Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


WestCanMan last won the day on May 19

WestCanMan had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

386 Excellent

About WestCanMan

  • Rank
    Full Member

Recent Profile Visitors

2,322 profile views
  1. They try but they literally have no ammo. If Scheer had put out Bernier’s accurate but now-infamous tweet about the “diversity is our greatest source of strength” comment the CBC would still be shrieking “RACISM!!!”
  2. It's a Liberal/Democrat policy to hope for the worst when the other party is in power, or to divide the country along religious/racial grounds for the sake of votes. Down in the States the Des act as if there was racial harmony until 2016. They pretended not to notice all the racially-motivated rioting and looting going on, and they act like it's happening now when it's not. Just recently they pretended that there was a recession. Here we have a PM rushing to the defence of the hijab hoax "victim" (like the Dems did to Smollett's fake hate crime) and denigrating Canadians on national TV, and then when it was found to be a hoax Trudeau went back on TV to denigrate Canadians a second time.
  3. Just because your talking points are good doesn't mean that you wouldn't get completely eviscerated by the MSM. It's hard to win an election with CBC and CTV calling you the anti-christ. The media leave Berner alone because he's taking votes away from the CPC.
  4. Polls and seat projections are total BS imo. I think that they are more of a tool to influence voters than an indicator of voter preferences. CBC and CTV wouldn't even show polling results that didn't favour their darling. I just looked at the polls for 2011: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2011_Canadian_federal_election#/media/File:ElectionPollingGraphCanada2011.png CPC was trending around 36%, some had them lower than 35%, they got 40% (39.6%). Nanos, who were fairly accurate with the CPC early on, had the Libs way up over 30% until a couple of weeks before the election. General consensus had them at about 27 or 28% over the same span. They got 19%. So Nanos was off by 12% less than two weeks before the election. NDP, on avg, were pegged at about 20% two weeks before the election, they finished at over 30%. It seems as though the pollsters picked up their accuracy in the closing days of the election, but in the lead-up stages, where we ware now, they were way off. On Apr 17th they were about 10% too low on the NDP and 9% too high on the Liberals. If they're still off by 10% fifteen days before the election they're completely useless IMO. It seems to me that in 2011 they could say what they wanted while people were in the decision-making process. They just tried to look good near the end.
  5. Who do you think was the head of the State Department when she was the Secretary of State? I'll give you a hint: it wasn't Bimbo The Clown. (It was Hillary Clinton) So, care to guess?
  6. The article is about her campaign donations as well, if you take the time to read it. And that's not the point of that post. Need me to spell it out? Countries that give to her foundation get to buy US weapons. That's really bad. It's the country that's selling the weapons, not her. She shouldn't get any money as a result of selling US weapons.
  7. https://nationalpost.com/news/world/clinton-campaign-started-taking-foreign-donations-right-after-her-foundation-banned-them-leaked-emails That's just a part of it. But Clinton's campaign and foundation accepted tons of foreign cash. And I'm not even joking. If you converted it all to $5 bills it would weigh tons. Side note: the part where it says "Completed arms sales to all countries only rose by 80 per cent" is worrisome enough on it's own.
  8. It is a completely valid point that the Kurds aren't an "ally" with the US like Canada and France are allies, or Britain and the US are allies. The Kurds are a group that benefits from US protection but it's not mutual at all. The Kurds only take part in actions in which they are the primary beneficiary and the US is the benefactor. That is 100% correct and it's indisputable. That's not to say that they should be left to die, but the eternal army of US soldiers standing guard in Kurdistan theory is coming to an end. If what the Turks are saying is true, and that Kurdish terrorists are attacking Turkey, then it doesn't look good for the Kurds to be ducking out from under Mama America's wing to attack and then come running back. It makes the US look like West Pakistan. Turkey got their warning from Trump. They have their chance to establish a buffer zone, just like Israel has theirs at the expense of Palestine, but Trump will not allow another Turkish genocide against a minority. Trump is not Obama. He will not stand idly by when people are gassed, etc. One thing that I find ironic in this is that the people of the muslim world, who abhor the US and call them monsters, are afraid of what the muslims in Turkey are going to do to the muslims in Kurdistan if the big, bad US isn't there to act as the world police. What reason do they have to fear Turkey? I was under the impression that they thought islam was the religion of peace?
  9. Trump (Kurt) is making a valid point in that the Kurds are great at helping to clear islamic state off their own front yard, but not at sending their armies all over the world, or even the middle east, to aid the US, NATO, the UN Peacekeepers, etc in other people's causes. I think that when some people talk about the Kurds being "an ally" they're mistakenly equating that to being an ally like Britain, Canada, France, Australia, etc. It's not nearly the same thing. Some of these countries have fought in full-on wars alongside Americans on hundreds of battlefields all over the world. With the US/Kurdish relationship I think it's more of a case of the Americans who have been an ally to the Kurds in a very real way, and the Kurds accepting US as an ally in their causes. In fairness to the Kurds though, their geopolitical situation is nothing like Canada's. We have no armies ( and especially not historically genocidal armies, like the Turks) along every inch of our borders, threatening our very existence every single day of our lives. Their situation compared to ours is like swimming through shark infested waters with an open wound vs swimming in your own backyard pool. We can send our armies away no problemo, if they sent half their army away for a month they'd come home to see a smoking hole with body parts sticking out.
  10. A lot about Quebec is ridiculous. They operate on a different wavelength. They've crossed the line which we would call racist a long time ago by the way they deal with the english or any other language aside from french. If you own a business in Quebec the government regulates the ratio of the sign sizes that you have to post outside. If you want an english sign the font can only be a certain percentage of the size of a french sign. They're trying to stop people from saying "Bonjour, hello!" to customers who walk into their store now. They call it "cultural erosion" or something. They're discriminating against all other religions and languages equally. I don't think it passes the Canadian sniff test but it's not just about people who want to wear burkas or turbans. It's about everything that's not essentially french in nature. It's a losing battle, but it's nothing for any one particular group can feel singled out about. And people are still free to wear or say things in public, just not in gov't buildings. I think it's perfect in schools.
  11. For certain, but it almost always behooves one side or the other to get certain truths out, and if the Bernie story was a fabrication someone definitely would have debunked it by now. He has a large, almost cultish, following.
  12. I'll accept that criticism, I don't think it's unfair.
  13. The Canadians who fought with them no doubt respect them and love them. That's normal. They had each others' backs. The Kurds who received the help and the training no doubt respect and love the Canadians who fought with them. Of course people in need love the people who help them. But in the long run, they have the training, and their anti-western ideology which justifies every nasty thing they do to everyone else, and that training will come back to bite us.
  14. It was a learning experience. Seems like every crop of anti-terrorists we train over there turn into terrorists as soon as they get a bit of power. That's actually the true test of character Ch. What a person does with power. And everyone who gets power in the middle east does the same thing. That's why I didn't like training the Kurds.
  15. I didn't say that we had to go there to get the goods. We have enough in the ground to suit ourselves. I'm just not going to pretend to be blind to the fact that some of the reasons for our troops being there might not have been entirely altruistic. I personally didn't want our troops there at all once I knew what the "good guys" over there were like. And you truly do lack the intelligence and foresight to be a leader cannucklehead. The fact that you think the opposite of what I do isn't a source of concern for me.
  • Create New...