Why isn't Canada helping to promote democracy?

[Guest eureka]

Most of the corruption in the "Oil-for-Food debacle was traceable to the US not Europe. I think Nlack Dog has demonstrated that fairly conclusively.

Those European nations who are criticized did not want the sanctions to continue: no country but the US did out of sheer vindictiveness. Just about all others wanted an end to sanctions and to stop the murder of millions of Iraqis that was the only result of the sanctions.

The program was profitable for the US and Iraq paid for it in blood not oil.

[err]

Those European nations who are criticized did not want the sanctions to continue: no country but the US did out of sheer vindictiveness. Just about all others wanted an end to sanctions and to stop the murder of millions of Iraqis that was the only result of the sanctions.

Eureka, the sanctions were about more than vindictiveness. The USA didn't want the sanctions lifted becauase Saddam had deals in place with Russia, Holland, and France to exploit Iraq's oil... once the sanctions were lifted ... The USA and UK-based companies were not going to get any chance at the oil.... Allowing the UN to lift sanctions would mean lost access, no control, and no profits for the US-based firms.

You'll have to remember who is running the Whitehouse, and what perspective employers will be rewarding Dick Cheney, George Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, and Condoleeza Rice for securing 10% of the worlds oil for the said companies.... The administration will have to wait until their terms in office are done before they can collect any rewards though... from their old employers... the big oil companies.... I would imaging the rewards to be quite significant.

If you'll remember, Dick Cheney was made CEO of Haliburton after he privatized much of the US army and contracted it out to Haliburton ($23 Billion in contracts). One can only surmise that similar rewards will await the others in the Bush administration once they secure 10% of the world's oil for their previous employers....

[mirror]

No kidding Cheney is coming to Alberta!

[Montgomery Burns]

It's funny that the USA has never been interested in democracy in Saudi Arabia...

And if they did, the left would be screaming bloody murder - just like they did with Iraq.

They have a deal with Saudi Arabia to keep democracy out....

Apparently you missed the memo where the US turned over ALL of the Iraqi oil operations to the Iraqi govt.  Didn't Michael Moore mention that?

I think you'd have a long way to go to find a more gullible nitwit than you....

Even the USA admits that there is no link between Al Queda and Iraq (other than the letter "Q" that they both share)

Now you're drowning in the Kool-Aid. The US has repeatedly said that Al Qaeda and Iraq were linked. There is absolutely no doubt. This is an undisputed irrefutable fact.

Is the proof just hidden with the invisible weapons of mass destruction ???

I've got better things to do than type all the evidence again.  I suggest you look at the end of the Ann Coulter thread where I beat Black Dog....like a Dog, and forced him to give up like a broken beaten Black Dog.

Are you on drugs ??

And Saddam killed 1.5 million (a conservative estimate and not counting the war he started agaisnt Iran) of his citizens during his 25 year rule; 60,000/year.

And how many did the USA kill.... They've got the record... they fried 140,000 Japs in just a few milliseconds. But more specifically, in Iraq, they USA killed over 500,000 babies between the first and second wars... by not allowing anyone to bring in water purification equipment..... The USA has killed how many tens of thousands of Iraqis in their quest for oil...But I suppose you think that's ok.

How about the 100,000 American citizens who Bush lets die every single year by not providing health care... At least Saddam did that much...

How about the USA's assistance in gassing the Kurds.... The Democrats tried to block the sale of the helecopters Saddam was going to use to kill the Kurds, but the Republicans blocked the bill, (Prevention of genocide act). So the USA helped kill those people... how are they morally superior in this case... because they didn't actually fly the choppers ????

Since the Islamopussies can't beat the US in face to face combat, they have to resort to acts of terrorism against the innocent Iraqi people trying to establish a democracy.

Are these the same Islamopussies who took out the World Trade Centres ???

Do you get all your news from Canada's state-run, taxpayer-funded, Soviet-style CBC

Canadian style ?? I think you are a bit confused. Maybe you should go lie down....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

1) And your proof is where? Oh right. You just made it up.

2) You flamed me. Cartman and Mirror are going to go running to the moderator and tattle on you. I know they will.

*crickets chirping*

3) You are the one that made the ludicrous claim that Al Qaeda and Saddam had no links. How can you be so blindly ignorant of this?

4) No, but I suspect you are. And I suspect you drink the Kool-Aid to quench your dry mouth.

5) Change the subject and attack the USA. Typical self-loathing liberal. They always take the side of the enemies of mankind. And the US didn't kill those babies; Saddam did.

Saddam murdered over 500,000 children by refusing them food and medical aid; backed up with 75 footnotes

I don't know how you can look at yourself in the mirror sticking up for that massmurdering dictator. Shame shame shame on you. :angry:

And your claim that 100,000 US citizens die every year from no healthcare is utter BULLSHIT.

What kind of a sicko types this?

How about the 100,000 American citizens who Bush lets die every single year by not providing health care... At least Saddam did that much...

I'd use this as another example of the ugly hate-filled left, but Cartman will be over me if I do so.

As for your claim of the Democrats trying to stop the sale of helicopters, but the Republicans blocked them....The Democrats controlled Congress back then

I.E., the Democrats allowed the sale to go through Congress, because they controlled Congress.

Look, everybody makes errors sometimes, but you are way out of your league on a political forum. You have to be one of the most utterly uninformed persons I have ever come across on the internet.

6) Yes. The same ones who murdered 3000 innocents instead of being men and taking on the US military.

[Montgomery Burns]

Is that the most recent reason for invading Iraq?  Ok thanks, it was getting difficult to keep track there... appreciate the help!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

An informed person would know about the Authorization to use Force against Iraq resolution that was passed by both Republicans and Democrats.

But many Canadians were more concerened about their Prime Minister taking Saddam's blood money instead of enforcing the broken ceasefire and the 17 broken Chapter VII (binding) UN resolutions.

Canada's Liberal Party: moral to the bone.

[Montgomery Burns]

I see that err answered your latest tantrum so I need not bother. I do, though, apologize for my mistaken impression of you on another thread. There, I wrongly implied that you are not a half-wit.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In your dreams.

[Montgomery Burns]

Only the communistica-left would call building a democracy in the Mid East "BS".

You sure love those made-up terms, hey? "LLL", "neocoms", etc etc.

But to the point: the very idea that the U.S. is interested in building a democracy in the Mid East is b.s.

And if they did, the left would be screaming bloody murder - just like they did with Iraq.

I doubt democratic reform in Saudi Arabia would require military force, the destruction of the country and the deaths of tens of thousands. Mor elike a phone call here, a few cheques withheld there...

Free free free. Gimmie gimmie gimmie everything for free. I want free stuff from the "everything is free" fairy.

Healthcare and post-secondary education is not free.

You're drooling, I can tell.

And Saddam killed 1.5 million (a conservative estimate and not counting the war he started agaisnt Iran) of his citizens during his 25 year rule; 60,000/year.

Actually the number is 600,000 civilian executions, plus around 500,000 in the Iran-Iraq war. The vast majority of these occurred during a period when Saddam was a client of the U.S., particularly during the reign of Saint Ronnie.

Now you're drowning in the Kool-Aid. The US has repeatedly said that Al Qaeda and Iraq were linked. There is absolutely no doubt. This is an undisputed irrefutable fact.

I've got better things to do than type all the evidence again. I suggest you look at the end of the Ann Coulter thread where I beat Black Dog....like a Dog, and forced him to give up like a broken beaten Black Dog.

I know you love patting yourself on the...back, but there's only so many times one can read the same NewsMax bullshit before realizing the futility of dicussing it. The simple fact is the Bush adminsitration has shied away from making any strong claims as to an Iraq-Al Qaeda conection. They've flatly denied any link with Iraq and 9-11 and, at best, have painted a rough sketch that puts Al Qaeda members in Iraq, but have offered no dpcumentary evidence of a collaborative relationship. If such a relationship could be proven, then there's no doubt the Bushies would seize on it. The simple fact that the one group that would benefit the most from publicly pushing your ramblings has, for the past three years, declined to touch it with a ten-foot pole, leads to the conclusion that the "evidence" you've presented is nothing more than a paranoid conspiracy theory advanced by the Cult of George.

Oh and the quote function is super-easy to master.

Burn'd again.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

1) LLL and neocoms are not "made up" terms. And yes, trying to create a democracy in the Mid East cesspool is "BS".

Let's hear it. come on, you can do it.

NO BLOOD FOR OOOIIIILLLLLLLL!

2) I have no idea what you are babbling about. Hint: try to get to the point and be concise.

3) Ahhh. Healthcare and post-seconday education are free.

Wherever would we be without Black Dog's infinte wisdom?

Da govt pays for it; it's free.

4) No, the number is 1.5 million without the people killed in the Iran war, whence Saddam was getting nuclear reactors built by France.

5) YOU were the one who made the incredulous claim that there were no links between Saddam and Al Qaeda. But if you want to make a fool out of yorself by quoting the far-left NY Times, I'm not going to stop you.

6) And spelling is easy to master.

[Montgomery Burns]

Can we PLEASE say goodnite to this bloody Al Qaeda-Hussein rumour? It is here in black and white. ("We have no credible evidence that Iraq and al Qaeda cooperated on attacks against the United States.")

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...-2004Jun16.html

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Can we please get away from this bloody "there is no link between Saddam-Al Qaeda nonsense?

This is just a short list of their links:

Just a few of the links between Saddam and Al Qaeda.

I could post more but I am tired of repeatedly doing so time and time again.

[Montgomery Burns]

The best way for Canada to help promote democracy is to take a hard line against the current US administration that does not promote democracy anywhere - even at home. This whole 'promote democracy' mantra is little more than a lie to cover the arses of the US and Great Britain in their latest military fiasco. These are exceptionally large arses and thus this is an  exceptionally large lie.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Are you getting a cut from all the blood money Jean Chretien made off the slaughtered carcasses of the Iraqi people?

[mirror]

Toro

That ignore feature came in handy about six posts ago.

Cheers

[Montgomery Burns]

Sir Chauncy:

Forcing a way of life on a country is not giving that country freedom, but giving it "Your way of life" whether they want that way of life or not.

What a racist statement. Like Omar from IraqTheModel said, people like you think of the Iraqi people as subhuman second-class people who deserve nothing better than to live under a massmurdering dictator. Shame on you. :angry:

No one ask Iraqis what they wanted. No one asked America to invade Iraq and butcher hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, men, women, children. No one asked America to dump Depleted Uranium all over the country  so that Iraqi's will continue dying horrible deaths forever.

Me thinks that Sir Chauncy hs been spending too much time at the Democratic Underground. Come on, top it off to a million. You know you want to.

Show me the "freedom" that Washington is "giving" Iraq.

Were you sleeping when 60% of the population risked life andlimb to vote in January? Remember those purple-stained fingers?

Were you sleeping when the Iraqis constructed a constitution?

Washington wants to control Iraq, period. Israel wants Iraq controlled, period.

I figured you would out yourself. It's those Zionist Neocon Joooos!!!

Freedom is a word bantied around by the Bush administration like chicken at dinner time today. It is meaningless gobblygook,  something to instill trust in Bush with his people, his supporters.

Some people just hate the thought of those subhuman second-class Iraqis being free of a massmurdering dictator.

The election in Iraq was certainly no show of freedon. No one knew who was even running because of safety reasons Washington said so voters voted blindly for those they didnt know.

Those Iraqis are morons. They had no idea who they were voting for. They probably voted for Joooos.

And lo and behold, a Washington approved Government.

Nope. The Iraqis did not vote for who the US favored.

Canada does not need to get involved in Washingtons bid at tyrany, and power playing.

Canada was more interested in taking Saddam's blood money than enforcing the broken ceasefire and the 17 broken Chapter VII (binding) UN resolutions.

SOMEONE has to pay for all of Canada's vast social programs!

Get real, Canada has made our nam as a peacekeeping country. We gained world recognition as peacekeepers.

Huh? Peacekeeping is admirable, but holding hands with Islamofascists and singing Kumbaya is utterly naive. But when your Liberal Party govt has gutted the military, I guess one has little choice.

We are not a warmongering Nation of thieves like Washington.

We're a nation of thieves that takes Saddam's blood money instead of enforcing broken ceasefires and 17 Chapter VII (binding) UN resolutions.

[Montgomery Burns]

Most of the corruption in the "Oil-for-Food debacle was traceable to the US not Europe. I think Nlack Dog has demonstrated that fairly conclusively.

Those European nations who are criticized did not want the sanctions to continue: no country but the US did out of sheer vindictiveness. Just about all others wanted an end to sanctions and to stop the murder of millions of Iraqis that was the only result of the sanctions.

The program was profitable for the US and Iraq paid for it in blood not oil.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Europe wanted the sanctions lifted so they could continue to sell Saddam weapons, just like before. After all, Europe armed Saddam to the teeth. They only wanted some of that blood money that jean Chretien was getting from Saddam.

[err]

Let's not forget something here, yes they were U.N. sanctions and it was member states like Germany, Russia, France. Blegium and probably a few more that allowed Saddam Hussain to get around those sanctions and use that money to buy weapons and other illegal contraband with oil sales that was supposed to be spent on medicine and food for the Iraqi people.

The USA was Saddam's biggest customer during the Oil-for-food program, buying 2 million barrels of oil per day.

This corruption reached all the way to the highest levels of this supposedly unbiased world organization.

And was this as corrupt as taking over another country, killing thousands of Americans, killing 10's of thousands of Iraqis, spending hundreds of billions of dollars on a war to get oil for their previous (and future) employers... so much taxpayer's money that they didn't have the resources to handle a national emergency at home.... I don't think so....

[err]

Most of the corruption in the "Oil-for-Food debacle was traceable to the US not Europe. I think Black Dog has demonstrated that fairly conclusively.

Those European nations who are criticized did not want the sanctions to continue: no country but the US did out of sheer vindictiveness. Just about all others wanted an end to sanctions and to stop the murder of millions of Iraqis that was the only result of the sanctions.

Europe wanted the sanctions lifted so they could continue to sell Saddam weapons, just like before. After all, Europe armed Saddam to the teeth. They only wanted some of that blood money that jean Chretien was getting from Saddam.

Europe wanted the sanctions lifted because they were wrong and immoral. They also wanted the contracts for Saddam's oil to go forward as they should have.

And WHO armed Saddam to the teeth... and did Saddam hide them with his invisible WMDs ?? Well, his army didn't have weapons.. and couldn't put up a fight because he didn't have any weapons... did he ??

... All of the weapons that the USA gave them to use on Iran were destroyed in or after the first Gulf War.... The old clunker Soviet weaponry they had was also destroyed during and after the first war...

[err]

Sir Chauncy:

Forcing a way of life on a country is not giving that country freedom, but giving it "Your way of life" whether they want that way of life or not.

What a racist statement. Like Omar from IraqTheModel said, people like you think of the Iraqi people as subhuman second-class people who deserve nothing better than to live under a massmurdering dictator. Shame on you.

You don't seem to understand things very well. Are you reading invisible stuff written between the lines, hidden with the WMD's ??

Show me the "freedom" that Washington is "giving" Iraq.

Were you sleeping when 60% of the population risked life andlimb to vote in January?

And your version of freedom ="Risking life and limb"???

And lo and behold, a Washington approved Government.

Nope. The Iraqis did not vote for who the US favored.

And that's a surprise to you ???

We are not a warmongering Nation of thieves like Washington.

We're a nation of thieves that takes Saddam's blood money...

How about elaborating on how Canada took Saddam's money ???

[PocketRocket]

Why isn't Canada helping to promote democracy?

The quick and easy answer; We are, by example, by being a peaceful, successful democracy.

"Democracy" is not something achieved by force at the point of a gun.

Democracy is achieved from within, through the will of the people, people who are willing to sacrifice their own lives, their homes, their honor.

Why isn't Canada in Iraq?

Have you seen the size of Canada??? The size of Iraq???

We wouldn't fit

As for America's interest in championiing democracy, well, forgive me if I remain sceptical, but the USA has propped up too many dictators too many times simply because it suited America's agenda at the time.

This current mantra about bringing democracy to Iraq is simply too convenient.

But it does play well in the media, and it certainly has convinced a lot of people.

But then again, that's why it's there.

[Montgomery Burns]

Most of the corruption in the "Oil-for-Food debacle was traceable to the US not Europe. I think Black Dog has demonstrated that fairly conclusively.

Those European nations who are criticized did not want the sanctions to continue: no country but the US did out of sheer vindictiveness. Just about all others wanted an end to sanctions and to stop the murder of millions of Iraqis that was the only result of the sanctions.

Europe wanted the sanctions lifted so they could continue to sell Saddam weapons, just like before. After all, Europe armed Saddam to the teeth. They only wanted some of that blood money that jean Chretien was getting from Saddam.

Europe wanted the sanctions lifted because they were wrong and immoral. They also wanted the contracts for Saddam's oil to go forward as they should have.

And WHO armed Saddam to the teeth... and did Saddam hide them with his invisible WMDs ?? Well, his army didn't have weapons.. and couldn't put up a fight because he didn't have any weapons... did he ??

... All of the weapons that the USA gave them to use on Iran were destroyed in or after the first Gulf War.... The old clunker Soviet weaponry they had was also destroyed during and after the first war...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Europe wanted the sanctions lifted, despite Saddam violating the ceasefire and UN resolutions, so they could continue to sell him arms, nuclear reactors, and get their greedy hands on Iraqi oil. They didn't care that Saddam killed 1.5 million of his own people in his 25 years of rule.

And WHO armed Saddam to the teeth

Swedish Peace Institute: Russia (57%), China (13%), France (12%), Czechoslovakia (7%)

USA? One percent - 9th on the list. And this is from a Swedish Peace Institute, an organization that would hardly be biased for the USA.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear Montgomery Burns,

The following is an exerpt from the same "Swedish Peace Institute",...

Two years ago the United Nations failed to prevent the illegal invasion of a Member State by a group of other Member States, including my own, who were acting in defiance of some of the most important principles on which the Charter is based – the peaceful settlement of disputes, respect for the sovereignty of States, no use of force without the consent of the Security Council etc.

This did enormous damage to the standing of the UN and led many, especially in the media, to announce its demise. But the failure of the invasion to produce the expected results and the disgraceful conduct of US and other troops (including those of my own country), not to mention the out-sourcing of torture which is Mr Bush’s latest contribution to his world of values, freedom and democracy – all this has had the perverse effect of causing many to say that it would have been better to go down the UN road. And this has created hopes that a new, reformed and efficient UN could arise like a phoenix from the ashes of Baghdad.

They seem to de-bunk all sorts of things there...

[PocketRocket]

Why isn't Canada helping to promote democracy?

Well we are in Afghanistan helping to get things on an even keel there.

Perhaps it's because there was actual PROOF that Al-Qaeda was in Afghanistan, whereas the stories of them being in Iraq were, by the Bush administration's own admission, just stories.

Why isn't Canada in Iraq?

See answer above, add to it this; How many Canadian soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan???

I can recall hearing of four.

All killed by American pilots.

Not intentionally, to be sure, but good intentions do not a live soldier make.

And you recall what the road to hell is paved with.

[mcqueen625]

Why doesn't Canada help promote democracy? For the same reason that our Prime Minister just signed a trade deal with the Leader of China. I won't dignify the title of President because he was not voted into office by the people but installed there by the Communist Regime he is part of.

Paul Martin made a big deal of the fact that he was going to brouch the subject of human rights with the Chinese Leader, but at the end of the day, after admitting that China's record of human rights is abysmal, money won out and human rights be damned. Paul Martin is more concerned about improving trade relations with China than he is with the working, and social conditions of the Chinese people.

If Martin is substantially different than Chretien as he tries to imply, why was Chretien even invited to the reception for this communist leader? My take is that there is absolutely no difference between the two and that is why it is time for a change in government.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear mcqueen625,

Why doesn't Canada help promote democracy?

The question could be better asked, of Iraq, "Why isn't Canada forcing countries to accept democracy at the point of a gun?" As to China,

but at the end of the day, after admitting that China's record of human rights is abysmal, money won out and human rights be damned.

you are bang on the money, so to speak.

So, why is a non-democratic Iraq unacceptable, but ok for China? I should say that it is obvious, if the 'west' can profit from the misery of others, and the abuse of human rights helps it, it is therefore acceptable. (plus, China has a huge military) If the US and the West cannot profit from it, (such as pre-invasion Iraq) it is therefore unacceptable.

[err]

Why doesn't Canada help promote democracy? For the same reason that our Prime Minister just signed a trade deal with the Leader of China. I won't dignify the title of President because he was not voted into office by the people but installed there by the Communist Regime he is part of.

Paul Martin made a big deal of the fact that he was going to brouch the subject of human rights with the Chinese Leader, but at the end of the day, after admitting that China's record of human rights is abysmal, money won out and human rights be damned. Paul Martin is more concerned about improving trade relations with China than he is with the working, and social conditions of the Chinese people.

If you don't have a problem with our largest trading partner, the USA, I don't see how you can have such a problem with the Chinese. I think the USA's record is worse... killing 1.5 million Iraqis between the first and second wars (through sanctioning medicine and water purification equipment).... They started the second Gulf war for imperialistic greed rather than any other reason, killing tens of thousands of Iraqi people....

The USA allows 100,000 of her own citizens to die each year because they cannot afford life-saving health care.

If you refuse to acknowledge the abuses of countries you are friendly with, you lose a lot of credibility accusing your enemies of the same abuses....

[Shady]

I think the USA's record is worse... killing 1.5 million Iraqis between the first and second wars (through sanctioning medicine and water purification equipment)....

If you're referring to the United Nations sanctioned sanctions on Iraq, how can you only blame America? Also, you're claim of 1.5 million Iraqi's being killed as a result of the first and second gulf wars is a joke. Medicine and water purification equipment were not sanctioned under the U.N. passed sanctions on Iraq.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear err,

the Chinese. I think the USA's record is worse... killing 1.5 million Iraqis between the first and second wars (through sanctioning medicine and water purification equipment).... They started the second Gulf war for imperialistic greed rather than any other reason, killing tens of thousands of Iraqi people....

The USA allows 100,000 of her own citizens to die each year because they cannot afford life-saving health care.

Believe it or not, China is much worse. Where do you think all the slave-labour is kept, to help fatten the 'golden calf' of America? China is far, far worse (mostly at home, mind you) than the USA for death and violations of Human Rights.

[August1991]

If you don't have a problem with our largest trading partner, the USA, I don't see how you can have such a problem with the Chinese.

The US is a federal democracy with two competing political parties that regularly control various governments. China is none of those things.

Believe it or not, China is much worse. Where do you think all the slave-labour is kept, to help fatten the 'golden calf' of America? China is far, far worse (mostly at home, mind you) than the USA for death and violations of Human Rights.

I'm not sure what this has to do with trade. The vast majority of Chinese citizens voluntarily choose to work where they do because the alternative is worse. If we were to insist on only trading with Chinese when they have living conditions such as ours, we would hurt both them and ourselves.

Would it make sense to refuse to buy apples from a poor farmer because he is poor and lives in a shack?

The best way to deal with totalitarian regimes is to trade with them.