Jump to content

Greg Gutfeld Apologies....so of


Recommended Posts

27 French soldier have been killed in Afghanistan.

That second rate wanna be should attack the french - and maybe ban french fries..oh - that's been done - but who said the comedic was original - everyone wants to be famous but they don't want to do the work - and talent is diligence - at least Miller and Cobair have paid some dues..as far as being skilled and informed entertainers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

That second rate wanna be should attack the french - and maybe ban french fries..oh - that's been done - but who said the comedic was original - everyone wants to be famous but they don't want to do the work - and talent is diligence - at least Miller and Cobair have paid some dues..as far as being skilled and informed entertainers.

It worked....I'll bet Gutfeld was not exactly a household name in Canada (or the USA) before this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It worked....I'll bet Gutfeld was not exactly a household name in Canada (or the USA) before this.

Just like Galloway - ban him and make him famous...It's crazy how the very media some control becomes their Frankenstein. I really don't know who Gutfeld is nor do I care - I listened to sound bites on the radio and noticed that modern female tone that some males have these days ---not men and not woman - but things...yep - this guy and his little buddies sound like girls..we have quite a few personalities in Canada that are hetro-fags...men with high tones and no principles - is there something in the water?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Five minutes alone with the PPCLI should straighten Mr Gutfeld out.

Nawh - 5 seconds would do the trick - and if you used the traditional Canadian sucker shot - a half second would bring him to his senses. Don't you just love it when these over paid losers spew off non-sense then go home to order up a call girl, snort coke and drink Jack..what do you expect from this class of person? Intelligence? Awareness?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just like Galloway - ban him and make him famous...It's crazy how the very media some control becomes their Frankenstein. I really don't know who Gutfeld is nor do I care -...

That's probably the most insulting thing of all....Gutfeld and his producers did this for throwaway laughs, trivializing Canada's role in Afghanistan and their reaction to the bit. Now they are just waiting for a ratings spike.

Rinse and repeat....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes alone with the GG could straighten Liberace out.

He does seem "manly"....in a

sort of way...

:P

---------------------------------------

When the reviews are bad I tell my staff that they can join me as I cry all the way to the bank.

---Liberace

Edited by DogOnPorch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep....that's enough ante for this poker game. Here is a good "score board" that Gutfeld missed:

http://icasualties.org/OEF/DeathsByYear.aspx

Well, I hope this works because it took some work!

These are the casualty rates (from above)

expressed in proportion to the populations of these countries

http://www.prb.org/pdf08/08WPDS_Eng.pdf

Deaths of soldiers per 5 million people

SKorea.... Portugal.....Finland..... Hungary

0.2............1.0............1.0.............1.0

Sweden.... Italy......... Poland...... Czech....... Lithuania

1.2.............1.2..........1.2............1.5...........1.5

Germany.. Romania... France...... Latvia....... Australia

1.8.............2.2...........2.2...........2.2.............2.3

Spain....... Norway..... Netherlands.......US........Estonia

2.8.............3.2...............4.7..............11.2.......11.2

UK........Canada........Denmark

12.5.......17.7...............19.2

-edit- there!

Now this is interesting data that you can actually draw some conclusions from.

Of course the US has lost the most soldiers numerically, by a long shot,

and proportionately they are still among the top 5 in losses.

But with only 10 percent of the population of the US, Canada has lost proportionately more soldiers than the US.

I think sometimes even our American friends forget the size of the population of the US compared to most of the rest of the world's countries.

Edited by tango
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...then why do they line up for the "shit"?

We were pressured/goaded into it, because Bush and a lot of 'Americans' had a hissy fit when we refused to deploy to Iraq.

And hey ... didja hear? We're getting out ... of combat.

We're losing too many to IEDs and US troops.

It's your war...in the UN and NATO's opinion.

Oh that charade! :rolleyes::lol:

It was in the other order.

We can schmooze our way out of combat anytime. ;)

We're being replaced as we speak I believe.

The US is now sending over way more troops than we have there, or ever could.

Our RESERVES are depleted, exhausted ... the last round up scraped up only 43 more to send over, and our regular forces are probably walking zombies by now, with multiple deployments to Af. :blink:

We just don't have any more to send, and ours are in double danger from exhaustion, and are taking heavier casualties per capita than yours.

Try to keep a perspective, eh?

Edited by tango
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We were pressured/goaded into it, because Bush and a lot of 'Americans' had a hissy fit when we refused to deploy to Iraq.

Pssst....you might want to check your memory....Afghanistan was 2002 for Canada....Iraq was invaded in 2003.

And hey ... didja hear? We're getting out ... of combat.

No you're not...

We're losing too many to IRDs and US troops.

You can't lose "US troops".

Oh that charade! :rolleyes::lol:

No bigger UN champion than Canada....just ask General Dallaire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're losing too many to IEDs and US troops.

You can't lose "US troops".

Clarification: We are losing soldiers to IEDs and we are losing soldiers to US 'friendly fire'.

got it now?

And ... I believe we did not assume a combat role in Afghanistan immediately.

There is nothing unusual about our troops being there for reconstruction/peacekeeping, and no Canadians complain about that at all.

It's the combat role that is unusual for us, disturbing, not our fight (some say), and not an honourable war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're losing too many to IEDs and US troops.

You can't lose "US troops".

Clarification: We are losing soldiers to IEDs and we are losing soldiers to US 'friendly fire'.

got it now?

I think so....you wanted to be clever...but dicked it up instead. Practice makes perfect...just look at me! :lol:

And ... I believe we did not assume a combat role in Afghanistan immediately.

There is nothing unusual about our troops being there for reconstruction/peacekeeping, and no Canadians complain about that at all.

False.....there was a "combat role" immediately (JTF2) and some Canadians want everybody home NOW!

It's the combat role that is unusual for us, disturbing, not our fight (some say), and not an honourable war.

Not so unusual....and only disturbing to those who don't know their own nation's history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ya well ... it's just how we feel, on the right and the left, I'd be inclined to think.

I went looking for American invasions of Canada and got engrossed in this ... (perhaps others later ... )

A 1935 US Plan for Invasion of Canada

The following is a full-text reproduction of the 1935

plan for a US invasion of Canada prepared at the US Army

War College, G-2 intelligence division, and submitted on

December 18, 1935. This is the most recent declassified

invasion plan available from the US archival sources.

Centered pagination is that of the original document. The

spelling and punctuation of the original document are

reproduced as in the original document, even when in error

by present-day norms.

This document was first identified by Richard Preston

in his 1977 book, "The Defence of the Undefended Border:

Planning for War in North America 1867-1939" (Montreal:

McGill-Queen's University Press.) Preston's reference

citation (p. 277) identified this to be archived at the US

Military History Collection, Carlisle Barracks, Pa., coded

AWC 2-1936-8, G2, no. 19A. It was located by the US

National Archives and supplied on microfilm.

The military planning context of this document is War

Plan Red, which was approved in May 1930 by the Secretary

of War and the Secretary of Navy. War Plan Red and

supporting documents are available from the US National

Archives on microfilm, in the Records of the Joint Board,

1903-1947, Roll 10, J.B. 325, Serial 435 through Serial

641. In War Plan Red, the US Army's theatre of operations

is defined to be: "All CRIMSON territory" (p.80), and the

US Army's mission, in bold type: ULTIMATELY, TO GAIN

COMPLETE CONTROL OF CRIMSON (p. 84). CRIMSON is the

colour code for Canada. In 1934, War Plan Red was amended

to authorize the immediate first use of poison gas against

Canadians and to use strategic bombing to destroy Halifax

if it could not be captured.

In February 1935, the War Department arranged a

Congressional appropriation of $57 million dollars to

build three border air bases for the purposes of

pre-emptive surprise attacks on Canadian air fields. The

base in the Great Lakes region was to be camouflaged as a

civilian airport and was to "be capable of dominating the

industrial heart of Canada, the Ontario Peninsula" from p.

61 of the February 11-13, 1935, hearings of the Committee

on Military Affairs, House of Representatives, on Air

Defense Bases (H.R. 6621 and H.R. 4130). This testimony

was to have been secret but was published by mistake. See

the New York Times, May 1, 1935, p. 1.

In August 1935, the US held its largest peacetime

military manoeuvres in history, with 36,000 troops

converging at the Canadian border south of Ottawa, and

another 15,000 held in reserve in Pennsylvania. The war

game scenario was a US motorized invasion of Canada, with

the defending forces initially repulsing the invading Blue

forces, but eventually to lose "outnumbered and outgunned"

when Blue reinforcements arrive. This according to the

Army's pamphlet "Souvenir of of the First Army Maneuvers:

The Greatest Peace Time Event in US History" (p.2).

Now ... we know this is just 'war games' and we've already sold ourselves to the US without a war ...

But the persistent omnipotent fantasies that Canadians want to be US 'Americans' ... (Those who want to ARE, and many are dual citizens.)

The failure to comprehend and respect that there is a Canadian perspective that is totally independent of what the US does or is ...

It has nothing to do with the US.

It's just us.

Canadians.

Not 330m ... just 33m ... more in league with other countries of our size, and with many allies.

We may not burn the whitehouse next time,

but have you ever seen a condom full of paint fly out of a HUGE slingshot?

Man, you can douse somebody's campfire 10 sites away!

Across the Niagara river, maybe even!

(beer later, of course)

:lol:

war?

with guns?

where?

why?

Link to terrorism ...

are you nuts? :rolleyes::lol:

Thank god for boring but sane old Canada! B)

Ein Prosit!! Chimo!! Down the hatch!!

SlurrrRRPP

BurrrRRPP

yawn

zzz

Edited by tango
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The failure to comprehend and respect that there is a Canadian perspective that is totally independent of what the US does or is ...

It has nothing to do with the US.

It's just us.

Canadians.

Not 330m ... just 33m ... more in league with other countries of our size, and with many allies.

Then why are those "independent" perspectives so often articulated with respect to the US and not so many other countries?

We may not burn the whitehouse next time,

Nope...never again....your empire has collapsed. God Save the Queen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,712
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...