Iran War

[User]

17 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Well Trump never provided stats  to ever show that there was an increase in cocaine much less an increase Venezuela-routed cocaine but we were all told the reason that his had to happen ASAP with no time for congressional approval was that there was a cocaine emergency due to Maduro purposely flooding USA with cocaine as part of deliberate attack on USA.
 

NOW you’re claiming it was never about the cocaine? It was just to arrest a random criminal right when Trump was pardoning and releasing the ex-president of Honduras for the same thing?

YOU were the one who made the claim. As usual, you get called out for your BS and try to change the subject to avoid owning up to being full of shit. 

Then you have to make a dishonest argument about what I said. I was clearly making the point that YOU tried to very specifically make this about cocaine when the effort was against drugs in general. 

 

[User]

2 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

MAGAs own words: no more “globalist interventions”, no more “world’s policeman”. 

Who is this "MAGAs" you are quoting that speaks for everyone? LOL

2 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

They are a long ways awy from developing a nuke and MAGAs own ideology declares that foreign humanitarian crises don’t justify sacrificing American blood and treasure.  These are the same people who oppose helping Ukraine fight off Russian invasion or even helping Ukraine shoot down Russian missiles aimed at schools and hospitals  

How do you know how far away they are and define "long ways"

As I have tried to tell you and others before, there is no monolithic MAGA movement that marches lock step on all issues, nor is the entire Republican base of support MAGA. 

Yet, you insist on trying to characterize everyone the same because you are lazy and not very smart. 

[eyeball]

25 minutes ago, herbie said:

You just included domestic killers with known mental conditions with countries spreading international terrorism as if that's even logical.

About as logical as thinking holding hands with people who butcher journalists is normal.

[CdnFox]

34 minutes ago, eyeball said:

You'd still be...

 

No, you're the one trying to make the point, so it would be a case of you:

 

 And also 

34 minutes ago, eyeball said:

 

Not necessarily, we could have easily put all sorts of pressure on the House of Saud to cough up the criminals responsible for 9/11.

 

No they couldn't. They were out of the country at that point. In fact they were dead.

But I appreciate your straw man efforts to try and distract from the fact that you've been horribly wrong and look stupid again   

Edited March 1 by CdnFox

[paxamericana]

1 hour ago, ExFlyer said:

Seems many Americans and other nations lost many people.

Japan came out of it with an amazing economy so...in the end...Japan did well....as did the other WWII loser Germany.

Yes that’s American power and grace.  The mental gymnastics, must be a Canadian national sport. So why resist when you know we’ll treat you better than your own current regime in Ottawa hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm? Just ask the Japanese and Germans am I right?

Edited March 1 by paxamericana

[Reg Volk]

 

[Reg Volk]

Thumbs up!  Rita grew up in Iran.  She knows what a big day this is for Iran.

[Reg Volk]

This is like Hamas all over again.  Every time they would appoint a new leader, that guy was off to see his virgins within a couple of hours.

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, Reg Volk said:

This is like Hamas all over again.  Every time they would appoint a new leader, that guy was off to see his virgins within a couple of hours.

Man. Their group life insurane policy providers must be wishing they upped their premiums last year. 

[John Stone]

1 hour ago, paxamericana said:

And look at how poorly it went for Japan. China knows that lesson well.

Indeed. 

What were they thinking?

Destroy the Pacific Fleet and then we'll negotiate??

Arguably the only other event that raised the Nation's ire as much was 9/11. 

 

[Reg Volk]

[Reg Volk]

 

[Goddess]

8 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. 2. Unless something crazy happens, these things won't change. I almost never make predictions on here.... But you can write down this one. The PM has no secret agenda to change things radically, as he is a conservative at heart.

We will have to friendly bet on this one.  🙂

It's too late for him to walk back the "America is our enemy" rhetoric.  He's already convinced half of Canadians of that.

And I will really have to disagree on the "he's a conservative at heart" line - I read his book.  He is, most definitely, NOT.  He's a globalist.  Their goals are far from conservative.

[Reg Volk]

 

[CdnFox]

12 minutes ago, Reg Volk said:

 

Sadly for him, the white smoke IS the new Ayatollah.  Rest in plumbe big guy! 

[Michael Hardner]

36 minutes ago, Goddess said:

1. It's too late for him to walk back the "America is our enemy" rhetoric.  He's already convinced half of Canadians of that.

2. And I will really have to disagree on the "he's a conservative at heart" line - I read his book.  He is, most definitely, NOT.  He's a globalist.  Their goals are far from conservative.

1. You're overstating what he said.  Why would he have to walk back anything?  He just said he supports the US action in Iran.  ... so do you think that was difficult 

2. Globalist is a made-up word. You think Stephen Harper was not conservative because he pursued trade deals with the Pacific rim? World Blanket, defacto establishment conservative.

[Reg Volk]

 

[Nationalist]

15 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. You're overstating what he said.  Why would he have to walk back anything?  He just said he supports the US action in Iran.  ... so do you think that was difficult 

2. Globalist is a made-up word. You think Stephen Harper was not conservative because he pursued trade deals with the Pacific rim? World Blanket, defacto establishment conservative.

Globalist is not a made-up word Mike. 

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/globalist

See?

[Michael Hardner]

2 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Globalist is not a made-up word Mike. 

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/globalist

See?

Well I concede your point. But every word is made up after all. 

The point is that globalism is as much part of conservatism as socialism these days. 

 

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c75evve6l63o

 

Three tankers struck in the Gulf of Hormuz ..

 

I filled up at $1.36 a litre.

[Reg Volk]

 

[Goddess]

17 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. You're overstating what he said.  Why would he have to walk back anything?  He just said he supports the US action in Iran.  ... so do you think that was difficult 

I don't think I am.  Fear of Trump, fear of America was his main platform in the election.  He was the only one who could save us from them.  It was very successful.  Recent polls show more than half of Canadians now think America is our greatest threat.  Not China.    Yes, I think it was difficult for him to say he supports the US action in Iran.  I'm not sure why he said that.  I don't believe Canada is relevant enough for anybody in the world to give a sh!t what Canadians think on anything.  I suspect he only said it to try and walk back some of his "America is our enemy" rhetoric.

24 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

2. Globalist is a made-up word. You think Stephen Harper was not conservative because he pursued trade deals with the Pacific rim? World Blanket, defacto establishment conservative.

No it's not.  It's been around for a long time.  I just looked and it was first coined and defined in the 1940's.

No Conservative has ever said our only trading partner should be the US and I certainly never said that.  So the entire premise of your attempted insult is wrong.

The fact of the matter on trade is that the US should be our largest trading partner.  And we should be theirs. They're right next door.  Geographically, it makes the most sense.  Obviously diversified trade is good and we have always had that.  Finding new trade partners or finding new trade with old partners is good.

Poilievre's last speech I thought was very good.  Yes, diversifying our trade is necessary.  What wasn't necessary was encouraging Canadians to light their hair on fire and poop their pants every time Trump tweeted.  Someone has to be the adult in the room and not match childishness with childishness.  That was the gist of Poilievre's speech and that was the gist of his platform last election.  The biggest criticism of him was that he wasn't freaking out enough about Trump tweets.

To me, that was his biggest positive.

But I tend to lean more stoic.

[Reg Volk]

[Michael Hardner]

15 minutes ago, Goddess said:

1. I don't think I am.  Fear of Trump, fear of America was his main platform in the election.  He was the only one who could save us from them.  It was very successful.  Recent polls show more than half of Canadians now think America is our greatest threat.  Not China.    Yes, I think it was difficult for him to say he supports the US action in Iran.  I'm not sure why he said that. 

2. I don't believe Canada is relevant enough for anybody in the world to give a sh!t what Canadians think on anything. 

3. I suspect he only said it to try and walk back some of his "America is our enemy" rhetoric.

4. No it's not.  It's been around for a long time.  I just looked and it was first coined and defined in the 1940's.

5. No Conservative has ever said our only trading partner should be the US and I certainly never said that.  So the entire premise of your attempted insult is wrong.

 

1. It's in front of your face.  He never said that the USA is our enemy, and he said he supports the US action.

And yet you're confused.

2. Agreed.

3. Oh come on... Walk back something he never actually said?

4. I concede.

5. So was Harper a globalist then or not?  Sure sounds like he was.  It's not a made-up word but it's used to describe politicians that one opposes, even if they pursue the same policies as everyone else.

[Goddess]

10 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

So was Harper a globalist then or not?  Sure sounds like he was.  It's not a made-up word but it's used to describe politicians that one opposes, even if they pursue the same policies as everyone else.

I think the definition of globalist has changed slightly.

It used to mean politicians who advocated for economies that took into account other countries in their planning and strategies.

That was good.

Today, it's changed to politicians who MAINLY advocate for other countries.  Their own country comes last.

This is the Liberals. Spending tens of billions on other countries while our own systems and infrastructure crumbled.  And billions on favouring immigrants and refugees and fake asylum seekers over Canadian citizens.

Carney is no different.  I don't believe he gives a flying f&*k about Canadians.  We don't need another globalist in power.  We've had 11 years of it now and Canada is circling the toilet bowl.  Housing, the economy, jobs, healthcare, the education system.....all gone downhill.  Adding expensive bureaucracies that achieve nothing, increasing gov't workers without delivering better services, the 2nd highest paid gov't on the planet.

We need to start looking after our own country more.

And that will never happen under the virtue-signaling Liberals.  I don't think there's even one cabinet member or backbencher who isn't in this for the sole purpose of using their position to pig out at the taxpayer money trough.

Would the current Conservatives be any different?  I don't know.  But I am 100% sure the current Liberals don't give a f*&K about Canadians.

[Goddess]

28 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Walk back something he never actually said?

No, not in those words.

But he implied it so strongly that more than half of Canadians now believe America is our greatest enemy.

Edited March 2 by Goddess