Stoker

United North America IMHO, the creator of this site put alot of thought and work into making it..........And he is a Canadian. I find his stats on how the "new states" would rank with the "orginal 50" quite intresting: Future State Profiles Here's my future 'home state' of British Columbia: As for the mighty Ontario.......Remeber August always harping about Ontario being nothing more than another Michigan if it didn't have ROC.......

That would back up David Kay's claim also: Iraqi Chemical Weapons

I tend to agree with August in principle, I think everybody should be allowed to have their say, even the annoying and trolling posters. With that being said, I think Greg is in a tight spot when it comes to total assine posts and how they could reflect on the University of Lethbridge (The owners of the site). Even if we had a, bright, flashing, neon "wavier" stating the views and opinions spoken on this site are not necessarily shared by the U of L, it would not mater. The U of L pays for the site, thus is responasble for it's content. Does anybody think that such highlights as the Anti-American threads, Anti-western, Anti-Quebec, Anti-Religion, Anti-Homosexual and any other assine topic reflect good on the University of Lethbridge? I'm all for different points of view, if not we might as well go to Rabble or Free Dominion and slap ourseleves on the backs. I find debate educational, intresting and a good killer for boredom.....almost a work-out for the brain if you will. I'm finding Mapleleafweb to be less enjoyable over the last little while.....and to be honest, I don't know what needs to be done to rectify it.

You know for a quarter of the cost of the long gun registry, we could have purchased the most state of the art Kevlar bullet proof vests for every memeber in the RCMP............I wonder if we would still have four dead Mounties on our hands...... Come on.......it's a joke.......500 million this year! 600 million next year......it won't be until the third year that DND will see anything above a billion dollars........Do you not think that there will be an election within the next year or two? Will a Liberal majority maintian these comitments? Will the Quebec wing allow them to? This "12 billion dollars" is nothing more then pandering to the media and the CPC. Even Liberal Senator Kenny (head of the Senate defence review) has stated that at least an additional 1.5-2 billion are needed annually, right away......not in three years.

I normally try and stay away from the tabloid garbage, tin-foil hat wearing, consipracy theories. I find them annoying, insulting to my intelligence and quite frankly cheap! But based on the success the Canadian left has had with using them in demonizing the Canadian right, I truely feel it is time that the right start throwing some mud around......and not stupid stuff like the Kim Campbell Conservatives did when they called Jean a retard.......(He was far from a retard, I say modern Machiavellian)....Let's get into the nitty gritty...... Bring on the "stories" about Bill Graham and his male hookers, bring the Anne Mcallen sexual harassment alligations, bring on the ties with organized crime with the Gordon Campbell government and for christ sakes, get a hold on Power Corp and don't let go!!! It doesn't mater if they disprove our claims Argus........did it mater when we disproved their? I'd bet Halliburton is one of the most googled words ever.......soon, if you look into a thesaurus, halliburton will be another term for evil

CBC does local tv broadcasts? I honestly don't think they have one for BC.......5 pm is normaly the Simpsons and 6pm is national news........daytime maybe? I don't mind Politics on Newsworld, but I prefer Question Period on CTV...... Other then those two programs, I get all my local news from Global BC (Can remeber Tony Parsons from when I was young) national news from Global National with Kevin Newman (which I have to flick too during the commercials of the Factor) and International News with FOX. As for the CBC Liberal Bias itself, I find Robert Rabinovitch's ties with formor Chrétien campaign director and Power Corp stooge John Rae to be quite telling........ Hey if the left can play the old Halliburton/Bush/Cheney word association game, why can't the right?

Here's another good one bbacon: The Power behind the thrones I wonder if we had of had Fox up here at the time if it would have made a difference? I wonder were the Fifth Esate and Micheal Moore are when you need them So thats why the state run media is not reporting the story..........

Blah blah blah blah Put up or shut-up!!!

Don't forget to add Saudi Arabia to that list.

fleabag (long time no see) Canada doesn't need to be directly targeted by a rouge States ICBMs to feel the negative effects of such an attack, both physicaly and economically. As I pointed out earlier to Black Dog, a nuclear attack on the greater Seattle area, which houses three Naval bases (one base, Bangor is home to half the American SLBM fleet), an Army base and I beleive an Airforce base, a major port (second largest after longbeach) on the American West Coast and to say nothing of Seattle itself, would have devastating effects on the Lower Mainland and Southern Vancouver Island. I'm sure that will save us from nuclear fallout..........

Thats a complete and utter strawman (as Black Dog would say) As I pointed out to Black Dog, all of the nuclear nations have been developing new nuclear weapons and new long range missile programs even after the end of the cold war........this "new arms race" is not new, it is still the original one.

Thats a complete and utter strawman (as Black Dog would say) As I pointed out to Black Dog, all of the nuclear nations have been developing new nuclear weapons and new long range missile programs even after the end of the cold war........this "new arms race" is not new, it is still the original one.

Whats your favorite type of Soup?

That seems to be your theme......I guess why change horses in mid-stream So you agree with him that our army is inept? Rules and Guidelines You bring up our military, then go onto a tanget about the Americans.....

It looks like common trend with anticlimates eh? Perhaps we shouls just stop feeding the troll

How does that disprove ft.niagara's statement that our miltary is inept? Point them out then, it would be a first.......I count Australia, the United Kingdom and New Zealand as the other english speaking nations, all if which, had troops or still have troops invloved in Iraq........Are you know going to claim that these nations aled by fascist right-wingers? I already proved why it wasn't common sense and you have yet to refute my claims. irrelevant relevant With the mater at hand being the Earth and the Human Race.........Who's changeing the context of the word irrelevant? Is that like "kinda pregnant"? Popular maybe.........didn't we already go over this? Again, didn't we already go over this? Thats absurd, the only reason China has not taken over Taiwan is because of the United States..... Do you wish to contiune? If you do, answer my past question.......

The man had either a semi-Automatic rilfe or Automatic.......if he had a gun like this (which is illegal in Canada) do you really think the registration and gun laws would protect against illegal guns? Give me a break. The RCMP gave up their thirty eight police revolvers years ago...the S&W 9 mm is the standard side arm of the RCMP, hardly a revolver. You want to know the god's honest truth as of to why our courts and laws are the way we are? It's because of people like YOU that vote in Liberal governments, which seem bent on "treating" criminals as opposed to punishing them. It's also people like YOU that demonize people like the Conservatives for wanting tougher laws. WRT him having firearms, do you think those firearms were legal? And whats to say they won't be replaced by Crack houses and meth labs?

Well Black Dog, I have to admit you make some convincing points on personnal freedom......though I still hold some reservations which I believe IMR outlined, and I admit, they are based on personnal prejudice and the fear of the unknown.

And let me add, I don't think common sense is always a partisan issue (though you will find more on the right side of the fence)........I fail to see how debating over if Bush is irrelevant can even be made into a partisan issue.

I never once claimed to be objectively judging the "actions" of GWB or Dick Cheney.......I fully admit that I'm a very partisan person........With that said, I do have some reservations on some actions done by the Right... Do you claim to be objective? If yes, start answering my above questions in your next responce instead of "trolling" and wasting my time. Even if you don't claim to be objective, at least start replying in an adult manner by debating the issue and not spewing empty rhetoric.

Though I tend to agree with you in theory, in that if you make a crime legal, crime rates will go done. (Duh) What I have a problem with is the principle. I feel that it's giving in to crime, even though it would likely hurt organised groups for a while....I don't think it's permanent soultion........look at prohibition in the States. After it was lifted, crime didn't go away, if anything the crime rated increasd in the States. I also feel that giving in to crime will lead to backing down in other areas......Let's legalize all drugs, how about prostution well we are at it. Does that end all crime related problems associated with these two vices, or just sweep them under the rug? Making drugs and prostution legal worked so well in bringing down crime rates, lets legalize all petty crimes.....no more vandalism and shop lifting...etc etc etc When and where do we draw the line? Murder and Rape? Ditto. How's the saying go....great minds think alike i just don't like the precendet it could set.... Are the lives of police officers worth having any crime illegal? Which crimes are worth human life to enforce? Is principle worth enforcing? I agree with you on your post in general, but if we make a crime, no longer a crime, will that get rid of "bad people"? Or will it just give "bad people" more freedom?

Here we go....... Can I add a fifth? 5. Alien abductions.

But the Americans have in NAFTA.....are you suggesting that NAFATA won't last? Hey, your preaching to the converted.......I'm all about outsourcing, but in last years election Kerry/Edwards campaigned on a protectionist platform........could another Dem hopefull run and win on a protectionist tilt? Add that to deteriorating relations with Canada, namely due to our lax approach to security and defence, (an area where Dems look weak), throw in our stance on many social issues what is deemed by many Americans as unmoral (SSM and lax drug laws) and I see no reason why a Democratic canidate couldn't win on a "anti-Canadian" ticket. Even without a "trade war", would a protectionist President help Canada much? Who says they would have to.....ditto any other resources based industry. They could quite easily pick and choose......if I wanted to boycott certain sectors in Canada, I would lean towards our manufactured goods industries and leave our resource based industry alone.......... Another positive benfit of this policy, is that it wouldn't hurt as much for the Western Provinces (which supply over 80% of our resource based exports), the same geographical area that tends to look at the United States in a favorable light. But it would hurt most of the major industries in Ontario and Quebec, areas in which you will find Canadians that tend not to favour the United States. In the end, the Americans would either force the Eastern Canadian power bloc to change it's views, or at the very least, change the views that it acts on when it comes to dealing with the United States. Or it would create a deeper chasm between the United States and Ottawa, which would hopefully lead to increased negativity between the West and Ontario/Quebec and ultimately Western Separation. Either case would, in theory, be a win win for the United States......they would get either a more manageable Canada, that would (hopefully) base it's realtionship with the United States on reality as opposed to some inferiority complex. The other side of the coin would see a friendly, resources rich, nation made-up of the western provinces.... Who says GWB would be, or would have to be, in favor of a trade war with Canada? I could see him punishing us in some way, but that would pale in comparsion to what Democratic held Congress and Senate could do in 2006, or a Democratic, protectionist President in 2008. To be honest I had to look-up what a Mahoot was......I didn't find Mahoot, what i did find, and I asume you meant, was a Mahout Thats is, truely delusional.

That could very well be the case, and the same lobby group could have got the needed Republican Senators to vote against their party...... What a trade war between Canada and the United States would amount to. Do you not seek out deals that would favour yourself before another? In terms of government, I'd hope they would try and further my countries intrests before another nations. And how many American owned, Canadian based companies employ Canadians? Off the top of my head, The big three automakers could, with the backing of a protectionist President/Senate/Congress, move their Canadian based plants to areas of high unemployment within the States, like Ohio (red state) and/or Kentucky (red state). Bell Textron could pull out of Quebec and expend it's facilities in Houston Texas (another Red state) etc...... So what if they voted for him? He's not going to be running for public office again....... That being said, I doubt GWB would implment any serious protectionist policies......I'd leave that to the Dems in next year's election and the presidential election in 2008.....Remember all those "jobs GWB sent overseas"? Sure would seem like a viable slogan for the Democrats......we will bring your jobs back to the good ole US of A......Products for Americans, made by Americans and all that BS.

If PM PM would have said last summer, after the election, either yes to BMD or found a diplomatic, yet assetive way to say no, do you think we would be having this conversation? I agree that Martin wouldn't last long in a trade war, but for different reasons........If/when a trade war happens, I can see one of two things happening: 1. Our economy starts to lose traction, an election occurs, and PM PM on a platform of increased anti-American rhetoric is able to paint the Conservatives a traitors, thus gains back seats at the expense of the Cons. .........End result, Liberal Majority or possably NDP/Liberal majority coalition. Due to fustration in election results, the CPC falls apart.......like the Phoenix, the Reform Party is reborn, this time with an increased anti-eastern perspective......some elements start the push for Western Separation with the majority of the party following after Quebec leaves. -OR- 2. Further polarization, with more of the moderate Liberal rural and suburban ridings going to the CPC and it's promises to mend fences with the Americans, well on the other end, the "progressive" urban Liberal ridings start to flock to the NDP and it promises to disassociate with the Americans and "somehow" break into the European and Asian market places, well at the same time not hurting our manufatored goods industries ( ). The Bloc scoops up some more Liberal seats in Quebec. End result, Conservative minority with strong Bloc backing (due to promises of further increases in provincial powers)... I know........what floors methough is that most Canadians would have prefered Kerry/Edwards...... I think the difference is very small........except of course, the American moo-moos will be protected by BMD