and bleach at women who aren't dressed modestly and if we don't draw a line in the sand here with this seat on a bus, then I don't know what this country and this religion is going to look like in 20 years," Ms Ragen said. I will, if you take one on civility.

"... is now lining up support for her case and may be included in a petition to the High Court of Justice over the legality of sex-segregated buses." Sure sounds like the state has allowed this segregation. Will the state step in and provide protection for people, from these ultra orthodox fanatics? Lets hope so. The problem could then be, some of them ARE the judges, and the politicians??? Sounds like they need a lesson in equal rights, and a better democracy. Send in the Predator drones...

Sir Bandelot - Naaaa You guys can high five each other all day if you want... if that gets you your jollies. I have no problem with the varieties of debate. Some people are on to certain topics, but if you want to introduce something new, please do that. If I want to go yuk it up with some chums, theres plenty of idiot forums to do that. But in this here idiot forum, lets keep it at arms length... that way you won't feel so jaded when I tell you where to go

Because you don't understand the importance of the idea I have presented. It doesn't even matter who the Monarch is, they are only a symbol and what matters most is the idea behind this symbol- that human beings must hold the highest position of rights and empowerment. Not the institutions, which have no real life but continue forever, but the individual, the very mortal being must be represented at the highest level. The role of monarch is to be the absolute protector of these rights, against those who would seek to join together to manipulate the powers of state, to change laws and give themselves legal advantage. Give us a new king- of Canada

You have no objection, but I and many others do. I should be able to go out in a public area and not have my sense of decency assaulted, by some debased swine who want to wave their genitals. I should be able to take my kids for a walk there, and not see their urge for public obescenity. Without this restriction, my liberty is curtailed. Do I not also have rights? Or are my rights only, that I must hide from being in public when they chose to display themselves. If they want to fag each other off in privacy, thats their business. Just as it is mine to be with my good lady wife, in the privacy of our home.

All of the above.

I vote "No" to a republic. The Monarch is a single individual who has the highest level of respect and authority. Their role is to defend the person against being steamrollered by the state. They are the protectors of human rights and justice for the people, not just creating a bunch of laws, about how corporations can get rich making more money. Whereas a government can be influenced by industry lobbyists, the Monarch is untouchable. They cannot be bribed because they already have anything they want. That is the true role that they must have, in theory. Not necessarily in reality... But without this role and the conscientious application of the idea that the rights of persons are the most important, we are at the mercy of the elected officials and their benefactors.

This abomination must be stopped.

What I said isn't about the job that they gave you, its about the jobs they took away and gave to very poor men, in other countries. Consequence... now several hundred thousand, or millions inthe US are out of a job. Will those poor men in China be giving the jobs back? No. I suppose you're right then.

Come on, get over it. No society is pure and untarnished... America does offer freedom. Relative to many others in the world they represent the free society. But freedom does not come for free... someone else has to pay for it. America has done well by taking their advantage in the poorest parts of the world. The evolution of laissez fair capitalism means, using the cheapest labour and resources to get the highest profit. Hence the chinese. the indians, the pakistanis are making most of our goods. The irony of this is, its the very thing that may finally take America down. Because the free market, unregulated approach to the economy has brought things up to this critical point. The greedy have eaten out their own guts. Its not possible to continue down that dead end road no more. Something has to change. That doesn't mean, I believe these changes are the right ones that need to be made... what did they really do? Took the money from the public purse, the peoples money, which they told us for years theres nothing in the coffers for building better infrastructure, then they pull 1 trillion dollars out of a hat, and use it to protect the investments of the bankers and insurance companies. Meanwhile the little guy takes it up the ass. Again

Yes, its true... hindsight has 20/20 vision.

How does this translate then: McNamara later described the Vietnam war as "terribly wrong"... He described the war as "terribly wrong" owing to a combination of the anti-communist climate of the times, mistaken assumptions of foreign policy and military misjudgements. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3740700.stm There. I think thats the phrase you were looking for?

I couldn't say which one was right. I will let McNamara answer those questions himself. In the 2003 film, "The Fog of War: Eleven Lessons from the Life of Robert McNamara", McNamara raised questions about the nature of war and human behavior by providing a behind-the-scenes perspective of the Vietnam war, the Cuban missile crisis, and World War II. He "expressed his regrets about the stubborn ‘stay the course’ mentality that dismissed even the most thoughtful and constructive criticism as merely anti-war propaganda." http://www.examiner.com/x-2071-DC-Special-...Donald-Rumsfeld

I did just say that, didn't I? Some have a conscience, anyway. Think about it... come down off that flagpole for a moment. Relax your sphincter It's a bit of a double entendre- admitting that, what they did was horrific and wrong, although arguably it had to be done. And here was a man who did have regrets. No,not like Stalin or Hitler... or etc.

I read his book a few years ago, and he had his regrets about the war later in his life. I suppose anyone with a conscience would.