Quote:
|
Originally Posted by alexg
everyone knows that it's only a matter of time until "innocent" countries get attacked.
most won't admit they were wrong and probably make up new excuses, such as the "head scarf" issue, or that canada sent 2 soldiers and 4 guns to afghanistan...
|
Canada is not an "innocent" country in the eyes of islamic terrorists, why do you keep suggesting that it is? If it got attacked it would be understandable why it happened. Canada was a bad example to use as an "innocent" country.
In November 2002 Canada was specifically mentioned as a prime al-Qaida target by Osama bin Laden.
"What business do your governments have to ally itself in attacking us in Afghanistan -- and I mention specifically Britain, France, Italy, Canada, Germany and Australia," Bin Laden said on an audiotape obtained by Arab Al-Jazeera TV before warning of impending attacks.
By the way, I'm not one of the people that blamed Bush for the London attack, I'm simply replying to the premises in your argument because they're weak and you've used poor examples to support your argument. The premise that Canada is an innocent country is extremely weak.
You may have had a decent point to make (conclusion) in your original post, but you fucked it up because you used an incredibly weak premise to support your conclusion, and it's obvious that you've realized this because your attempts to belittle Canada's contribution to the war in Afghanistan shows the great lengths you're going to attempt to prop up the weakness in your argument. It's a sign of desperation.