Iraq Invasion - America's Shame... 10 years on

[Guest Derek L]

notwithstanding your Dr. Distracto act and your attempted NDP wedge issue, do you not recognize a distinction in the supporting legal foundations, in the required UNSC legal authority for each?

So a UNSC hall pass is all that is needed to wage war?

[waldo]

So a UNSC hall pass is all that is needed to wage war?

you can trivialize it if you choose... it's the reason (the lack of), Chretien gave for Canada not participating in the U.S. invasion of the sovereign nation of Iraq.

[Guest Derek L]

you can trivialize it if you choose... it's the reason (the lack of), Chretien gave for Canada not participating in the U.S. invasion of the sovereign nation of Iraq.

But as demonstrated our “non-participation” garnered a greater contribution of assets to the initial operation then all other “participating members” of the coalition outside of the Americans and British well being roughly on par with that of the Australians…………..If anything, Jean’s run around through Operation Apollo, allowed him to eat his political cake and have it too………

[eyeball]

So it's fashionable again for conservative right wing Canadians to cast a side-wise glance towards having truck and trade with dictatorships or allies that prop them up?

Cool. It's about time.

Now, what about compelling Harper to do something other than fall all over himself when it comes to peddling Canada's fortunes in China?

[bush_cheney2004]

notwithstanding your Dr. Distracto act and your attempted NDP wedge issue, do you not recognize a distinction in the supporting legal foundations, in the required UNSC legal authority for each?

No, because of NATO's Operation Allied Force (Kosovo - 1999). Is Canada ashamed of that ?

[Guest American Woman]

Isn’t context in the eye of the beholder?

It most definitely is. From what I'm seeing, this thread is meant to be about American warmongers. Period. But the issue, even limited to Iraq, does involve a lot more. Some just don't want to acknowledge/talk about 'a lot more.' They want to make it all about America's "shame," and bring anything else relevant into it, and it's "I might add something in another thread..." - which tells me all I need to know.

Anyone interested in an in depth discussion about it would be more than willing to discuss more than 'bad America.' In fact, they would insist on it. But it's all about "America's shame" to some - and as much as I'm sure they find it bothersome, Americans et al don't feel "shame" over Iraq.

I feel as if this thread is trying to promote shame, trying to make Americans feel shame, but if I were prone to feeling "shame," as I said, I would feel just as much shame if I were a Canadian, as Canada was as involved as it could be - under the table; and if I were inclined towards rage for being lied to, I would be just as outraged as a Canadian for being lied to about not being involved. The ilk we are dealing with here, however, dismiss everything except the U.S.'s 'wrongdoings.' That's what it's ultimately all about, really.

I think some of these holier-than-thou 'critics' better be careful what they wish for, because they just might get it.

[waldo]

But as demonstrated our “non-participation” garnered a greater contribution of assets to the initial operation then all other “participating members” of the coalition outside of the Americans and British well being roughly on par with that of the Australians…………..If anything, Jean’s run around through Operation Apollo, allowed him to eat his political cake and have it too………

no... boots... on... the... ground! Ok, ok... ~35 pairs per existing transfer agreement commitments. I appreciate you have nothing to argue in terms of formal legal foundations, hey?

[Guest American Woman]

……..If anything, Jean’s run around through Operation Apollo, allowed him to eat his political cake and have it too………

Absolutely.

[waldo]

No, because of NATO's Operation Allied Force (Kosovo - 1999). Is Canada ashamed of that ?

there are those apologists who insist NATO came in under the broader 1244 resolution... that it, in conjunction with the UNSC not accepting the Russian draft resolution against NATO's unilateral intentions, provided the legal framework. And, yes, please... let's have more of your "force projection" chest-thumping... rogue nations wear it well!

[waldo]

Absolutely.

still owning it, hey?

[Guest American Woman]

still owning it, hey?

In case you haven't noticed, I don't play your game.

[bush_cheney2004]

It most definitely is. From what I'm seeing, this thread is meant to be about American warmongers. Period. But the issue, even limited to Iraq, does involve a lot more. Some just don't want to acknowledge/talk about 'a lot more.' They want to make it all about America's "shame," and bring anything else relevant into it, and it's "I might add something in another thread..." - which tells me all I need to know.

Of course...it's just more of the same smug visage some Canadians need to rationalize not only their complicity in not only the Iraq War, but all "American wars" and foreign policy actions, all while sending 75% of exports to the United States.

No wonder they get neurotic.....did I mention American TV ? LOL!

Edited March 24, 2013 by bush_cheney2004

[waldo]

I think some of these holier-than-thou 'critics' better be careful what they wish for, because they just might get it.

what are "they" wishing for?... do tell, do tell!

take solace in your false equivalencies - it certainly seems to allow you to play both sides, hey? You get to claim never being in support of the U.S. invasion... while you push your apologist slant and whine about being forced to "carry the weight of the world"!

[Guest Derek L]

no... boots... on... the... ground! Ok, ok... ~35 pairs per existing transfer agreement commitments. I appreciate you have nothing to argue in terms of formal legal foundations, hey?

So suggest Canadian sailors and airmen weren’t put at risk by being in the Gulf during the initial invasion? And legal foundations, with the UN as a basis, are only relevant if you feel allowing a foreign body to regulate national interests is appt…….

[bush_cheney2004]

No, because of NATO's Operation Allied Force (Kosovo - 1999). Is Canada ashamed of that ?

>there are those apologists who insist NATO came in under the broader 1244 resolution... that it, in conjunction with the UNSC not accepting the Russian draft resolution against NATO's unilateral intentions, provided the legal framework. And, yes, please... let's have more of your "force projection" chest-thumping... rogue nations wear it well!

Oh...the gut wrenching shame of Canadians dropping bombs on Serbs without a UNSC resolution and hallway pass. Will Canada ever overcome this historic wrong and crimes against the peace and humanity ? Is Canada doomed to never again win the Stanley Cup because of this and other shameful sins ? Only time will tell....

[Guest American Woman]

Of course...it's just more of the same smug visage some Canadians need to rationalize not only their complicity in not only the Iraq War, but all "American wars" and foreign policy actions, all while sending 75% of exports to the United States.

No wonder they get neurotic.....did I mention American TV ? LOL!

I have to wonder if, in reality, they're actually even managing to fool themselves - but they sure aren't fooling this American.

[Guest American Woman]

what are "they" wishing for?... do tell, do tell!

take solace in your false equivalencies - it certainly seems to allow you to play both sides, hey? You get to claim never being in support of the U.S. invasion... while you push your apologist slant and whine about being forced to "carry the weight of the world"!

In case you haven't noticed, I don't play your game.

[Topaz]

That's what Cheney said about PMs Chretien and Martin too !!

how could he when he didn't know who Chretien and Martin were or which direction Canada was, sorry that was Bush!!

[waldo]

Of course...it's just more of the same smug visage some Canadians need to rationalize not only their complicity in not only the Iraq War, but all "American wars" and foreign policy actions, all while sending 75% of exports to the United States.

No wonder they get neurotic.....did I mention American TV ?

you mistake smugness for pride... pride in not following in your (claimed) country's fiasco. Exports... teevee... is this more of your trolling examining the greater CanAm dynamic!

[Guest American Woman]

how could he when he didn't know who Chretien and Martin were or which direction Canada was, sorry that was Bush!!

Really? And you have proof of that, I'm sure.

[Guest Derek L]

Absolutely.

And has allowed many Canadians to chastise the Americans……………….Canadian Forces in the Persian Gulf region during the second Iraq war outnumbered the Canadian Forces contributed to the UN sanctioned Operation Desert Shield/Storm……..

The contribution during Operation Apollo was so great (for us) that it taxed both fleets in terms of training and maintenance cycles for years………

This perfectly sums up Chrétien’s contribution to the second gulf war:

[waldo]

So suggest Canadian sailors and airmen weren’t put at risk by being in the Gulf during the initial invasion? And legal foundations, with the UN as a basis, are only relevant if you feel allowing a foreign body to regulate national interests is appt…….

I appreciate you feel a void in not being able to tout your military zeal over Canada's minimal exchange/transfer contributions. Yes, please feel free to ignore the Iraq vs. Libya distinction I pointed out to you... in yet another one of your distractions!

[Guest Derek L]

I appreciate you feel a void in not being able to tout your military zeal over Canada's minimal exchange/transfer contributions. Yes, please feel free to ignore the Iraq vs. Libya distinction I pointed out to you... in yet another one of your distractions!

And you walk past the contribution of over 1200 Canadian men and women that were there for kick-off………

[Topaz]

It most definitely is. From what I'm seeing, this thread is meant to be about American warmongers. Period. But the issue, even limited to Iraq, does involve a lot more. Some just don't want to acknowledge/talk about 'a lot more.' They want to make it all about America's "shame," and bring anything else relevant into it, and it's "I might add something in another thread..." - which tells me all I need to know.

Anyone interested in an in depth discussion about it would be more than willing to discuss more than 'bad America.' In fact, they would insist on it. But it's all about "America's shame" to some - and as much as I'm sure they find it bothersome, Americans et al don't feel "shame" over Iraq.

I feel as if this thread is trying to promote shame, trying to make Americans feel shame, but if I were prone to feeling "shame," as I said, I would feel just as much shame if I were a Canadian, as Canada was as involved as it could be - under the table; and if I were inclined towards rage for being lied to, I would be just as outraged as a Canadian for being lied to about not being involved. The ilk we are dealing with here, however, dismiss everything except the U.S.'s 'wrongdoings.' That's what it's ultimately all about, really.

I think some of these holier-than-thou 'critics' better be careful what they wish for, because they just might get it.

As it was said on MSNBC, which talked about this, it's more about the US government , under Bush and Cheney and all the rest, lying over and over again, to get what they wanted, a regime change of Hussein, to be replaced by a friendier leader to the US and for revenge on Bush Jrs part. over 4000 US soldiers died for their country and for two, Prez and VP, who wouldn't go to war for their country! What about all those Iraq citzens that died, Iraq was no danger to the US. All of that government should be brought up on war crimes, along with Tony Blair.

[bush_cheney2004]

you mistake smugness for pride... pride in not following in your (claimed) country's fiasco. Exports... teevee... is this more of your trolling examining the greater CanAm dynamic!

Yes.....not only has/does Canada make oodles of cash from America's wars, it makes even more cash from the same nation that "starts them", and fights for more access to the 'world's best defended shopping mall'.