Why canadians are proud of their country?
- Thread starter Logic 7
- Start date
Naw just cute as a button... I like her...
The Queen silly and i ain't talkin 'bout D'Avril
Logic,
Are you saying that you aren't proud of Canada because we have a queen? How silly.
I wouldn't be terribly upset if Elizabeth II was our last monarch but having a monarch is certainly of no great inconvenience to me.
Are you saying that you aren't proud of Canada because we have a queen? How silly.
I wouldn't be terribly upset if Elizabeth II was our last monarch but having a monarch is certainly of no great inconvenience to me.
yeah i'm with ya on this one...I like the old gal in a way...It's just her being a monarch and all sort gets a lil uppity...you know above us common folk and all...I'm sure she really isn't all that into her being placed down here by God an all...although i heard, she sort of thinks that way...hmmmmmmm...ack so no big whoopty do...i'm sure she's likes to hang with folk like the rest of us back slappin and havin a good ole lol....ceptin when everyone has to walk behind her and stuff...
yeah she is just yer average canuk..beer farts and all
Bullsh-t! This sort of ignorance upsets me no end. Canada's contribution to both world wars was, by any definition, exemplary. On a per capita basis Canada's contribution to either war was greater than any, including the United States. The United States entering those wars, albeit two years late in both cases, certainly brought them to a quicker end, but I don't concede that the wars would have been lost if they hadn't joined. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad they did join. I just don't agree that they won the wars single handedly.
Hear Hear nice one #Juan!
May I add here we are team players.No one country could win a world war.
just adding....
Last edited:
It is seriously pathetic to still have a queen, i just can't believe you guys are proud of this stupidity.
No, we didn't overthrow the "ruling" government, we threw out a king. A king mind you that starved his own people almost to death to retain the colonies. Yeah let's revisit that one! Not.
Ok, lets pretend you are right, is this the only thing you are proud to be canadian?
TO me canada-canadians, has no opinion, no word , niet nada , they always rely on americans for everything, canada pretend to be peaceful, but they support israel, usa and the whole coalition of agressors, they even supplied us with agent orange , during the vietnam war,supported iraqi sanctions and so on and so on.
IF you guys ask me what i think about it, i think canada is a nation of hypocryte who has no opinion at all, and on top of it, they are still serving the queen, tres pathetic de mon point de vue.
Check your stats again #juan, because you're incorrect. Canada ranked fifth or sixth I believe in percentage of recruits. And anyway, half your army and nearly 80% of your Air Force never left Canada anyway. You did however have the 3rd largest navy, albeit it was mostly frigates and transport ships.
You know, I've gotta side with Logic on this.
It is silly to have a Queen. We should get rid of her.
And, though Juan's point is absolutely correct about the proud history this country has fighting wars, we are also a country that has not pulled its weight on military affairs and contributing to the defense of the Western alliance for the past several decades as Canada is one of the skimpiest spenders on defense per capita in NATO (or at least had not until Afghanistan.)
But no country is perfect.
Saying that Canada shouldn't be proud because he have a Queen living in a foreign land and that we rely on the US is the same reason why Quebec shouldn't be proud, since not only do they also have a Queen and are reliant on the US, they are also a conquered people whom many Quebecois believe still live in a system where the majority (English) thwart their own ambitions.
Not only that, but if Quebec were to separate, they would be even more reliant on the US for its defense because as a country, it would be pacifist and isolationist. The strongest opposition to military engagements abroad have always come from Quebec. If Quebec were a separate country, Canada would be more likely to pull its weight more in international affairs.
It is silly to have a Queen. We should get rid of her.
And, though Juan's point is absolutely correct about the proud history this country has fighting wars, we are also a country that has not pulled its weight on military affairs and contributing to the defense of the Western alliance for the past several decades as Canada is one of the skimpiest spenders on defense per capita in NATO (or at least had not until Afghanistan.)
But no country is perfect.
Saying that Canada shouldn't be proud because he have a Queen living in a foreign land and that we rely on the US is the same reason why Quebec shouldn't be proud, since not only do they also have a Queen and are reliant on the US, they are also a conquered people whom many Quebecois believe still live in a system where the majority (English) thwart their own ambitions.
Not only that, but if Quebec were to separate, they would be even more reliant on the US for its defense because as a country, it would be pacifist and isolationist. The strongest opposition to military engagements abroad have always come from Quebec. If Quebec were a separate country, Canada would be more likely to pull its weight more in international affairs.
Can you provide a reputable source for this? We pay for the GG. I think you are confusing what Britan pays for the Queen and what Canadians do.
I very much doubt that anyone is going to ask you. You hate everything about the country. I don't know why you are still here.....Have a good day.:roll:
Firstly, do you have the slightest idea how much money that would be? Secondly, Canada pays nothing to the Queen for her services.
The queen is not a billionaire, she is not even the richest woman in Britain - apparently the Harry Potter author JK Rowling is.
The king was your ruler, you tossed him out. Hence became traitors to your homeland.
Starving people to death is the benchmark is it? Have you had a chance to visit the slums? People starve in the U.S. daily and aside from humanitarians, no one gives a rat's a$$. Sure people SAY they care, but damned if they had to put their money where their collective mouth is. So I ask, what is the difference other than the fact you have no monarch? From this side of the border it would appear worse now simply due to the enormous wealth the U.S. has managed to generate since it's inception. People still starve, people still die from health issues due to no insurance, wealth is still accumulated in the top 5% of the population while the bottom portion in some cases work three jobs to pay for basic living necessities, an underclass of illegal Mexicans are used as cheap labour to fuel the economy. It sure seems like a mirror of the 'old way' minus the monarch figurehead.
p.s. - by revisiting I was taking a not so veiled swipe at the government, not the people.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/royals/queenelizabeth.html
Elizabeth is one of the wealthiest women in the world, with a net worth of $818 million in 2004, according to Forbes magazine. This is the result of a nest egg put aside for her by her father during his reign as king. Other estimates put her personal fortune at more than $4 billion, or as much as $16 billion if the Royal Collection -- which includes the crown jewels - is included.
I stand corrected8O
Well today I have found the epitome of strange conversations.....
When Logic7 and Canucklehead discuss history ... I am amazed at the possibility of revisionist thought and how things can take a course I seem to have missed along my plodding way in school...
Do continue with more thought fellas.... you reach new heights
When Logic7 and Canucklehead discuss history ... I am amazed at the possibility of revisionist thought and how things can take a course I seem to have missed along my plodding way in school...
Do continue with more thought fellas.... you reach new heights