pinko Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 I think that shows that foreign aid money is largely wasted. How do you economically "develop" an area where the people's inclination are in that direction? I know this is off topic but I am thinking you might want to invest in a snowblower, jbg. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 No and despising U.S. foreign policy is not the same as hating Americans. I love Americans, take my brother who officially became one this past month for example... americans like to use the israeli's debate tactic and proclaim any criticism of them to mean that you hate them...and some canadians are the same way...but I'm okay with it, I don't make assumptions that people hate me merely because they disagree with my countries policy...americans, israeli's, mongolians whoever are free to criticize canada and I won't take it as a personal attack, I'll either defend canada or I may agree with their POV... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted February 1, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 This is very short sighted, and displays an ignorance about the purpose of US economic, military, and humanitarian aid. You have to play to win. However, the US is not playing to win. See Iraq and Afghanistan. Something you have even admitted yourself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 However, the US is not playing to win. See Iraq and Afghanistan. Something you have even admitted yourself. Depends on how you define "win". The former Soviet Union thought the same thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bloodyminded Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 You mean like the riots against the Shah of Iran? They were indeed positive, and perfectly justifiable. But with a terrible outcome, obviously. Of course, since the West adored the murderous tyrannical Shah, we supposed the Iranians should have loved him as well. But it doesn't work that way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted February 1, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Depends on how you define "win". The former Soviet Union thought the same thing. My version of win would have been to make sure those two wars don't drag out longer than both previous world wars put together. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 My version of win would have been to make sure those two wars don't drag out longer than both previous world wars put together. What's your hurry? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bloodyminded Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Ditto. AW is not Bush-Cheney 2004. One is an intelligent, gutsy and caring poster. The other is not. No kidding; the very comparison is absurd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 No kidding; the very comparison is absurd. Agreed...who would make such a comparison? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 They were indeed positive, and perfectly justifiable. But with a terrible outcome, obviously. Of course, since the West adored the murderous tyrannical Shah, we supposed the Iranians should have loved him as well. But it doesn't work that way. extremism breeds extremism...if the anglo-american instigated coup had not removed the Iranian democracy and replaced it with the hated shah we would not have a theocracy in Iran now...I think the CIA refers to it as "blowback"... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Americans are not anti-Canadian, we just hate your government's policies. LOL! Hey, so do some of us! Can't figure why YOU would though, thought Harper was one of your ilk... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Hey, so do some of us! Can't figure why YOU would though, thought Harper was one of your ilk... Because I'm old enough to remember Trudeau. Nixon was right about him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted February 1, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 What's your hurry? What's your hold up? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 What's your hold up? A superpower's job is never done. You just wouldn't understand! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Depends on how you define "win". The former Soviet Union thought the same thing. Ever notice the simularities between what the U.S. did to precipitate the Soviet Union's downfall and what China is now doing vis-a-vie the United States? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Because I'm old enough to remember Trudeau. Nixon was right about him. Ahhh go fuddleduddle yourself! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Ahhh go fuddleduddle yourself! OK...but it is interesting that anti-American attitudes are readily tolerated and even encouraged, but turnabout is met with such surprise. It's perfectly normal to criticize Canadian policies too, no? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JB Globe Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 With respect, this is a country in which even Christians are persecuted. True, you're not keeping in mind how Christians are treated in other countries You gotta ask yourself - why haven't you heard anything about the anti-Christian pogrom by Hindu fundamentalists, right? (the answer is - it doesn't fit into the narrative that Islam is at war with all other religions, and hinduism is a religion of yoga and peace) The recent bombings in Alexandria were orchestrated by Al Qaeda, not some Egyptian radical movement, there is no widespread popular campaign against Christians in Egypt. The fact Jews are virtually all gone from Egypt also bespeaks the level of discomfort they suffered while still in residence. That has more to do with the creation of Israel than anything else. Remember - prior to the 20th century you were safer in Arab countries than you were in European countries. And even then, you'd better not be a Jew living anywhere close to the third reich. It took the holocaust for Western nations to finally start to rid themselves of rampant antisemitism. Perhaps your hosts were happy at you being a Jew after you had already expressed their solidarity with their views. Part of my job is interviewing people, so I know how to not bias a discussion. In each case, I was the one asking the questions, and I refrained from giving them my opinions. Only later on would I answer questions, and the thing is - we didn't exactly agree on much, but they were respectful enough to be able to listen and consider. To suggest these people bear no animosity towards Jews in general given the cultural primitiveness expressed in their support for stoning and executions over religious and moral crimes possess a sense of enlightenment and religious tolerance strikes me as highly unlikely. And yet, they see the difference between Jews and Israelis, and they clamour for the same democratic principles that we take for granted most of the time. Looks like you can't make sweeping judgements after all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 (edited) Of course, since the West adored the murderous tyrannical Shah, we supposed the Iranians should have loved him as well. The West loved a shah that was tyrannical (not murderous) towards Communist agitators and was making attempts to Westernise a Middle Eastern country. The latter angered Iranians because a) they went against Islamist traditions and many of them failed to deliver the economic prosperity that was promised, anyway. The former just provided Pahlavi's enemies with the grounds on which to build, when the time was right, over-inflated myths about the Shah's attitudes (only to then turn around, when they themselves were in power, and impose against their opposition manners that were ten times more draconian than anything the Shah was guilty of). But, as someone who went through the Iranian Revolution and its aftermath warns today in The Globe and Mail, those out there looking to topple governments should pause for just one second to think seriously about the consequences. Change is exciting, and people generally want change that brings improvement, but all change isn't inherently for the better. There are lessons there in history - France, Russia, Spain, Iran, Nepal - to which not many people in Egypt and Tunisia seem not to be paying attention. [+] Edited February 1, 2011 by g_bambino Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Not if their future negatively affects me and mine. I have one primary barometer for determining what I support - how will it affect the Jewish people and Israel? That question is answered first, before addressing secondary questions. If their wishes put me and mine at risk, I'll oppose their wishes. Takes TWO (or more) to tangle my friend, takes TWO... Hell, I remember a semi Super Power going half way around the world to take back a virtually worthless Island by force and they were both Christian countries... Takes two... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 OK...but it is interesting that anti-American attitudes are readily tolerated and even encouraged, but turnabout is met with such surprise. It's perfectly normal to criticize Canadian policies too, no? yes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WIP Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 With respect, this is a country in which even Christians are persecuted. The fact Jews are virtually all gone from Egypt also bespeaks the level of discomfort they suffered while still in residence. Just once, I would like someone who still buys all of this rightwing clash-of-civilizations crap to explain why both Christians and Jews were able to live in many nations after the Muslims arrived until very recent times. But for the record, one church getting blown up, in a region of the world where explosives don't seem to be in short supply, does not = Christian persecution. Maybe you weren't aware that there were crowds of Muslim neighbours who formed rings around Coptic churches in many Egyptian cities after the bombing, because that's not the story that gets carried on Foxnews or CNN. The Copts still make up 10% of the population, and are an active part of this uprising against Mubarak. If anyone should know what the odds of a secular revolution turning into a theocracy, I would say the people on the ground who live there, know more about the nature of the Muslim Brotherhood and their likelihood of forming a government, than Glenn Beck does! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Just once, I would like someone who still buys all of this rightwing clash-of-civilizations crap to explain why both Christians and Jews were able to live in many nations after the Muslims arrived until very recent times. But for the record, one church getting blown up, in a region of the world where explosives don't seem to be in short supply, does not = Christian persecution. Maybe you weren't aware that there were crowds of Muslim neighbours who formed rings around Coptic churches in many Egyptian cities after the bombing, because that's not the story that gets carried on Foxnews or CNN. The Copts still make up 10% of the population, and are an active part of this uprising against Mubarak. If anyone should know what the odds of a secular revolution turning into a theocracy, I would say the people on the ground who live there, know more about the nature of the Muslim Brotherhood and their likelihood of forming a government, than Glenn Beck does! Amen to that brother... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Interesting backgrounder: The Suez Crisis contributed to the adoption of a new national flag for Canada in 1965, without references to that country's past as a colony of France and Britain. The Egyptian government had objected to Canadian peacekeeping troops on the grounds that their flag at that time included a British ensign. As Prime Minister, Pearson would advocate the simple Maple Leaf that was eventually adopted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JB Globe Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Let's see what this trolling business is all about, since none of what you say is true anyways . . . Correct...I do not enjoy the verbal diarrhea as much as you do. Pithy hits are more my style, and very effective given your passionate contortions. Stop touching yourself when you talk about passionately contorting. Your mother could walk in. Yes...you were a fool...again. If you thought I was smart I'd be worried. You are also very repetitive. If it ain't broke, why turn it off? Because it annoys you? Who cares? Then we chased you away. How adorable, it thinks it has it's own little kingdom. I guess you need some kind of control over something to make it through the day. I give as much as I get...it is great fun. You're kidding yourself. You're a bottom. LOL...are you still rambling? You still running away? Then please go away again...it was so nice...much better than "Ignore". But without people to piss off, than you're all alone, with no one but your mother to tell you that you're special enough to pay any attention to. I will...I don't need your elitist permission. Go whine someplace else. Pathetic! Naw, what's pathetic is calling someone something and then running away each time they get asked for proof. I mean, I could say you enjoy making sweet, sweet, love to gerbils - but without evidence, that wouldn't be true . . . Would it? You know, trolling isn't half as fun as you make it out to be. It certainly doesn't require any effort or skill. That ish kinda gets old fast - have you really been keeping that up for years? Wouldn't you rather be outside playing sports with all those days of time you've racked up each year? Or seeing friends? Or flirting with women/men? Kinda sad if you ask me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.