ok if you meant more along the lines of but they're canadians and not making it sound like people from the maritimes are shit and don't represent real canadians, then i don't have a problem with it. choose your words a bit more carefully in the future. you really made it stand out that they may have been canadians but they were from nb and ns by putting it on a seperate line as if you were emphasizing it.

it was you who made the initial threat, i simply told you to fuck off.

We were trained at Kent University.

Try saying the words "What do you mean?" next time. Most times, shit like this isn't worth causing a fuckus about, and it is plainly obvious from my posts that I am in support of what those Canadians are doing so my meaning was not all that ambiguous.



You've been quick to jump on me before, and if you continue to do so my invitation stands. If you're going to puff your toughness everywhere, shaddap and prove it. Otherwise try playing nice.

Guys, it's easy to misunderstand someone on a message board.

Kiss and make up.

It's silly to argue about words when you both believe the same thing.

For the record, this "unconnected" guy has proven himself to be a complete retard on many past discussions and arguments. If any doesn't see things his way they automatically "have their head up their ass"...... he once even tried to tell me (on another board) that he would welcome Russia invading the USA. You gotta love his tenacity though.



Fact is, this dipshit neither speaks for all Quebecers nor does he have a clue what the rest of Canada thinks. Not even a trace of a clue. I have many relatives that are from Quebec and have lived there for generations, and many of them wonder about our PM's decisions lately. As for the rest of Canada, I wouldn't put the anti-American sentiment at anywhere CLOSE to 70%. I would put it at maybe dead even at worst, but I think that the majority of Canadians support the removal of Saddam's crew, and we support the coalition forces and wish that Canada was a part of it.


The protestors in Canadian cities are no better informed than those in the US, and many are of course protesting simply because it's the cool thing to do right now. It's an empty protest, because no one WANTS war, most people would have been overjoyed if Saddam had of complied with UN sanctions, 1441 etc. He didn't, war has begun, deal with it and move on.

That's one of the issues, the fuckwit is done in less than 8 months and he will not be up for re-election!!

He has represented us poorly, and for that I am embarrassed!

Protestors are all idiots!
:thumbsup

I have to pipe in as a Canadian...

Chretien is an idiot. Our country has had very little growth under his government. I would love to see a change but I doubt that any other current potential PM would be much better (sad times).

While I am still unsure whether or not all out war was warranted, I firmly believe that Canada should support the coalition forces in Iraq. Full support. It feels like a family affair out there... and for some reason we are still at home.

And besides, relations with the US were already strained and tense... from softwood lumber to potentially allowing terrorists into the USA (however much that may have been hyped up by the media), the attitude towards Canada by the average US citizen has gotten much worse then I ever thought possible.

And while Canada has been bringing in more business from across the pacific lately, I still believe we need to have take advanatage of our natural trading position with the US to grow. Diversify and expand.

A side note on the demonstrators I have seen... all a bunch of hippies out to make a point and a bunch of punks there to riot. Neither group of people even understand the situation I think. Both groups are demonstrating for the social aspect - hippies to get together and share love and hug trees, and young punks to riot and get rowdy...

but according to Controlthy, I should move out of Canada, and 12clicks doesnt care cuz I am a Canadian and beneath notice... I luv this place :)

Not true. It is perfectly fine to be anti-war, because no one in their right mind actually WANTS war. It is only those that can't see where there's a valid reason to stand up and fight for what is right that need a smack upside the head. Those that are so unreasonable as to be calling their president "hitler" etc are the walking uninformed.

Sorry, I will correct:

Protestors are all blind. :winkwink:

Canada has sent troops to Afghanistan to relieve US troops from Afghan duty so they can fight in Iraq.....

What spews out of Chretien's mouth isn't necessarily true.....he DOES and HAS supported the Iraq War...whether it was directly, or indirectly...makes no difference IMO.

prove it? you want me to jump on my bike and drive to manitoba? my wrists would be a bit sore...

Then I guess your only choice is to play nice, EH?



Take your time, it'll come to you.

Further to: the topic... apparently and not surprisingly... it's not over.

Look here: <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2003/03/26/libscellucci030326" TARGET="_blank"><b>Liberals caucus considered expelling U.S. ambassador</b></a>
Horror of HORRORS! You mean someone <i>dared</i> to suggest that Canada doesn't have a sufficiently-funded military???!

OMG!! Alert the press!

i only play nice when i want to

I've said it before and I'll say it again, our PM is an assmunch who should be dragged into the street along with his entire fucking party and beaten bloody with rubber farm animals.

no comment needed.

Let's hope it's enough mr Prime Minister.

Contribute to the reconstruction of Iraq? Does that mean he'll be looking for UN issued contracts?

Figures...

It probably means that we will send in peacekeeping forces, specialty teams for disaster aid, and also a ton of building supplies, food, clothing, and personnel to assist with the entire coalition post-war operation.

i just seen on a news break that canada's gonna put up 100 mil to help rebuild iraq.

Ok, cool.

I keep getting mixed signals here. Have been reading some articles from Canadian news sources. And it almost looks like Canada is supporting this "war", just doesn't want to admit it.

What's your take?

You got it pontiac..... :thumbsup

trying to look good globally while not pissing off americans.

That's disgusting.

What a pussy.

This is Canada's official position:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/iraq/canada/canada_role.html

That IS interesting.

What I find interesting is many people and nations across the globe feel Saddam is a threat and needs to be taken out, yet they refuse to back an invasion simply because some glorified body didn't name the invasion "ok".

Does anyone else find this funny? Someone needs to make your opinion "ok" in order for you to defend it?

The resolution didn't pass simply because of a few countries with veto power, as I understand it, please correct me if I'm wrong. So because of these few countries, who coincidentally have large business dealings with Iraq, the world decides not to support an invasion even though they think Saddam needs to go.

Doesn't this jump out at anyone else? If Canada is worried about the legitimacy of the UN, as the latest article states, then they should definitely be concerned about the veto powers of "interested" nations.

people can support regime removal but not the means that have been followed to achieve it.
What you gung-ho war people consistently over look is that people in the rest of the world
were never against war, they just wanted it to be a last resort.

You say 'blah blah 12 years worth of resolutions'. The reality is that Iraq only came back to public
attention because of US efforts, they got weapon inspectors re-instated to Iraq but NEVER intended to listen
to what they said. This was very hypocritical, and caused a lot of mistrust in many countries.

The US said they wanted to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction, they neglected
to say that they wanted regime change and would settle for nothing less (again deceiving the international community)

The weapon inspectors didn't have a timetable of years, in fact they said their job could be done in three months.. The US couldn't wait three months, not because Saddam was an imminent threat, but because of logistical reasons (maybe practical but not the best moral reason for starting a war)..

The reason people are anti-GWB and his cronies is simple. We don't trust them.

Now I haven't heard one person say the Iraqi people wouldn't be better off without Saddam. It is sad
that the Arab world sees the civilians dying and blame the US, when thousands(or more) died under Saddam
and they said nothing.

I just hope there is a swift successful resolution to this now the path has been chosen.

the biggest problem that people who are totally against a war have is the potential civilian casualties.

<a href=http://www.cnn.com/US/9803/13/senate.iraq.vote/>U.S. Senate calls for war crimes trial for Saddam Hussein</a>

March 13, 1998

Yup...

It didn't pass because they didn't have the numbers, so it didn't get voted on. France threatened to veto it, but if the US had the numbers then forcing France to use their veto would have been useful because it would show that France was in the minority.

Also Tony Blair didn't want to have it voted on and lose, because it wouldn't have gone down well with the British public

Totally understandable. It's a concern of mine as well. Hey, I don't want these people dying any more than the peace protesters in San Francisco.

But, at the same time I realize how many civilians are already dying because of a brutal regime.

You can have a few hundred/thousand civilian deaths today, or a few hundred thousand deaths tomorrow, and the day after, and the day after.

I don't want any flames about "liberating Iraq". Hey, I actually want it to happen. It just so happens that several administrations want something done about Iraq as well. Although I do feel liberation is one of those factors, I'm not naive enough to believe it's the main factor. It's not. But, at the same time, isn't the liberation worth it?

FletchXXX what's your point? that link is from 5 years ago, and it says it was large symbolic.

I thought Americans had problems within the States. But you canucks beat out our animosity between your provinces hands down. :1orglaugh

Disclaimer: Not in any way meant as an insult.

Isn't Chretien french for "cretin"?

No, cretin is Moron... that you own with your " schrub"

Chretien is Christian....

exactly.

Not rebuild, 100 mil for " humanitarian aid".

Rebuild is the task of US/UK according to international law...

Just like in a store:

"you break it, you pay it"!