anticlimates

in a diplomatic way of course. He's great, fantastic choice. We need someone to be totally blunt with those assholes, in a diplomatic way. He's already doing just that even before taking the post.

This topic is moronic. Why would Canada or anyone in Canada - Liberal or otherwise - be afraid of FOX? Pure trolling bullshit. By an American, I'm guessing!

I didn't vote. And when I see a country building CIA prisons in non-democratic nations I get a little angst. Sorry, didn't mean to make you feel bad. Is my "hate" bummin' you out? I'm such a hater, I know. Not like those rightwingers. They're such a lovin' sort. Muslims, poor people, gays...they just shower 'em all with love.

Two years to late for 2 World Wars. Geography gives it isolation which allowed it to develop unchallanged....with vast resources. America has had an easy ride. Now Bush thinks he's the bringer of "freedom" (even though the initial point was to remove a threat) because he removed Saddam. America is buying it, maybe. Maybe after the new Shia government sets up and women aren't allowed to touch non-relatives and dancing to music is forbidden, maybe then the ignorant rightwingkoolaidrinkin 'mericans won't be gushing about bushs "freedom" anymore.

I've noticed in the world media and among my own circles that Bush is now looked upon in the same way that Bush-lovin' farrightwingers like to look upon the U.N...as irrelevant. Like a rightwingnut could care less about the UN and what it says, I think the entire world (and half of the USA) feels the same way about Bush now. I've even recognized it in myself. I never liked the man ever since I noticed his narrow patterns of thought and response to 9/11, but he always captured my attention. Now I couldn't care less what he has to say! I feel like I've heard it all before and that it's really not interesting or relevant. I witnessed his visit to Canada, and besides the millions wasted on security and the thousands of protesters (God bless 'em) what he had to say was treated more with silent embarrassment than any real consideration. Has this bumbling boob managed to turn the leadership of the free world into something to be only patronized? It sure seems that way. Whatever political figures and media within America might say or believe....the vast majority of the world outside of America sees the policies of Bush as failures. His leadership style has been a stunning failure.......his dealings with alies has been an obvious failure. He's a walking trainwreck! I almost feel sorry for him. I can't though, becuse I know HE actually believes he's the real deal and respected by others. He's respected by about 50 million Americans, that's it. It's such a sad performance by an international leader, I wonder if he even cares about the respect of anyone other than those 50 million.

Are you saying that the second gulf war was illegal? If it was, why didn't any of the other members of the serurity council draw up a resoultion agaisnt the United States? You just ain't to bright, is ya? You gotta quit drinking that stuff.

Since I think the entire article portrayed that notion, and since we have rules on coypright infringment at this site, I'll refrain from posting the entire story and just recommend anybody intrested read the entire story. That is the most pathetic excuse to avoid dedbate I've every seen! You claim the whole article portrayed your previously stated notion, which was that "It assumes that the reason Germany and Japan succeded with democracy, is becasue they had it really bad off" This is a bizarre claim which makes me wonder if you've been into the cheer a bit. I've quoted and restated MANY examples from the article which explain why Germany and Japan both had great advantages over Iraq to succeed in democracy and stability, and none of them had anything to do with your claim. Your EXCUSE for not backing up this dishonest and time-wasting claim that the whole article backs you up, is that there's "copyright infringement" rules!!! Go ahead Einstein, quote a few examples from the article that back up your ramblings, there's no rules against that! You can't post the whole thing. Post 25% of it then! Or just provide the jist of each paragraph! So pathetic.

Anyone who thinks Fox would be successful in Canada is a f#cking idiot. I'd love to see Fox in Canada. From the outside looking in it's a clear demonstration of rightwing propaganda and most Canadians would be able to see that. About 20% of us would be whoopin' it up with Bill O'Reilly and Coulter. The rest would be further vacinated against the basic dishonesty that pervades rightwing influences.

Emotionaly, it's very sad. Logically it's a good thing. It contributes to the perception in America that the BushWar is a failure. Only continued American death will do that. Once that perception is solidified, let Bush try and talk his way into another War...asking America to trust him about threats and urgency. It won't happen. The soldiers dying in Iraq today are saving thousands of lives by helping to expose Bushs failure.

Yes, I saw that factor. You describe it very poorly though. You've misrepresented the article. Maybe quote what you think represents what you're trying to say. They are clear differences with Iraq that obviously gave a nation like Japan a major advantage in attaining democratic success. They highlight the stupidity of expecting a similar result from Iraq simply because it's another nation that America is trying to instill democracy in. The evidence is strong that conditions were ripe for success in Japan and Germany after the war. The failed Bush policy which has resulted in this bloody ongoing war in Iraq has done it's very best to hamstring any conditions for success. I don't hate Bush, I'm just being truthful about the reality in Iraq. Talk about all the new schools you wish, the reality is violence is rampant there, religious and cultural divides are huge, and terrorists are being born out of the despair and resentment. BushCo. can talk about "foreign terrorists" all they want, and they will. They know that strokes the conscience of America. The reality is that less than 5% of those fighting the US in Iraq are "foreign terrorists".

Nevermind my request for a source M.Burns. I found one: CRTC approves Fox News... Just another example of a shrill hysterical rightwinger getting the story wrong. Good job M.Burns, keep the rightwing tradition alive!

Sure, you know ALL ABOUT the CRTC. The CRTC banned Fox News from Canada? Can you source that, or did you fuck that one up? Similar in fashion to your "stacked" comment?

Um, I did. I provided a link and listed the main ones. If you don't get it, I can't help you. I'll try once more, although I don't hold out much hope for ya. To keep it simple, I'll just deal mainly with Japan, although Germany shares in these points and more. - Japan was stable and secure during the occupation, with virtually no violence. - Occupation planning had begun 2 years earlier. - No email, internet, TV. America was able to maintain control over information. - there was a tradition of democracy and civil society on which to draw. It's pretty obvious that Japan (and Germany) are wholly different than Iraq. Drawing the parrallel to suggest Iraq can quite possible develop as Japan and Germany did is pure tripe. It's partisan, blind Bush-lovin' tripe. My #1 difference between Japan/Germany and Iraq? OK, #1 and #2.... #1. Iraq is now a breading ground for terrorism (not a magnet) an incubator for new terrorists. #2. The Iraq war continues. It ain't over, and it won't be over for a LONG time.

Did you read this part? But when the CRTC invited comment on bringing the channel to Canada, fully 85 per cent of the 600 respondents voiced support. A few domestic broadcasters objected for competitive reasons, and a handful of critics on both sides of the border wrote in complaining that Fox is biased. But on the whole, Canadians seem unafraid to add a nakedly partisan presence to the dial. "Hysterical"? It's a pretty relaxed, entertaining article.

Another example of rightwing lying. I said I'd like to see him dead, big difference from saying I want to kill him. Either uneducated and ignorant, or dishonest. Take for example the constant comparisons of Iraq to Germany and Japan. What is that? A dishonest representation of history to bolster Bush policy, or simple ignorance? Look at the claims by ALL on this rightwing administration before this war. Was it dishonest representation of intelligence information, or simple ignorance? Take your pick.

Why would you ask him to explain post-war Japan? Iraq and Japan are completely different...as was Germany also. A parrallel is drawn only by koolaid drinking Bush apologists. Here's a source of information for you, read it and gain a little knowledge on the matter: http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2004/0...ratization.html Of note are the facts that the occupation in Japan was seen as legitimate. There was a formal surrender. Also important.... there were no hostile political or religious factions within the country. I quote: the occupation and reconstruction had been endorsed by Emperor Hirohito. Except for the military, the Japanese government remained intact at all levels, and the Japanese had a tradition of democracy and civil society on which to draw. After the war, Japan was relatively stable and secure. Why do rightwingers continue to push these falsehoods? Any straw to defend Bush and his failed policy is not only grasped at, it is held onto tightly in spite of repetative debunking.

I don't hate America or Americans. Let me get this straight....I choose not to support America because of the direction it's money goes, and that makes me a hater? Or was it the "America can go to hell" comment? Maybe I should be more specific...George Bush and his supporters can go to hell. Idiots who think Canada should be beholden to an idiot like Bush can go to hell. America has some growing up to do and then some apologies to make. That's not hatred pal, that's a fact.

Are you using Windows? Internet Explorer? Mozilla Firefox?I think it is fair to say that you would be dead within a matter of days if you were to stop all trades involving in some way an American. That's the most bizarre statement I've read in a long time. Why would I be dead within a "matter of days" if we didn't get American crap? Be specific, please!

Why? How can you even ask that? Why are you faking ignorance?

Cherry. You assume that a PERCEIVED FAILURE (which would really just be an accurate picture) in the USA means "further deaths". Iraq has already failed. It's an incubator for terrorists. The insurgency will last as long as America wants to dance. They can kill them all day and they will keep coming back because the occupation and action create new enemies every day. If democracy manages some kind of control there vs. another autocracy or some other non-democratic system.....can you really say deaths will be more numerous one way or the other? No, you can't. All the outrage here stems from an assumption that a Bush failure confirmed in the collective mind of America somehow would mean more death and suffering in Iraq than otherwise. What a narrow assumption. Iraq might be better off or basically the same either way. And don't forget the untold thousands that will die if Bush creates the image of success in Iraq and thus spends his "political capital" invading another nation for abstract and rhetorical reasons.

I didn't quote your whole post...the rest was a list of examples of past wars and death and slavery which you said was pointing out that this kind of stuff is nothing new. I'm not sure why you make that point, but I'm "almost uneducated" ah guess. Are you saying that we shouldn't care about suffering and trying to avoid it for the world becuse it's inevitable? As for the quote above, my wish does not "assert then that America is the only country that has ever done evil". It is meant to prevent death. If Bush died....or Iraq became perceived to be a failure in the USA (perceived as it is, that is)...then Bush would be politically and militarily unable to engage on another fools errand. You said "I don't enjoy myself when people die" so you should support my wish....a dead or castrated Bush would prevent much death and suffering.

Who do you think started the Iraq war? The UN? Blair? Saddam? It was a bunch of Al-Q extremists, and they did it on Sept.11th 2001. What kind of koolaid did you just wake up from? The planes aren't the issue. The issue is Bush and the idiotic manner in which he conducts foreign policy. He's a complete failure, and there's no reason to doubt that he will whip up some more unnecessary violence in this world that will AGAIN cause 50 times the amount of death and injury 9/11 caused. If Bush died, his successor might be just as ignorant and pig-headed. The best thing would be a perceived failure in Iraq which would make it impossible for Bush to win support for anymore misguided adventures PNAC style.

America can go to hell. And take it's 2 years 2 late performance in each of the Great wars with it. I don't buy American or travel to America anymore. I'm not paying for the smart bombs that redneck idiot uses for the retarded wars he starts.

Only those things will prevent that monster from stiring up more war and spreading more death and suffering.