Our soldiers suffer while caught in the middle.

[hot enough]

8 hours ago, dre said:

Talking about wars and invasions in the context of legality is kind of pointless. There's not really such a thing as "international law". Just a patchwork of treaties, and a small group of countries with the might to make whatever decisions they want (permanent UNSC members). The "law" only applies to you if there's an able and interested posse willing to enforce it.

You have hit the nail on the head. The USA is a rogue nation. There is a strong body of international law - established by the rank hypocrites of the USA. What you are doing is providing support for a nation that is no different than was Nazi Germany. The USA has its holocausts, many of them.

[Army Guy]

4 hours ago, hot enough said:

The people of Korea suffer, and have suffered as a result of the US occupation. All the rapes by US soldiers, all the Koreans lined up and machine gunned into pits dug, as long as a football field. The US has been threatening the north with nuclear annihilation, it has been terrorizing Korea since WWII. 

Hey the last time i checked this topic was about ,Our soldiers suffer while caught in the middle,  want to high jack a thread try your own, or the on i started for you.....

[hot enough]

1 hour ago, Army Guy said:

Hey the last time i checked this topic was about ,Our soldiers suffer while caught in the middle,  want to high jack a thread try your own, or the on i started for you.....

I'll just note who you have focused this on and retire to the drawing room for a spot of brandy. Carry on.

[Moonlight Graham]

17 hours ago, hot enough said:

See how easily the propaganda drips from folks' mouths. There was nothing at all that was threatening Canada, or the USA for that matter. Same thing back in the 1950s when the USA was aligning itself with right wing Japanese troops who were still in Korea and the US was setting itself up to take over a country that was a Japanese colony since, what, 1910?

My point was, we need soldiers to defend our borders.  If they don't exist, foreign actors are free to invade at will.  Not a hard concept.  We can't NOT have a military.

[blackbird]

On 2017-03-18 at 3:52 PM, Army Guy said:

your right we were cast aside because we did not rate ....it pissed a lot of soldiers off when Omar khadr  thing was going on.....how a terrorist was going to be treated better by our government than our very own soldiers....His family was well looked after.....while our soldiers had to beg for medical help....our VAC treating us like beggars in the streets....offering ridiculously low pay outs....I remember one of my comrades , who had been blown up by a IED on a donkey, and lost his testicle, it had been removed by a piece of donkey bone.....the VAC offered him 1200.00 because some bean counter had said that is what one testy is worth....he redress it.....resubmitted it for a another review....on the second review they offered him 1600.00 that was their final offer.....( review panels are made up of various members of the Vac staff, and a medical officer, it is set up like a court proceeding , a lawyer is present, you and your lawyer is present....the entire time no one has a clue what it is like to serve or be in combat.....kind of hard to explain to them what it is like when they have no clue.....It was never the same review board they only sat for that one day....never to come back....

If you got them in the morning it was pay day sort of ...late in the afternoon, it was nothing but head bobing and yawns).....he told the review panel to stick their 1600 up their asses....of course they phone our commanding officer to complain he then charged him with behavior unbecoming a soldier, they charged him 800. 00....so today he lives with that constant memory and pain of having gone to afghanistan 4 times and paid the government for the honor of getting one of his nuts blown off for 800.00 dollars. and while all this was going on their was talk of our government going to pay out omar a huge multi million dollar pay out....for being on the other side....all of this was pumped over seas for our viewing pleasure....kind of hard to keep moral up when our own citizens are demanding huge pay outs for terrorists, and nothing for our own troops.... 

I can remember the running dark humoured joke at the time was to ask around camp how we could get a job working for the taliban because they paid more....the Canadian government paid out more....or when the politicians would have a dog and pony show, and a soldier would ask when are we getting new equipment ....and the politicians would come back with there is no more funding for that....(That was code for not enough soldiers have died yet).and wonder why they would get heckled there is no more money because your paying out terrorist, or giving it out to Canada's number one family the Khadrs.....ya those guys were very popular with our troops.....  

I agree.  The system is in need of a massive overhaul. 

I disagree with the comments saying we shouldn't be sending our soldiers to other countries.  They don't understand what is going on in the world.  They are to be pitied as lacking in basic knowledge about world affairs.  

Soldiers should be given the respect they deserve for putting their lives on the line and serving their country and the cause of freedom in the world.

Edited March 22, 2017 by blackbird

[Michael Hardner]

7 hours ago, blackbird said:

I disagree with the comments saying we shouldn't be sending our soldiers to other countries.  They don't understand what is going on in the world.  They are to be pitied as lacking in basic knowledge about world affairs.  

Soldiers should be given the respect they deserve for putting their lives on the line and serving their country and the cause of freedom in the world.

Putting aside your personal respect for soldiers (which I generally share as well) why do you think we should send soldiers to other countries ?  Didn't you speak against globalism on another thread ?  What's more globalist than invading countries ?  Confusing.

[eyeball]

On 3/20/2017 at 1:52 PM, Moonlight Graham said:

For pete's sake man, these people have injuries, mental and physical.  The least we can do is help them.  A lot of young men and women who don't know much about how our politics work and want to help defend our country get sent to these wars as pawns, and come back damaged or broken or dead.  We may not like some of the missions, but our soldiers are still necessary to defend Canada.

Sure these people need to take responsibility for their actions but we also can't relegate them to the gutter. They didn't sign up to murder people and watch rapes happen and do nothing, they signed up to defend their country.  I think many soldiers are a bit naive and aren't aware how they're being taken advantage of, but that's part of the tragedy.

I can relate to it being our own fault that young people don't know much about how our politics work and how ugly and venal they are, if I'd known for example that kids my age were being fucked up the ass in residential schools I might not have celebrated how wonderful Canada was and made some very different choices when I grew up.

This is why I say our foreign military adventures and their consequences should be funded entirely with war bonds.

[blackbird]

12 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Putting aside your personal respect for soldiers (which I generally share as well) why do you think we should send soldiers to other countries ?  Didn't you speak against globalism on another thread ?  What's more globalist than invading countries ?  Confusing.

I don't see sending soldiers as globalism.   I see globalism as a country being controlled by some international group or political power.  Soldiers are sent to defend other people from terrorism or aggression.

 

20 hours ago, blackbird said:

 

 

[Michael Hardner]

7 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Soldiers are sent to defend other people from terrorism or aggression.

You don't believe that they're looking out for national interests ?  Including goodwill ?

[blackbird]

Just now, Michael Hardner said:

You don't believe that they're looking out for national interests ?  Including goodwill ?

They might be.  Our soldiers in Afghanistan were fighting terrorists as well as trying to build a better life for women and children (schools) for example.

[PIK]

On 3/22/2017 at 7:31 AM, Michael Hardner said:

Putting aside your personal respect for soldiers (which I generally share as well) why do you think we should send soldiers to other countries ?  Didn't you speak against globalism on another thread ?  What's more globalist than invading countries ?  Confusing.

We need to put a end to the refugee makers. We just can't keep bring everyone here or we will be a refugee maker in the future.

[Michael Hardner]

50 minutes ago, PIK said:

We need to put a end to the refugee makers.  

This was pointed out already and hard to disagree, but we are talking about Russia and the US too.  Not intending to cast blame, though, since there was not intention to create refugees IMO.

[hot enough]

On 3/21/2017 at 4:27 PM, Moonlight Graham said:

My point was, we need soldiers to defend our borders.  If they don't exist, foreign actors are free to invade at will.  Not a hard concept.  We can't NOT have a military.

These "foreign actors" are not stopped by the military. But again, ask yourself, just who these foreign actors are, the USA/UK, and the direction that the invasions have gone.

[hot enough]

22 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Not intending to cast blame, though, since there was not intention to create refugees IMO.

You believe that with all the US/UK invasions of ME countries, it never crossed their evil minds that there would be refugees? A country that will willingly murder its own for its geopolitical ends. A country that has stolen trillions upon trillions of wealth from the poor of the world.

[Army Guy]

16 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

You don't believe that they're looking out for national interests ?  Including goodwill ?

You don't sound convinced Michael, that our nations military does look after our national interest when it can....including goodwill.

 

[Michael Hardner]

7 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

You don't sound convinced Michael, that our nations military does look after our national interest when it can....including goodwill.

 

I'm asking another poster a question.  How could you interpret that as me not being convinced ?  It has nothing to do with me.  I do think that that is a goal of a military.

[Army Guy]

And i was asking you a question, or is that not allowed. 

I think Blackbird is pretty clear that he understands what our military is for, and to what they're responsibilities are, which lead me to the same conclusion your having right now, How could this be interpreted as him not knowing....unless your fishing for something else.....hence my question.

[overthere]

57 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I'm asking another poster a question.  How could you interpret that as me not being convinced ?  It has nothing to do with me.  I do think that that is a goal of a military.

Military  forces in a democracy such as ours are not permitted to have goals.  Their goals and actions are determined and directed by politicians.  Because power is very concentrated in Canada it is ultimately the PM who decides..  Thoise decisions and  actions in Afghanistan, which resulted in the deaths of 167 Canadian men and women came about from hard decisions made by Chretien, Martin and Harper.  I am not saying those choices were right or wrong.  They must have been very difficult, but they were made.  I don't think our current PM is up for the challenge of these or other hard choices.

[Army Guy]

There is some good news in this budget in reference our Veterans.....And it does tackle some of the issues vets are having .....additions to more programs that are going to be offered.....see below, everything is all good.....however and there is always a however, they big issue and one that the PM campaigned on as a election promise was he would bring in life long pensions....Not so much right now they are taking the current pay out, and dividing it up for as long as they can.....and when that magic pay out is reached thats it, your cut off....where the last system we have in place was for life...meaning until member died.....now it does cost more because we don't know when each member is going to die....but our government has a way to control this, these payments will be taken out of your CPP when they are eligible to receive that...so for one government pocket into another....Another ongoing battle that vets have with their government......

Did i also mention that the total amount one can receive is 360,000....that payout is a rare figure, and rarely do they pay out that value...most soldier would likely see way less than half of that.....over their life times...one could receive more on poggy over 20 years time....

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-politics/federal-budget-leaves-uncertainty-over-defence-spending-veterans-pensions

http://www.metronews.ca/news/canada/2017/03/22/feds-provide-more-cash-for-injured-vets-but-leave-pension-question-unanswered.html

Quote

 

Finance Minister Bill Morneau’s new fiscal plan did include new spending for veterans and their families, specifically $725 million in promised additional benefits over five years.

Those include up to $80,000 for long-serving veterans who leave the military and want to go back to school, as well as a new program that will offer job-coaching and other assistance obtaining a civilian job.

The budget also expands the financial benefits available to family members and others caring for disabled veterans, while making it easier for them to also access career training and counselling services.

 

 

Quote

 

Funding is also being set aside for organizations that do research on veterans’ issues, and for a new emergency fund the veterans affairs minister can dole out in urgent cases.

Still, as welcome as the new money will be, the big question for many veterans will be how the government plans to bring back life-long pensions as an option for those injured in uniform.

The Liberals were the only party to promise in the election to re-introduce the pensions, which were replaced by a lump-sum payment, career training and targeted income-replacement programs in 2006.

The budget says progress has been made, and further details will be announced by the end of the year, but it also sends a strong signal that the old pension system won’t be coming back.

Officials insisted no decision has been made, but the budget suggests that the lump-sum payment, known as the disability award, could simply end up being spread out through monthly payments for life.

The lump-sum varies depending on the extent of injury, with the maximum amount being $360,000, which would amount to $1,000 per month if spread over 30 years.

 

 

Edited March 23, 2017 by Army Guy

[Rue]

On ‎2017‎-‎03‎-‎19 at 0:06 AM, -1=e^ipi said:

Future wars will be fought with drones instead of humans anyway. Better to spend money on programmers to develop military ai than waste it training soldiers.

 

Man, trashing the military is fun.

You would be the first to whine for a soldier to save you if need be. Man trashing the military is fun when you take your freedom for granted and are so soft and sheltered you have no clue what goes on outside your bubble.

 

Future wars will not be fought just with drones. Sure in your world its all done with games on your computer but in he real world its a tad more complex. Just hope you are not attacked to understand why drones alone can not engage in any war.

[Rue]

On ‎2017‎-‎03‎-‎22 at 0:19 PM, eyeball said:

I can relate to it being our own fault that young people don't know much about how our politics work and how ugly and venal they are, if I'd known for example that kids my age were being fucked up the ass in residential schools I might not have celebrated how wonderful Canada was and made some very different choices when I grew up.

This is why I say our foreign military adventures and their consequences should be funded entirely with war bonds.

Such crap. Tell me when Afghani boys were being "fucked up the ass"  weren't you the same person on this forum complaining Canadian soldiers should not be in Afghanistan trying to change that? Hmmm? You even think before you write such drivel? You have any clue how many soldier shave come back from Afhanistan with ptsd precisely because of having to see kids "fucked up the ass" and prevented from doing anything because of the leftist trendy politics of people like you? Nah. Of course not. Clueless. Another sheltered, entitled, privileged know it all.

[Rue]

On ‎2017‎-‎03‎-‎22 at 8:29 PM, blackbird said:

They might be.  Our soldiers in Afghanistan were fighting terrorists as well as trying to build a better life for women and children (schools) for example.

Exactly and see my comment damn further to yours damn it. People haven't a clue what our soldiers were doing in Afghanistan and how they put their lives on the line so others can sit and ridicule the very freedom these brave people put their lives on the line for. Man oh man blackbird what a country we live in with so many sheltered spoiled sob's.

[Rue]

On ‎2017‎-‎03‎-‎21 at 4:05 PM, hot enough said:

I'll just note who you have focused this on and retire to the drawing room for a spot of brandy. Carry on.

No stick around just let me say save some brandy for Army Guy and many like him. They are not rogues. They are good people who fought and fight for the very freedoms we take for granted. Hey I know some of those Yank soldiers. Know them personally. They aren't rogues. They believe in democracy and freedom. You are mixing them up with corrupt politicians with agendas. Be fair. Soldiers-meet some. They aint politicians. They are firefighters. They put out fires they did not start. You so sure they are rogues?

You have any clue who they fight? You ever seen the results of a terrorist attack or a world where extremist Muslims rule and do things you wouldn't think could happen?

They have. I have. I don't have an iota of the guts these soldiers have. I've put flesh in bags and mopped up guts but I never could wear the boots of these people. Never. I am glad to have dug some latrines for them and cleaned infected feet but I never could do what they have done. Never. They are decent people. They are not rogues.

[hot enough]

They are people who got duped, just like you and all the others who run from one silly excuse to another, mouthing the same tired, worn bits of propaganda. They are people who got used, similar to young people getting talked into gangs. 

[eyeball]

24 minutes ago, Rue said:

giggle giggle tee hee poopy ca ca

FIFY

Now get lost.