Ouch...

[Infanteer]

In my opinion Anne Coulter is no better then Michael Moore, both idiots from the end-of-the-spectrum who are talking the talk (and not much else).

I second the notion of watching her and Parrish mudwrestle.

 

[Slim]

I second the notion of watching her and Parrish mudwrestle.

We could bill it as "see the battle of the political piggies as they try and stick their opinions to each other...with mud!"Lol

Slim

 

[rhourd]

I must say when I first read the initial post I was pissed but, I'm glad to say that I had a good laugh with the first few replies. Seriously though, I want to know where those loud mouths (and our own) get the stupid ideas that they do? I mean, we did smoke them in the war of 1812 but, who cares. We've had our tiffs in the past but we all got along. I have been hearing more and more resentment on the behalf of the American people after we refused to send troops to Iraq. What did we ever do to them. We've supported them many times before. Why are they getting all catty over this war? Sadly to say I will never be able to understand politicians OR political annalists for that matter. It seems that more and more people now a days have a lot to say but don't really have the kahunas to back it up. Sure, Canadians and Americans alike live in free societies where we can say what ever we like and not get shot in the streets but, what ever happened to a little common Curtisy to keep you opinions to yourself or at least not be so rude when you voice them. I try to keep an open mind on most issues but, people like Coulter are giving Americans an ever worse name. oh well, it's all over my head any way. I just want to know this though....CAN'T WE ALL JUST GET ALONG?

 

[JasonH]

Consider the source, guys.  Consider the source.  As noted above, both countries have loudmouth types who don't seem to perform any function other than participating in the oxygen/carbon dioxide cycle.

Personally, I'd like to see Coulter and that nutcase of yours -- Parrish? -- in a mud wrestling match.  It would be good for a laugh or two.

Jim

I say introduce the :rofl: smiley 

 

[Leviathan]

Why are they getting all catty over this war?

Simple answer:

They wish they had more allies involved in Iraq that could share the blame.

Nothing makes you feels better about yourself after a realizing a severe mistake you made than dragging other people down with you.

 

[Slim]

Nothing makes you feels better about yourself after a realizing a severe mistake you made than dragging other people down with you.

So, trying to free people from the rule of a dictator who, along with his sons, has raped, tortured and killed innocent people for years, is a mistake?! And lets not forget thoughs weapons of mass-distruction that the SAS found during the first gulph war while they were hunting scud missles.

Glad to see you have such a clear picture of what's going on in the world. The United States did a courageous thing...Kindly don't run down someone for doing something that you know nothing about.

Cheers

Slim

 

[rhourd]

Where as Saddam needed to be usurped from his "throne" of power i think that the American government is going about it all the wrong way. Although removing Saddam from power and finding weapons of mass distruction are both noble causes I can't help but feel that the US is getting into yet another Vietnam war. I support the ideas of getting rid of the weapons and getting rid of saddam but, who's to say that the American gov't isn't just trying to impose western ideas? If I may be as bold to make a comparison, the American army rolled over Iraq in a few days. They blew by most of saddam's forces feeling that they were not a threat. It should be noted that Hitler (and bush is not like Hitler but...) rolled over Europe with his Blitzkrieg. Maybe Bush's advisers just wanted to try a tactic that worked for another army but, if I may be as bold to say that I think the fact that both American and German armies have now done this Lighting fast attack is kind of weird. Is it possibly that there is some connection? I know, it's a crazy thought but, it's just something wild to ponder.

P.S. I apologize in advance if I offended any one out there.

 

[48Highlander]

Where as Saddam needed to be usurped from his "throne" of power i think that the American government is going about it all the wrong way. Although removing Saddam from power and finding weapons of mass distruction are both noble causes I can't help but feel that the US is getting into yet another Vietnam war. I support the ideas of getting rid of the weapons and getting rid of saddam but, who's to say that the American gov't isn't just trying to impose western ideas? If I may be as bold to make a comparison, the American army rolled over Iraq in a few days. They blew by most of saddam's forces feeling that they were not a threat. It should be noted that Hitler (and bush is not like Hitler but...) rolled over Europe with his Blitzkrieg. Maybe Bush's advisers just wanted to try a tactic that worked for another army but, if I may be as bold to say that I think the fact that both American and German armies have now done this Lighting fast attack is kind of weird. Is it possibly that there is some connection? I know, it's a crazy thought but, it's just something wild to ponder.

P.S. I apologize in advance if I offended any one out there.

    Yeah I totaly see where you're going with this.  You know, both Hitler and Bush had a dog too.  There's GOTTA be some sort of connection when they have so much in common!

 

[George Wallace]

Oh yeah!

Did they talk to theirs like Mackenzie King did?

GW

 

[Slim]

I can't help but feel that the US is getting into yet another Vietnam war.

The only thing that the U.S. is trying to impose on Iraq is FREEDOM FOR ITS PEOPLE! And yes its going to be a long hard road! Thats why we have soldiers...To do the hard things!

The quality of a good person is not giving up when the going gets tough, despite all the self-doubt and the other people that constantly second-guess and run him/her down.

If I was living under a tin-pot dictator then sure as hell I would want someone to come and rescue me and my family.

The only people who are causing the troubles there are a bunch of power-hungry fanatics trying to return the country to a state of medievilism, and those stupid enough to believe all the crap they spew.

And those who believe the crap are NOT LIMITED TO IRAQ!!

Slim

 

[rhourd]

OK so Hitler had a dog. it makes no never mind. My point is that I see the United states government as sometimes getting involved in conflicts where there right or motives to be present in such conflicts is not there. I'll make a point to state that the U.S. is NOT the only country to do this. No need for the pot to call the kettle black right? But why does the American gov't want to be so involved? Yes, the people of Iraq have mostly benefited from the help of the U.S. but, look at the cons of the situation. American soldiers dead, towns and villages bombed all to hell, population displaced, government virtually non-existant and so on. I understand that collateral damage is a fact of war but, come on, are you to say that the U.S. is in the right when ever they decide to intervein and march on a country? Don't get me wrong though. I was more than satisfied when the U.S. Army captured Saddam. It was about time that his BS was put to an end. I just can see the situation escalating into something that the American Government can't handle, again.

 

[Slim]

OK so Hitler had a dog. it makes no never mind. My point is that I see the United states government as sometimes getting involved in conflicts where there right or motives to be present in such conflicts is not there.

Like WW2   right...After all Germany didn't actually attack the U.S.   :

Why does the American gov't want to be so involved? Yes, the people of Iraq have mostly benefited from the help of the U.S. but, look at the cons of the situation. American soldiers dead, towns and villages bombed all to hell, population displaced, government virtually non-existant and so on. I understand that collateral damage is a fact of war but, come on, are you to say that the U.S. is in the right when ever they decide to intervein and march on a country? Don't get me wrong though. I was more than satisfied when the U.S. Army captured Saddam. It was about time that his BS was put to an end. I just can see the situation escalating into something that the American Government can't handle, again.

If the U.S. had walked away from Iraq afterthey had caught Saddam then I guarantee my next 6 paychecks that there would be another tin-pot dictator well on his way to power in that country right now! And the U.S. would have an even bigger problem on its hands than the civil war that they are currently facing.

They would also be broadcasting the message to the world that the U.S. doesn't care about anyone but its self! Then all the left-leaning wacko's WOULD be right in their estimation of our southern neighbours.

You can't just wage a war and then walk away from a country when you're done...WW2 was started because the first world war allies did exactly that to Germany, giving the rise of a militaristic dictator a practically forgone conclusion!

We have to stick by the Iraqi people and demonstraight that we won't abandon them to some warlike a$$h@le who likes to rape, poison and murder anyone he can get his hands on!

By the way, about Iraq, this widespread ignorant and uninformed attitude that seems to hold sway thoughout the nation is the reason that the liberal party is in power in Canada and the CF is practically non-existant!

 

[Blakey]

Not trying to hijack the thread but the 1812 thing got me intrigued. ;D
I found this on the web, I guess the British read a different history book that Canadians and Americans....? i dunno :
Anyone?

 

[atticus]

Not trying to hijack the thread but the 1812 thing got me intrigued. ;D
I found this on the web, I guess the British read a different history book that Canadians and Americans....? i dunno :
Anyone?

Sorry, what the link???

 

[Blakey]

Sorry, what the link???

oops sorry  :-[
http://www.aug24.co.uk/Rowles/why.html

 

[Danjanou]

Nice link. Actually in addition to pilfering the President's wine the Brits actually scoffed down the entire victory dinner laid out in anticipation of the returning US Militia Generals after they repelled the invading Redcoats. Then they torched the place.

Nice to see consistency in the world, Even the Brits get it wrong though, there were no Canadians in this campaign.

 

[atticus]

Nice to see consistency in the world, Even the Brits get it wrong though, there were no Canadians in this campaign.

Weren't the Canadians at the time busy taking a different state? But also, couldn't there have been Canadians serving with the Brits, after all, we were a British colony.

 

[Danjanou]

There is a slim possibility that someone born in Canada or the various colonies here if you want to be accurate was serving in some of the units that were in that campaign, most likely as an officer. There is evidence to suggest some of the officers may have been former US colonists who having lost all years earlier joined the Army. Odds are though it's unlikely as the units involved were shipped directly from Europe most having fought in Spain prior.

Transportation wasn't as good then, so I can't see a local joining a unit in England, maybe one on garrison duty here, but not across the ocean.

And yeah our troops were busy torching Buffalo (again) around that time  ;D

 

[GreatbigC]

  One of my favourite quotes

"In my time we have gone from JFK to George W. Bush, from RFK to Al Gore.  If this keeps up, in 12 years I believe we will be voting for plants"
 

Just thought it was kinda funny

 

[Leviathan]

I was a little late getting back to this... But here I am. :boring:

"So, trying to free people from the rule of a dictator who, along with his sons, has raped, tortured and killed innocent people for years, is a mistake?! And lets not forget thoughs weapons of mass-distruction that the SAS found during the first gulph war while they were hunting scud missles."~Slim

Sadam and his son's have acctually raped people? And there is proof of this?
Or was he just in controll of a government which fostered an invironment that allowed such terrible acts to take place.
Which IS A VERY BAD THING! (Don't get me wrong...)
But if by your estimation Sadam is guilty of rape, Then Bush is just as guilty of abusing Iraqi prisoners of War...
*cough Cough*
Both sound rather stupid to me.

Sadam was NOT a good person, beleive me, but what the American's are doing is NOT right, and I stand proudly by my goverment's decision against aiding our neighbors.

...If the U.S. had walked away from Iraq afterthey had caught Saddam then I guarantee my next 6 paychecks that there would be another tin-pot dictator well on his way to power in that country right now! And the U.S. would have an even bigger problem on its hands than the civil war that they are currently facing...

...You can't just wage a war and then walk away from a country when you're done...WW2 was started because the first world war allies did exactly that to Germany, giving the rise of a militaristic dictator a practically forgone conclusion!...

By the way, about Iraq, this widespread ignorant and uninformed attitude that seems to hold sway thoughout the nation is the reason that the liberal party is in power in Canada and the CF is practically non-existant!

The problem the US is facing right now IS THE PRODUCT OF THEIR ACTIONS IN THE FIRST GULF WAR!
It was then that they DID walk away without finishing what they started, and now here we are.
The US Government had a much more solid reason to get rid of Saddam back then, but they didn't.
They got what they wanted,(Oil from Kuwait) and left.

Now they have to spin tales of NON-EXHISTANT WMD in order to justify the completeion of a task they started over a decade ago.
I do honestly hope that Bush finishes what he starts now, cause the only thing that could be more wrong than what he is doing now is if he walked away too soon.

During the so called "Shock and Awe" campain, i sometimes wonder if anyone other than the journalists safe withing the collums of tanks rolling toward Bhagdad really felt Awe OR Shock.
What did the average Iraqi citizen feel?
My guess is that they felt fear...
Complete and utter terror even.
The last time I looked, a person who used violent actions to invoke fear as a method forwarding a political agenda of some description was called a TERRORIST.
(Well... Something to think about at least. ???)

BTW... I hope you are not against a little "Education" yourself.
Being that I am possibly a victim of a "widespread ignorant and uninformed attitude" I feel somewhat humble in offering up the following correction.

Hitler came into power as a product of TOO MUCH Foreign intervention, NOT a lack thereof.
It was greed and corruption on the part of the WWI Allies that caused the invironment that allowed Hitler to come into power on the platform he did.
Even by modern estimation, the processes that were undertaken to create the basic, sound principles of the Treaty of Verseilles were utterly rife with corruption and greed.
THIS was the source of Hitlers primary greivance and was the single largest factor which allowed him to attain power.

For detailed information on his motives, I highly recommmend hearing it from Hitler himself,
If you can get your hands on his book "Mein Kampf" I highly reccomend you read it to escape the category YOU YOURSELF adressed as "widespread ignorant and uninformed attitude." :

Now before you call me a neo-nazi, (I can hear it coming...) please realise that Hitler is MUCH higher on my list of corrupt world leaders than Mr. Bush.

Well I think that about wraps it up.
At least untill i receive Slim's rebuttal... or apology... (riiiiight... :)