How Bad Is The Nation Of Canada

[Hugo]

Oh yeah... and a skyrocketing crime rate combined with the lowest RCMP and uniformed police funding levels in the last three decades. Violent crime is (per capita) at a higher level in Canada than the US. Yet the Liberals believe that the answers lie in gun registries and biometric ID cards.

Regarding social issues and government - I don't think the government can dictate morals but it can certainly influence them. I don't think it's coincidence that the traditional hard-working Canadian attitudes became replaced with the morality of laziness, hedonism and selfishness during Trudeau's reign.

The government could very well produce social change with a few things. If it told the truth about abortion and about homosexual health risks and so on, a lot of people would probably be swayed. Not many people know that the life expectancy of a gay man is 42, and not many people know that most aborted foetuses can feel pain and yet the common methods involve dismemberment by twisting off limbs with forceps or being dissolved (literally burnt alive) in saline solution, without anesthaesia.

I don't believe that the majority of Canadians are so morally bankrupt that they'd accept these facts as right and just if they were told widely.

[SirRiff]

a) the national debt is absolutely enormous (2nd largest in the world) and will take centuries to pay off

no economist agrees with the truth of economics. each side had thier own philosophy and there is no consensus at all. national debts come along with huge budgets and the complexities of the modern world.

i have no idea how to 'fix' the economy, because if no other nation in history has been immune from recessions and shit we wont be either. its the ebb and flow of the global economy. we will get through it, and there is nothing that a liberal or a conservative knows that will get it done faster. it will take the 31 million citizens of Canada working everyday and paying taxes to recover. simple as that.

taxes damage an economy and Canada taxes individuals and businesses very heavily

yeah well we still live along the highest quality of life in the world, and we have been Canada for a long long time. if everything we taxed was so flawed, we would have collapsed already. our high taxes give alot back socially, and it seems to be working pretty well so far. we live healtheir, longer, less violent lives then the US. its not just coincidence man. there is a reason. Canada can surive high taxes. we are dong very well with them actually.

c) the ineptitude in the Canadian economy drives most of the talent south of the border (doctors, entrepreneurs, investors)

well considering the ENTIRE WORLD covets the $$$ in the US, its not just a canadian fault. I got offered a job in san diego last week but i didnt take it. so there. the brain drain just lost one.

i have not heard of anybody laying on the street dying because there were no doctors. i can buy computer parts, adn electronics, and my portable mp3 player, and everything else capatalism brings. hell the US buys most of its stuff from china or taiwan or whatever, so if they must rely on the rest of the world, so do we. its not a fault it just a reality.

d) the trade deficit is very large and grows

larger

its a reality of global trade. the US cant even escape it, we just have to deal with it man. life is hard.

e) the health care system has massive problems and the government has no plans to fix it (either privatisation, or mixed methods such as the British p3 scheme).

yeah it is pretty strained. but you know what, that is generally because there are more nad more people who demand better health care and who live longer. not the liberals fault people have sex and live longer.

either you cut services, or spend more money. either way its a cost benefit analysis. i aint a doctor or health administraiter, so i dont know, but EVEN under the strain, we are not dying of SARS or having heart attacks in the streets. we are still among the healthiest nation on earth.

its getting harder, but it has nothing to do with politics. too many people demanding too many services living too long. there is no magic bullet regardless of what peope say.

f) the welfare system is completely broken, and many people live off it while others wait 6 weeks for an unemployment cheque

yeah well its pretty hard to design something that works for everyone. the economy is bad i know. of course, i',m sure by rejecting peope on welfare, they will only find other ways to drain society link crime or drugs or whatever, adn the cost of that is much worse, as we see in teh US. again, politics dont solve the problem, there is no easy answer. $$$ is needed or we have to kick people out on the street.

g) the birth rate has dropped to 1.52 children per woman. Immigration is now the only method of Canadian population growth. What this means is massive tax increases to pay for increasing pension and healthcare costs for the aged as the ratio of pensioners to workers multiplies.

yeah well what middle class women wants to have 10 kids? wealth always reduces the birth rates, because women have contraception and career aspirations, and can pick and choose thier pregnancies. that is just advancing society, nothing else.

h) in social matters, teen pregnancies are up massively, and divorce rates are skyrocketing.

well that is in part due to stress in society and all that other crap.

not to mention, if a young girl wants to have sex, nobody can stop her. in a civil society we are not going to punish her for this. its tough on her, and her kid, but its the reality of modern life. same with divorce, modern society isnt interested in lifelong commitments it seems. thats the reality, no politics there.

it would be better for society to help young mothers and offter greater help for stressed out couples.

i) the drop in wages as high-earning manufacturing and trades jobs are replaced with low-paid service jobs, combined with increasing taxes.

well yeah, but what are we gong to do. India and mexico are getting the jobs from the US too. again, its the reality of modern global trade and no Canadian government or party can change it. its beyond us. we just need to adapt as best we can like everyone else really.

j) the increasing taxpayer-borne costs of education, its increasingly poor results, and the increasing worthlessness of educational credentials.

you dont have to tell me about this, i had a tough time after school and i think i will have to go back to earn a decent wage. so many people, bad ecnomoy, competition. its just reality nowadays.

SirRiff

[theWatcher]

Here's a link for you Gugsy, looks like these people are already evaluating each riding to suggest the best small c conservative:

Progressive Conservative Tory Democratic Representative Coalition Back Room

[Hugo]

its the ebb and flow of the global economy. we will get through it, and there is nothing that a liberal or a conservative knows that will get it done faster.

Just letting things alone was what let the Great Depression go on so long. Do you not think it highly irresponsible that the Liberal party built up a mountain of debt from nothing and then just expects someone else to deal with it? I think people have to pay their debts.

Just putting it down to "economics" is unacceptable. It amounts to fiscal irresponsibility and we cannot leave a mountain of debt that will take three times as long to repay as the nation of Canada is old.

yeah well we still live along the highest quality of life in the world, and we have been Canada for a long long time.

It's in decline. Canada's position in the world is slipping: real incomes, life expectancy, crime rates etc. If you continue to stick your head in the sand and pretend that since things are OK now they always will be, don't be surprised when you wake up one morning and find that the Canadian standard of living resembles the Nicaraguan. It's on the way down, Riff.

we live healtheir, longer, less violent lives then the US.

Not true. Life expectancy is roughly comparable but certainly less than Japan, and violent crime per capita in Canada is higher than in the US.

i have not heard of anybody laying on the street dying because there were no doctors.

My wife's grandmother is 75 and extremely diabetic. She has not had a family doctor for 5 years, nobody will take her on. She isn't getting the care she needs because all she can do is go to the ER or walk-in clinic and has no on-going care whatsoever, and does not have long to live, so now you have heard of somebody dying because there are no doctors. Satisfied?

The brain drain is a reality, my friend, and it costs us dearly. As long as Canada continues to offer less, the best and the brightest will go elsewhere, leaving Canada as a nation of mediocrities with no innovation or prospects. Hey, hang on a minute...

[the trade deficit is] a reality of global trade.

Really? So how come Japan doesn't have one?

yeah it is pretty strained. but you know what, that is generally because there are more nad more people who demand better health care and who live longer. not the liberals fault people have sex and live longer.

It's their fault the healthcare system is screwed up though. They are in power.

yeah well what middle class women wants to have 10 kids? wealth always reduces the birth rates, because women have contraception and career aspirations, and can pick and choose thier pregnancies. that is just advancing society, nothing else.

Within a mere 40 years, income taxes will have to double to cover increases in pension plans alone. Is that advancing society?

well yeah, but what are we gong to do [about decreases in wages].

Well, how about doing ANYTHING?

All you've said is that you admit that these are all problems, but that we should just not worry about them. Unacceptable. You can't just watch the country go down the toilet (and by your inability to deny any of my points you must concede that it is) and say, well, what are you gonna do?

If a government does that, they need to be dissolved immediately. That is not government for the people.

[Guest The Pope]

Alright its time to face some of the facts about Canada as a nation, it is near death. Many left wingers here such as Gugsy, and Siriff, may be already prepared to attack me, but lets face it Canada was once one of the most beautiful countries in the world, it was also one of the richest, we had a strong military, and were built around strong families. However the Canada which 100,000 Canadian's died for has been crushed, and destroyed, by 30 years of Liberal and Progressive Conservative governments. The Liberals and PC's have brought in a socialist state, and have moved Canada so far left that even the Canadian Alliance which would be considered a moderate party by world standards is considered to far right wing.

Canadians could have reversed the tide of liberalism in Canada when the Reform party was made official opposition, and despite the Reform party, and Canadian Alliance's best efforts the east kept saying no. On issues such as gay marriage, multiculturalism, and religious freedoms, any person whom is against socially liberal doctrine is considered a nazi, bigot, or redneck.

So is Canada doomed, in the end it probably is, Alberta, and particularly the west are moving more and more towards western seperation, Paul Martin, Peter Mackay, and the liberals and PC's now are trying to buy Albertan's votes, not earning them, PC's and Liberals represent the old eastern arrogant establishment [i know that many in eastern Canada may hold conservative values, however a large majority seem to be brainwashed], PC's and Liberals have attacked western Canadians for not supporting the establishment, Joe Clark, Peter Mackay, Paul Martin, and Sheila Copps have attacked Albertan's who are opposed to the central Canadian establishment, Mackay and Clark have attacked Harpers proposal which would give Alberta more power to govern its own affairs.

In conclusion the fate of Canada depends on two elections 2004, and 2008, if either a Liberal or Progressive Conservative government come about, it is likely that Alberta, BC, and maybe Saskatchewan would bprepared to seperate, or join the states. PC's and Liberals continuosly attack the country which 100,000 Canadians died for, they consider it evil, and racist, and they support the Trudeau state of socialism.

Well i guess we are in trouble, we will see how things work. Though i am with you, i don't like the way that we are always leaning in the left direction..

[Mr. Chater]

neither do i...

[Black Dog]

a) the national debt is absolutely enormous (2nd largest in the world) and will take centuries to pay off

A problem excrabated by the high-interest, low inflation policies of the last two decades, policies instituted by the Mulroney Tories and the boys on Bay Street with little regard to their long term effects on the economy.

taxes damage an economy and Canada taxes individuals and businesses very heavily

That's a plain old oversimplification. Look at the example of the U.S.A. Federal taxes there have remained relatiovely unchanged for decades (18.4% of GDP in the '50s to 20.5% in the early '90s), yet productivity has declined ever since.

The problem lies not with taxes, but with the distribution of taxation. The trend has been to cut taxes for the wealthy and for corporations and shift the tax burden onto mid and low income folks. This policy is simply wrongheaded. Again, look at the U.S.A, which enjoyed its highset period of productivity when the top marginal tax rate was 91.2%. Basically, the problem isn't high taxes, it's that the wrong people are carrying too much of the tax burden.

c) the ineptitude in the Canadian economy drives most of the talent south of the border (doctors, entrepreneurs, investors)

The overblown "brain drain" is offset by the influx of highly skilled immigrants into the country. There are four times as many university graduates entering Canada from the rest of the world as there are university degree holders of all levels leaving Canada for the United States, simply due to the larger number of immigrants Canada has.

d) the trade deficit is very large and grows larger

Hardly a uniquely Canadian trait, though.

e) the health care system has massive problems and the government has no plans to fix it (either privatisation, or mixed methods such as the British p3 scheme).

The health care system's massive problems stem from chronic underfunding. Period.

f) the welfare system is completely broken, and many people live off it while others wait 6 weeks for an unemployment cheque

I don't know what you mean by "broken". Care to elaborate?

g) the birth rate has dropped to 1.52 children per woman. Immigration is now the only method of Canadian population growth. What this means is massive tax increases to pay for increasing pension and healthcare costs for the aged as the ratio of pensioners to workers multiplies.

Which makes it all the more important for the country to attract and retain skilled immigrants, as well as to bolster education to ensure a high level of productivity.

h) in social matters, teen pregnancies are up massively, and divorce rates are skyrocketing.

Wrong.

"There are fewer teenage pregnancies and a lower rate of teen pregnancies now than in 1974. The teenage pregnancy rate in Canada was at its highest in 1974 (54 per 1,000) then declined until reaching its lowest point in 1987 (41.1). The rate then rose gradually until it hit 48.1 in 1992 and has been fluctuating since then. The rate in 1995 was 47 pregnancies per 1,000 women aged 15 to 19."- (Statistics Canada and Canadian Council on Social Development)

The divorce rate has actually declined, due to lower marriage rates, an increase in the number of legal separations and the increasing prevalence of common-law unions.

Yet you still don't want people who actually want to get married marry. Weird.

i) the drop in wages as high-earning manufacturing and trades jobs are replaced with low-paid service jobs, combined with increasing taxes.

No doubt that's a problem, which is why we need lower interest rates, higher taxes for high income earners, more tax breaks for small-medium businesses and to rejig NAFTA.

j) the increasing taxpayer-borne costs of education, its increasingly poor results, and the increasing worthlessness of educational credentials.

Reinvestment in public education should be a top priority of government. That means curbing tuition rates at the post-secondary level and increasing funding to public schools. Worked for Ireland.

Oh yeah... and a skyrocketing crime rate combined with the lowest RCMP and uniformed police funding levels in the last three decades. Violent crime is (per capita) at a higher level in Canada than the US.

Canada's crime rate has declined steadily over the past 10 years. Vilonet crime is measured differntly in the U.S., so the comparason is meaningless.

Really, this list of Canada's woes is mostly baseless proclamations of half-truths and distortions. You should at leats back up your own statements.

[Hugo]

Sorry, but I don't see why I need to any more than I have. You have admitted that all of the abovementioned are definite problems, and maybe you disagree with the extent and the remedies, but nevertheless you consent that virtually all of these issues need to be addressed for the sake of the prosperity of the nation.

With regard to the teen pregnancies, for instance, your point stands, but according to your figures we're only 0.7% lower than the highest peak. I wouldn't call that problem "solved". If crime had dropped 0.7% from it's highest rate ever, I wouldn't say that the crime problem was solved, would you?

All I was intending to do is to dispel the notion that everything in Canada is rolling along just fine. Canada does have problems, real ones, that need addressing. I think, by your statements, that you agree with that - you agree that change and reform is needed in taxation structure, in healthcare funding, in education and so forth. Riff seems to be stating that no changes are necessary, that "Everythign is not wrong if you look at it. we are actually doing very very well", and clearly we both disagree with him on that score.

That was all I was saying.

[SirRiff]

With regard to the teen pregnancies, for instance, your point stands, but according to your figures we're only 0.7% lower than the highest peak. I wouldn't call that problem "solved". If crime had dropped 0.7% from it's highest rate ever, I wouldn't say that the crime problem was solved, would you?

i think you are making an error of logic in assuming that its a problem that can ever be solved. some teens may want to get pregnant, some may accept it as the reality of life, some may abort the child or give it up, some may ruin thier lives over it.

its a reality of this thing we call life. just because teen pregnancy exists does not mean Canada is doing something wrong.

SirRiff

[Hugo]

And does that mean that absolutely nothing should be done about it? And what about all the other points I mentioned?

[westcoast99]

And does that mean that absolutely nothing should be done about it? And what about all the other points I mentioned?

Edited August 11, 2015 by Gugsy

[Hugo]

No, but you could stop telling them to have sex.

[Black Dog]

No, but you could stop telling them to have sex.

Gee, why didn't someone think of that before? I mean, teenagers always listen when others, especially authority figures, tell them what to do.

[Hugo]

I didn't say "Tell them to stop having sex", I said "Stop telling them to have sex."

Please tell me you mistook me on purpose, and not that you genuinely can't make that distinction.

[Mr Farrius]

Sorry I'm kind've confused. Who tells people to have sex?

[Hugo]

Sex-ed in schools tell children that it is natural and good to have sex and that their desires are to be indulged. This is told to kids 14 and younger. Schools, along with Planned Parenthood (which is actually invited into many schools, despite the fact that they are a profit-making company and not an educational organisation at all), encourage children not to confide in their parents in such matters. Planned Parenthood promises abortions that can be performed on under-16s (or rather, their children) anonymously and without parental consent, and will give free condoms anyway to anyone who asks.

Popular media increasingly encourages portrayal of kids as sex objects. Perhaps you've seen the pre-teen girls on the Gap Kids commercial and their provocative dancing? Why do you think Britney Spears' "Hit me baby one more time" video was so popular - because she's "talented", or because she's dressed as a schoolgirl?

I don't know if you've seen pre-teen fashion these days, but it's mostly tank tops, hip-hugger pants, miniskirts (that could pass for belts), platform shoes, jogging pants with "Hot Stuff", "Bad Girl" or something similar written across the derriere - and this is for children 12 and under to wear. Even in Wal-Mart.

This isn't supposed to be a rant, but I think that as a society we should stop thinking of our kids as sexual beings. I don't condone paedophilia, but we are not exactly keeping them away from temptation, are we?

The government could stop this. If it can outlaw cigarette adverts, why not adverts in which children are used provocatively? If it can tell school-age kids that smoking can be bad for them, why can't it tell them that sex can be bad for them (not just STDs, but problems with emotional maturity and so on)? If parents are the anti-drug, how come they are not the anti-STD?

[westcoast99]

Your definition of provocative is not the same as everyone elses. You can't tell people what to wear.

Edited August 11, 2015 by Gugsy

[Hugo]

Freedom of choice, eh?

These are minors we are talking about.

Last time I checked, minors didn't have freedom of choice and weren't considered legally responsible. At 14, you can't be trusted to smoke (or drink, or buy a gun or join the army) because it might give you cancer, but you can be trusted to choose who to have sex with, how and when to do it, even though it might give you AIDS or pregnancy a long time before you are ready?

Pull the other one, it's got bells on.

[Black Dog]

The government could stop this. If it can outlaw cigarette adverts, why not adverts in which children are used provocatively? If it can tell school-age kids that smoking can be bad for them, why can't it tell them that sex can be bad for them (not just STDs, but problems with emotional maturity and so on)? If parents are the anti-drug, how come they are not the anti-STD?

Snerk!

Apparently teh government is the root of all evil...unless you need to use it as a club for your own brand of morality...

Given the realities of today's mass media and the messages therein, comprehensive sex education is the only way to address teen sexual problems. We can't shut our eyes and hope for the best

...but you can be trusted to choose who to have sex with, how and when to do it, even though it might give you AIDS or pregnancy a long time before you are ready?

Well actually teens as young as 14 do have the "right" to have sex in the sense that it's not illegal for them to engage in consenual sexual activities. Whether or not that's too young is not an argument I want to address right now.

That said, I agree the hyper-sexualized media environment is a big contributor to the sexual confusion that racks young people today. But isn't that just the free-market in action? I mean, since sex sells (and it's being used to sell to younger and younger kids), I would expect the conservative cohort to be OK with that. Caveat emptor and all that.

Planned Parenthood promises abortions that can be performed on under-16s (or rather, their children) anonymously and without parental consent, and will give free condoms anyway to anyone who asks.

Good for them. Kids need to be educated about their options and given real information on sex. Simply expecting them not do do it isn't going to work. If I were a parent, I'd be less concerned about the possibility of my kid being sexually active if they actually knew to use condoms.

Actually, I'd klike to hear what other sex-ed ideas you might have Hugo (seriously; not trying to be confrontational or anything).

[Hugo]

Apparently teh government is the root of all evil...unless you need to use it as a club for your own brand of morality...

Government should be a tool of the people. Like any tool it can be used for good or evil, wisely or foolishly. When the policies of the government lean towards endorsement of practices that harm the people, I would say that the tool is being used foolishly.

I mean, since sex sells (and it's being used to sell to younger and younger kids), I would expect the conservative cohort to be OK with that. Caveat emptor and all that.

The market cannot remain completely free. Just as personal freedom should be limited in regards to the causing of harm to others, so the free market must be limited similarly.

Adam Smith and most other capitalist thinkers since have taught us this. To make a good product and sell it for profit is fine, to exploit children or cheat your customers is not.

It's not self-contradictory for me to remain a staunch capitalist and still tell you that fairness and morality must apply to businesses. Neither is it self-contradictory for me to tell you that personal freedom must be maintained, but you may not do what you want to another human being.

If I were a parent, I'd be less concerned about the possibility of my kid being sexually active if they actually knew to use condoms.

Condoms can break or fail. Let me ask you something.

Let's say you're in a bar and you meet a girl. You want to sleep with her and she with you. She tells you she has AIDS, syphilis and gonorrhea, but that she's happy to use a condom. Would you sleep with her anyway, and if so, would you feel as comfortable doing it as with someone healthy?

The only way to remain truly safe from STDs and unwanted pregnancy is abstinence.

Actually, I'd klike to hear what other sex-ed ideas you might have Hugo (seriously; not trying to be confrontational or anything).

First of all, I'm not sure that sex-ed should be being taught in school at all. I think school is for academic education. Judging by the continuing drop in academic standards, it seems clear that when you put more social education into school you have to make room by getting rid of academic education. I think sex-ed is a matter for parents, supported by community leaders.

But what should we tell the kids? First of all, tell them to stop selling themselves cheap. Tell them that sex is not like playing pool or watching a movie, it's not just a recreational activity. When you have sex, you give something of yourself and take something from the other person. It's an act of sharing and a very deep and emotional one, and believe it or not, like it or not, when you have sex with someone you have made a very deep and fundamental bond with them. That's why premature sex leads to so many emotional problems.

Sex leads to children and that is what its purpose is. We cannot truly foil it as no contraceptive method is 100% effective. It is also tied strongly to marriage by social norm, religious belief and history, whether you agree with those ties or not. Therefore, the question should be, why would you sleep with somebody if you would not have a child with them or marry them?

I wouldn't say you have to be married to have sex, but if you can't see yourself getting married to your partner or having children together, or if you can't even see yourselves together in 5 years, is it really the right thing to be having sex together?

That's basically it. Tell children to value themselves and others, and not to give their bodies away like the free condoms they do it with, nor ask others to. Don't ask them to grow up too fast and take on that which they're not suited to do.

[FastNed]

A report in the National Post published on 9/11 has Canada "fading off the map of the world"

Referencing a TV Documentary "Foreign Fields: Canada's Role in the World" scheduled for broadcast on that date, it quotes a variety of the participants of the status of Canada.

Stephen Lewis, acknowledged as a leading Canadian International figure and a special UN envoy is quoted on Canada's role in the World:

"We are not the factor we once were. As a matter of fact, in some places, we are not a factor at all."

Internationally acclaimed Canadian scholar Michael Ignatieff has hammered his home country repeatedly in recent months for its muddled response to Sept. 11, 2001, and its waning commitment to foreign aid. The shoddy state of Canada's military has also been widely lamented for several years. And Carleton University professor Andrew Cohen has published a scathing critique of the country's shrinking role on the world stage, with the sobering title "While Canada Slept: How We Lost Our Place in the World."

Mr. Ignatieff also commented:

""There's a very bad fit between our self-image and what we actually deliver," he contends. "We think we're better peacekeepers than we are. We think we're better at development assistance and helping poor countries than we are. And we think we're innocent. We think nobody would possibly hate or want to kill a Canadian.

"On all three grounds we've got to wake up."

What do you think - is Canada going, going, gone.......

//NOTE: I posted this as a new post "Alas, Canada" but then decided it belonged under this existing thread//

[SirRiff]

A report in the National Post published on 9/11 has Canada "fading off the map of the world"

its certainly troubling that we as a first world nation have trouble contributing to the rest of the world. however you have to look at it realistically. are we going to send out money to get wasted by corrupt governments in africa and the middle east? Mugabe in Africa already sends foor preferentially to his political party supporters. he recently said he wants his men alone to handle the UN food aid. the US rejected that, saying that the food would be used as privalleges. they said they would stop the food aid program rather then give it to Mugabe to be abused, which would leave millions upon millions of Africians without food. this is an example of the problems we face when we seek to contribute. we just cant write a blank check for two reasons, we cant affored it, and most likely it will be eaten up without good use.

shoiuld we send out troops to occupy iraq and get shot at in IRaq? its very very expensive to get your hands dirty, so we have to pick the ones that we actuallly contribute in a meaningfull way.

also you gotta look at population growth too, canada vs the world. from the UN;

Year ------ 1975 -------- 2001 ------- 2015

Canada --- 23.1 ------- 31.0 -------- 34.1

World ----- 4,068.1 ---- 6,148.1 ---- 7,197.2

% ---------- 0.568 ------- 0.504 ------ 0.474

thus our proportional global population contribution is going down because the world population continues to grow at alarming rates. even the US with its influx of mexican immigrants will not be able to maintain its per capital prosperity going from 288M to 329M in the next 15 years, as many of the recent immigrants to north america will be largely unskilled coming from poor nations.

so i gotta say, as much as i think we should do more, i gotta wonder how can avoid just wasting precious resources. i like the idea of joining region alliances that have specific long term goals in regions of the world. we will never be able to rescue africa from starvation and war, but there are intelligent wants to help out specific governments that show democratic and civl policies.

the world is too fucked up, i can see how its easier to blow stuff up with F-16s then send food.

SirRiff