moderateamericain

ahh ok i see now, its a bill against threatening (implied or directly) against individuals or groups based on sexual orientation. Basically they can label it a "Hate crime" and therefore provide stiffer penalties?

A quick question, This bill c-250 that i see referenced every where, is it a bill that would make "bashing (making fun of) gays" a hate crime? as i couldnt call someone a "fag" without it being a crime? im just trying to understand what its about.

By now you know they are not lies. The Bush Admin has to constantly adjust their 'language' to reflect the recently uncovered bull. Lies to cover lies, eventually it bites you in the ass. These lies, however, may just eat you whole. This is laughable. 100% I trust CBC more than let's say CNN, MSNBC, or ...Fox News? Also you should look elsewhere for supporting evidence on your position. Plenty of other news websites out there that will give you a bigger picture of what is going on. And that would be your first mistake assuming we ONLY read CBC. Huge mistake. I know that the people who visit this web forum, generaly know more than the Average Amercian Bear. And I would be scared of North Korea(ahh not) or China let's say. You think that the US can just overun a Chinese military? M.A.D. IF they cannot clean Iraq up, what makes you think they can do that to a country that actually poses a threat to the US? The US does not even really know what they are up against in a county like China. North Korea has singed on with paper. Now you have to wait to see if that will pan out. Hopefully we don't have to wait another 10 years to find out that they still have not disarmed. They must have some kick ass sheep. That wool over your eyes is pretty thick. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> A few things you pointed out. CBC is notoriously left leaning, if you believe them over CNN you like your news like you like your MCdonalds, have it your way. CNN is by far the most neutral news network. And the United States could fight the Chinese in a war. Modern Armies are not designed around a club, they are designed around the ablility to PROJECT POWER. The united States ability to PROJECT POWER is far greater then that of the chinese. I am not saying the chinese have a weak army by any means, they are trully a force to be reckon with and on the ground; i dont think there is a country that could match up with them. However in the air, and on the sea, They have zero chance. You can have the best ground force in the world, but if you have no way to get it from point A to B then its useless.

i think you hit it on the head when you say the arabic countries use them as a tool against the jews.

This is for you Moderateam. It's originally from the Wall Street Journal. The colonel doesn't claim the American anti-war movement defeated the U.S. army(I don't know how you could possibly draw that conclusion Eureka), but that it encouraged them in the face of defeats on the battlefield. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> ahh thanks.

Thats are real problem! 2 parties to choose from(realistically)

im trying to figure out what your talking about here? Care to quote?

What are they signing on to, exactly? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I was thinking about this thread, and are you sure, that its the US they are backing down to? If i was N.K. Id be more worried about that billion man army that chinese maintan then the 50k or so US Marines. Keep in mind that i seriously doubt the budding chinese economy wants a cornered animal of a nation with nuclear weapons in its near vacinity. No if i was North Korea, i would back down to china a helluva lot faster then i would to the United States.

actually if you wanna compare attrition we killed about 10 of them for every 1 of us. However you can slaughter an enemy until you rot, if you do not accomplish your goal it was for not. And i dont think losing vietnam had anything to do with protest at home. It may have been detrimental to morale but the real reason we lost that war, is we fought it with one arm tied behind are back.

To ModerateAmerican, If I misread you, I apologize... Looking at your post again, it was not really against Canada's position. My response was not an attack at you, but it is how I feel. 'Pologies again, and have a nice day... Err. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> no apology is necessary, you did not attack me directly. As far as individual americans being "punished" for voting for Bush, whos going to admister it? Canada . Awfully assumptious of you to assume i condone everything my government does. Now it may seem that I do, because i look for solid proof of accusations before i believe it. But i consider that practical. To each his own i guess. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> canuckcat, I apologize for giving you the assumption that i think canada is inferior to the united states, sometimes in haste, i dont choose my words correctly. What i was really attacking was the notion that your average American should be punished for voting for bush. I think its safe to say he hoodwinked a few of us. Also you have to look at the situation as well. John kerry was not a well liked candidate. If someone like John Mccain had run i surely would have voted for him of George Bush. However the American people did vote for George Bush. And to be Honest, I will not be made to feel that i should have to apologize for following the democract process of voting for who i felt (at the time) had the best intrest of the United states at heart and more importanly for me. I think its at best foolhardy for you to come here and say Americans should be punished for who they vote for. How is that a democracy?

To ModerateAmerican, If I misread you, I apologize... Looking at your post again, it was not really against Canada's position. My response was not an attack at you, but it is how I feel. 'Pologies again, and have a nice day... Err. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> no apology is necessary, you did not attack me directly. As far as individual americans being "punished" for voting for Bush, whos going to admister it? Canada . Awfully assumptious of you to assume i condone everything my government does. Now it may seem that I do, because i look for solid proof of accusations before i believe it. But i consider that practical. To each his own i guess.

Actually, it doesn't. FACT STOP LYING! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> another thing to add to this, didnt the vietmanese get into a rather bloody war shortly their after with china?

I dunno if this is appropriate or allowed. But happy thanksgiving from the southern US.

has afghanistan in all its years of history ever known 10 years of peace? (non-rhetorical question) TO the OP question did Bin laden win? well let me ask you this. Would you want to run from shit hole to shit hole hiding place for the rest of your life, knowing that if your caught not only will you be executed by flaunted like some kind of play thing? I dunno about you but thats not my idea of a "win"

isnt canada really exercising democracy? by choosing not to get involved? Isnt that the point of Democracy to choose for yourself?

I keep saying that the problem here is a political one, so the prescence or lack of 160,000 U.S. troops has little bearing on its resolution. It seems to me that the U.S. has been bungling the diplomatic side almost as bad as they've bungled the operational side. The wholesale dimissal of the Iraqi army, the new government's rabid commitment to deBaathification, and the wholesale corruption that has emerged are all grave missteps that have contribute dto the dismal econiomic and security situation. If the U.S. is serious about a stable, self-sufficient and democratic Iraq, it needs to start acting like more of a facilitator, rather than a imperial proconsul. That means making serious overtures to the Sunni factions to convince them that a civil war is not in their best interests while curbing the ambitons of the Kurds and Shiites. So, in actuality, I think a withdrawl of a large number of U.S. troops would send the message that they are serious about helping to find a political solution. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> ill give you that.

But are the American forces really contributing much to the security situation? Every day, we read of another suicide bomber, another ambush. Now, we're starting to hear of Iraqi Government death squads and torture facilities. Now, the argument could be made that an American withdrawl would lead to a full-scale armed civil war, versus the under the table one that's going on right now, but I'm not convinced taht's a good thing. As I said, curently the Sunis kill the Shiites under the guise of fighting the occupation while the Shiites and Kurds are exacting revenge on the Sunnis unde rth eguise of counterinsurgency. If the American prescene is in fact, preventing the mess from boling over, they are only delaying a inevitable (and some might say necessary) step in Iraq's post-Ba'athist development. You're labouring under the misaprehension that being "Iraqi" is important. It's not. Tribal, religious and sectarian loyalties trump natinolist ideas everytime. Look at the constitution which, as it stands, divides the country into semi-autonomous regions, with the Sunni minority being left out in the cold. Like I've said before, viewing the mess as the struggles of a nascent democracy is hopelessly idealistic. What we're seeing is a winner-take-all scramble for the remenants of the imperialist creation dubbed "Iraq" (1932-2003). (Now, personally, I believe the bulheadedness on the part of the U.S. vis a vis withdrawl are motivated more by concerns over who might swoop in to fill the vacumn they would leave behind. I don't think they are going anywhere.) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> fair enough. I see what your saying especially about the tribal and religious loyalties. I wasnt thinking in the shoes of an iraqi. see in America we think "im an american" not "im a caucausian" or "im a north carolinian" or im a "christian" we just simply say yep im american. But in iraq, and i think you hit it on the head, they are much more divided. Maybe the democracy will fail, i really dont know, but i assure you that we will find out when and if American troops do pull out. But put yourself into the shoes, you have essentialy invaded a country. Do you A. trash it and leave. B. trash it and try and fix it. and dont say "i wouldnt have gone there in the first place" because we already know how you feel about it. So we have a big mess now, and we can either leave it or attempt to clean it up. One thing i do know, suicide bombers and death squads are not going to get us to leave any sooner.

Wrong. The left's hero Cindy Sheehan believes in an immediate troop withdrawal, and we all know how much the kook-left supports her. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I am referring to realistic people in government, not people like Cindy Sheehan. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The Pentagon is already planning on pulling out 60,000 troops after the new parliment sits in January. Can anyone tell me why pulling out immediately would make the situation any worse in the long run? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I will step up to that plate. In order to show why pulling out immediatley would create chaos in iraq. you have to look at other situations when "the law" was removed from an area. Take a look at the LA riots for instance. When the LAPD pulled out of Watts, a notable ghetto in LA and the center point for just about every riot ever in LA. The people in that area went nuts. The worst rioting and burning was done when the LA police pulled out to regroup and organize. As they pushed back into that area of the city the rioting dwelled down to nothing, "the law" had re-established dominance in that party of the city. Now take a country like Iraq, where you have people that have showing a willingness to kill even those that profess to sympathize with them. Now pull out the standing "law", what do you think is going to happen? A lot of innocent people who want nothing more to rebuild their country are going to die. The iraqui government has to develop and enfore laws and a sizable police force to combat any remaining terrorist there. Im willing to bet, that even afte we leave, they will still be a constant threat of terrorism in that country.

The religious anghle never struck me as anything more than window dressing. I suspect the vast majority of the rioters don't know the Koran from Cocal Cola. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> you could say the same thing about the riots in LA and such, nothing more than an excuse to steal some stuff.

i already have. have you? And now my 19 year old brother is? has your family? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You can compliment the troops, and be critical of those that direct them. this is not a black and white situations, theres an awful lot of grey. Do you really think those boys want to be over there? Dont you think they would rather be at home with their famlies? girlfriends? wives? They go for the very reason you posted. The manner in which we defend it is just as important as the fact that we do. We cannot decend to the level of those that we fight. We are better than that. More importantly the ability for are citizens to critizise our government is the very basis for our freedom.

I guess I should not surprised, being an American joining a Canadian forum, that this sort of ignorance exists up North. There are others who do show sense. Clearly you must feel that the French solution to Islamo-fascism is the way to go. Start gearing up for your riots. Bush chooses to let liberty and freedom expose the lie of fascist Islam as opposed to bombing the Middle East into submission. Read and learn: www.logictimes.com/bushplan.htm <{POST_SNAPBACK}> May I ask: would your support for Bush drop at all if he said: "I now have to raise your taxes and get rid of your social security to pay for the beauty of freedom and the end of fascist tyranny in Iraq?" You have a president who is in economic denial. One of the reasons I support the conservative viewpoint is because I like a strong economy free of tax and spend liberals. The problem with Bush is he spends carte blanche while cutting the taxes of the richest...you can't have your cake and eat it too. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> More urban myths and intellectual dishonesty. You apparently are unaware that this war is the second cheapest military enterprise in US history (date here: www.logictimes.com/dissent.htm. We have an 11 trillion dollar economy and can afford to defend ourselves against Islamo-fascism. You may have missed the recent almost 4% rise in GDP this last quarter despite hurricanes and the war? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You did not answer my question. My question is, quite simply, the U.S. has a serious national debt problem right now and Iraq is a major part of that. The U.S. government underestimated the cost of the Iraq war by about 14 billion dollars. So I ask my question again: are you willing to PAY for the U.S. spending many years in Iraq to rebuild it? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> actually the riots in paris were relgiously geared as well as frustration at poverty levels in muslim ghettos. ive posted several articles in other threads on the subject.

Well, that link opens up more questions than it answers. Actually it is pretty damning to the Bush admin. After 4 years they still can't get their story straight. Clarke claims 'sole responsibility' for the decision, but then says "The FBI actually approved it", and the FBI denies Clarke's word. People in the Bush admin seem to be trying to throw themselves on a grenade that hasn't gone off yet... Seems like Moore was telling the truth, and the US gov't hasn't even settled on the lie they are going to tell the people. And you seem to have every faith in them...let us know when they finalize whatever lie they come up with at the end, and bring it back to us. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Michael Moore doesnt not love his country. Michael Moore is a seething mass of hatred. Im ashamed he went to Michigan State University. Hes an example of everything i hate in a human being. In retrospect hate is too strong a word, so i change my statment to say "He is everything i dislike in a human being." <{POST_SNAPBACK}> He is a champion of mediocracy.

http://www.iris.org.il/blog/archives/561-E...h-Intifada.html The french Intifada, this post is for Eureka.

Alright, you are right, war is not illegal. I guess. So I guess that makes it alright to do anything. War is hell, and the will always be colateral. But the U.S. is always boasting a moral standard that the rest of the globe should follow. That in there itself is a mask. There is still a shitload more of what we do not know of. What other weapons, they first deny of using. Then after some evidence comes out they finnaly DO admit to using those weapons. They if they will admit to that, when the evidence is found that they used other questionable munittions, what then? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The United nations is about the most powerless organization ive ever seen. The US would laugh at it if it tried to put American troops up for war crimes (unless legitimate in the eyes of the US). Not to mention Kofi Anna might wanna pull the UN troops off the 13 year old african girls that they are there to "protect". I bet slave trade, kiddie porn is a great money maker. Not to mention that pushinng the US to the point where it drops out of the UN would be akin to chewing off your own arm.

Well, that link opens up more questions than it answers. Actually it is pretty damning to the Bush admin. After 4 years they still can't get their story straight. Clarke claims 'sole responsibility' for the decision, but then says "The FBI actually approved it", and the FBI denies Clarke's word. People in the Bush admin seem to be trying to throw themselves on a grenade that hasn't gone off yet... Seems like Moore was telling the truth, and the US gov't hasn't even settled on the lie they are going to tell the people. And you seem to have every faith in them...let us know when they finalize whatever lie they come up with at the end, and bring it back to us. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Michael Moore doesnt not love his country. Michael Moore is a seething mass of hatred. Im ashamed he went to Michigan State University. Hes an example of everything i hate in a human being. In retrospect hate is too strong a word, so i change my statment to say "He is everything i dislike in a human being."