Assad made the U.S. flee. A no go zone against the U.S.. U.S. saw red. Russia saw bla

[French Patriot]

Assad made the U.S. flee. A no go zone against the U.S.. U.S. saw red. Russia saw black oil and pounced.

The U.N. should declare war before WWIII. A long term oil policy stabilises the whole world.


Rather nice for the economy and the refuge/immigrant problem. People want to return home.


The U.N must show that it runs the world and not just the gutless cop and the wannabe gangster.

Canada should go vigilante. If it were not for national security, I would tell you more.

Regards
DL

 

[MHz]

You should stick to religious topics, politics is not suited to you.

 

[French Patriot]

You should stick to religious topics, politics is not suited to you.

If we and the U.N. do nothing, respect for it will disappear and all hell will break loose. They either rule or we are back when everyone did whatever they wanted.


I like order and not chaos.


Either we step up or get out of the way.


Regards
DL

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

That assumes the there was ever a time when everyone didn't do whatever they wanted.

 

[French Patriot]

That assumes the there was ever a time when everyone didn't do whatever they wanted.

There was and we do not want to return to that day.


We should take advantage to stabilize oil for the long term at this point in time though. Chinese demand is dropping a touch and that makes it easier.


It is also time for the U.N. to stabilize the area and return the refugees and migrants to their home to help out in the U.K..

Regards
DL

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

There was and we do not want to return to that day.

Because you say so.

OK, that was the beginning of an interesting argument. Too bad it died a-borning with your insistence that something is a fact because you say it is.

 

[French Patriot]

Because you say so.

OK, that was the beginning of an interesting argument. Too bad it died a-borning with your insistence that something is a fact because you say it is.

There was always some cooperation between nations but there was no U.N..


If you have facts to refute what I put, --- an opinion and not a fact, --- then do so.


Regards
DL

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

There was always some cooperation between nations but there was no U.N..


If you have facts to refute what I put, --- an opinion and not a fact, --- then do so.


Regards
DL

How about the fact that there has been constant warfare since the founding of the UN, and the only one of these the UN had any significant effect on was the Korean War?

How effective was the UN in Vietnam? How about in the Iran-Iraq War? The U.S.-Iraq War? The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan? The Falklands War? The Chinese invasion of Nepal?

I could go on, but that will do for a start.

 

[French Patriot]

How about the fact that there has been constant warfare since the founding of the UN, and the only one of these the UN had any significant effect on was the Korean War?

How effective was the UN in Vietnam? How about in the Iran-Iraq War? The U.S.-Iraq War? The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan? The Falklands War? The Chinese invasion of Nepal?

I could go on, but that will do for a start.

Actually, the U.N. can be quite effective. When it decides to move.

All it takes is one member to declare war and the U.N. would have to take a stance.

Canada should be the nation to declare war against Assad.

Canada is the only nation that can bring piece to the region and should act as soon as possible so that refugees and immigrants can get back home.

I think we should arm them all and send them back to fight for their country instead of fighting the white West.

These people flee because they do not have the means to retaliate.

We the people bear arms en masse and we should insure that those who flee oppression at present have the means to turn and fight.

Better to have them fight their oppressor than put them in ghettos that end in fighting their host country. That has always been the way.

Canada declaring War is the right thing to do. Assad has to go so that Canada and Russia can have a rapprochement. They want oil and Canada has it and that should grease the rapprochement.

Regards
DL


P.S.


http://www.ted.com/talks/steven_pinker_on_the_myth_of_violence?language=en

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Actually, the U.N. can be quite effective. When it decides to move.


All it takes is one member to declare war and the U.N. would have to take a stance.

And yet, somehow, in all the wars I mentioned above, the U.N. never took a stance [sic].

But, no matter. This time the UN would HAVE to take a stand.

Do you even understand how the UN works? Let me clue you up. . .

Canada declares war on Syria.

Everybody laughs.

Supergirl premieres.

But let's assume somebody gives a damn. Reset. . .

Canada declares war on Syria (you can't declare war on an individual).

The U.S., Britain, and France bring a motion to the Security Council to go stomp on Syria.

China abstains.

Russia vetoes.

Supergirl premieres.

 

[French Patriot]

And yet, somehow, in all the wars I mentioned above, the U.N. never took a stance [sic].

But, no matter. This time the UN would HAVE to take a stand.

Do you even understand how the UN works? Let me clue you up. . .

Canada declares war on Syria.

Everybody laughs.

Supergirl premieres.

But let's assume somebody gives a damn. Reset. . .

Canada declares war on Syria (you can't declare war on an individual).

The U.S., Britain, and France bring a motion to the Security Council to go stomp on Syria.

China abstains.

Russia vetoes.

Supergirl premieres.

The U.N. obviously took a stand in all those wars. It declined to engage.


Canada can declare war on a nation or an individual.


Russia would smile ear to ear.


Russia and the rest of the world would see a sane voice enter where there is near insanity.


The markets will love us.


Regards
DL

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

The U.N. obviously took a stand in all those wars. It declined to engage.

Canada can declare war on a nation or an individual.

Because you say so.

Russia would smile ear to ear.


Russia and the rest of the world would see a sane voice enter where there is near insanity.


The markets will love us.


Regards
DL

So, in your world (i.e., in your head) doing nothing is "taking a stand."

Ohhhh-KAY.

 

[French Patriot]

The U.N. obviously took a stand in all those wars. It declined to engage.



Because you say so.



So, in your world (i.e., in your head) doing nothing is "taking a stand."

Ohhhh-KAY.

??


When Assad crossed the chemical warfare line, was the U.S. doing nothing taking a stand?


Yes it was. The U.S. decided to stand down instead of handing Assad his head.


Obama likely wanted a country like Canada to step up but we did not. We should redress that mistake.


Regards
DL

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

??


When Assad crossed the chemical warfare line, was the U.S. doing nothing taking a stand?


Yes it was. The U.S. decided to stand down instead of handing Assad his head.


Obama likely wanted a country like Canada to step up but we did not. We should redress that mistake.


Regards
DL

Yeah, the United States regularly sits around and waits for Canada to do something.

OK, you've proven yourself delusional. Have a nice day.

 

[Blackleaf]

Yeah, the United States regularly sits around and waits for Canada to do something.

No, you're wrong.

The United States usually sits around and waits for two or three years not doing much until it then joins in half way through or towards the end after other countries have put in the hard graft, sustained millions of dead and are actually getting the war won, and then it claims for decades afterwards that it won the war single-handedly.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

No, you're wrong.

The United States usually sits around and waits for two or three years not doing much until it then joins in half way through or towards the end after other countries have put in the hard graft, sustained millions of dead and are actually getting the war won, and then it claims for decades afterwards that it won the war single-handedly.

You should discuss this with French Patriot. The two of you might amuse each other. Me, I deal with far too many imbeciles on a daily basis to seek out more.

 

[French Patriot]

No, you're wrong.

The United States usually sits around and waits for two or three years not doing much until it then joins in half way through or towards the end after other countries have put in the hard graft, sustained millions of dead and are actually getting the war won, and then it claims for decades afterwards that it won the war single-handedly.

This is true but when they hit, they hit hard. At the same time, we would have to look carefully at every situation. To be too hasty could hurt more than give care.


The U.S just needs a country like Canada or Germany to show them how to aim. The U.S. does not want to acknowledge that fact.


Regards
DL

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

The U.S just needs a country like Canada or Germany to show them how to aim. The U.S. does not want to acknowledge that fact.


Regards
DL

True. Nobody could question the wisdom of Germany's military history.

 

[French Patriot]

True. Nobody could question the wisdom of Germany's military history.

Correct.


Germany was just a tad ahead of it's time in new world order thinking. They now apply it to U.N. thinking.


Germany has learned well from it's mistakes.


The Jews have forgiven them and so should you.


Regards
DL