Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

bush_cheney2004

Members
  • Content Count

    56,636
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    199

Everything posted by bush_cheney2004

  1. Agreed....I don't think the Global Warming faithful and US gazers understand this. There is no ruling party or cult of personality to carry the day for wholesale changes to the hydrocarbon economy. Hell, Al Gore couldn't even win his home state. Any changes will be driven by what matters...economics. Investing one's faith in trendy icons won't get it done. 1998 Kyoto Senate Vote: 95 - 0 .....NO!
  2. I see...must Canadians be whupped upside the head to pay attention to such things? Perhaps a stronger magnetron and descriminator circuit for that "radar"? The questions were answered before President Bush ever took office in the way of US public law and actions, to wit, the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-338). After much bombing and UN inspection foreplay, this was followed by the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002, a law passed by the United States Congress in October 2002 as Public Law No: 107-243. PMs Blair and Howard concurred. The "explanation" was so complete that PM Chretien declined to join in the festivities, finding Afghanistan to be quite enough for his plate (but only a "take note" debate in Parliament). More "radar" trouble? Knock yourself out...new threads are free. No, I am mocking earlier references to same. I'm more of a sonar man, but radar is fine in a pinch.
  3. Sweet! Better thna a game of Risk with old school wooden pieces. General MacArthur had the same idea but Truman said no and fired him. What the hell...NATO is already in the neighborhood.
  4. Why surprised?...they tried to whack Bhutto several times. Why didn't Canada try to stop it? LOL! We know from history that it was Nixon and the goddamn US military that Pakistan even survives to this day. India does not like its crazy neighbor. We'll have somebody new for you to whine about in January 2009.
  5. Well in that case, the US should just surrender right now! All those Chinese and Iranian troops could swim across the ocean and attack New Jersey's oil refineries!
  6. Pssssst! Wanna play hockey in Afghanistan, eh? No, we pretty much dick around with them too, only in different ways. US troops have been in China and Russia.
  7. But that is the point...I am not arguing with you at all, but you don't realize it. It's no fun when you force me to dumb it down!
  8. No wiggle and squeak at all....go back and read it again. I answered your assertion and added a cherry on top just to keep things interesting. How many dead babies is a leader worth?
  9. Worst government? Compared to what....(hint: America does not have "governments"....they do not "fall" as in Canada. See US Constitution). Perhaps you meant to say "worst Administration". Ya think? I wonder why Canada bombed and starved those poor Iraqi bastards back in the 90's?
  10. The "US government" faciliates a lot of things...even killing babies in utero (before they can become leaders). Brilliant!
  11. People are murdered every day....including beautiful women who would be king. Deal with it instead of using her lukewarm corpse to bash President Bush. What's wrong with being called "black"? Bhutto is dead....but life goes on. America has better assasinations just for entertainment. Any club that would have you as a member.....
  12. Seems to me that insisting that the US should have protected Ms. Bhutto only cements the very superpower role that you rail against. Please try to get this storyline better organized. I still think it was Canadian Al Qaeda from Esquimalt.
  13. Yes, obviously not asked when the Grits cried "Tally Ho!" Sure it is....President Bush had a goal and timeline. Ding Dong....Saddam is dead. Unlike Parliament, the US Congress even voted to start and extend the war. Dosen't get any better than that. Meanwhile..."back under the radar"....
  14. Well, that kind of whacked logic deserves more...I think Canada is to blame for not "insisting" on proper security. Canadian Forces were closest to the scene and allowed the bombing. It's a big conspiracy from Ottawa don'tcha know! The "hope to end terror"? Utter nonsense....she was the hope for one more round of corruption Pakistan style. Big political egos invite an even bigger demise on the sub-continent and elsewhere. "Dorothy....you killed her! "
  15. Of course they did...same as "supremacists" in Canada (no stranger to the Klan), along with some militant black folk as well. Oh goody...a contest for most "animal-like" lifestyle. Mustn't leave out Bobby Kennedy's untimely demise at the hand of a Palestinian, or the October Crisis complete with murder, or thousands of other recorded events in history. I guess we are all living like "animals"....and Tatianna should have just stayed in her enclosure....much safer, eh?
  16. You may think whatever you wish. Or not. Hmmmm...seems these questions should have been asked before sending Canadian Forces. Even Bush had a better story for the invasion of Iraq.
  17. Delightful..I knew the examples would appeal to your experience. Understood, but I think the former are no longer warranted (assault is assault) and the latter should rarely be used. Yep....Canada got a taste of this standard when the Captain's Quarters blog divulged Gomery "secrets".
  18. Then please move along, as others may not have such difficulty with abstract thought. Any flavor of Canadian snow job is Canada's business....I was amazed when PM Chretien pulled it off...twice.
  19. Perhaps, but it does happen: Gag orders, rape shield laws, sealed cases, etc. The significant point is that Canada accepts the lower standard from the 'git go, while the US forces a confrontation in the courts, where such "limitation" laws can be found unconstitutional. I think we agree which nation has the higher standard.
  20. This is key....and demonstrates the collective naivete which now finds a majority of Canadians unprepared for reality when it comes home in an air transport casualty container. Afghanistan is a war....General Hillier has hinted at this many times. "Under the radar" is a damn poor excuse for understanding what Canadian Forces have been asked to do, in the former Yugoslavia or Afghanistan. These forces certainly understand the meaning of "lead, follow, or get out of the way." Perceived differences do not change the reality, only the sales job. Closer to home, American KIAs from Afghanistan do not get bigger flags than those killed in Iraq.
  21. Yes....in practice, the courts can affect the same "limits" in the USA, but I am not aware of equivalent language in the US Constitution (Bill of Rights).
  22. But that is the issue...those who do not have answers will never lead those who do, or think they do. Lead, follow, or in this case, get out of the way. The point is that Operation Allied Force in 1999 (Kosovo) had Canada engaged as a NATO bombing machine without so much as even a vote in Parliament. But Afghanistan is now a mistake and quagmire? Is it only the Canadian body count that matters ? No, I want Canada to lead if it thinks it has a better idea for NATO and Afghanistan. Show the Americans and NATO where they are wrong and build support, resources, and execution to get the job done "right" if it has a better way. I don't want to wait for the next sob story book from General Dallaire about woulda, coulda, shoulda. No...my bad...I assumed you were familiar with Mr. Layton's comments and criticism vis-a-vis Afghanistan.
  23. Fair enough....but that is just more of what I call a domestic political liability instead of a mission supporting foreign policy goals, Canadian "values", yada, yada, yada. The Taliban grunts don't know Grits from Tories....or Dippers from Greens. (But they probably do know Jack Layton.)
  24. The president that Bush replaced did not bring peace back to most of the world....far from it. Nor did the one before that. Why would the next American president be any different? Not sure what this means....if nominated by the GOP, he will run an an Independent?
  25. I think you have answered your own questions. Maybe start by defining Canada's interests, foreign policy goals, NATO responsibilities, hobbled capabilities, and political liabilities. It sure was swell to drop NATO bombs on Serbs in 1999 with big American muscle in the air, but not so good on the ground when dedicated troops do their duty and lose their lives? "Human Rights*"..... *Subject to limitations, exclusions, and political polls. Limited to supply on hand. Not valid with other offers. Must be present to win. Got a better idea for the war zone that is Afghanistan? Let's hear it on an international level.....Layton talks a good game, but he does not lead. Canadians are in Afghanistan because Canada sent them there.
×
×
  • Create New...