Would you die for your country?

Haggis McBagpipe

Walks on Forum Water
Jun 11, 2004
5,085
7
38
Victoria, B.C.
As suggested by Research, I'm starting a new thread with this question:

What do you believe in? What would you be willing to fight for? What tenets would you be willing to die defending?

Are you willing to fight your own government for the same freedoms you would fight an invading enemy?

When we say we believe in freedom of speech, do we believe in it even for those who are in complete opposition to us? Or do we say, as many Americans and too many Canadians are wont to say, 'Love it or leave it'?

When we demand freedom of religion, does this include the freedom not to have religion?
 

Andem

dev
Mar 24, 2002
5,643
128
63
Larnaka
What I would be willing to fight for:

- If it was self defence.
- If it was to defend an ally such as Australia, Britain, France.
- If it was truly to protect another nation, that isn't allied.
- If the reason to goto war was to protect the planet it's self.

What I wouldn't goto war for (AKA moving to Switzerland) :

- Battle of ideologies.
- Oil.
- World domination.
- A misunderstand or a disagreement.
- To fight for somebody's or a company's/government's own gain.
- To command and conquer.
 

Andem

dev
Mar 24, 2002
5,643
128
63
Larnaka
No, that's not right, Haggis.

The only people who are fighting to take away our rights are from within. The west has become the most powerful force in the world. Our worries are more from inside than outside.

Look at the companies and government agencies working with elitist groups who want to control us in every way possible. I'm ready to fight them. Read this: Tiny minority attempts to decide Canada's future.
 

Haggis McBagpipe

Walks on Forum Water
Jun 11, 2004
5,085
7
38
Victoria, B.C.
PS To the above, there are other ways of fighting aside from the more obvious methods. For example, doing as the Resistance did during WWII with sabotage. Yes, they killed but they also did a lot of good old-fashioned sabotage, which made life very difficult for the Germans. Or think Gandhi in India, with his passive resistance. Very effective, brought an end to British rule.
 

Haggis McBagpipe

Walks on Forum Water
Jun 11, 2004
5,085
7
38
Victoria, B.C.
Andem said:
No, that's not right, Haggis.

The only people who are fighting to take away our rights are from within. The west has become the most powerful force in the world. Our worries are more from inside than outside.

Absolutely, I agree. The question of an enemy from without is purely hypothetical.
 

LuShes

Electoral Member
Mar 25, 2002
868
1
18
45
Kamloops, B.C.
www.canadiancontent.net
I still think there is other ways then to fight. No I don't want people stripping em of of my freedom or harming our children.

But in this modern day and age, I think there should be better ways to fight.

We were taught in school, that fighting never resolved anything. And it doesn't.
 

Haggis McBagpipe

Walks on Forum Water
Jun 11, 2004
5,085
7
38
Victoria, B.C.
LuShes said:
I still think there is other ways then to fight. No I don't want people stripping em of of my freedom or harming our children.

But in this modern day and age, I think there should be better ways to fight.

We were taught in school, that fighting never resolved anything. And it doesn't.

This is the truth, LuShes.

As I say, there are other ways to win the battles without resorting to fights and wars. Gandhi proved this, as have others.
 

Numure

Council Member
Apr 30, 2004
1,063
0
36
Montréal, Québec
I would never fight anyone, no matter the context. In to days world, things can be resolved diplomaticly, or peacefully. No need to call up the army, and kill more innocents.
 

Démocrite

Nominee Member
Jun 1, 2004
63
0
6
I would fight with words if my country would ask me.

I wouldn't participate in any physical fights. However, I would be willing to prepare the dinner for the military and I would take care of the war wounded.

I would do anything but take up arms. I am a pacifist and I would probably get jailed for taking this firm stance. Alleluia
 

researchok

Council Member
Jun 12, 2004
1,103
0
36
I would fight for my country, of course.

As the father of a child, I owe her the same freedoms that I have known. I could not justify my talking about the value of freedom and not be willing to fight for it.

Fighting for freedom isn't about a nationalist chauvanism.

It is about fighting for the human ideal and potential, as did our antecedants.

To paraphrase Moliere, 'The less we are like our ancestors, the less we deserve them'.
 

Koga Ringo

New Member
Jun 9, 2004
27
0
1
Would you die for your country?

HA!!!

Not Canada.
Too many lawers(the type of personality, not actual job) and too many technicalities.

On that note, I wouldn't die for any country.
Why would I?
Why does my country deserve my life just because I was born hear.

It all makes no sense to me.
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
I would fight for my country. I would fight in the open and I would not hesitate to use the tactics of the French Resistance, which makes me a terrorist according to George Bush and Stephen Harper.

I wouldn't drop bombs on children though, and I wouldn't poison the water and the air.

Mostly my fight would be one of ideas though. That is where the real battles are won and lost.
 

researchok

Council Member
Jun 12, 2004
1,103
0
36
Haggis McBagpipe said:
As suggested by Research, I'm starting a new thread with this question:

What do you believe in? What would you be willing to fight for? What tenets would you be willing to die defending?

Are you willing to fight your own government for the same freedoms you would fight an invading enemy?

When we say we believe in freedom of speech, do we believe in it even for those who are in complete opposition to us? Or do we say, as many Americans and too many Canadians are wont to say, 'Love it or leave it'?

When we demand freedom of religion, does this include the freedom not to have religion?

I haven't responded quickly, Haggis, becdause I wanted to give the questions you asked some thought.

In answer to te first question you asked, I'd say firstly and foremost, I believe in the free will of the individual-- That is to say, I believe in a society where that free will is inviolate, under any circumstance (save the choice to harm other individuals). Those are principles I believe that are worth fighting for.

As for fighting my own government, that was a 'bell ringer' question. I would hope the answer is yes, if the government were to strip us of our freedoms and rights. In that case, I'd have to say yes, I would fight a government that stripped us of our freedoms and rights with as much vigor as I would a foreign enemy trying to usurp our freedoms and values.

The freedom of expression question, too, is interesting. I do believe in protecting freedom of speech (save of the yelling 'FIRE" in a crowded theater variety). There is the matter of what is called 'hate speech', but I submit that is a different issue, also worthy of discussion. As a Canadian living in the US where there are no 'hate speech' exceptions, I have seen both sides of the argument-- both the merits and pitfalls.

As for freedom of religion or not to have a religion, of course. Religion though, cannot be exempted from the 'fire' in a crowded theater rule or be exempted from from the 'no harm' to others basic right.
 

Haggis McBagpipe

Walks on Forum Water
Jun 11, 2004
5,085
7
38
Victoria, B.C.
Thank you for your thoughtful response, Research. You have said so well what many of us feel.

researchok said:
As for fighting my own government, that was a 'bell ringer' question. I would hope the answer is yes, if the government were to strip us of our freedoms and rights. In that case, I'd have to say yes, I would fight a government that stripped us of our freedoms and rights with as much vigor as I would a foreign enemy trying to usurp our freedoms and values.

It is almost impossible to recognize an enemy from within. So much rhetoric, so many conspiracy theories, we are becoming de-sensitized to the drama of it all. This makes us dangerous, for our apathy can allow bad things to happen.

I believe that Americans would answer much as you have answered, and I believe they would be absolutely sincere about it. Yet they have a government that has used the threat of terrorism to strip away too many freedoms. But it isn't just a matter of the freedoms removed since September 11th. The strangest thing seems to happen south of the border, and I mention it because we will soon be faced with the same strange thing if Harper wins.

In the name of the freedom: the US government somehow convinces the people that freedom means being kept safe from socialized medicare, ergo giving them the freedom-loving right to lose all they have because of one major illness. The government tells them that freedom means the right to have a gun to protect against a shadowy danger in neighbourhoods that are dangerous only because of the other freedom-loving Americans with guns. The government tells them that freedom is found in free-enterprise, for the freedom-giving system gives them the freedom to work two, three jobs in order to almost survive.

The question is, what are Americans doing to fight for their freedoms lost to government mismanagement, greed and corruption? Nothing. Why?

Can Canadians hope to do better? We're on the brink of an election, one in which Harper, who should be laughed at for being the extremist rednecked conservative-with-a-capital-C-and-small-c-and-every-c-in-between that he is, but instead is a serious contender for the position of Prime Minister of this country that nowhere near deserves him.

How, then, do we know when we are losing our freedoms? How do we know when something is presented as a freedom but is really a constraint?
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
The national identity card supported by both the Liberals and Conservatives shows us how they want to protect our freedom. So do the twin "Canadian Patriot acts."

I will remain free...the first person who shows up at my door pushing one of those damned internal passports on me is going to suffer some extreme anal discomfort.
 

Haggis McBagpipe

Walks on Forum Water
Jun 11, 2004
5,085
7
38
Victoria, B.C.
Reverend Blair said:
The national identity card supported by both the Liberals and Conservatives shows us how they want to protect our freedom. So do the twin "Canadian Patriot acts."

Good point. Any thoughts on why Canada is following in the steps of the US in this way?
 

researchok

Council Member
Jun 12, 2004
1,103
0
36
Good post, Haggis!

Your desription of the 'enemy within' being hard to recognize is spot on, for many reasons, not the least of which is that the erosion is usually long, spanning generations. What may be offensive to us may not be so 'bad' for those coming after us-- after all, if they've never experienced what we have, there is nothing for them to miss.

Having said that, Haggis, I take issue with the phrase you used, that America faces the " (Govt) uses the threat of terrorism ro strip away too many freedoms". The threat is real-- as real as it gets. The events of 9/11 changed things here-- some for the better, many for the worse-- but those changes were forced upon those of living here in the States. While it may be a while before these issues work out, I believe they will. One of the nice things about democracies is that they are self correcting, despite the ever doomsayers at each election cycles. Frm Carter to Readon, Bush to Clinton, from Trudeau to Clark, Mulroony to Chretien, the ballot box is usually id the great equalizer.

I also believe that democracies make choices-- which can for example, easily expalin the differences between Americans and Canadians. We watch the same TV, eat the same food (I will refrain from making a haggis joke) speak the same language and wear the same clothes. Yet, Canadians are different-- as a result of the choices they make in terms of societal values. While it is always tempting to natuarlly feel superior, those kind of comparisons don't usually carry much weight, as differences in populations, state (province) vs federal govt relations, etc are so different, making comparison no more than doodling for the statisticians.

I want to relate an incident that happened to me post 9/11. I was in the air on my way home from Montreal when the tragedy occured. Our plane was forced to land in Atlanta, as the airport in my city was shut down as it was too full of planes that were grounded. Too make a long story short, while in Atlanta, on the morning of 9/13, I was walking on Peachtree (wanted to see the convoy out of the CDC) when I walked by the Red Cross blood center.

In the line, were old lady blue hairs, pierced punk rockers and everything in between. Mostly, people were quiet, with a few hushed conversations going on between some of the most unlikely people. I eavesdropped on a conversation between a well dressed elderly black gentleman and what was obviously a local 'bubba'.
The older gentleman nodded in agreement as the 'bubba' declared, "The war between the states ended 2 days ago." It retrospect, he was right.

Not that there aren't still problems, or won't be, but the tenor and tone have changed. On 9/10, the big issue in the south was the Georgia state flag issue. That issue was no longer on the front burner in political priorities. Even today, the 'stars and bars' no longer carry the significance they once did.

My point is, yes, things here have changed, as I said, some for the better, some for the not so good. In the end, as in all great democracies, I believe things will even out at the ballot box.

As to your last question, "How, then, do we know when we are losing our freedoms? How do we know when something is presented as a freedom but is really a constraint?", is a question, we should struggle with. If nothing else, it keeps us involved with our democracy.