An Angle Straight to Hell.

[I think not]

Re: RE: An Angle Straight to Hell.

Yea, that's why Syria left lebanon, Lybia gave up it's WMDs and Saudi & Egypt have instituted the beginnings of women's rights and democracy. (Sarcasm) Bush's actions have had NO positive effect at all.

At what cost?

Ummm...I believe it's called WAR. Canadians might actually recall the mid-40's the last time we joined with the americans in a fight against a tyranny of hatred. And make no mistake, islamic fundamentalists HATE you and want you dead. This fact seems lost on everybody!

Nothing is lost. The way Bush handled it is absurd. He should have gotten off his horse and dropped the f*ck you mentality to long standing allies.

Actually, long standing allies used the f**k you mentality on the US. France and Canada both abstained from support due to national economic and personal interest.

What were the national economic and personal interests Canada had to not participate? France, I already know.

 

[Gordon J Torture]

Guess what? WRONG. He brought down the Soviet empire

Yes, he brought down the empire that was responsible for their victory in WWII. Nice guy eh?

And what makes the USA any more benevolent than the Soviet Empire was? ... In reality the USA is much worse.

 

[mattyaloo]

islamic fundamentalists HATE you and want you dead. This fact seems lost on everybody!

That is not true, they only "hate" the circumstances the USA has forced upon them.

OHHH!!! you are so misinformed. Read up on islamic fundamentalist groups like al qaeda. US foreign policy is literally OFF THE RADAR SCREEN when compared to the simple concept of the "Infidel". I watched a doc. on the "Passionate Eye" where a middle-eastern born Canadian posed as an al qaeda recruit and took with him a hidden camera to meetings in Britain and France. US foreign policy wasnt even mentioned. The main goal is to conquer infidel nations and create new muslim states. During the documentary hidden camera footage, France was routinely referred to as "conquered territory" (you are aware that the majority religion in France is muslim?). Get the point? You have been spoonfed rhetoric from andti US lefties which completely misses the point of this war.

 

[Gordon J Torture]

Indoctrination to hate the US and Israel in Arab schools and Television is very true.

and

OHHH!!! you are so misinformed. Read up on islamic fundamentalist groups like al qaeda. US foreign policy is literally OFF THE RADAR SCREEN ...

Yes it is, but WHY, WHY , WHY, WHY, WHY does that indocrination exist????????

That's what it all comes down to.

Religion is just being used and manipulated in order to acheive a desire for revenge created from circumstances the USA is responsible for.

 

[mattyaloo]

Re: RE: An Angle Straight to Hell.

Yea, that's why Syria left lebanon, Lybia gave up it's WMDs and Saudi & Egypt have instituted the beginnings of women's rights and democracy. (Sarcasm) Bush's actions have had NO positive effect at all.

At what cost?

Ummm...I believe it's called WAR. Canadians might actually recall the mid-40's the last time we joined with the americans in a fight against a tyranny of hatred. And make no mistake, islamic fundamentalists HATE you and want you dead. This fact seems lost on everybody!

Nothing is lost. The way Bush handled it is absurd. He should have gotten off his horse and dropped the f*ck you mentality to long standing allies.

Actually, long standing allies used the f**k you mentality on the US. France and Canada both abstained from support due to national economic and personal interest.

What were the national economic and personal interests Canada had to not participate? France, I already know.

Power Corp. is the biggest shareholder in TotalFinaElf, the western corporation closest to Saddam Hussein (it has since changed its name to the Total Group). Total had secured development rights to 25 per cent of Iraq’s oil reserves, a transformative deal that would catapult the company from a second-rank player into the big leagues with Exxon and British Petroleum. For a year, the antiwar crowd had told us it was “all about oil”--that the only reason Iraq was being “liberated” was so Bush, Cheney, Halliburton and the rest of the gang could annex in perpetuity the second biggest oil reserves in the world. But, if it was all about oil, then the fact--fact--is that the only Western leader with a direct stake in the issue was not the Texas oilpatch stooge in Washington, but Jean Chrétien: his daughter, his son-in-law and his grandchildren stood to be massively enriched by the Total-Saddam agreement. It depended on two factors: Saddam remaining in power, and the feeble UN sanctions being either weakened into meaninglessness or quietly dropped. M. Chrétien may have refused to join the Iraq war on “principle,” but fortunately his principles happened to coincide with the business interests of both TotalFinaElf and the Baath party.

 

[I think not]

Guess what? WRONG. He brought down the Soviet empire

Yes, he brought down the empire that was responsible for their victory in WWII. Nice guy eh?

And what makes the USA any more benevolent than the Soviet Empire was? ... In reality the USA is much worse.

Someone misses the Soviet Union me thinks.

 

[mrmom2]

So Matty boy you believe the official 911 story I take it . 8O That explains a lot You better go do some investigating .You might want to start with the thread 911 Quetsions I have a few :wink: Who knows might change your whole way of thinking

 

[mrmom2]

Sorry Matty the threads gone Vanni can you post those questions again for Matt here :wink:

 

[Ocean Breeze]

The PROBLEM, my friend, is that this country operates under "groupthink" whereby it is sacrelig to suggest that someone from the right might actually have virtue.

that might be YOUR perception. But one size does not fit all.


If one is not prepared to facilitate the kind of change and improvement nec in CA......and is only bent on condemning it..... then it might be wise to simply move to the US where this kind of thinking is prevelant.

The last thing that CA needs is to follow the US model......or a band of hardliners.

Evolution and progress are a process that take time. (and a whole lot of patience)

 

[I think not]

Indoctrination to hate the US and Israel in Arab schools and Television is very true.

OHHH!!! you are so misinformed. Read up on islamic fundamentalist groups like al qaeda. US foreign policy is literally OFF THE RADAR SCREEN ...

Yes it is, but WHY, WHY , WHY, WHY, WHY does that indocrination exist????????

That's what it all comes down to.

Religion is just being used and manipulated in order to acheive a desire of revenge created from circumstances the USA is responsible for.

Well then why dont you give me a few examples as to why? One or two are fine. Why does the Arab world have hate? Explain this to me.

 

[mattyaloo]

Indoctrination to hate the US and Israel in Arab schools and Television is very true.

Yes it is, but WHY, WHY , WHY, WHY, WHY does that indocrination exist????????

That's what it all comes down to.

Religion is just being used and manipulated in order to acheive a desire of revenge created from circumstances the USA is responsible for.

Umm, the USA supports Israel's right to a homeland, in other words, the Jews. Islamic extremists in the middle east HATE jews too. They want Jews and their allies DEAD. It's actually pretty simple. But there is a much broader point you make which I wish to address. Yes, the USA's foreign policy has been imperfect. My only argument is that they are the world's ONLY superpower and policeman. One thing I know about police is that there are times when they use aggressive force to enforce the law. SOme people might even argue that policemen sometimes use TOO MUCH force. But generally speaking, thank god they are there when you need them. I would apply that same analogy to the USA. I can't say they are perfect, but I am glad it is them that is in this role right now and not the USSR or Nazi-Germany.

 

[I think not]

Re: RE: An Angle Straight to Hell.

Yea, that's why Syria left lebanon, Lybia gave up it's WMDs and Saudi & Egypt have instituted the beginnings of women's rights and democracy. (Sarcasm) Bush's actions have had NO positive effect at all.

At what cost?

Ummm...I believe it's called WAR. Canadians might actually recall the mid-40's the last time we joined with the americans in a fight against a tyranny of hatred. And make no mistake, islamic fundamentalists HATE you and want you dead. This fact seems lost on everybody!

Nothing is lost. The way Bush handled it is absurd. He should have gotten off his horse and dropped the f*ck you mentality to long standing allies.

Actually, long standing allies used the f**k you mentality on the US. France and Canada both abstained from support due to national economic and personal interest.

What were the national economic and personal interests Canada had to not participate? France, I already know.

Power Corp. is the biggest shareholder in TotalFinaElf, the western corporation closest to Saddam Hussein (it has since changed its name to the Total Group). Total had secured development rights to 25 per cent of Iraq’s oil reserves, a transformative deal that would catapult the company from a second-rank player into the big leagues with Exxon and British Petroleum. For a year, the antiwar crowd had told us it was “all about oil”--that the only reason Iraq was being “liberated” was so Bush, Cheney, Halliburton and the rest of the gang could annex in perpetuity the second biggest oil reserves in the world. But, if it was all about oil, then the fact--fact--is that the only Western leader with a direct stake in the issue was not the Texas oilpatch stooge in Washington, but Jean Chrétien: his daughter, his son-in-law and his grandchildren stood to be massively enriched by the Total-Saddam agreement. It depended on two factors: Saddam remaining in power, and the feeble UN sanctions being either weakened into meaninglessness or quietly dropped. M. Chrétien may have refused to join the Iraq war on “principle,” but fortunately his principles happened to coincide with the business interests of both TotalFinaElf and the Baath party.

I've read about this, but nothing has been proven. So I'm not impressed.

 

[mattyaloo]

The PROBLEM, my friend, is that this country operates under "groupthink" whereby it is sacrelig to suggest that someone from the right might actually have virtue.

that might be YOUR perception. But one size does not fit all.


If one is not prepared to facilitate the kind of change and improvement nec in CA......and is only bent on condemning it..... then it might be wise to simply move to the US where this kind of thinking is prevelant.

The last thing that CA needs is to follow the US model......or a band of hardliners.

Evolution and progress are a process that take time. (and a whole lot of patience)

In the context of the current conversation my argument is that hardline isn't ALWAYS bad as most of this country would have you believe. Why do we insist on aligning ourselves with France, a country that simply stood by and watched hitler walk right in and then waited for us to save them? My point is that people in the country automatically label pro-bush people as extremists, when they haven't considered the idea that the passive role in this case might be the WORST course of action. I ask you, did appeasement work against Hitler?

 

[mattyaloo]

Re: RE: An Angle Straight to Hell.

Yea, that's why Syria left lebanon, Lybia gave up it's WMDs and Saudi & Egypt have instituted the beginnings of women's rights and democracy. (Sarcasm) Bush's actions have had NO positive effect at all.

At what cost?

Ummm...I believe it's called WAR. Canadians might actually recall the mid-40's the last time we joined with the americans in a fight against a tyranny of hatred. And make no mistake, islamic fundamentalists HATE you and want you dead. This fact seems lost on everybody!

Nothing is lost. The way Bush handled it is absurd. He should have gotten off his horse and dropped the f*ck you mentality to long standing allies.

Actually, long standing allies used the f**k you mentality on the US. France and Canada both abstained from support due to national economic and personal interest.

What were the national economic and personal interests Canada had to not participate? France, I already know.

Power Corp. is the biggest shareholder in TotalFinaElf, the western corporation closest to Saddam Hussein (it has since changed its name to the Total Group). Total had secured development rights to 25 per cent of Iraq’s oil reserves, a transformative deal that would catapult the company from a second-rank player into the big leagues with Exxon and British Petroleum. For a year, the antiwar crowd had told us it was “all about oil”--that the only reason Iraq was being “liberated” was so Bush, Cheney, Halliburton and the rest of the gang could annex in perpetuity the second biggest oil reserves in the world. But, if it was all about oil, then the fact--fact--is that the only Western leader with a direct stake in the issue was not the Texas oilpatch stooge in Washington, but Jean Chrétien: his daughter, his son-in-law and his grandchildren stood to be massively enriched by the Total-Saddam agreement. It depended on two factors: Saddam remaining in power, and the feeble UN sanctions being either weakened into meaninglessness or quietly dropped. M. Chrétien may have refused to join the Iraq war on “principle,” but fortunately his principles happened to coincide with the business interests of both TotalFinaElf and the Baath party.

I've read about this, but nothing has been proven. So I'm not impressed.

..and yet I bet you're quick to heap the same accusation upon GW Bush re: Halliburton

 

[I think not]

Re: RE: An Angle Straight to Hell.

Yea, that's why Syria left lebanon, Lybia gave up it's WMDs and Saudi & Egypt have instituted the beginnings of women's rights and democracy. (Sarcasm) Bush's actions have had NO positive effect at all.

At what cost?

Ummm...I believe it's called WAR. Canadians might actually recall the mid-40's the last time we joined with the americans in a fight against a tyranny of hatred. And make no mistake, islamic fundamentalists HATE you and want you dead. This fact seems lost on everybody!

Nothing is lost. The way Bush handled it is absurd. He should have gotten off his horse and dropped the f*ck you mentality to long standing allies.

Actually, long standing allies used the f**k you mentality on the US. France and Canada both abstained from support due to national economic and personal interest.

What were the national economic and personal interests Canada had to not participate? France, I already know.

Power Corp. is the biggest shareholder in TotalFinaElf, the western corporation closest to Saddam Hussein (it has since changed its name to the Total Group). Total had secured development rights to 25 per cent of Iraq’s oil reserves, a transformative deal that would catapult the company from a second-rank player into the big leagues with Exxon and British Petroleum. For a year, the antiwar crowd had told us it was “all about oil”--that the only reason Iraq was being “liberated” was so Bush, Cheney, Halliburton and the rest of the gang could annex in perpetuity the second biggest oil reserves in the world. But, if it was all about oil, then the fact--fact--is that the only Western leader with a direct stake in the issue was not the Texas oilpatch stooge in Washington, but Jean Chrétien: his daughter, his son-in-law and his grandchildren stood to be massively enriched by the Total-Saddam agreement. It depended on two factors: Saddam remaining in power, and the feeble UN sanctions being either weakened into meaninglessness or quietly dropped. M. Chrétien may have refused to join the Iraq war on “principle,” but fortunately his principles happened to coincide with the business interests of both TotalFinaElf and the Baath party.

I've read about this, but nothing has been proven. So I'm not impressed.

..and yet I bet you're quick to heap the same accusation upon GW Bush re: Halliburton

No I'm not. I need proof of that also, connecting dots to form a fictious puzzle doesn't do it for me.

 

[mattyaloo]

Re: RE: An Angle Straight to Hell.

Yea, that's why Syria left lebanon, Lybia gave up it's WMDs and Saudi & Egypt have instituted the beginnings of women's rights and democracy. (Sarcasm) Bush's actions have had NO positive effect at all.

At what cost?

Ummm...I believe it's called WAR. Canadians might actually recall the mid-40's the last time we joined with the americans in a fight against a tyranny of hatred. And make no mistake, islamic fundamentalists HATE you and want you dead. This fact seems lost on everybody!

Nothing is lost. The way Bush handled it is absurd. He should have gotten off his horse and dropped the f*ck you mentality to long standing allies.

Actually, long standing allies used the f**k you mentality on the US. France and Canada both abstained from support due to national economic and personal interest.

What were the national economic and personal interests Canada had to not participate? France, I already know.

Power Corp. is the biggest shareholder in TotalFinaElf, the western corporation closest to Saddam Hussein (it has since changed its name to the Total Group). Total had secured development rights to 25 per cent of Iraq’s oil reserves, a transformative deal that would catapult the company from a second-rank player into the big leagues with Exxon and British Petroleum. For a year, the antiwar crowd had told us it was “all about oil”--that the only reason Iraq was being “liberated” was so Bush, Cheney, Halliburton and the rest of the gang could annex in perpetuity the second biggest oil reserves in the world. But, if it was all about oil, then the fact--fact--is that the only Western leader with a direct stake in the issue was not the Texas oilpatch stooge in Washington, but Jean Chrétien: his daughter, his son-in-law and his grandchildren stood to be massively enriched by the Total-Saddam agreement. It depended on two factors: Saddam remaining in power, and the feeble UN sanctions being either weakened into meaninglessness or quietly dropped. M. Chrétien may have refused to join the Iraq war on “principle,” but fortunately his principles happened to coincide with the business interests of both TotalFinaElf and the Baath party.

I've read about this, but nothing has been proven. So I'm not impressed.

..and yet I bet you're quick to heap the same accusation upon GW Bush re: Halliburton

No I'm not. I need proof of that also, connecting dots to form a fictious puzzle doesn't do it for me.

There's nothing fictitious about Jean Chretien's daughter being married to Paul Desmarais's son. Desmarais: Controlling interest in Power Corp. -- biggest shareholder in Total Group. Very simple dots to connect. But maybe old Jean and Paul never talk business at family picnics...

 

[mrmom2]

Nothing fictitiuos about Bush Sr being a major shareholder of the Carlyle group with the Bin ladens nothing fistitious about Dick Cheney being the former head and major stock holder of Halliburton :roll:

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: An Angle Straight to

You are ignoring the fact that Chretien was under a lot of pressure, including pressure from within his own party, to join the Coalition of the War Criminals. If he had joined up, he likely could have salvaged at least some sort of deal for Power Corp. Nobody really thought the US was going to lose the war, did they?

Chretien didn't do a lot right in his career as far as I'm concerned, and considering him to be on the left of the political spectrum is laughable (although the left of the Liberal Party is another matter). He was right about Iraq though.

 

[mattyaloo]

Nothing fictitiuos about Bush Sr being a major shareholder of the Carlyle group with the Bin ladens nothing fistitious about Dick Cheney being the former head and major stock holder of Halliburton :roll:

Gosh you saw "Fahrenheit 9-11" too? :wink:

 

[Ocean Breeze]

I ask you, did appeasement work against Hitler?

Who is talking appeasement??? Seems this too is part of the extremist non thinking modality. And why is the Hitler situation being brought up so frequently now..... as if there is some comparison .


hmmm. or is there?? Hitler was invading nations. The US is invading nations. Each had it's own propaganda to do that.

How far are you prepared to "appease" bush in his military actions before the momentum of such decisions get out of control??

........

IF the US is supposed to be the self appointed "world cop" ...then it better start following international laws. (which it doesn't ) So that negates the premise of "world cop" Military might is just braun. ( and without brains behind it, can be used any which way the US wants) In keeping with "world cop" , the US should learn how to be fair and JUST to all parties. It isn't.


the role that CA should play is along more neutral lines. BUT.....it should focus on rapid reponse teams to assist in areas of crisis. It should redefine it's military into a PEACE keeping and stabilizing focus. Peace keepers (well trained) can be sent into hot spots to assist in stabilizing the situation , until the crisis is over , and order is restored. A division of same might be set up to assist in many of the humanitarian crisis that exist on this planet.

This could evolve into a true CA identity. One that is CAPABLE, COMPETANT, and PEACE motivated. Problem solving is the focus then......not problem creating as war does.

Society must get out of the war /defensive mode of thinking and work towards more constructive resolution methods.