bush_cheney2004 Posted September 8, 2009 Report Share Posted September 8, 2009 Ahh yes, the Canada bit you play so well. I am sure there is a comparison about Native Land claims and the invasion of a country that harboured terrorists that struck capitolism in the heart..... but I am not seeing it .. Care to elaborate more on it? Krikey man.....North America was settled on the backs and bodies of "noble savages".....now that they are subjugated, you want to get religion? Sheesh..... Our military is in horrible shape. not to mention that the Canadian population is about 1/10th the size of the US, so you know, by simple ratio we don't have the numbers or the equipment. It's something that has been neglected for a couple decades. Tough titty.....Canada still asked men and women to execute the mission without proper kit just so you can have "free" health care. But it did not/could not commit all available forces. You must get tired of my agreeing with you the majority of the time. Doesn't matter to me....I prefer reality to fantasy. Ah there is the cowboy attitide I am used to from you. Yes the US can jugge more than one quagmire at at time, they have shown at least that much. Fine....next time you and General Dallaire want to under-achieve (Rwanda), please call Washington for a ready made excuse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabre Rider Posted September 9, 2009 Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 Germany never attacked the United States. Not so fast, Germany declared war on the US on December 11th, 1941 four days after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour and began U-Boat operations inside US coastal waters almost immediately afterwards. See the Second U-Boat Happy Time for more information. Those operations costs the allies over 600 ships for the loss of 22 U-boats and almost brought coastal shipping along the US Eastern Seaboard and Gulf of Mexico to a grinding halt. If that is not an attack against the US, then what is? The odd thing about the German or rather Hitler's declaration was that he was under no treaty obligation with Japan to do so if Japan instigated a war between itself and the US, the only treaty obligation Germany had with Japan in regards to war with the US was that Germany would come to Japanese aid if Japan was attacked by the US. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted September 9, 2009 Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 lol...alright...we'll call that an 'attack on the US'...but it wasn't an attack on US soil. Hitler was feeling pretty cocky circa early Dec 1941...things were going very well...except for outside Moscow...but that was just a burp to him. To the troops it was known as the Meat Locker. I suppose it was that 'sittin' on top of the World' feeling that had him declare war on the USA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted September 9, 2009 Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 Krikey man.....North America was settled on the backs and bodies of "noble savages".....now that they are subjugated, you want to get religion? Sheesh..... Was that so hard? And I don't have any use for religion at all. Maybe the US was settled by nobles savages. I guess that could go for Lower Canada as well. Since those wimpy ass French settled Upper Canada. Now if you are equating US and Canadian troops to the settlers, again you fail to make a proper comparison there. You have just insulted every military person out there including yourself. You said you served correct? I don't think NATO is going to 'settle' Afghanistan anytime soon. Noble savages indeed. Tough titty.....Canada still asked men and women to execute the mission without proper kit just so you can have "free" health care. But it did not/could not commit all available forces. Which was a bad idea. I know Rumsfeld said 'You go to war with the Military you have.' Which is kind of short sighted and could end up in faiulure because of them not being even remotely prepared with training and proper equipment. Fine....next time you and General Dallaire want to under-achieve (Rwanda), please call Washington for a ready made excuse. Hey BC, topic is about Afghanistan. Don't be getting all off topic on us now again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted September 9, 2009 Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 Was that so hard? And I don't have any use for religion at all. Maybe the US was settled by nobles savages. I guess that could go for Lower Canada as well. Since those wimpy ass French settled Upper Canada. And you will always be guessing. Now if you are equating US and Canadian troops to the settlers, again you fail to make a proper comparison there. You have just insulted every military person out there including yourself. You said you served correct? I don't think NATO is going to 'settle' Afghanistan anytime soon. Noble savages indeed. Now you are just being obtuse....General Custer is in Afghanistan ? Which was a bad idea. I know Rumsfeld said 'You go to war with the Military you have.' Which is kind of short sighted and could end up in faiulure because of them not being even remotely prepared with training and proper equipment. Rumsfeld was right, but that doesn't mean that Canada gets to include or direct the deployment of other nation's forces, especially when it lacked the means to even deploy its own properly to Afghanistan. US obligations elsewhere are not subordinate to Canada's NATO responsibilities. Hey BC, topic is about Afghanistan. Don't be getting all off topic on us now again. Would you even know the difference? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted September 9, 2009 Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 And you will always be guessing. *yawn* Now you are just being obtuse....General Custer is in Afghanistan ? Has been a cluster f from the beginning. Rumsfeld was right, but that doesn't mean that Canada gets to include or direct the deployment of other nation's forces, especially when it lacked the means to even deploy its own properly to Afghanistan. US obligations elsewhere are not subordinate to Canada's NATO responsibilities. But you are subordinate to your own NATO responsibilities. Which includes Afghanistan. Or have we forgotten about 9/11 already? Would you even know the difference? *yawn* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myata Posted September 9, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 Nope...but it does mean killing the bad guys. Right, and it's being like that since the times of cave man. The nature of "bad guys" nor why they all necessarily need to be killed needed (and still needs) no explanation. I don't know what you mean by "lesser people", but some other members will sure buy you beer to discuss that. The point has been that if we are still behaving in the pretty much the same mental framework as a thousand; hundred; some generations back, it would mean only one thing, that we aren't at all as civilized and advanced as we like to think. Which appears to be the principal reason we "go" in most cases. One would need a serious (brainwashing) persuasion to start believing that Afghanistan and Iraq could be (have been) serious existential threats to our freedoms. You're joking, right? What system? Whose forces to execute the "legal decision"? Who will live and who will die? If we can't rely on self restraint, and there's no external system to keep us in check, it's all back to square 0. Everybody's free to conquer, educate, and rebuild everybody else as they see fit (and their capacities allow them). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted September 9, 2009 Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 *yawn* Not getting enough sleep, eh? Has been a cluster f from the beginning. No, the beginning was quite successful. But you are subordinate to your own NATO responsibilities. Which includes Afghanistan. Or have we forgotten about 9/11 already? Maybe you are not so good at math? The US has deployed both NATO and CENTCOM assets. *yawn* ...definitely not enough sleep.....worried too much about those damn Americans I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted September 9, 2009 Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 Right, and it's being like that since the times of cave man. The nature of "bad guys" nor why they all necessarily need to be killed needed (and still needs) no explanation. Nope.....it's self explanatory. That's why we call 'em "bad guys" or "the enemy". The point has been that if we are still behaving in the pretty much the same mental framework as a thousand; hundred; some generations back, it would mean only one thing, that we aren't at all as civilized and advanced as we like to think. Which appears to be the principal reason we "go" in most cases. One would need a serious (brainwashing) persuasion to start believing that Afghanistan and Iraq could be (have been) serious existential threats to our freedoms. Are you shining me on? Do you really want to parse conflicts in such terms just to satisfy some pretentious definition of what is civilized and what is not? Is this just another fine example of the mental gymastics that some Canadians (and Americans) have engaged in just to make Afghanistan the biggest mind bender of all, since it was held up as the beaming standard for righteousness compared to Iraq? Now where do they find themselves after creating such a "moral" conundrum. If we can't rely on self restraint, and there's no external system to keep us in check, it's all back to square 0. Everybody's free to conquer, educate, and rebuild everybody else as they see fit (and their capacities allow them). What makes you think it was ever any different from that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted September 9, 2009 Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 OK sorry, if we believe that Afghanistan and Iraq should qualify as the Third Reich of our days. But details aside, the question as said, is more about going forward, so are we going to continure doing same things as 500, 200, 60 years back, or show some ability to understand and learn? Countries like Afghanistan and Iraq are actually the victims of the super-rogues of our days, and no, America and the Soviet Union are nothing like Nazi Germany or Imperial Japan. That said, if you've seen one rogue you've seen them all. As for the development of things like human rights and democracy in the backward parts of the world, they're probably best left to largely develop and unfold on their own, like they did in our culture. The world would be a better place faster if we could just be content with shining, like a beacon so to speak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myata Posted September 9, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 Nope.....it's self explanatory. That's why we call 'em "bad guys" or "the enemy". Guess works for them, too. Now where do they find themselves after creating such a "moral" conundrum.What makes you think it was ever any different from that? No it wasn't and by all signs isn't still, but it doesn't prove that it's impossible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted September 9, 2009 Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 Guess works for them, too. Ummmm...OK...we still decompress puppies too. No it wasn't and by all signs isn't still, but it doesn't prove that it's impossible. The "possibility" is irrelevant as long as we want what we have and intend on keeping it. What will you give up? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted September 9, 2009 Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 Countries like Afghanistan and Iraq are actually the victims of the super-rogues of our days, and no, America and the Soviet Union are nothing like Nazi Germany or Imperial Japan. That said, if you've seen one rogue you've seen them all. ...or imperial Britain and her Commonwealth....heh....heh. As for the development of things like human rights and democracy in the backward parts of the world, they're probably best left to largely develop and unfold on their own, like they did in our culture. The world would be a better place faster if we could just be content with shining, like a beacon so to speak. Excellent.....lots more bloody "unfolding" can be expected in the future, just as in the past. All is well.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myata Posted September 9, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 The "possibility" is irrelevant as long as we want what we have and intend on keeping it. What will you give up? We could start with Afghanistan. Why would anybody want to "keep it" anyways? Other than of pure and self sacrificial love for humanity? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted September 9, 2009 Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 ...or imperial Britain and her Commonwealth....heh....heh. That's right, if you've seen one rogue you've seen them all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted September 9, 2009 Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 We could start with Afghanistan. Why would anybody want to "keep it" anyways? Other than of pure and self sacrificial love for humanity? You mean the "lesser people"? No matter, like Iraq, they are road kill on the economic autobahn. Jihad is a two way street. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted September 9, 2009 Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 That's right, if you've seen one rogue you've seen them all. Correct, but I always like to add what never come naturally for you. Funny how that works... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myata Posted September 9, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 You mean the "lesser people"? Well, yeah, if they need our gentle but steady hand to be helped into the embraces of their new life (just couldn't get it on their own, sorry), we, democratic ubermensh, simply couldn't stand by and watch them suffer, correct? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted September 9, 2009 Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 Correct, but I always like to add what never come naturally for you. Funny how that works... Please feel free to assume that I include Canada and the evil empire that spawned us whenever I mention interference or super-rogues or quagmires in the context of just about anything that piques you. You seem to always omit that I've pointed this out many many many many times in the past. Funny how that works... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted September 9, 2009 Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 Well, yeah, if they need our gentle but steady hand to be helped into the embraces of their new life (just couldn't get it on their own, sorry), we, democratic ubermensh, simply couldn't stand by and watch them suffer, correct? No....they can suffer all they want...but WE don't have to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted September 9, 2009 Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 Please feel free to assume that I include Canada and the evil empire that spawned us whenever I mention interference or super-rogues or quagmires in the context of just about anything that piques you.You seem to always omit that I've pointed this out many many many many times in the past. Funny how that works... But it means so much more when you actually say it....God Save the Queen ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myata Posted September 9, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 No....they can suffer all they want...but WE don't have to. No, but we simply insist on helping! Our hearts are just too civilized to watch you suffer. Here, you've got yourself a wrong government; there you can't manage your resources as we know they should be; there yet, you refuse to welcome new folks who'll share your home with you from now on, because we thought it'd be a good thing to do... the list goes on and on. And if you resist and "blow back", it gives us all the more reason to rebuild you. Enjoy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted September 9, 2009 Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 Afghanistan is Canadas mini Viet Nam. Watching a report on that desolate nation - I wondered...what the hell are we doing there converting these people to western ways? Oh yah - these "Taliban" are terrorists...they sure looked poor to me ....maybe he who has the most money calls all challengers to their domination terrorists - It is not worth one single Canadian life to meddle in tribal affairs....If the "terrorists" did not hate Canada 7 years ago - they certainly hate us now - well done Canada - You let some adventuring banksters have fun at the expense of Canadian families who now have no son.....YOU could leave there tommorrow or have never gone - the out come would and will be the same. Harper is not a friend of the people - Maybe this neo-con rube should step down and let the disloyal internationalist Ignatieff take over - at least this traitor will be honest when he screws you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wulf42 Posted September 9, 2009 Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 Nope....there is no "12 O'Clock High" television show for the Luftwaffe flying daylight missions over Kansas aircraft factories! I loved that show...................... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wulf42 Posted September 9, 2009 Report Share Posted September 9, 2009 Afghanistan is Canadas mini Viet Nam. Watching a report on that desolate nation - I wondered...what the hell are we doing there converting these people to western ways? Oh yah - these "Taliban" are terrorists...they sure looked poor to me .... Well they seem to be able to afford AK-47'S and RPG'S...........they can't be cheap? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
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.