Time For Don Cherry To Give Up The Pro-War Talk

ironsides

Executive Branch Member
Feb 13, 2009
8,583
60
48
United States
Why do you personally feel guilt for pissing off a Muslim and Arabs. You really on a guilt trip. Yes when was it that you stepped all over a Muslim, as for me hit has been yours. I feel no guilt in what I did to those who opposed me. I also never fired the first shot, robbed or stole from anyone. I always treat a person equally until he proves me otherwise. I have been shot 6 different times and yes it hurt. We will not forget and someday if I have the privilege to serve again, it would be as if I never left.
 

earth_as_one

Time Out
Jan 5, 2006
7,933
53
48
The Taliban supported and hid Al-Qaeda within Afghanistan, they stood between us and Al-Qaeda. Your the one who better read better.
What they did is the same thing that the UK did regarding Julian Assange. They requested the US go through a legal extradition process. I suppose you could also claim that the Brits are hiding Assange from Sweden and that Sweden, just like the US is justified invading and occupying the UK and installing a pro-Swedish government.
 

EagleSmack

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 16, 2005
44,168
96
48
USA
The US demanded the Taliban start another war with people who were their "guests" according to Pashtun culture and tradition. In that culture the "host" is responsible for the safety of their "guests". They are honor bound by this code to the death. Its a foreign concept to me too, but this tradition goes back for centuries and I understand that living in shame after violating this code would be far worse than an honorable death. The US ignored this code and arrogantly demanded the Taliban hand them over or face the consequences. .

That is THEIR code and THEIR culture. Not ours.

It is part of OUR code and OUR culture to do what we did. Sometimes cultures clash.

Besides, this Pashtun culture and code thing is far over played. Just like us trying to keep from hitting mosques so as not to offend... therefore the muslims put their weapons and supplies inside the mosques.
 

Unforgiven

Force majeure
May 28, 2007
6,770
137
63
What is it with some? people, that every thread they go into has to turn into a pro islam, anti joo thread....a sign a a single track Dhimwit or appologist.

It's a bit like depression I think. Someone gets focused on one thing, starts excluding some inconvenient facts and closes down what was an open mind.

What they did is the same thing that the UK did regarding Julian Assange. They requested the US go through a legal extradition process. I suppose you could also claim that the Brits are hiding Assange from Sweden and that Sweden, just like the US is justified invading and occupying the UK and installing a pro-Swedish government.

Oh come on! You can't seriously think anyone here that isn't a foaming Islamomob booster is going to accept the tribal council that is the Taliban is going to provide a developed nation standard on court of law do you? I mean what the hell are you thinking. We have a difficult enough time keeping out system in check with all the transparency, checks and balances and people dedicated to finding the truth without fear of persecution. And you think the Taliban, are going to manage that under Shar'ria law? Give you're head a shake!

After two months of Osama and the Al Qaeda crew being held as guests to see if they need to stand trial for terrorism, all the videos they made claiming responsibility for terrorist acts they've released aside, you think they aren't going to be gone when the Taliban announce they were just doing their Jihad?

As if!
 

ironsides

Executive Branch Member
Feb 13, 2009
8,583
60
48
United States
What they did is the same thing that the UK did regarding Julian Assange. They requested the US go through a legal extradition process. I suppose you could also claim that the Brits are hiding Assange from Sweden and that Sweden, just like the US is justified invading and occupying the UK and installing a pro-Swedish government.

If what Julian Assange had done was anything on the level of what Al-Qaeda had done who knows what action would have been taken to bring him to justice. The Taliban had/have no legal extradition process to go thru.


By GARETH PORTER
CounterPunch.org
February 8, 2011
The central justification of the U.S.-NATO war against the Afghan Taliban – that the Taliban would allow al Qaeda to return to Afghanistan – has been challenged by new historical evidence of offers by the Taliban leadership to reconcile with the Hamid Karzai government after the fall of the Taliban government in late 2001.
The evidence of the Taliban peace initiatives comes from a new paper drawn from the first book-length study of Taliban- al Qaeda relations thus far, as well as an account in another recent study on the Taliban in Kandahar province by journalist Anand Gopal.
In a paper published Monday by the Center on International Cooperation at New York University, Alex Strick van Linschoten and Felix Kuehn recount the decision by the Taliban leadership in 2002 to offer political reconciliation with the U.S.-backed Afghan administration.
Citing an unidentified former Taliban official who participated in the decision, they report that the entire senior Taliban political leadership met in Pakistan in November 2002 to consider an offer of reconciliation with the new Afghan government in which they would “join the political process” in Afghanistan.
Shattering the Myth of Taliban / Al Qaeda Ties | The Global Realm
 

dumpthemonarchy

House Member
Jan 18, 2005
4,235
14
38
Vancouver
www.cynicsunlimited.com
That is THEIR code and THEIR culture. Not ours.

It is part of OUR code and OUR culture to do what we did. Sometimes cultures clash.

Besides, this Pashtun culture and code thing is far over played. Just like us trying to keep from hitting mosques so as not to offend... therefore the muslims put their weapons and supplies inside the mosques.

Quite laughable in not bombing mosques, not to "offend". Oh how PC in a war zone. War by lawyers. A big reason why we cannot "win" right now in Afhgan. We did win by kicking out the Taliban. It's over for us.


Back to the topic.

Cherry ought to be talking more about reducing concussions for stars like LIndros and Crosby. Which is he and spoken against the lacking of control by the NHL, which is partly due to the end of the instigator rule in 1992. There's no longer a fear of retribution by guys like Matt Cooke. The instigator rule was frontier justice but there were fewer concussions
 

EagleSmack

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 16, 2005
44,168
96
48
USA
Quite laughable in not bombing mosques, not to "offend". Oh how PC in a war zone. War by lawyers. A big reason why we cannot "win" right now in Afhgan. We did win by kicking out the Taliban. It's over for us.

Sure we can!


Back to the topic.

Cherry ought to be talking more about reducing concussions for stars like LIndros and Crosby. Which is he and spoken against the lacking of control by the NHL, which is partly due to the end of the instigator rule in 1992. There's no longer a fear of retribution by guys like Matt Cooke. The instigator rule was frontier justice but there were fewer concussions

As you wish...back to topic we go...

Don Cherry can (in my opinion) say what he wants.
 

dumpthemonarchy

House Member
Jan 18, 2005
4,235
14
38
Vancouver
www.cynicsunlimited.com
Because that is what YOUR Canada should hear?



But he should be able to talk about it if he wants.

You don't understand. Cherry, if he wants could go on many media outlets and talk his head off about the Cdn military and he would get a big audience. So why doesn't he do that? Because he likes to talk to a bingo caller like Maclean who just nods like a mechanical doll. Laughable.

Cherry's afraid to talk to adults about the military, Afghanistan, Iraq, war, the military industrial complex and imperialsim. To talk about what really interests him beyond hockey at length with someone who will ask him tough questions. But on serious TV shows no one is allowed to go on and on. That's what a web page/blog is for. Cherry has crossed limits and is getting people ticked off. Democracies do not let any one person have free rein.
 

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
You don't understand. Cherry, if he wants could go on many media outlets and talk his head off about the Cdn military and he would get a big audience. So why doesn't he do that? Because he likes to talk to a bingo caller like Maclean who just nods like a mechanical doll. Laughable.


Maclean is a nodding mechanical doll when it comes to Cherry??????? Holy shyte, you really haven't watched those 2 very often, have you? Your less than credible credibility just went straight down the crapper now. ROFLMFAO.
 

dumpthemonarchy

House Member
Jan 18, 2005
4,235
14
38
Vancouver
www.cynicsunlimited.com
Maclean is a nodding mechanical doll when it comes to Cherry??????? Holy shyte, you really haven't watched those 2 very often, have you? Your less than credible credibility just went straight down the crapper now. ROFLMFAO.

Get a grip. Cherry went to Asia for "Coach's Corner" . On this and so many issues Cherry goes on and on which is what he's supposed to do, and is fine as long as it is about hockey.

New flash, Maclean is no journalist, he went after Burrows on the Canucks last year and was rightly ripped for it. He's a puff ball, deal with it.
 

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
Get a grip. Cherry went to Asia for "Coach's Corner" . On this and so many issues Cherry goes on and on which is what he's supposed to do, and is fine as long as it is about hockey.

New flash, Maclean is no journalist, he went after Burrows on the Canucks last year and was rightly ripped for it. He's a puff ball, deal with it.


lol...ok....what ever you say.:roll:
 

EagleSmack

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 16, 2005
44,168
96
48
USA
Get a grip. Cherry went to Asia for "Coach's Corner" . On this and so many issues Cherry goes on and on which is what he's supposed to do, and is fine as long as it is about hockey.

.

I bet he disagrees, and apparently a whole bunch of Canadians agree with him.

Isn't Democracy great?
 

dumpthemonarchy

House Member
Jan 18, 2005
4,235
14
38
Vancouver
www.cynicsunlimited.com
I bet he disagrees, and apparently a whole bunch of Canadians agree with him.

Isn't Democracy great?

Yet Cherry hasn't talked about his pro-imperialism military industrial diatribes for two weeks, now. Let's see how long it lasts. Democracy is great because you can't talk about what you want all the time. Sometimes you use your clicker to turn a show off, and sometimes you you speak out to turn off a show and use people power to prevent harangues and the craziness it can produce.