If ISIS terrorists fire on Canadian troops, ‘we’ll kill them': Harper


Locutus
+4
#1
OTTAWA – Prime Minister Stephen Harper made it clear that if ISIS terrorists fire at Canadian troops, “we’re going to kill them.”

Harper’s was responding to media questions in St. Catharines, Ont., on Thursday about whether the nature of the Canadian mission in Iraq would shift to more of a combat role.

“This is a robust mission where (Canadian Forces) are going to make (Iraqi Security Forces) effective to take on the Islamic State and deal with them,” he said. “And if those guys fire at us, we’re going to fire back and we’re going to kill them.”


http://www.blazingcatfur.ca/2015/01/...l-them-harper/

now go make us some sammiches justine!

 
Most helpful post: The members here have rated this post as best reply.
petros
+3
#2
Halal goat sammiches.
 
MHz
-1
#3
Odd thing to say when we have combat troops on the ground over in their homeland who have already been in a firefight with ISIS.

Self defense arguments ends when you leave your own country. I notice he didn't make the speech while in Iraq.

Canadian soldiers get into firefight in Iraq | Toronto Star
OTTAWA —Canadian special forces soldiers on a “non-combat” mission in Iraq have been giving directions to fighter jets to bomb Islamic State positions and have exchanged gunfire with extremists, the military said Monday, revealing a more involved role for Canadians than previously disclosed.

While their mission to train Iraqi forces is not supposed to involve fighting, the small band of elite troops has seen frontline action, senior commanders told a briefing.

That includes calling in airstrikes by Canadian CF-18s on targets and in one dramatic incident in the last week, firing on extremists after being attacked.

At the time, the Canadians were visiting front-line positions with Iraqi forces as they planned an operation. The group came under “immediate and effective” mortar and machine-gun fire, forcing the Canadians to fire back, Brig.-Gen. Michael Rouleau, commander of the Canadian Special Operations Forces Command, told reporters.

“Using sniper fire, they neutralized both threats at some distance,” he said, adding that there were no injuries.

“This is the first time this has happened since our arrival and our reaction is wholly consistent with the inherent right of self-defence.”
 
Retired_Can_Soldier
+5
#4  Top Rated Post
Quote: Originally Posted by MHz View Post

Self defense arguments ends when you leave your own country.

Maybe our troops should have sent them a sharp note instead.

Something like:

Dear ISIS,

On behalf of the rest of the civilized world we would appreciate you stop all this beheading stuff. Clearly, not everyone believes in your god or his prophet and clearly not all Muslims follow your idiotic doctrine. (Oh wait.) Was idiotic too harsh a word? How about barbar... Never mind, let's not get into that again. We've already established how hypersensitive you guys are about words, and cartoons, well we don't want to start all that up again do we.

Anyway, in the interest of your feelings and keeping folks heads firmly attached to their necks we would really appreciate that you play nice and not go about treating women like cattle and murdering folks in the name of _____ or _____. Gotcha, you thought we were going say: Allah or Mohammad. Didn't you?

Aw nuts!

Be nice okay. Otherwise we'll have to send you another note and this next one will be much sharper.

Thanks
JTF2
 
MHz
#5
Bring it on fuktard.
Remind me again how they are the rabid ones. lol
Remind me again how some cave dwellers did 9/11.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?x-yt-cl...21914688#t=130
 
WLDB
No Party Affiliation
+2
#6
That had to be said? Seems like pretty common sense that if someone shoots at you in a war zone you shoot back.
 
Tecumsehsbones
+5
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by WLDB View Post

That had to be said? Seems like pretty common sense that if someone shoots at you in a war zone you shoot back.

I think it did. Given the political wars and peacekeeping missions of the last few decades and the abstruse and frankly nonsensical rules of engagement and mealy-mouthed political balderdash, a little clarity is welcome.
 
taxslave
Free Thinker
+3
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by MHz View Post

Bring it on fuktard.
Remind me again how they are the rabid ones. lol
Remind me again how some cave dwellers did 9/11.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?x-yt-cl...21914688#t=130

OK we will remind you once again. The muzzie terrorists are the rabid ones. If you love them so much go live there. Our side is fighting for democracy and human rights. Just two of many things muslims know nothing about.
 
Tecumsehsbones
+4
#9
MHz calling somebody else "rabid" is like Blackleaf pissing and moaning about other people being outraged.
 
MHz
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslave View Post

OK we will remind you once again. The muzzie terrorists are the rabid ones. If you love them so much go live there. Our side is fighting for democracy and human rights. Just two of many things muslims know nothing about.

We, is that you and your fleas?
The West has killed more than 1M in the last few years, justified by a false-flag operation done by the West on themselves. Clearly only one side in mentally ****ed, sucks that it isn't who you are programmed to blame.

Quote: Originally Posted by Tecumsehsbones View Post

MHz calling somebody else "rabid" is like Blackleaf pissing and moaning about other people being outraged.

You aren't rabid, just stupid to the max. See I can tell the difference being ****ed you can't.

Quote: Originally Posted by WLDB View Post

That had to be said? Seems like pretty common sense that if someone shoots at you in a war zone you shoot back.

You would shoot them if they invaded the homeland, saying they shouldn't defend their homeland from invaders who are waging war against them is a new level of stupid for you. Sympathy for the invaders, I don't see that happening anytime soon, give them the money for their oil and the war is over, other than the one at home when gas is $10/gal here and $0.10/gal over there.
 
Walter
+1
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by Locutus View Post

OTTAWA – Prime Minister Stephen Harper made it clear that if ISIS terrorists fire at Canadian troops, “we’re going to kill them.”

Got my vote.
 
Sons of Liberty
+2
#12
I'm not sure why that needed to be clarified, don't Canadian troops shoot back when fired upon?
 
Locutus
+3
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by Sons of Liberty View Post

I'm not sure why that needed to be clarified, don't Canadian troops shoot back when fired upon?

of course but the shiny pony will say something like 'see! we're being mean to those terrorists instead of seeking root causes and giving them toques'. these pussies need to be shut down early.
 
hermanntrude
+1
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by Walter View Post

Got my vote.

I'd say this would be true of any politician. Left, Right or Centre, they'd all fire upon ISIS because a) we stand to make money out of it b) the whole world is in the middle of a terrorist witch hunt c) if we didn't make it clear we don't like ISIS they'd set up shop here just like they have done elsewhere
 
Zipperfish
No Party Affiliation
#15
I smell mission creep.
 
MHz
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by Zipperfish View Post

I smell mission creep.

There ya go.
 
mentalfloss
-1
#17
Harper getting his GWB rhetoric on.
 
Locutus
+4
#18
the only creeps are the gun-grabbing leftards that want an intervention meeting with terrorists...but sure, if someone fires at you, by all means, run away.

a lot of the boys huddling around shiny to sniff his aramis and be one with the pony.
 
B00Mer
No Party Affiliation
+1 / -1
#19
 
whitedog
No Party Affiliation
-1
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslave View Post

OK we will remind you once again. The muzzie terrorists are the rabid ones. If you love them so much go live there. Our side is fighting for democracy and human rights. Just two of many things muslims know nothing about.

Well holy ****e Bad man, that made a lot of sense. "Our side is fighting for democracy and human rights. Just two of many things muslims know nothing about." So, who's democracy and human rights are we defending? Not the iraqi people, their mostly muslims, not the sirians, nope, their mostly muslims. Soooooooooo? Please have the decency to present a real argument, not one that was written on used toilet paper by the reformist who had an epiphany whilst passing a loaf.

Oh and while I'm at it, "If you love them so much go live there. ", this f'cking mantra of the reform party, if you disagree with us you must be the enemy, has got to stop. Like why not something a little more to the point? Why not try "oh yea" or "my mother can whip your mother", like you sound like such a wee child. Take a chance, come up with a rebuttle, a real one. No wonder you reformists had to merge with the cons, you needed party folk who could do the thinking.

Quote: Originally Posted by Walter View Post

Got my vote.

I'm sure he did. And I know you like him. That's ok. The issue isn't that we were fired upon. The issue isn't that our guys were on the ground. Nor behind enemy lines. Nor that they were sighting for the western coalition war plans, ours or anybody else. The issue isn't even that perhaps the mission changed, though I doubt it did. No the issue is that our PM has basically run this country by the popularity polls. I'm sure he judged that most Canadians had had enough with war. That if he were to George Bush it, and jump right in, his popularity would take a nose dive. When asked, he could simply have said, that we were going to join in with the rest of the western nations. When asked what they would be doing, he could have said sending over war planes, and troops, and as to actual actions while there, he could have refused to answer by simply saying it would be detrimental to our troups to publicly discuss the military actions. And too bad if the media and opposition wanted to pander their theories. If he believed that going there was the proper thing, then he should have been a leader, and did it, without sugar coating it, pretending that we would only be dropping bombs from 5 miles up, instead worried about his polling numbers. The press weren't asking him why we were shooting at the enemy, they were asking him why, if we aren't on the ground, needing to return ground fire. So now, as one might expect, everyone is all over this. With the military saying that the mission changed because of the increased threat, and what was that, that isis found a box of bullets? All this b/s because our champion of hair spray didn't have the balls to lead.
 
MHz
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by Locutus View Post

the only creeps are the gun-grabbing leftards that want an intervention meeting with terrorists...but sure, if someone fires at you, by all means, run away.

Good reason not to miss with the first shot.
 
Zipperfish
No Party Affiliation
+1
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by Locutus View Post

the only creeps are the gun-grabbing leftards that want an intervention meeting with terrorists...but sure, if someone fires at you, by all means, run away.

a lot of the boys huddling around shiny to sniff his aramis and be one with the pony.

"the Government of Canada will not deploy troops in ground combat operations,”

-- Stephen Harper

I support stopping ISIS massacres--barely. I'd rather not get in the middle of a Sunni - Shi'a civil war though.
 
Tecumsehsbones
#23
Hmm. . . echo from the past. . . "We had to destroy the village to save it."
 
lone wolf
Free Thinker
#24
I'll side with the guys in the field ... but Harper's WE? Only if he grows balls enough to put himself anywhere near the noise
 
Tecumsehsbones
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by lone wolf View Post

I'll side with the guys in the field

They mostly wanna get the hell out of it.
 
EagleSmack
#26
Quote: Originally Posted by Tecumsehsbones View Post

Hmm. . . echo from the past. . . "We had to destroy the village to save it."

What past would that be?
 
MHz
#27
Pick a year, there have been more than a few villages.
 
darkbeaver
Republican
#28
Quote: Originally Posted by EagleSmack View Post

What past would that be?

Sometimes you say the funniest things.
 
MHz
#29
I hear Allison would still be in power if the jet she took went to Iraq so she could plunk a few Muslim terrorists as the public would have covered all expenses, like the good people of the town that had a Mayor do that very thing. The 'More Bang for your Buck' is a bit crude.
 
WLDB
No Party Affiliation
+1
#30
Quote: Originally Posted by Tecumsehsbones View Post

I think it did. Given the political wars and peacekeeping missions of the last few decades and the abstruse and frankly nonsensical rules of engagement and mealy-mouthed political balderdash, a little clarity is welcome.

He never claimed we were going in as peacekeepers though and we have been dropping bombs. That should have made it obvious that this is a shooting war and we are on one side.