GostHacked

Hmm, maybe you do have some reading comprehension issues. I did not state Saddam was still alive. And yes you may have given Canada weapons, but I don't really see anywhere in the news where Canada will use them on their own people. Pretty big difference there, no?? The poker game was rigged from the start. Hard to play fair when the opponents are just as crooked. But then again, it is not about playing fair. It is about playing for the crowd. Like Elvis .... really??? OH wait, I am the one with the tinfoil hat .... so yeah... sure.

This is why I keep talking about the fallacy that is the war on terror. But... dammit where is my Alcan Hat?!?!? Anyways... the wars (both Iraq and Afghanistan) were not about freedom in the way most people understand it. Freedom to most of us is to live free, be happy and respect others, liberty ect ect .... but to the people in charge of this war is talking about the freedom of resources. Liberating them for the west's demands. The war with Iran will not be about freedom. It will not be about chemcial or nuclear weapons. This war with Iran, will be all about oil. If you think anything else, then you are duped. This rhetoric between Israel and the US and Iran is all just a distraction.

Another thing to note here is that Saddam was a person of convenience as well. The US gave weapons to Iraq in order to fight of Iran. The chemicals came from several countries, but just like the war on drugs, you punish the buyer and not the dealer. Which solves nothing.

BC Psst. Those perps were not in Iraq.

BC Well, I never claimed it to be a moral fight for Canada. Rhetoric is so drastically different from the actions that you will have a hard time finding any morality in this war on terror from both sides. So, NATO along with the UN and the ICC are just bodies of convenience for the US then?? So there was no objective of invading and occupying Afghanistan? Wow 1993?? Must have been when Gretzky went south to work for L.A. He is not the Great One for nothing you know.

BC Basicly what I have been saying all along, but my smugness must have blinded you on that. Simply Canada does not have the military resources to poject themselves like that. But the US is part of NATO. With us or against us. What? Yeah because Afghanistan was not the focus for the war on terror. Maybe there was no focus considering what the US has reserved for the Iraq invasion. So the US left their NATO pals high and dry when they were the drummer boy for the war. The US went to Iraq to find their own meat grinder. I guess you should not drum up support for a cause in which you cannot make a valuable contribution. Your total forces for Aghanistan was around 50,000 troops from many countries. The US makes up for half of this number. Your total forces for Iraq was close to 250,000 troops. The US contributed over 150,000 troops for the 'cause'. Slightly messed up ratios no?? Since there is a Timmy's there already, why the hell not? I bet those Afghans could follow that little black puck on the white ice better than the US counterparts who need that blue or red streak highlighting it. But to seriously answer your question is... I do not know. I have never seen a fixed Afghanistan. Let's go with the notion of national interests. Canada is there because of national interests. The US is not there because the US's national interests lie in Iraq, and Iran. We are always taught to finish something before we start something else. Before you know it, you are in over 100 countries trying to do the job all at once and wondering why the job is not done, or wonder why the job is taking so long.

This sounds a lot like how the US approached Iran during the Hostage Crisis. The US went in, put in a puppet, which was quickly replaced by Iran which then resulting them turning more anti-US than before. Well the US should just go in anyways. With us, or against us. Blah blah blah. Publicly , I'd say the US is not in Pakistan, however, I would bet they are doing covert operations in Pakistan, just like they are doing covert operations in Iran.... again. So the lesson here is?? Dogonporch

For more information, please see your doctor.

BC Hell, you make judgements about Canada all the time... And Canada could have never made the commitment to the air campaign. Again, not enough resources to meet the demands. I know you hate this response. This is not only a judgement, but a cut and clear fact that Canada simply does not have the military might that is needed for these missions. The other countries that contributed to Afghanistan had less resources than Canada to throw into the mix. Since the US is part of NATO, why not be part of it? The US led the war in Afghanistan, but got sidetracked and went to Iraq. To me this shows that the US is not really not acting in honesty when approaching this war on terror. But according to you BC, that was part of the plan. Leave your pals high and dry in a battle you started, just so you can go start another bigger battle somewhere else. Also, all this don't mean shit because the war on terror is an absolute fantasy and fallacy. But yes, DING DONG Saddams dead. And 'knock knock' ... Bin Laden who???? Guess that sucks for countries like Sweden and Switzerland who declair themselves as neutral. By your logic they are with the terrorists, because they are not with the US. So the main focus was never Afghanistan. Or that problem would have been solved by now. Saddam is dead. (nothing to do with 9/11) Bin Laden still at large.

Instead we have all sorts of legal pharmaceuticles for you to blow your brains out on.

Reading your posts hurts my brain. I tried to make sense of it , but failed.

Let me make this clearer. It does not matter the amount that is conrtibuted. And since what I say does not matter( to the powers that be) I am curious as to why you think I need to clarify anything. The reason I take exeption to it is this : Biting off more than you can chew. Clean up one area first before messing up another area. The war on terror has been multitasked to a point where the focus was lost and the job will be longer and harder because of it. If Afghanistan was a focal point, then it should have remained THE focal point untill the job is done. This is why I have a problem with it. The resources should have all been thrown at Afghanistan at the start. Regardless of the amount of troops Canada could contribute, it would come nowhere near the number that then US can contribute. Also, the amount of troops the US commited to Afghanistan is far lower than what was commited to Iraq 2 years later. If the US has no intentions of going into Iraq when they did, you can sure bet that Afghanistan would be fixed by now. http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/02/1...oops/index.html Compare that with over 150,000 troops the US took into Iraq. It is clear that Afghanistan was not their main focus.

I said BC Replied. Reading comprehension is essential here BC. I never said it would be ok, I just stated that we simply do not have the resources like the US has when it comes to money and military. So even if I was ok with it, Canada simply does not have the resources to accomplish the goal of winning this war on terror. Canada can never make the contribution that the US has wether I am ok with it or not. Shady Al Queda is still based in Aghanistan. And now operating in Pakistan. You know, those guys who are helping the US in the war on terror, but will not allow US troops to go into Pakistan to kill the rest of Al Queda. You figure with Pakistan as an ally, they would allow the US to go in and 'get er dunn'. But that has not been the case. The Taliban are making a come back because the situation in Afghanistan is getting worse since the initial invasion. Which tells me the focus on the war on terror made a huge shift away from Afghanistan ... but what could that possibly be?? Afghanistan was invaded in 2001. Iraq in 2003. Afghanistan had Al Queda and Bin Laden (the guys who did 9/11 apparently) and the Taliban. Iraq had none. Iraq had been made a focal point in the War on Terror Afghanistan used to be a focal point for the War on Terror. Saddam is dead. Bin Laden still at large.

I am not thrown off by these people, in fact it encourages me to post more. Ignoring them will not go away. And if they want to character assasinate me ... then they better figure out what my character is before trying to kill it. Rue Do not ignore Israel's track record if you are going down this path. Both Israel and Iran are looking out for #1, which is their own. That is reasonable. Both countries also want some type of protection, wether it be a military plus nuclear weapons, or asking another country for protection if they cannot do it on their own, but there will be a price to pay for the security. Israel and Iran have both made their decisions. It is all in how you look at it. And also look how the modern mainstream media shapes your views. Israel is always seen in good light by western media. Iran has always been the bad boy from as far back as I can remember. I remember being 10 years old, cleaning my room and listening to the conflicts happening in the middle east. I always wondered why the hell that was always happening in that part of the world. I learned me some history. I did not like what I found. Another think you all want to know about tinfoil. Shiney side out.

Do you know where else alcohol is legal?? That's right, CANADA !!!!! And we don't have to wait untill we are 21. Hell I got my first drunk on back when I was .. I think 16.

You do, only if you spell my name correctly. I messed up my name when I made an account here on MLW. It should have read GhostHacked. Crap maybe I should just drop my account .... someone could.. no IS watching me. And I am not that poor, sure I have some debt left to pay off. My new apt is pretty nice actually. Lots of room for my insane crazy ass, and my cat. My skin is clear. Way past those teen acne days. And actually the air is kind of bad. I walk to work from the bus stop, and there are plenty of large trucks that drive by on this road, bieng an industrial area, the stench is pretty bad from the vehicles. Not to mention walking by sewer drains, you get that awfull crap smell. Is there a way to spot weld tinfoil without ruining it?? I think I need a new tank for the torch. Almost done sealing up the apt wiht tinfoil as well.

I think I'd quit alcohol altogether if pot was legalized. I'd be concerned about quality though.

Actually I am appealing to your own ignorance, because ignorance IS bliss.... right?? However, anyone can watch almost anyone. How many security cameras are you exposed to on a daily basis. Someone is always watching you. Our loss prevention team at work watches what goes on in our warehouse because there is theft and sometimes damage to the property/equipment. ect ect. We have this old lady in our apartment complex who seems to have nothing better to do but walk her dog and watch everyone. Saw her yesterday on my way out hanging around the corner of the hall listening to a couple that was having a fight inside their apartment. Now that is pretty crazy eh? DAMMMM... I went to the grocery store today after work .... I could only fit about 12 boxes of tinfoil in my backpack. But that is ok, I only had enough money for 10. Someone must have stolen my money ,,,.... but who?

So I guess ABC news is one of those tinfoil hat wearing news sources. Even when it comes from the horses mouth you still deny it. Hitler used the burning of the Riechstag to further his plan of Nazi Germany. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_fire DAMMMMIT ... I need more tinfoil, this hat is wayyyyyy to small. edited to add the following The Nazis tried a Dutch man for the fire. http://www.canada.com/victoriatimescolonis...43-d7323719d083 But they end up pardoning him for the crime.... 75 years after he was executed for the crime.

I wonder which failure he was assasinated for.

Dogonporch. It is called fabricating a crisis. A crisis in which you created soyou can come in do things and claim victor and high road. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662 We know about planned operations by the US to justify an invasion during the Cuban Missile crisis. False flag operations do happen. But, I guess it was a good thing Kennedy shot that idea down.

Rue, I can see someone hit a nerve here. I guess Gaza is in the same boat?? When the former state of Palestine was broken up to create Israel, this now becomes an international dispute, because it involves two or more countries. We all have heard of the illegal settlements Israel is building in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. So in order to get around the international dispute, they are categorized as non-nations. Which strikes me as odd since Gaza and West Bank have their own government and military. But not a recognized one by international standards because they are consideres non nations. But the UN mandate was to break up the Caliphate to create Israel after WWII. Glad the Caliphate had a say in it. This was already an international dispute before Israel was even created.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/07/17/news/compa...dex.htm?cnn=yes Well, another major finnancial intsitution is coming under fire for business practices. The reason why these institutions freeze assets is so they don't loose their collective shirts. When to many people take their money and investments out of a bank, the bank risks a run off and bankruptcy. Notice where we get that term from bank-ruptcy. When collecters demand payment and you do not have the capitol to cover those payments. This is an example of living beyond their means. People, banks, corps, governments. They all do this.

So you support genocide as well?? OK that might be a bit harsh of a label, even for you BC. So now you know why I do not hold Israel to a higher standard. All standards can be met when you lower your expectations. It seems like Israel is not even holding itself in high standards, if it did, maybe there would be no conflict in the Missle East (not a typo).

Argus Then what I suggest, is that we abolish welfare. No more leeching. And even if you have a work program in order to receive welfare, this is not slavery, but actually an untapped cheap labour force. I have to work for my money. More or less I guess I am a slave to the dollar. So welfare people should work for their money as well. This I don't see as slavery, since most people who get themselves into welfare are lazy. I do understand that some on welfare are there for reasons beyond their control, but for the most part, people are too lazy to get a job when the welfare state gives them a pretty easy life, granted with little cash left over from buying the essentials. You also have to look at how some people spend their welfare. Rent, food, clothes, ect ect ect... They still pay for most of the same essentials that others work and get paid. I had a friend who was on welfare, he was working a crappy job like me, not getting paid much, had a wife, and a kid .... and felt less than human. The man has a concious. He realized and understood that he could not raise his kids the way he wanted to on a welfare cheque. He started his own company. He eventually closed up shop 5 years later, but he got out of welfare, bought a house, and him and his wife now have jobs that pay well.