Guess that makes me a traitor then. Whenever I see that moron on TV I hit the mute button or change the channel.
Time For Don Cherry To Give Up The Pro-War Talk
- Thread starter dumpthemonarchy
- Start date
Guess that makes me a traitor then. Whenever I see that moron on TV I hit the mute button or change the channel.
Tell ya one thing, when the orders came to deploy to Iraq from Afghanistan we were very unhappy campers, we thought we had bin Laden pretty much surrounded.
Canada could do with 33 million more Don Cherry's who support the troops.
Canada could do with 33 million more Don Cherry's who support the troops.
>>>>>>>>>>
I believe you refer to the assassination of the Northern Alliance's leader a few days before 9/11:
Ahmad Shah Massoud - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
At the time, Afghanistan was divided by civil war and had two competing governing authorities. Each governing authority was responsible for civilians under their area of control. Since the Taliban controlled the part of Afghanistan where bin Laden and his associates lived, the Taliban were responsible for these civilian's safety and security. In Pashtun culture a host is responsible for the safety of their guest. Even if you don't like your guest, the obligation remains absolute.
So if I understand your point, you believe the Taliban should have ignored their legal and moral obligations regarding civilians and without any proof or evidence of wrong doing, just cowardly handed bin Laden over to the US for torture and execution in response to illegal US threats. This sounds more like a lynching than some sort of legal judicial process, where people have to be proven guilty first.
Anyone familiar with the Pashtun culture could have predicted the Taliban's reaction:
Pashtunwali - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
As far as I know, OBL and his associates had not attacked anyone in Afghanistan or broke any Afghan laws. Also, I'm not aware that OBL or anyone else in Afghanistan at the time has ever been convicted in a court of law in the US or elsewhere for the events of 9/11.
I disagree with your statement, "they chose to have the country bombed.". The Taliban chose to respect their legal obligations regarding civilians and their Pashtun code of ethnics.
Regarding this statement, "The taliban had bullied their way into acting as though they were the power in the country, ". Afghanistan was in the middle of a long civil war. All factions were fighting for control. The Taliban were just the most powerful of the competing militant groups and controlled the biggest area. What you describe as "bullying their way into acting as though they were the power in the country" more describes the US than the Taliban. At least the Taliban consisted mostly of Afghans and were an Afghan power. The US and their allies including Canada are foreigners imposing their will on the Afghan people by military force.
Regarding the right of the US to make illegal demands and start illegal wars without offering any evidence to support their accusations.
Should all nations cave in to illegal US demands or just the Afghans?
Does US authority have limits outside of the US?
If you recognize the right of the US to make illegal demands and threats against the government of Afghanistan then you must also recognize this US right to extends to all nations including Canada.
Are you sure you want to support this kind of international lawlessness?
If the US can ignore international laws with impunity, then other nations (China, Russia....) will claim the same right. Do you support all military powers making illegal threats and starting illegal wars or does just the US have this right exclusively?
Going back to my previous post. Venezuela and Cuba have a similar grievance with the US as the US had with the Taliban. Do you think that Cuba and Venezuela should be able to commit acts of war against the US if the US doesn't hand over Carriles?
IMO, the Taliban's offer to hand over OBL to an objective third party for trial was a fair and reasonable compromise. The US should be condemned for not exhausting all peaceful options for justice first before resorting to war.
Last edited:
The majority of Canadians do support the troops. Not all Canadians support Canada's Afghan mission. The difference is important. I disagree with treating these two concepts as the same concept.
Its possible to be a patriotic Canadian who supports the troops and yet be against the Afghanistan war.
Its even possible to support war as a valid instrument of foreign policy and be against the Afghan war because it was started illegally, was poorly conceived and unwinnable.
Eventually a majority of Canadians will tire of this war and will stop supporting it. I expect that a majority of Canadian will never tire of supporting our troops.
That may be true, but shouldn't it be up to the Afghans to determine how their country is run, whether we understand it or not? Who are we to impose our version of morality and governance on the Afghan people?
Regarding the rest, I'm just offering an alternative viewpoint on this war and trying to get you to consider US actions in the context of international law and diplomacy.
Few people were aware that the Taliban initially condemned the 9/11 attacks and that the US ignored the Taliban's compromise offer to bring OBL and others to justice without starting a war.
IMO, The Taliban didn't want a fight with the Americans, but their situation, their culture and US actions gave them no other option.
Last edited:
You would think the Taliban were just doing their duty, just as you do your duty every day. You are so bias to be irevelent.
The taliban had no particular interest in the u.s. and their focus was on taking over afghanistan, who
actually hadn't had any solid leadership since before the russians had invaded.
The taliban's condemnation of 911 attacks 'in words' didn't mean anything one way or another, they had
their own agenda, and the 911 attacks upset that, all the more reason to turn over bin laden, so they
could get on with their own invasions and violence against the afghan people, and saying that the afghans
should decide how they run their own country, is like saying that the people of the sudan should be let
to run their own country, 'they have no power or no say in running anything'.
I agree that the method the u.s. used, and how quickly they attacked was 'something out of the old west',
and you know who was at the helm, and he was 'brain dead', and when he actually said in his speech that
'we' have a way of dealing with this situation, referring to the old west, was so embarrassing, I squirmed
at the time, realizing that a president of the u.s. actually uttered those words.
It's really too bad that he was president when 911 took place, even reagan (and I would not be a republican
if I were a u.s. citizen),I think, would have handled it
with much more finess, BUT I do agree that there had to be an answer, it was a vicious attack, by a group
of 'arab' thugs, who really had no idea it would come off as thorough as it did.
They had no authority from anyone to do such a thing, did not represent any country at all, and didn't
act any different than a street gang who had planned and pulled off such a thing, from within the u.s. or
anywhere else.
The 911 attacks was violence against many countries, who were present inside those buildings.
We are coming up to the 10th anniversay of 911. It would be interesting to hear just how, in a realistic
way others would have responded, if they were the u.s. president.
To say the u.s. deserved that situation in my opinion is insane. boy we're way off topic.
Don Cherry has the right to say whatever he wants, and the backlash or agreement he gets from listeners
is also their right, that's free speech, and if HNC/CBC doesn't like his statements they can act, but
I certainly don't see the harm in showing a picture and saying words to support the fallen soldier, the
poor guy/girl has lost their life for heavens sake, can't we have compassion for that? Perhaps some
people would never be aware 'enough', without his HNC presentation of that fact, and become 'more' aware
after watching Cherry.
Cherry is on there to make money, lots of money, and he has found a way to spout and spurt out many things,
some good, some garbage, and he is arrogant and embarrassing on many occasions, and as far as his hockey
knowledge, there are hundreds of more knowledgeable hockey analysts, (ex players), but they don't have
his format, and when he is gone, we will watch someone similar to him, because he is there for entertainment
purposes, and nothing else, and they will hire someone who has the 'big' mouth to make people laugh, or
get mad, that is what they want, (will probably be doug mcLean), who, at least has a sense of humour,
which cherry doesn't.
See below...
Ya, and all that would be worth something, if Afghanistan wasn't a failed State. Something you simply ignore, because it's convenient to your anti US agenda,
With every lie you spread, ever fact you purposely overlook, you most certainly do.
No, you wish to hold the US and Israel to a higher standard, while countries you don't have a hate for, get a whitewashed pass.
Boy, must be Don's biggest supporter here. Toss the bum if he continues to use his pedestal to support war and imperialism. Of course supporting a war in another country can be okay, doesn't really bother us much. Nice.
Don can have plenty of free speech talking about hockey all he wants.
If he and you were people who support free speech, then you would support the idea that Don should go on political shows to discuss his views. Other news shows would love him as their ratings would shoot up. Don would never do this because I think he is unable to have a discussion where he is not dominating.
With Don shouting "support the troops," it indirectly means "support the troops or else." And or else to Don means you are not being Canadian because these are good Canadian boys. Those are fighting words to me.
Otherwise why is Don shouting?-this is the foaming at the mouth part. He's totally committed to the troops, good for him, but they are a waste of money there. The UN mandate was to throw out the Taliban from governing Afghanistan, that was done by the end of 2001, as a result, so are the Canadian armed forces are done too.
That's one way of looking at it, but I disagree. The original UN mandate was to toss the Taliban from governing Afghanistan. Done. Go home.
Time to bring our good Canadian boys home as they are fighting an illigitimate war and illegal occupation. Supporting the troops means you support the military-industrial complex, the war party. You hate peace I think. You are definitely naive. The war party is winning when they are fighting a war, any war. To the war party any war is a good war, war is their oxygen, take away war and they die.
Not when he gets political and expects to use his pedestal for his own purposes. Hockey coaches and managers run a traditional sport. Especially in Don's era, a player only talked to a coach when spoken to. Like a Victorian father who only let his children speak when he said so. That's not the country I want.
Hockey is sometimes so comic, Don rages against hockey coaches who don't wear jackets. He hassled Robbie Ftorek for wearing a casual grey sweater when he was behind the Los Angeles Kings bench. Mr Joe Lunchbucket hectors like some prep school proctor.
I mean, give me a break, coaches can't even wear club nylon coats. I saw coaches during the Spengler Cup in Europe do so, and Canada did not get the gold here in 2010 last Christmas. The hockey world runs too much on fear, the media shouldn't cower at Don's bellowing. They need a little backbone. Time to break the code.
Don Cherry can give all the speeches he want about any topic he wants. We may like or dislike what he says, but that is what is called free speech. It has nothing to do with media giving him time to rant on without discussion, that is also their right. Don't like listening to him, just turn him off that is your right. Now you saying they are (the troops) a waste of money there is your opinion you also have that right to say it. As for the Taliban, they were not thrown out, almost but not completely. As soon as we all leave Afghanistan, the Taliban will be back as if we never were there. That most likely will be because of the lack of 100% dedication from the countries who are trying to drive them out. We will lose the Afghan. war not because of the troops involved, but because of the dedication of some governments and their so called will into really defeating the Taliban.
No one can talk about anything they want on TV, except it seems Cherry. Why does he have this right and it seems like no one else? That's what the web and youtube are for.
Why doesn't Cherry visit troops in Manitoba instead? Not exciting, no war going on there. Wouldn't help his ratings I guess. He needs to juice up his show like anyone else. But he's getting out of his depth.
Afghanistan has a civil war, and as far as the Taliban go in running Afghnastan, other Afghanis consider them good Muslims, which is something you cannot say for the Canadians there. Plus, there's a civil war going on in the country. The Taliban will always be a part of the govt, but not dominant.
There are plenty of people who speak their mind on television and while I don't agree with plenty of it, they have the right to say it and that's good enough for me. In the same vein, there are those who voice concerns that I personally have and they are also free to do so. Those who dislike that can also suck it up.
You can switch stations, must the tv or do as you please. No one is telling you that you have to listen or agree with what they say.
But you can't force them to stop speaking without first putting yourself at risk of being forced to stop speaking.
If you enjoy the right to speak, then you must give others their due.
Don Cherry pays a Christmas visit to Canadian troops in Afghanistan.
Don Cherry pays a Christmas visit to Canadian troops in Afghanistan | Vancouver, Canada | Straight.com
Right, there's no counterpoint to Chey's one sided bursts. Maclean is a soft muffin. Makes we think we already have Fox sports/news on the CBC.
It's not like en stations ofer hockey on TV, at many times you watch what there is or watch poker. It's no choice at all. Cherry should direct his supporters to his web page.
Write to the CBC and quit whining. Sheesh!
Tell them you want Amir Attaran to counter on coaches corner and that will bring some balance to their news broadcasts on Afghanistan.
Last edited:
Write to the CBC and quit whining. Sheesh!
Tell them you want Amir Attaran to counter on coaches corner and that will bring some balance to their news broadcasts on Afghanistan.
Hey, that's an idea. I found this and learned he was a lawyer. Not too exciting. He brought some of the allegations to light that Canadian soldiers were seriously breaking international laws.
Canadian Forces find no foul in Afghan shooting allegation | Canada | News | Toronto Sun
Cherry doesn't need balance, he needs to stick to what he knows, puck stuff. Why Cherry is encouraging a war in an obscenely corrupt country is mystifying. I guess that's why he's called a buffoon and blowhard, he makes no sense. I support Canadian soldiers but not in dumb wars.
And I'm sure Afghanis would like to thank Canada and the military industrial complex for making a new narco-state. Just what the world needs.
You know when you post a link it pays to read it.
Military Industrial Complex Narco state. People like you make my day.
What a joke.