Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Opposing war goes against the feeding of that military industrial complex, and let's face it, US taxpayers are used to it by now.

Just hope the Gov does a reach around while reaming the behind. That is the LEAST they could do.

  • Replies 199
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

....I would hope that Canada on the other hand protects their young from enterprises of glory. I would hope that Canada can fly the banner of "mission accomplished" when our society can be comfortable in our peaceful role on this earth and our young can expect to live to see old age.

Yes...may hope spring eternal...but in the meantime, Canada is and has not been so peaceful. But per your request, I shall not bore you with the details of such policies and actions. It is best that the thin veneer of "peacekeeping", "soft power", and "responsibility to protect" remain foremost in Canadians' minds. The reality outside of Canada's borders is best left to the Canadian Forces who have to do the dirty work.

Economics trumps Virtue. 

 

Posted

LOL, we'll take all the tax money you want to throw away.

Quite right. Even the Fed helped to bail out Canadian banks last year. The non-bailout, as it was called. Spare some (hope and) change?

Posted

Apparently everyone has their price. What did Bush and Cheney cost the US?

cost? Why they cost the U.S. respect and standing within the world community... imagine that, somehow hicksville "cowboy diplomacy" just didn't go over too well!

Posted

LOL..."opposing war"...but loving those military contracts and jobs in Canada.

what? C'mon... what happened to your usual tent pleading/begging refrain? Is there a problem?

Posted

Americans don't worry about what Canada will do in Iraq.

then why do you have a brazillion posts about the not so willing Canada not joining the "Coalition of the Willing"?

Posted

cost? Why they cost the U.S. respect and standing within the world community... imagine that, somehow hicksville "cowboy diplomacy" just didn't go over too well!

U.S. favourable ratings overseas aren't any higher under Obama's "leading from behind" foreign policy, and nobody fears them anymore.

Posted

If the USA has promised "no boots on the ground" then that special forces contingent must have been wearing slippers when that team went into Iraq to try to save the American journalist. This is not looking good for the USA.

Except the rescue attempt was in Syria.

"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

Posted

Quite right. Even the Fed helped to bail out Canadian banks last year. The non-bailout, as it was called. Spare some (hope and) change?

No, it actually didn't

"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

Posted

No, it actually didn't

Actually... it did.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/banks-got-114b-from-governments-during-recession-1.1145997

But Canadian lenders also dipped into a program set up by the U.S. Federal Reserve aimed at providing cash to keep American banks afloat. CIBC and BMO took almost $3 billion each out of the fund, RBC and TD took out $8 billion and Scotiabank drew down almost $12 billion, the CCPA report found.

Posted

The banks didn't need any bailout from the fed. And many of the numbers in that report are mischaracterized. However, the US program was so loose in its regulatory framework that almost anyone could apply - an did. What? You think a bank isn't going to accept free money if it's offered? I would myself, though I don't need any money.

"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

Posted

The banks didn't need any bailout from the fed. And many of the numbers in that report are mischaracterized. However, the US program was so loose in its regulatory framework that almost anyone could apply - an did. What? You think a bank isn't going to accept free money if it's offered? I would myself, though I don't need any money.

It was also more about Canadian banks not operating at an unfair disadvantage with banks that were essentially being subsidized. GH is completely wrong, and dishonest with his bailout claim.
Posted

It was also more about Canadian banks not operating at an unfair disadvantage with banks that were essentially being subsidized. GH is completely wrong, and dishonest with his bailout claim.

I quote the CBC and it's my dishonest claim? Remember, it was the 'bailout that was not a bailout'. If they were not in trouble, why did they take the money?

Posted

The banks didn't need any bailout from the fed. And many of the numbers in that report are mischaracterized. However, the US program was so loose in its regulatory framework that almost anyone could apply - an did. What? You think a bank isn't going to accept free money if it's offered? I would myself, though I don't need any money.

You realize that taxpayers are on the hook for that money... right? Where does the Fed get it's money? OH right it can print money whenever they need it. A bank can also conjure money out of thin air.

Posted

So much for the "stability and democracy" Dubya said would follow his needless invasion of Iraq.

So much for the "stability and democracy in Iraq" that Dubya promised would follow his needless invasion.

Any similarities? (I made a matching post)
  • Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone."
  • Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds.
  • Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location?
  • The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).

  • 1 year later...
Posted

Well, we just got a British OOPS!!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/06/chilcot-report-2003-iraq-war-was-unnecessary-and-invasion-was-no/

Will we see something similar from Bush?

I think not.

What's more likely is that someone will send Bush a WMD. He'll finally be able to say, see, "told you so".

A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,898
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Flora smith
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...