William Ashley Posted July 2, 2011 Author Report Posted July 2, 2011 (edited) As the African Union (and I applaud them for their real efforts to end the conflict), negotiates a plan that the National Transition Council and "Tripolitan Forces" , Gaddafi says that places in Europe are legitimate targets of war. http://main.omanobserver.om/node/56765 Although actually trying to implement Resolution 1970/1973 as the African Union is doing, I'm really wondering the long term of effects on terrorism in Europe due to this, it is actually quite sad as it will likely equal even more security spending that effects "regular people" as civil defence increases with increased threats coming out of the middle east. This while the Windsor fire and the Los Alamos fires threaten to spread toxic and nuclear waste (far more in Los Alamos though). Canada and other places are so vunerable even a lighter can cause massive damage. So I appluad the AU and scorn harper for bombing civilians and assisting in the increase militarization and death, and maiming of Libya's peoples. This seems nothing more than a NATO plot to destabalize the area - and without any actual threat or need to do it. It is a fight picked by NATO and the humanitarian concerns could have been more easily accomplished through dialouge and continuing to move expasts and western media to the area, now the gates may be once again shut. This gets a little more NATO vs. Libya now - rather than UN vs Libya because of NATO's mutual protection clauses... and what is Canada saying as this war heats up a bit beyond the borders of Libya. http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/06/30/kelly-mcparland-canadas-limited-mission-in-libya-gets-a-bit-unlimited/ This has more effects however, but these guys need to recognize that war can be made with very limited resources, and the effects are massive not only in local but longer term global effects including increased CO2 levels, this in turn can create natural disasters like hurricanes as Caribbean waters warm. http://www.kob.com/article/stories/s2182810.shtml The economic damage is also real not only to things like forestry, but in the resources used to combat things like fires. It may be seem insignifigant but in some areas, where nuclear testing has been done full nuclear cleanup may not have occurred, meaning fire can respread radioactive waste. This was a risk in the Chernobyl area with the Russian fires last year. Even some toxic releases can also increase health costs due to increased risk of cancer. Limited effects but this is a real threat engineered and expanded by NATO countries, it is an escalation by nato not a reduction as the UNSEC is there for. Canada is helping undermine the UNSEC This as Russia says NATO is planning an invasion of Libya http://en.rian.ru/world/20110701/164951748.html US Admiral also states this.. as the Senate moves towards increasing war powers in regard to Libya as the Obama administration seeks its carte blanche. http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/03/29/nato-may-order-ground-forces-into-libya-u-s-admiral-admits/ http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42657450/ns/world_news-mideast_n_africa/t/west-eyes-plan-send-ground-troops-libya/ http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/18/libya-conflict-eu-deployment-ground-troops "The European Union said it was willing to deploy an armed force " Would like to send 1000 trooops, and there were no considerations to send ground forces? "The EU has established an operations headquarters in Rome under the command of an Italian rear-admiral as part of its plan for a military deployment to Libya" And what is Canada saying...? Like Afghanistan, Canadians were split 10 years latter the removal of all but about 900 troops there that will be left after everyone thinks Canada has left Afghanistan (not true) but in peoples minds it may appear that way.. still the force with be 1/5th or more the size it was, and much equipment may be left there for "nobody" and this while the person who organized those equipment and personnel lifts is sitting in jail for serial murder and rape. http://www.torontosun.com/2011/06/29/canadians-split-over-libya-mission-poll Still Canada doesn't seem to have a defined position like the US - no troops, and Britan and France - can we send them? What is Harper and his staff saying - shouldn't they have a formed position on those things? Or is this more government secrecy as the illegal actions and war crimes are conducted, that they have full knowledge prior the fact. "I would appreciate it if the EU could take the initiative on the delivery of humanitarian aid," the Nato secretary-general, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, said last week. "Nato has no intention to play a leading role."" Canada to lead nato mission in Libya. http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2011/03/25/libya-nato-mission.html "NATO agreed Thursday to assume responsibility for a no-fly zone over Libya, part of a UN-backed mission to protect civilians from forces loyal to longtime leader Moammar Gadhafi." One story: http://www.haaretz.com/news/mideast-in-turmoil/gadhafi-s-daughter-files-war-crimes-lawsuit-against-nato-1.366650 http://www.enotes.com/genocide-encyclopedia/assassination "We think that bombing a civilian home where a man and three children were living is not part of the mandate given to the members of the United Nations by the Security Council resolutions on Libya, "Luc Brossolet, a French lawyer acting for Aisha Gaddafi, told Belgium's Le Soir newspaper. This as NATO says "we take great care to avoid civilian casualties." If it try to avoid civlian casualties why is it bombing the homes of people where their families are. This is flagrant war crimes. There are multiple instances of this occuring, They call them "command facilities" Yet they are homes. This makes any government officials home a legitimate target of war, that is nonsense. Civilian administrators and families of government officials are not military targets in international law. THEY ARE WAR CRIMES AND ILLEGITIMATE ATTACK POINTS! ESPECIALLY TO PROTECT CIVILIANS IT IS NONSENSE. NOTICE HOW THE TARGETS ARN'T DEAD BUT THEIR FAMILIES ARE! ITS NOT A TARGET IF YOU DON'T SEE SOMEONE. THAT ISN'T AVOIDING CIVLIAN DEATHS IT IS FIRING BLIND SHOTS AT POSSIBLE LOCATIONS, a possible location is not a confirmed legal target THEY ARE WARCRIMES ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY ARE HOMES. http://blog.heritage.org/2011/07/01/kucinich-invites-foreign-intrigue-with-nato-war-crimes-letter/ STOP THE WARCRIMES IN LIBYA BY CANADA! - Canada is leading the operation THEY ARE ALLOWING WAR CRIMES TO OCCUR! Edited July 2, 2011 by William Ashley Quote I was here.
Bob Posted July 3, 2011 Report Posted July 3, 2011 So William Ashley, which Canadians should be arrested and put on trial for war crimes? According to your analysis, Harper and his defense establishment are war criminals. And what was the basis of your assertion? Gaddafi's daughter's accusations against NATO. And now on a serious note, William Ashley, do you believe that Gaddafi's forces clearly delineate themselves? Do you think they take care to separate their infrastructure of war from civilian infrastructure? You don't think we have combatants and their weapons embedded within the civilian infrastructure - in apartments, in schools, in government offices, in hospitals, and in civilian vehicles (on both sides of this conflict)? Quote My blog - bobinisrael.blogspot.com - I am writing on it, again!
William Ashley Posted July 3, 2011 Author Report Posted July 3, 2011 (edited) So William Ashley, which Canadians should be arrested and put on trial for war crimes? Ultimately the people authorizing and carrying out the attacks. Who gased the Jews, who was put on trial for that. Even Helmut Zimmer was wanted decades after the war had ended because he was thought to be involved in the Nazi War Machine that is thought to have killed hundreds of thousands of Jews if not millions in what was genocide. Likewise Gadaffi is charged with war crimes for planning to attack his own people (although the use of force by a government to quell protest has often and still does involve the shooting of people. For instance people have been shot in Syria and Israel for protests yet no war crimes charges. Israel has killed little children intentionally no war crimes trials. Gaddaffi killed protestors that in other countries had become violent leading to violence and deaths trial. The US bombed the families of members of the Libyan government - no war crimes trials. A Canadian Officer commands the bombings that are targetting families figures in Libya, no war crimes trial. The standard is not even. Who should be put on trial. First we indicate the person who authorized the strikes, who determined those strikes, and who carried out those strikes. What we know is that indeed the places were targetted and authorized as strike targets. Places were targetted not people, that is the problem. Those places that were targetted were family homes. Family homes are not legitimate war targets. If the target was an individual, they should confirm the individual is there, and that civilian casualties are avoided. It appears that war crimes are not a concern for NATO but they should be. Which Canadians all officers in the chain of command that carried out the attacks against family homes. Any political officer in the chain of command (minister of defence) prime minister, and any de facto person authorizing the attacks continuance such as the governor general and Queen. All them are complicit with war crimes and eliciting their continuance by not putting out an immediate directive to cease all activities that violate international humanitarian laws which that are treaty to. According to your analysis, Harper and his defense establishment are war criminals. And what was the basis of your assertion? Gaddafi's daughter's accusations against NATO. And now on a serious note, William Ashley, do you believe that Gaddafi's forces clearly delineate themselves? Do you think they take care to separate their infrastructure of war from civilian infrastructure? You don't think we have combatants and their weapons embedded within the civilian infrastructure - in apartments, in schools, in government offices, in hospitals, and in civilian vehicles (on both sides of this conflict)? NATO admitted to the bombings. On a legal basis there is definately a delineation. Also breach of the rules by one state does not authorize the breach for another. Gaddaffi commiting war crimes does not allow NATO to. Also since NATO is an organization the states participating in those attacks are, in that case all member states of nato and the chain of command that authorizes attacks such as those on family homes. So yes war crimes have been commited and admitted to by NATO. There is no contest to the fact of the acts. Unfortunate that the ICC is simply biased, in part the reason the African Union has put out a directive to ignore the ICC's arrest warrant, which seems politically motivated by the EU. I saw numerous violations of the rules of war by the transitional council reported in the western media. From the news reports it is clear NATO and the Transitional council have both committed transgressions of international law in their conduct. There may be a legitimate defence but that should be left to the law to determine. Also the directive to stop attacks should be legislated and put in the standing orders, otherwise the political officers and chain of command are complicit with the war crimes and are accountable. So yes the PM as a political officer would be complicit especially if not moving to legislate a stoppage to those sorts of attacks by the Canadian Forces. While true the CF is independent in executive function, the PM is in part responsible for the tabling of government legislation, and knowledge of war crimes acts should be a priority to insure they are prevented by legislation and counseling the governor general or Governor in Council to put out a standing order for the forces to cease all such attacks. Example: Family home residences are not a legitimate target of war in the standing orders. Bombing these places is a violation of the standing orders and anyone carrying out those sorts of attacks will be court marshalled and face war crimes trials at the earliest possible time. Family homes may be acceptable collateral damage only if a legitimate target of war is the actual target and that no intention to target the home itself is made, but instead damage is of a collateral measure and all reasonable steps to prevent collateral damage are undertaken. That is where the government and chain of command should be at to avoid war crimes. Due diligence is absent if targets are bombed for potential targets rather than identified targets. Negligence is not acceptable, and they are indeed warcrimes. This is one example, I don't completely agree with the author but it reiterates only some points that are issued, there are far more than just this though. But if NATO is openly commiting war crimes the reports coming out of libya on worse infractions hold more weight. http://alexandravaliente.wordpress.com/2011/06/20/nato-bombs-kill-more-libyan-civilians/ Edited July 3, 2011 by William Ashley Quote I was here.
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 3, 2011 Report Posted July 3, 2011 (edited) ...Which Canadians all officers in the chain of command that carried out the attacks against family homes. Any political officer in the chain of command (minister of defence) prime minister, and any de facto person authorizing the attacks continuance such as the governor general and Queen.... Cool...does this mean that the queen would be indicted and tried separately for war crimes committed by Canada and the U.K.? She is already a war criminal in Northern Ireland! Edited July 3, 2011 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Guest Derek L Posted July 3, 2011 Report Posted July 3, 2011 (edited) Ultimately the people authorizing and carrying out the attacks. Who gased the Jews, who was put on trial for that. Even Helmut Zimmer was wanted decades after the war had ended because he was thought to be involved in the Nazi War Machine that is thought to have killed hundreds of thousands of Jews if not millions in what was genocide. Likewise Gadaffi is charged with war crimes for planning to attack his own people (although the use of force by a government to quell protest has often and still does involve the shooting of people. For instance people have been shot in Syria and Israel for protests yet no war crimes charges. Israel has killed little children intentionally no war crimes trials. Gaddaffi killed protestors that in other countries had become violent leading to violence and deaths trial. The US bombed the families of members of the Libyan government - no war crimes trials. A Canadian Officer commands the bombings that are targetting families figures in Libya, no war crimes trial. The standard is not even. Who should be put on trial. First we indicate the person who authorized the strikes, who determined those strikes, and who carried out those strikes. What we know is that indeed the places were targetted and authorized as strike targets. Places were targetted not people, that is the problem. Those places that were targetted were family homes. Family homes are not legitimate war targets. If the target was an individual, they should confirm the individual is there, and that civilian casualties are avoided. It appears that war crimes are not a concern for NATO but they should be. Which Canadians all officers in the chain of command that carried out the attacks against family homes. Any political officer in the chain of command (minister of defence) prime minister, and any de facto person authorizing the attacks continuance such as the governor general and Queen. All them are complicit with war crimes and eliciting their continuance by not putting out an immediate directive to cease all activities that violate international humanitarian laws which that are treaty to. NATO admitted to the bombings. On a legal basis there is definately a delineation. Also breach of the rules by one state does not authorize the breach for another. Gaddaffi commiting war crimes does not allow NATO to. Also since NATO is an organization the states participating in those attacks are, in that case all member states of nato and the chain of command that authorizes attacks such as those on family homes. So yes war crimes have been commited and admitted to by NATO. There is no contest to the fact of the acts. Unfortunate that the ICC is simply biased, in part the reason the African Union has put out a directive to ignore the ICC's arrest warrant, which seems politically motivated by the EU. I saw numerous violations of the rules of war by the transitional council reported in the western media. From the news reports it is clear NATO and the Transitional council have both committed transgressions of international law in their conduct. There may be a legitimate defence but that should be left to the law to determine. Also the directive to stop attacks should be legislated and put in the standing orders, otherwise the political officers and chain of command are complicit with the war crimes and are accountable. So yes the PM as a political officer would be complicit especially if not moving to legislate a stoppage to those sorts of attacks by the Canadian Forces. While true the CF is independent in executive function, the PM is in part responsible for the tabling of government legislation, and knowledge of war crimes acts should be a priority to insure they are prevented by legislation and counseling the governor general or Governor in Council to put out a standing order for the forces to cease all such attacks. Example: Family home residences are not a legitimate target of war in the standing orders. Bombing these places is a violation of the standing orders and anyone carrying out those sorts of attacks will be court marshalled and face war crimes trials at the earliest possible time. Family homes may be acceptable collateral damage only if a legitimate target of war is the actual target and that no intention to target the home itself is made, but instead damage is of a collateral measure and all reasonable steps to prevent collateral damage are undertaken. That is where the government and chain of command should be at to avoid war crimes. Due diligence is absent if targets are bombed for potential targets rather than identified targets. Negligence is not acceptable, and they are indeed warcrimes. This is one example, I don't completely agree with the author but it reiterates only some points that are issued, there are far more than just this though. But if NATO is openly commiting war crimes the reports coming out of libya on worse infractions hold more weight. http://alexandravaliente.wordpress.com/2011/06/20/nato-bombs-kill-more-libyan-civilians/ Is there a “degree” system in place with war crimes? If all those you listed are guilty of war crimes, then how do they compare to Sir Arthur Harris and Curtis LeMay? What about individual, lower ranking officers that killed more in 90 seconds then those you listed above, like say Paul Tibbets and Charles Sweeney…….If there isn’t a difference, then why don’t today’s leaders use methods like their contemporaries did in the 40s…….I’d think a fire bombing of Tripoli would be more effective then today’s methods, just as the use of a few dozen W87s would solve any future problems with Iran. Edited July 3, 2011 by Derek L Quote
William Ashley Posted July 7, 2011 Author Report Posted July 7, 2011 (edited) Cool...does this mean that the queen would be indicted and tried separately for war crimes committed by Canada and the U.K.? She is already a war criminal in Northern Ireland! Yeah right after George Bush and Obama. Technically though if she was part of the approval process and had knowledge. Insuring human rights ought to be something that she does. Unfortunately the UK has lower human rights standards than the EU and won't oblige the EU's human rights code. None the less yes I think if she has reserve powers to issue a letters patent on human rights and requirement in non defensive warfare to follow international human rights laws and the rules of war, it is advisable to do so. In a defensive war against an aggressor inside your territories, breaking the rules may be a mitigating factor, but an aggressor and the offender and precipitator of a war ought to oblige the rules, even if attacking a foreign state is against the UN's charter in itself. Stopping the bombing domiciles that are not military points, and acts that amount to assassination and murder of civilians ought to be something that if the Queen were to enforce those operational standards, it would have to be supported by parliament, lest it face the harsh reality of openly admitting to stop conformity to international law, and truely show the debase immorality of the government subjecting people rather than allowing the politicians to live a lie having people think they are in anyway good people. So most certainly. It is much like the president should be held accountable for both mercenary/contractors and the US military for those war crimes committed. Edited July 7, 2011 by William Ashley Quote I was here.
William Ashley Posted July 7, 2011 Author Report Posted July 7, 2011 (edited) Is there a “degree” system in place with war crimes? If all those you listed are guilty of war crimes, then how do they compare to Sir Arthur Harris and Curtis LeMay? What about individual, lower ranking officers that killed more in 90 seconds then those you listed above, like say Paul Tibbets and Charles Sweeney…….If there isn’t a difference, then why don’t today’s leaders use methods like their contemporaries did in the 40s…….I’d think a fire bombing of Tripoli would be more effective then today’s methods, just as the use of a few dozen W87s would solve any future problems with Iran. I think all that stuff is mitigating factors. By the rules of war NCO's and enlisted men have a lower standard. Officers and men however have a higher standard. Since officers can disobey orders they know violates the law (while NCO and enlisted normally arn't suppose to (they could but the margin of expectation is much less) The point of order is also crucial - who authorized the order. In some circumstances it may not be a standing order but come out of a tactical situation or opertunity. Say attacking a village and masacreing them. THey may have only been on a patrol officially from their commanding officer, but a lower officer while on patrol may have done it. Unfortunately with the bombing missions, I think it is that each bombing site usually needs to be "Cleared" atleast in the US by a legal team, I don't know how things happened exactly. In the case of political officers, and military general staff, once they have knowledge of the crimes, need to act to court martial and deliver to war crimes trial if applicable. (the US isn't part of the International Criminal Court) (canada is though I think and I think the UK is also). They are required to stop the continuance of the act, and correct the problems that led to it. It is their responsibility as the civilian commanders (sorta) of the military. For instance the defence minister, should be suggesting to the GG to issue standing orders to prevent the repeat of war crimes against civilians by Canadian Airforce stikes. I don't know which nato planes hit the points, but failing a known, that should be determined who hit those points though. Oddly it is not likely the US because the US apparently wasn't performing strike missions, this leaves it to France, the UK or Canada, or Qatar. maybe a few others. Canada should be looking at the 200+ bombing runs they were part of to determine the declared targets and if they were legal targets, and the actual contact point of the strike. A flat refusal to perform the strike on the ground, rather than aborting is what should occur, and the standing orders to conform to international laws in regard to "legal" strike points should be made through the military's standing orders. If its not done it should be whether it is the queen GG or head of defence, cf etc... the standing orders should be there. Edited July 7, 2011 by William Ashley Quote I was here.
Oleg Bach Posted July 7, 2011 Report Posted July 7, 2011 A war is when you are attacked and square off with the enemy...Libya is not us AT war - Iraq was not a war - Afghanistgan was not a war - these are war games...One wages war when there is a real threat or actual attack..These are war games - conducted by people who sit in arm chairs. When I hear a public figure who is a bit wacko porclaim like it is 1915 "WE ARE AT WAR" - It's distressing that there is such a need in the achievement of old fashioned manhood through pretending we are a bunch of noble knights fighting some great cause...It's a joke - My father fought in the battle of Stalingrad - now that was a war! Quote
GostHacked Posted July 7, 2011 Report Posted July 7, 2011 A war is when you are attacked and square off with the enemy...Libya is not us AT war - Iraq was not a war - Afghanistgan was not a war - these are war games...One wages war when there is a real threat or actual attack..These are war games - conducted by people who sit in arm chairs. When I hear a public figure who is a bit wacko porclaim like it is 1915 "WE ARE AT WAR" - It's distressing that there is such a need in the achievement of old fashioned manhood through pretending we are a bunch of noble knights fighting some great cause...It's a joke - My father fought in the battle of Stalingrad - now that was a war! "Kenetic Military Action" is what Obama called them. But yes, no matter how you word it, Canada is at war with Libya. Canada and it's NATO allies have just commited war crimes right in front of our eyes and calls it 'humanitarian aid'. If the discussion of oil comes into this humanitarian aid at any time .. then we know it is now about humanitarian aid. Quote
M.Dancer Posted July 7, 2011 Report Posted July 7, 2011 Canada and it's NATO allies have just commited war crimes right in front of our eyes and calls it 'humanitarian aid'. I have a feeling you are not often called brilliant. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
GostHacked Posted July 7, 2011 Report Posted July 7, 2011 I have a feeling you are not often called brilliant. You have a lot of feelings. None which are relevant to this discussion. But you can try to prove me wrong. Quote
M.Dancer Posted July 7, 2011 Report Posted July 7, 2011 You have a lot of feelings. None which are relevant to this discussion. But you can try to prove me wrong. Again, brilliance, or even mediocrity is not your strong suit...so lets play... "Kenetic Military Action" is what Obama called them. find a cite where obama says this. I bet you fail. Canada and it's NATO allies have just commited war crimes right in front of our eyes and calls it 'humanitarian aid' This is your claim to prove, not mine...and given your past displays of ignorance regarding international law, the conventions of war, I wager another fail. On the other hand, you win the impotent emoting award... Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
GostHacked Posted July 7, 2011 Report Posted July 7, 2011 Again, brilliance, or even mediocrity is not your strong suit...so lets play... Doing things half assed, is just being half an ass. I was always told I was an ass on the whole, but I just grew bigger. find a cite where obama says this. I bet you fail. Alright, I fail in quoting Obama himself, but someone in his administration defined it as that. http://nation.foxnews.com/libya-war/2011/03/23/white-house-libya-fight-not-war-its-kinetic-military-action http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/03/white-house-libya-fight-not-war-its-kinetic-military-action This is your claim to prove, not mine...and given your past displays of ignorance regarding international law, the conventions of war, I wager another fail. I've already proven that much in a couple other threads related to Libya. Remember, British SAS were in Libya weeks before the uprisings started. They were caught with guns, explosives and fake passports, claiming they were on a diplomatic mission to meet rebel leaders. Libya has not attacked Canada, or the US, or even the two that started the whole debacle, France, Italy. And both those pussies now want to back out? Something stinks here, and it's not you this time. On the other hand, you win the impotent emoting award... Speak with emotion, or don't speak at all. Quote
M.Dancer Posted July 7, 2011 Report Posted July 7, 2011 Alright, I fail in quoting Obama himself, but someone in his administration defined it as that. http://nation.foxnews.com/libya-war/2011/03/23/white-house-libya-fight-not-war-its-kinetic-military-action http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/03/white-house-libya-fight-not-war-its-kinetic-military-action The term is far older than the current admin... I've already proven that much in a couple other threads related to Libya. Remember, British SAS were in Libya weeks before the uprisings started. They were caught with guns, explosives and fake passports, claiming they were on a diplomatic mission to meet rebel leaders. You have managed to prove you don't know bugger all...here's a clue...find in any convention or article of war where it says diplomats cannot have armed guards Libya has not attacked Canada, or the US, or even the two that started the whole debacle, France, Italy. And both those pussies now want to back out? Something stinks here, and it's not you this time. well, france anyway....italy wasn't keen nor is your memory...we went over this last week.... Speak with emotion, or don't speak at all. A good ploy if you don't know what you are talking about. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
GostHacked Posted July 7, 2011 Report Posted July 7, 2011 The term is far older than the current admin... Probably has, I call it a term of convenience. You have managed to prove you don't know bugger all...here's a clue...find in any convention or article of war where it says diplomats cannot have armed guards Armed guards also carry explosives and fake passports? Sounds pretty 'diplomatic' to me. Why would they not send a team directly to Gadaffi to negotiate some peace or treaty? I mean why send a diplomatic team to see the rebels long before the shit actually hit the fan? Sure uprisings don't happen over night. Wait.. seems like we've seen than several times this year already. well, france anyway....italy wasn't keen nor is your memory...we went over this last week.... Don't matter, looks like the US is gonna have to foot this bill again, mostly thanks to Europe. Well, now that Canada's military mission in Afghanistan was recently declared over ... guess where we are going next?!!? But no matter how similar it may look to other wars, it's not a war right? Because declaring it a war would mean .. what exactly? Not like Libya really has the power to project any of it's military power (I guess that is why we pick on the little guys like the bullies we are) so we can sit here and play while our men and women will eventually end up dying for another screw up. Official declaration of war would be Harper, Obama, Sarkozy ect, would have had to get some kind of parliment or congressional approval to declare war. So call it anything but a war, when it looks exactly like a war again,, just convenience. We can't afford it in blood or money. And before one of our boys comes home in a body bag, i'd like to make sure we have a clear and consice idea of what the fuck we are doing, and what is the plan before and after committing any ground troops. Which I have said will happen. A good ploy if you don't know what you are talking about. I believe I do. Quote
M.Dancer Posted July 7, 2011 Report Posted July 7, 2011 Armed guards also carry explosives and fake passports? Sounds pretty 'diplomatic' to me. Why would they not send a team directly to Gadaffi to negotiate some peace or treaty? I mean why send a diplomatic team to see the rebels long before the shit actually hit the fan? Sure uprisings don't happen over night. Wait.. seems like we've seen than several times this year already. Completely irrelevant. You claim it is a war crime. Cite the relevant article in the GC which calls it so. Don't matter, looks like the US is gonna have to foot this bill again, mostly thanks to Europe. Well, now that Canada's military mission in Afghanistan was recently declared over ... guess where we are going next?!!? But no matter how similar it may look to other wars, it's not a war right? Because declaring it a war would mean .. what exactly? Not like Libya really has the power to project any of it's military power (I guess that is why we pick on the little guys like the bullies we are) so we can sit here and play while our men and women will eventually end up dying for another screw up. irrelevant Official declaration of war would be Harper, Obama, Sarkozy ect, would have had to get some kind of parliment or congressional approval to declare war. short term memory loss? http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&source=newssearch&cd=3&ved=0CDUQqQIwAg&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theglobeandmail.com%2Fnews%2Fpolitics%2Fparliament-extends-libya-mission-ottawa-backs-anti-gadhafi-rebels%2Farticle2060025%2F&ei=zSkVTozhHubm0QHE39ha&usg=AFQjCNEcjacL4pPB2TP2C0HN_wLjIaWC-Q&sig2=KBhUcVh9ySYQM7OFAgSN6Q http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/europe/news/article_1636981.php/Italian-parliament-approves-Libya-military-mission i'd like to make sure we have a clear and consice idea of what the fuck we are doing, and what is the plan before and after committing any ground troops. Which I have said will happen. You and your toaster are the only ones calling for ground troops I believe I do. You believe a lot of nonsense, including the nonsense you believe in. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
GostHacked Posted July 7, 2011 Report Posted July 7, 2011 Completely irrelevant. You claim it is a war crime. Cite the relevant article in the GC which calls it so. When you use 'terms of convenience' you circumvent ant articles or conventions you are signatory to. short term memory loss? The Canadian Parliament gave authorization after the war already started. You and your toaster are the only ones calling for ground troops Can you cite where I've called for ground troops? And you are telling me I believe in non sense? You believe a lot of nonsense, including the nonsense you believe in. Time will tell. And the other thing I believe that is you are trolling me. But knowing your game, i'll pat you on the head and move on. Quote
M.Dancer Posted July 7, 2011 Report Posted July 7, 2011 When you use 'terms of convenience' you circumvent ant articles or conventions you are signatory to. short term memory loss? So no citation, no relevant article pertaining to a war crime...just talking because...? The Canadian Parliament gave authorization after the war already started. So what? Can you cite where I've called for ground troops? And you are telling me I believe in non sense? NATO/UN will put troops in Libya around the fall I suspect a huge influx of ground troops within two months. I also suspect Canada will be taking on a bigger role in this 'conflict'. Yep, you and your toaster have made the TSN call....no one else has... Time will tell. And the other thing I believe that is you are trolling me. But knowing your game, i'll pat you on the head and move on. That seems to be your standerd reply when shown you are talking out your bottom parts... Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
William Ashley Posted July 7, 2011 Author Report Posted July 7, 2011 (edited) I think how you have to term this stuff is "undeclared acts of war" There is a state of war, however official declaration has not been made. Canada and other countries shut down their embassies before hostilities started, then recognized, the other people as"official government". It is technical skirting, and undeclared acts of war. Shooting down another countries fighter jet without permission and bombing them are clearly acts of war. http://edmonton.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20110319/EDM_libya_110319/20110319/?hub=EdmontonHome Likewise shooting down a US fighter jet, is usually seen as an act of war, but alas it was only a mechnical error. And the retrieval of the pilots by shooting the people who "rescued/captured" the pilot including blowing off their leg, are friendly actions. Cause firing on your friends population and killing and maiming them, are friendly acts, not acts of war or war crimes. Hmm firing on civilians to retrieve a pilot. Hmm firing on civilians, this seems familiar. "Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates supports protection of the rebels in Libya, but he calls the imposition of a no-fly zone an “act of war”. He said such actions would be a part of a policy of attacking Libya to destroy Libyan air defenses. He goes on to say that our Constitution gives only Congress, not the president, the authority to declare war. Gates also points out that Gadhafi’s acts to defend his administration do not constitute a threat to the United States.Read more: http://blogcritics.org/politics/article/gates-libyan-no-fly-zone-would1/#ixzz1RRbCNjhY" see also: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/09/opinion/09iht-edgreenway09.html Edited July 7, 2011 by William Ashley Quote I was here.
William Ashley Posted July 15, 2011 Author Report Posted July 15, 2011 (edited) I'm very suprised at the continued total news blackout of Libya on the CBC... some big things are ongoing right now... for instance the single turbine pumping water to western at risk of failure. (a "manmade" underground water pipeline pumps water from under the desert to the seacoast, is at risk of failure and they are looking for "imports" that are blocked to get the turbines running again. A turbine failure would result in water stopage to western libya such as Benghazi. US wants to free up Libyan assets and give them to the 'rebels' --- this prior said to be 'illegal' under international monetary law, equated to piracy. (coming from now where else but the Barbary coast. The AU is continueing to push for a peace plan - rebels rejected the initial peace plan, and cut deal with US to insure "democratic" process. Also Canada's first jet flight returned to winnepeg as the UK increased their jet strength. However has atleast one more ship joining the blockage -- do realize though that the ships have come under fire.. by Libya artillery and have been damaged. I'm suprised on the CBC blackout and that no one is really talking about the chance of water being unavailable to 2 million people. http://drinking-water.org/html/en/Sources/Fossil-Water-in-Libya.html http://www.google.ca/url?url=http://www.taiwannews.com.tw/etn/news_content.php%3Fid%3D1650508&rct=j&sa=X&ei=RX4gTo3EGeP20gHvta3GAw&ved=0CDEQ-AsoADAA&q=water+libya&usg=AFQjCNFgAMEQajUSm6jhH7s3bqQGSL9QcQ There is also a threat of the destruction of Tripoli floating in western media. Understand if Gaddafi was a butcher he could just poison the water supply and the rebellion would be crushed. The question of putting up Libya's assets in Canada as collatoral...?? This is so wrong. There is no doubt in my mind what is going on is totally wrong.. allowing an unrepresentative group of rebels access to another groups assets and outside laws, since there are currently no laws in Rebel Libya or legislature. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-mulls-diplomatic-outpost-but-still-cant-fund-libyan-rebels/article2098858/?from=sec431 So much for democratic governance "The council has 33 members; the identities of several members has not been made public to protect their own safety." Their finance minister isn't even a Libyan Citizen.. "Born in Libya, Tarhouni studied economics at the University of Libya, until he had to flee the country in 1973. He was stripped of his citizenship, sentenced to death in absentia, " After immigrating to the United States, ... A US citizen as finance minister of Libya.. that is novel. Wow what are the chances of him being CIA? http://articles.philly.com/2011-04-02/news/29374623_1_anti-gadhafi-libyan-capital-ali-tarhouni "I dreamed it would happen, but I did not expect it would happen," said Ali Tarhouni, who left his job as an economics professor at the University of Washington to handle finances for the National Transitional Council, the quasi-government set up by the opposition in Benghazi. "Tarhouni, 60, said he last set foot in Libya in 1976" (He lived longer in the US than Libya at 60... this is more or less the Michael Ignateiff of Libyan Politics with out the BBC element. It is so rank... when you look at the citizenships and residencies of the people of the TNC. This is more or less a "movement" that bloomed in NATO countries... and it is foul completely fowl, when occupation .. is clearly not in the mandate. Also you have expansion of nofly zone assets to "any military targets". It is dirty. Doing things is one thing but lying about what you are doing is another. This one is funny the US and Canada is backing someone convicted as being behind a terrorist bombing of a flight? Abdelbaset al-Megrahi http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdelbaset_al-Megrahi "Megrahi was freed on compassionate grounds by the Scottish Government on 20 August 2009 following doctors reporting on 10 August 2009 that he had terminal prostate cancer" "In December 2010 it was reported that his condition had deteriorated and that he was in a coma.[11] Presently Al-Megrahi is living in a villa in Tripoli." Then the uprising???? Mr. Uthman Megrahi (City of Batnan) http://www.ntclibya.org/english/council-members/ Same person? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/world-africa-12698562 ... rebel war crimes.?? Child Soldiers? " use of young children and underage teens either as fighters or workers in the rebel supply lines, raising questions about the factions with which NATO nations have allied themselve" http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/1024716--libya-s-gadhafi-employing-scorched-earth-strategy Where are the International Criminal Courts Indictments on The Transitional National Council for War Crimes for employing the use of Child Soldiers? So much for human rights laws and advocacy when you have child Soldiers as part of your army... come on this is junk. Meanwhile another fog of war on the warcrimes by NATO and their allies... Now Gaddafi is being reported using the tactic and there is a total block in western media.. perhaps aside from the Toronto star's brief mention. Note that the Libyan Government (the non TNC one) denied the "we will blow up Tripoli" reports in western (and russian) media. Edited July 15, 2011 by William Ashley Quote I was here.
William Ashley Posted July 18, 2011 Author Report Posted July 18, 2011 (edited) US breached The Convention on International Civil Aviation (Chicago Convention) as it has launched attacks on the Tripoli International Airport. Although Canada also breached this before the outbreak of "open hostilities" in force landing an aircraft without permission. NATO broke the convention and continues to break the convention even before UN authorization occured. http://www.icao.int/icaonet/dcs/7300.html What's next cell phone towers? If they didn't know any EM array can be used to track aircraft. Does this suddently make every EM array a legitimate military attack target --- then TV stations, and radio stations are fair game.. it is way overstepping an attempt to prevent civilian casualties by bombing civilian infrastructure. This same thing happened to Gaza by Israel. http://www.icao.int/HyperDocs/Display.cfm?Name=C-WP/11791&Lang=E Where is the declaration from the ICAO on the attack on Tripoli International Airport by NATO? Its absurd when even telephone and power lines can be turned into a passive array, is NATO set to destroy the entire infrastructure of Libya? ??? http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/MG19Ad01.html And what is Kosovo doing today? http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/article/kosovo-press-review-july-aa8-2%C3%A5aaaa Wasn't that Yugoslavia war 20 years ago? And they still havn't determined how to elect a president or electoral law? Sound familiar - the Libyan contact group is using Yugoslavia as a "positive" example of how they can conduct the conflict in Libya http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosovo_War (1990 the autonomy of Kosovo was removed) Before the bombing the KLA was listed as a terrorist organization So the US propped in a terrorist organization... in Serbia and established a state out of it? " Christopher Hill, was leading shuttle diplomacy between an Albanian delegation, led by Rugova, and the Yugoslav and Serbian authorities. It was these meetings which were shaping what was to be the peace plan to be discussed during a period of planned NATO occupation of Kosovo" There are apparently many other issues with that war including "secret" NATO snipers (harassing civilians and military alike - not unlike Israel's killing of young girls for being in a zone of control) , and other operations that aren't public - that really have me question what NATO is up to in Libya, when we know they are willing to break all the humanitarian treaties out there to accomplish their goals (the breakup of Libya or mass casualties destruction and death in Tripoli and other parts of Libya --- all to "prevent civilian casualties.. I think that is dejective) , I am still quite unsettled that Canada is supporting war crimes and breach of treaty in anyway supporting the Rebel Libyans or recognizing a change of state by unlawful and terrorist means. This much like the invasion of Afghanistan has me seriously denounce the Government of Canada as one that deserves support. SHAME ON THEM. SHAME http://thechronicleherald.ca/Opinion/1253887.html So 4 billion lost to forcing out Canada's Suncor and now http://www.torontosun.com/2011/07/15/canada-to-play-banker-for-libyan-rebel-group Was this budgetted... the bridge in Montreal that is at risk of collapse wasn't... what should get the money first the busiest bridge in Canada or a war in Libya? Why is Canada spending hundred of millions of dollars in North Africa to kill people when they are in debt and can't even support their own crumbling infrastructure? Now they are paying to ruin others infrastructure? http://www.torontosun.com/2011/07/14/liberals-demand-action-on-crumbling-montreal-bridge Remember the Boycott Israel Campaign... http://www.bigcampaign.org/ what about Boycott Canada as a side effect http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/18-07-2011/118508-libya_nato_war_crimes-0/ Of all this the false reported "Gaddafi will raze if attacked Tripoli reports are most troubling since it means NATO may intend to raze Tripoli. If Canada wants to give hundreds of millions of dollars to the rebels why doesn't it just directly give the money to the CIA since it is an american that is the "finance minister" of the rebels. (irony?) I know Pravada... but it is down to earth and often very true.. If you don't read the entire article from Pravada atleast check out this paragraph. "Has anyone reporting on Libya actually bothered to contact sources on the ground and to tell the truth? Well here it is. The "rebels" have time and time again stage-managed false flag events, committing massacres and blaming them on the Libyan Armed Forces; they have massacred people in the streets, they are racists (targeting black Libyans) and they wish to impose Sharia law. Their military commander, Abdel Hakim al-Hasidi, himself admitted to having connections with Al-Qaeda and admitted that many of the terrorists fighting the Libyan Government also fought against NATO in Iraq and Afghanistan. Their civilian leader, Mahmoud Jibril, twice passed the death penalty against Bulgarian nurses working in Libya when he was Justice Minister and Muammar al-Qathafi lifted it." This article informs that funding is going ahead to the end of September... even with the US not being able to pay its bills.. and the Euro teetering.... http://www.ainonline.com/news/single-news-page/article/attack-helicopters-boost-nato-air-ops-over-libya-30549/ Recipe for exhaustion... http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/top-business-stories/will-the-debt-crisis-spell-the-end-of-euro-as-we-know-it/article2100810/ http://winnipeg.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20110718/us-washington-debt-default-talks-republicans-democrats-110718/20110718/?hub=WinnipegHome http://ozarksfirst.com/fulltext?nxd_id=489337 two weeks until the deadline.. 12th hour approach. - I guess its good that China held most of the US economy in its currency reserve. The collapse is starting 15 years before it was for-casted. Sure it is just numbers... but the media is making it real for the people. Why throw hundreds of millions of dollars to destabalize Libya, when not involving likely would have resulted in a stable country to the south? Its not like they did anything to stop Libya for the last 30 years... why change the game now? This is becoming an even stronger argument from 2 years ago.. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123780272456212885.html With USD and EURO defaults.. spurned by the Dogs of War, it seems China may get its wish. These arn't solely local effects to both a EURO and USD default.. it really is massive... you have to think in the back of your head... they'll do something to stop the slide.. I don't see how attacking Libya does that... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reserve_currency "The US dollar and the Euro make up 90% of Allocated Reserves " http://english.ruvr.ru/2011/07/18/53377375.html How does an expensive civil war in Libya play into the collapse of the western economic system? None the less I'm enticed to dump by USD. Check this forecast though do they know something I don't? http://www.forecasts.org/cdollar.htm 2 Aug 2011 0.974 0.010 0.023 3 Sep 2011 0.983 0.011 0.026 4 Oct 2011 0.996 0.013 0.028 5 Nov 2011 1.018 0.014 0.030 6 Dec 2011 1.037 0.014 0.032 7 Jan 2012 1.055 0.015 0.034 8 Feb 2012 1.076 0.016 0.036[ And the Euro is performing worse... http://www.marketmoves.com/category/Forex-Moves/EUR-USD-update-(18th-July-2011-15-00)-201107180006/ " http://af.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idAFTRE76H19N20110718 " How did these kids get from Turkey to Misrata and back.. and why the hell would you send kids back to a war zone? was treated in Turkey for two months before returning home - This is just Misrata... "813 people in Misrata had been killed, 7,848 had been injured and 781 were missing." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_2011_Libyan_civil_war "On February 18, two policemen were hanged by protesters in Benghazi." Explain how this isn't a war crime? On May 13, 11 religious imams were killed and 50 others injured when a NATO airstrike struck a large gathering in Brega praying for peace in conflict-ridden Libya "NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen stated on March 28 that NATO was impartial and that it interpreted the terms of UNSC Resolution 1973 on the protection of civilians to apply to both rebel and government forces." Understand that the "spark" in all this appears to have been an attack on a government compound.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Battle_of_Benghazi . Accounts differ on whether mourners began throwing stones first or the soldiers from Katiba opened fire without provocation. In the end another 24 people from the opposition forces were killed. Following the massacre, two policemen, who were accused of shooting the protestors, were hanged by the opposition What happened is no different than the shootings and use of live rounds that has occured in all the other middle eastern countries protests.. it is a standard there.. and all those governments are still going.. This just today.. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jul/18/syrian-protesters-killed-sectarian-violence "The fighting stopped on the morning of the 20th February. Another 30 people were killed during the previous 24 hours of fighting. A third funeral procession passed the Katiba compound. Under the cover of the funeral, a suicide car-bomber attacked the compound's gates, blowing them up.[18] Opposition fighters resumed their assault on the base, this time with reinforcements from al-Baida and Derna. During the final attack on the compound 42 people were killed. In the afternoon, Libyan Interior Minister Abdul Fatah Younis showed up with a special forces squad called the "Thunderbolt" to relieve the besieged barracks. Troops from his unit, based on the outskirts of town, arrived at the opposite side of the Katiba armed with machine guns and driving trucks mounted with anti-aircraft guns. Two tanks under Younes's command followed. However, Younis defected to the opposition and granted safe passage to Gaddafi's loyalists out of the city" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdul_Fatah_Younis Younis was ultimately sacked over concerns as to his relationship with the government in Tripoli. He was succeeded in his position by Khalifa Belqasim Haftar, to whom he now serves as chief of staff.[7][8] By May though he appeared to have returned to the role of commander-in-chief of the armed forces for balance http://www.presstv.ir/detail/189540.html Edited July 18, 2011 by William Ashley Quote I was here.
William Ashley Posted July 25, 2011 Author Report Posted July 25, 2011 (edited) Wow NATO has seemingly bombed the water pipeline mentioned in the last post by me, coincidentally...... http://english.pravda.ru/news/world/23-07-2011/118577-nato_war_crimes-0/ I would concur this definately seems like people in NATO need to be hanged for war crimes if this is the case.. endangering 70% of the libyan population and threatening them with LETHAL Dehydration.. by the end of this week. Edited July 25, 2011 by William Ashley Quote I was here.
William Ashley Posted July 27, 2011 Author Report Posted July 27, 2011 (edited) This story gives a little more credance if the agenda is not only to cut off Tripoli from oil but also from water. http://english.alarabiya.net/articles/2011/07/27/159658.html To step up pressure on Mr. Qaddafi, NATO-backed rebel advances in Nafusa, a range of hills that stretch from Yafran southwest of Tripoli to the border with Tunisia, aim to cut the Libyan capital off from water and oil supplies. Tripoli gets much of its water and oil through pipelines from the southern area of Ghadames that traverse Nafusa. France recently disclosed that its air force had dropped arms and ammunition in Nafusa to reinforce the rebel efforts. And now a story from fox that corroberates Pravda's story from yesterday.. http://news.google.ca/news/url?sa=t&ct2=ca%2F0_0_s_2_0_t&ct3=MAA4AEgCUABgAWoCY2E&usg=AFQjCNGbk0IwemNPrrD5xnLpp_kwMHVffQ&did=ae2c71b69d8f81c2&cid=17593923274189&ei=QZkwTpjTNZrIM6i2tOgC&rt=SEARCH&vm=STANDARD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.foxnews.com%2Fworld%2F2011%2F07%2F22%2Frebels-say-qaddafi-must-face-trial-as-airstrikes-hit-tripoli%2F The plant, located six miles south of the strategic oil installation, builds the huge pipes that carry water from underground aquifers deep in the south to the coast as part of the Great Man Made River irrigation projecRead more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/07/22/rebels-say-qaddafi-must-face-trial-as-airstrikes-hit-tripoli/#ixzz1TLkrxCsI Edited July 27, 2011 by William Ashley Quote I was here.
Chippewa Posted July 28, 2011 Report Posted July 28, 2011 Easy way to win the war. Just send some priests to that country, and convert them all to christian with bibles in there hands. Place and forceably remove all the children in Libya into Indian Residential Schools, just like Canada. Give the children a 51% death rate for decades at a time. Immigrate so that 96% of the population is immigrants, while selling off the resources like Oil, gold, or whatever, and launder it off to the world market. Then place the Libyians under a form of the 'Indian Act", so that we can keep the "natives" out of the economy for 100's of years at a time. We can create a new country, and make all the immigrants citizans of this new country "BallSack", and we can have a bunch of "BallSackians" running around the country. After the Libyians figure out that they have been oppressed and murdered off, we can place them all in prison, and blame them for all of there social problems afterwards. Just like Canada. Quote Canada-- Just A Hotbed For Laundering First Nations Land and Resources
William Ashley Posted July 29, 2011 Author Report Posted July 29, 2011 (edited) Easy way to win the war. Just send some priests to that country, and convert them all to christian with bibles in there hands. Place and forceably remove all the children in Libya into Indian Residential Schools, just like Canada. I think you are confusing Libya with Afghanistan. Your forgetting the part about brother killing brother, and the death of innocents by bullets (rather than disease) and occupation of the land by force. Give the children a 51% death rate for decades at a time. Immigrate so that 96% of the population is immigrants, while selling off the resources like Oil, gold, or whatever, and launder it off to the world market. Then place the Libyians under a form of the 'Indian Act", so that we can keep the "natives" out of the economy for 100's of years at a time. Libya was a colony of Italy not Britain, although both Gaddafi and his son were trained by the British. I think you are also forgetting the fact that natives were at war with one another before the arrival of mass colonization and enslaved one another. The 5 nations for instance conquered surrounding groups and forced them to integrate and conform. They pushed out Algonkian groups from the south, and even though treaty for most of the north west of lake Superior was Dakota land that was only treatied for use of hunting grounds as per the treaty. Most of the Mohawks came up from the states, and the Algonkian groups on the 7 fires journey was native to land that was micmac or inhabited by groups that were massacred by the early colonists in the US. Honshalaga for intance being totally abandoned when Europeans returned, and those people sited as starting a quest to the land of the kowry shell to rise. I think you need to understand that your groups were migratory much like Europeans and they have been here since 1000 AD or earlier in migrations. They just established a dominion not much unlike the 5/6 nations, or algonkian groups that had relatively small family groups travelling the area. What do you think natives did with copper or obsidian, made tools from them not unlike gold or silver or oil. You have this concept of a non resource using people but based on the technological resources available natives very much harvested the land. Other aboriginal groups in north america commonly practiced slash and burn. Wood was utitilized. While the technologically level saved exploitation, you can't say the land wasn't exploited by first nations groups, they just didn't have a need or capacity to get more than they got.. it was a struggle for survival. Natives used iron but couldn't work it. They used copper and hammered it. Native groups used gold in the americas. Stone tools were used bone tools, oil is a good sealant, they used trees, ate them, and harvested them for thousands of other uses. Your argument seems more based on the fact that they did so much harm, but now in small tastes first nations are building casinos, houses in european style, using motor boats and skidoos that use gas... I am someone who strongly supports naturalism, and conservation, but I when I see natives taking fish that arn't even legal size limit for "eurocandians or other canadians" the whole natives are kinder to the land thing may be a little false, since they are using the same technology that white people are using. I think that as a global identity there is far more concern for nature with some northern groups such as a Cree gentleman I spoke with explaining the elders up there are still closed to development and building of roads, or even harveys but the fact here is that he also spoke of the youths desire for european culture or american culture, like the kids that came up to me looking for bootleg or pot... I think you need to understand that it is good for the elders to protect their land and their culture.. but when speaking of first nations as a global entity there are many different people much like the native woman using a smart phone today etc.. or the natives lining up to use computers, or satalite communications connecting their reserves.. all that wouldn't be possible without the rape and exploitation of the land. I think the elders are looking to preserve and reduce localized harm --- and perhaps other things but the natives may have even burned down what was once the manitoulin island in an attack on a rival band... these arn't "conservation" mindsets.. they mind all the copper from the north shores tons of it. It spread all over america. I think you throwing antagonism or saying how even my namesake singed the northern treaty for hudson bay.. the fact here is that the crown has always been respectful to natives.. it is them who realized that they couldn't fight europe and come out better than in cooperating with them. They massacred the beothuk and other natives... While natives still comprise 1/10th of Canada's population.. that is a massive segment of the population... I think you need to realize that natives have been enfranchised for decades any exploitation is being done no more so by me than by you if either of us. I'm euroCanadian my ancestors were farmers and masons of all kinds of different backgrounds.. my ancestors log cabin still sits as a museum of sorts on the manitoulin.. and island set aside for natives. The fact is we worked together, and there is still a respect because we live on the same land. I live next to two reserves, and am somewhat upset when I hear people like you attack euroCanadians as a whole when it is more important to actually direct it to the people not the group, beecause not the whole group is out to get natives, if they were they would have been killed long ago. We are working to improve our mutual relations... some of us. Breaking that bond is only going to tear things down. We can create a new country, and make all the immigrants citizans of this new country "BallSack", and we can have a bunch of "BallSackians" running around the country. After the Libyians figure out that they have been oppressed and murdered off, we can place them all in prison, and blame them for all of there social problems afterwards. Just like Canada. Yeah anyway... as I said above.. libya is a whole different situation. Younis I mentioned above was assasinated today.. the turncoat interior minister and member of the Libya High Council Gaddafi's #2 that went to work for the rebels as the head of the military.. assasinated out of Bengazhi's supreme judicial council HQ when he was called to go there by the council. Other things have happened also.. nato saying that in order to protect civilians they must bomb civilians areas. "The alliance warned on Tuesday it would target facilities including factories, warehouses and agricultural sites being used by loyalist troops." To enforce their no fly zone..?? So medical centers treating gaddafi's wounded soilders? What about red cross sites? clinic hit by a Nato bomb that killed seven people. Isn't it a war crime to attack medical facilities? Hospital derives from place of santuary.. originated by the knights hospitalers during the holy crusades. ?? Red Cross upset at Nato warcrimes.. does this read right? http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=25528 Last I checked the NATO countries involved in the attacks are signatories of the Geneva convention http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-geneva-convention.htm Those who are not actively engaged in combat cannot be murdered... Establishments for the medical treatment of soldiers should never be attacked. It is really unfortunate it is easier to support Russia and China or India et al to conquer and destroy NATO because they have higher standards of human rights.. and that is very tough one to swallow. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/28/libya-lawsuit-nato_n_912033.html http://mathaba.net/news/?x=627683 http://www.bulawayo24.com/index-id-opinion-sc-columnist-byo-5810-article-Reverence+for+hatred+of+democracy+.html http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL1107/S00140/susan-lindauer-how-obama-got-it-all-wrong-on-libya.htm http://mathaba.net/news/?x=627460 Edited July 29, 2011 by William Ashley Quote I was here.
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.