Previous  1  2  3  4  5 ... 8  Next

If your absolute best friend committed a crime, do you turn him into police. It'd be the right thing to do, but do you do it? I'd say, it'd definately show the world there are concequesnces to war crimes (for which no one has been punished).

   

How? They're tied up everyplace else.



You should check your numbers on that, Godz.



How is that stupid? Disposing of a major competitor and pain in the ass?



The US has a huge base where their people would be trrapped.



The Australian people would never stand for it...they despise Bush, they love Canada.



They would come to our aid though...they want our stuff.



They aren't any less competent than the US, judging by Iraq.



That's called culture, shithead...they have it and you don't. Neither does George Bush. They also have armies. Modern, trained, well-equipped armies.





Today he announced that he had a new missile system designed specifically to blow up the United States,



If they destroy it they destroy the resources. Bit of a conundrum, eh?





I'd say that a good portion of the world is willing to step up to Bush. The man's a brainless weenie. So is Cheney.





We're not talking about Iraq or Afghanistan here...we're talking about going up against a coalition of modern armies when the US has been cut off from resources. What are going to do, bomb Calgary?





Enjoy the cavity search.

   

I think Rev's trying to make a point. If anyone else commited the crimes Bush has, Canada wouldn't even let them in the country. People with drunk driving records, drug abuse, and crimes against humanity. Arent these the kind of people Canada wants to keep out of the country?

   

Of course, indicting Bush would require us to indict Tony Blair as well since Britain also declared war and passed on false information to the United Nations. That's two of the world's superpowers and Canada's closest allies declaring war on us for arresting/indicting their leaders...hmm, Religious morals et al are fine and dandy, and I'm proud to live by common decency, but when it comes to survival in this scenario, Canada's damned if we decide to follow our morals instead of simple common sense.

   

Gonzo gets the kewpie doll.

I'm not naive enough to think that we would ever arrest Bush. I do think we should, I also think that the US would be destroyed should they choose to attack us.

We can arrest Bush, but we won't. That doesn't mean we have to welcome him on state visits though. The Liberals have been doing back flips to get Georgie here but not get him heckled in the House. Why? The man has done everything he can to snub us for four years.

Why not let it be known that we don't want him here on official visits and if he comes here unofficially he's fair game? Because it's polite and nice? Canadians might be polite and nice, but we have one of the most brutal democratic systems on earth. No politeness or nicety there.

75% of Canadians, according to scientific polls, don't like George. According to a decidedly unscientific survey I just ran, 97% of think he's had sexual relations with a pig. 3% thought that it was likely just a sex doll shaped like a pig. Nobody was undecided.

In a couple of weeks Paul Martin will welcome this man to our country and pretend that we love him.

Fuck that.

   

Godz46 your a real nutjob.

   

Nice fantasy for you foolish lefties to indulge in but how about less talk and more action

   

Unfortunately the action isn't up to us, it's up to Paul Martin.

   

Bush will come, Bush will go, and nothing will be done.
Thinking that Martin even entertains the idea is foolish,
The man may be spineless, but he's not stupid.

Mr Black

   

Continuing to push for it so that the rest of the world understands that not all Canadians are as spineless or morally bankrupt as Paul Martin is worthwhile though, Mr. Black. It discourages Martin from doing anything too drastic and sends a message that we do not want to become more Americanized.

   

Well, since you all seem to think Canada needs to indict Bush, then I suppose you also need to indict Putin, because it's been known that Russia has commited war crimes in Chechnya, you need to indict China for their suppresion of their people and their policies towards Tibet, indict Tony Blair and every leader who was a part of the coalition in Iraq, including Italy prime minister, etc. It's kind of funny, here you all will be claiming how the US thinks it has to get in everyones business, and then you are actually entertaining the idea of holding the US president as a criminal. Once Canada does that, even if it's the "right" thing, I can't see how all these nations would come to help you, because you would be the aggressor. What this is is just attacking the US because you don't like Bush, because I hear no talk of indicting Blair, or other world leaders who have done things you don't agree with. What would probably happen is Canada would take Bush, the United States would go to the UN, the UN would condemn the action, and then the US could move on to either war, or Canada could give Bush up. As much as you might think that suddenly the UN will have this huge moral break out, when they condemn and stand up to the US, they will never do it, because they are all for the status quo. The second Canada starts taking other countries leaders, especially those of countries who are a superpower and a major player on the world stage, they start to look just as bad, and like they are trying to start stuff with the US. Wouldn't you guys take it as the US imposing their will and trying to start stuff with Canada if we imprisoned your leader?

Not that I am super happy for Bush, but I don't want another country imprisoning my leader just because they think they have the moral high ground. To me it's like saying "we are right, you are wrong, and whenever we don't like your countries leader, we will imprison him because we are above your country." I don't see how you people don't realize the harm that this type of action would actually cause. It's like the US taking China's or Russia's leader and imprisoning them when they are visiting the country just because we don't agree with their policy. Do you think that China or Russia would just sit back and be like "well, they have a point"? No, they would be pissed that another country thinks they can run their country, and the rest of the world would see the US as the aggressor.

One last point: If, as you all say, you take Bush, and the US attacks you, and the commonwealth nations come to your side, how does that prove that you ahd the moral highground? First, you took the president, locked him up, and started the aggression, then you draq in countless other nations into a world war with the US which would result in far more deaths than Iraq. I don't see how this is a great option. The US, I think given their history, is not going to sit back, with one of the worlds best militaries in the world, and let Canada make them their bitch. While you say the US's army is overstreched, Canada's army doesn't have enough people and supplies to really be overstreched. The US has enough vehicles and such in storage, and a bigger economy, to enable them to put out a good number of soldiers, and Canada being an aggressor towards the US gives those 50 million Bush supporters a reason to fight. Canada could even spark a world war for taking the president, and a civil war in the US at the same time, resulting in tons of death. Real good idea, huh?

   

I'd have a hard look at Chretien and Martin too, Johnny.

That's kind of the point. If we aren't going to indict the big guys, how can we indict the little guys? Why should anybody follow the rules?

The fact is that George Bush is the ruler in power that has committed the most war crimes. Sending a message to him sends a message to the entire world.

   

What gives you the right to indict any foreign leader though who is not directly attacking your country? Under your idea of why people should be indicted, shouldn't Saddam have been indicted then? I never saw you all saying he should be indicted, but that the US should leave him alone.

On a lighter note....Oh yeah, I'm forum elite!

   

It isn't a right, it's an obligation. We've signed various conventions and agreements that require us to prosecute war criminals who come to or live in Canada. Bush has immunity this trip because it's an official visit, but the message should be sent before he takes another fishing vacation.



Yes. If he were to come to Canada it would be our obligation to try him for crimes against humanity in Iraq and war crimes in the war with Iran and the invasion of Kuwait.



We never said that Bush should leave him alone, we said that Bush has no right to invade a sovereign state. Nobody wanted Saddam to hang around, but the idea of bombing the crap out of a civilian population to get rid of him is just silly. It was the wrong answer to a problem that was largely created by Bush's father and the men who still work in the Bush administration.

   

Previous  1  2  3  4  5 ... 8  Next