maplesyrup Posted September 9, 2004 Report Posted September 9, 2004 Draft-dodger memorial to be built in B.C. These courageous folks who fled the US rather than serve in an unjust war are going to be celebrated in BC. I doubt very much that a similar activity would take place in Alberta. People throw around the term "the West" in Canada, when actually the people in BC think very differently than those in Alberta. Living in BC I consider the West as BC, as opposed to the Prairies - Alberta, Sask. & Manitoba. Quote An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you do know and what you don't. Anatole France
takeanumber Posted September 9, 2004 Report Posted September 9, 2004 I think that it's funny. You know, if they build a waterpark next to it, it'll go from a tourist 'attraction' to a tourist mega-hub. Quote
Argus Posted September 9, 2004 Report Posted September 9, 2004 Draft-dodger memorial to be built in B.C.These courageous folks who fled the US rather than serve in an unjust war are going to be celebrated in BC. I doubt very much that a similar activity would take place in Alberta. No, probably not. I suspect most Albertans would hesitate to apply a term like 'courageous' to people who ran away and hid. Most likely they'd reserve it for those who fought, or for those who were conscientious objectors and served in some other way, or even for those who stood on principals and went to jail rather than fighting. Odd people those Albertans. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
playfullfellow Posted September 10, 2004 Report Posted September 10, 2004 uh huh, and we wonder why BC went from being one of the richest provinces to being one of the have nots. We have better things to spend our money on in Alberta, like education, health, etc. Quote
caesar Posted September 10, 2004 Report Posted September 10, 2004 Playfullfellow; this is being done by activists and artists not taxpayer money. Our provincial government has bigger ways to waste taxpayer money; like buying ferries overseas instead of from their own taxpaying workers.They did this by "privatizing our Ferries" our ferries so that we can't demand accountability nor access information. Quote
Cartman Posted September 10, 2004 Report Posted September 10, 2004 There is nothing more noble than defending one's nation, but I do not think that Iraq qualifies as this is an aggressive war (not defensive). IMO, Afghanistan may be considered a defensive war. I suspect that many of these people entered the army because it was one of the only ways to earn and living and obtain an education. Call that a choice if you like. Bush showed no interest in serving his nation in a foreign war. Quote You will respect my authoritah!!
ticker Posted September 11, 2004 Report Posted September 11, 2004 I suspect that many of these people entered the army because it was one of the only ways to earn and living and obtain an education. That sums it up for some of them. I remember seeing a woman on TV in the US before the war objecting to it because her son just entered the army for free education and did not plan on fighting. well the free education angle without being in harms way applies more the canadian army. my neighbor was a dentist & big house because of that free education aspect. Quote
caesar Posted September 12, 2004 Report Posted September 12, 2004 Those people joined the military for education and to serve their country. There would be no complaints heard if it were in defense of their country rather than the flawed intelligence and other dubious reasons for invading Iraq without international backing. Risking our young peoples lives in defense of their country is one thing but sending them to risk their lives on this type of wild goose chase is a waste. Losing ones loved ones because of "friendly fire" incidents is a waste of lives. Too many died from "friendly fire" incidents caused by carelessness and hot dogging rather than by the fog of war. Americans seem to be more prone to these incidents; British forces did not have the same problem. Quote
maplesyrup Posted September 13, 2004 Author Report Posted September 13, 2004 There is nothing more noble than defending one's nation, but I do not think that Iraq qualifies as this is an aggressive war (not defensive). IMO, Afghanistan may be considered a defensive war. I suspect that many of these people entered the army because it was one of the only ways to earn and living and obtain an education. Call that a choice if you like. Bush showed no interest in serving his nation in a foreign war. Here is a simple and easy way to end most of the world's conflicts: Make it a rule that if any country is going to go to declare war that its leader's children will be on the front battle lines. Do you really think that Bush would have decalred war on Iraq, if his two daughters were going to get slaughtered by the Iraqi forces. You war mongers need to cut us UN peaceniks some slack. Instead of the bullshit world of CanWest and Fox News, let's all live in the real world at least here at mapleleafweb. Of course we would not have had a war with Iraq! :angry: What I am saying here is that you war mongers need to walk the talk!. Quote An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you do know and what you don't. Anatole France
Argus Posted September 14, 2004 Report Posted September 14, 2004 You war mongers need to cut us UN peaceniks some slack.Uhmm, you need to grow up a bit.There may be the occasional person who approves of war but I've never met him. However, there are, unfortunately situations where conflict is the only way to a satisfactory end. In essence, physical conflict is how the world works. All of our societies are based on laws which are enforced by physical means. Is there any other way to order a society? International society is really no different. When you have an outlaw nation which cares little for morals or ethics, for right or wrong, then physical confronation is really the only way to deter them from acting in a way others find dangerous, or at least, inappropriate. You and your sort seem to approve of physical confrontation when its done at the behest of the United Nations. Why not when it's done by others? Right is right. Wrong is wrong. Iraq was an international outlaw which murdered thousands each year. Sanctions were not going to be lifted as long as Saddam was in power, and they kileld tens of thousands every year. That situation could have gone on for another generation. The only way out was physical conflict. Or maybe brutal vicious mass murder doesn't bother you so long as the Americans aren't involved. Another excellent place for physical confrontation, to my thinking, is Sudan, where the brutal Sudanese government is engaged in mass murder and brutality. I would see no immorality if some individual nation or group of nations moved troops into southern Sudan to confront them. I don't know why you would. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
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.