Blame Hillier
Canadian_Mind @ Sun Oct 14, 2007 11:23 pm
either way lives are in the balance dude. the question is whether lives are immidiately in the balance, or if they will be in the balance in the future.
ridenrain @ Sun Oct 14, 2007 11:33 pm
Which lives?
The lives of the hundred Canadian troops died to when they volunteer to go and help the thousands of Afghan women they save, or the tens of thousands of Afghan children who now recieve medical care and education.
These people now can enter the 20th century instead of being inprisoned in the 14th century.
$1:
If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich.
Streaker @ Sun Oct 14, 2007 11:34 pm
Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:
either way lives are in the balance dude. the question is whether lives are immidiately in the balance, or if they will be in the balance in the future.
Very true, but maybe if the west didn't have such a long track record of poking its nose in Afghanistan's business, fewer lives would be in the balance today and in the future.
In the long run, adventures like the one we're currently involved in tend to make things worse.
Streaker @ Sun Oct 14, 2007 11:36 pm
ridenrain ridenrain:
Which lives?
The lives of the hundred Canadian troops died to when they volunteer to go and help the thousands of Afghan women they save, or the tens of thousands of Afghan children who now recieve medical care and education.
These people now can enter the 20th century instead of being inprisoned in the 14th century.
The lives of the hundred Canadian troops died to when they volunteer to go and help the thousands of Afghan women they save, or the tens of thousands of Afghan children who now recieve medical care and education.
These people now can enter the 20th century instead of being inprisoned in the 14th century.
$1:
If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich.
Maybe they would have gotten out of the 14th century a whole lot sooner if the west wasn't always interfering.
PENATRATOR @ Sun Oct 14, 2007 11:55 pm
Streaker, are you sure you are not a reincarnation of Avro? Same old tired drum beating.
Canadian_Mind @ Mon Oct 15, 2007 12:01 am
Streaker Streaker:
Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:
either way lives are in the balance dude. the question is whether lives are immidiately in the balance, or if they will be in the balance in the future.
Very true, but maybe if the west didn't have such a long track record of poking its nose in Afghanistan's business, fewer lives would be in the balance today and in the future.
In the long run, adventures like the one we're currently involved in tend to make things worse.
Aye, I agree with you there on you first point. Unfortunately we cannot change the past, we can only strive for a better future.
As for your second point, it depends on the situation. Right now we are stuck between a rock and a hard place whereby the rock is pulling out, and with pulling out comes a return of oppressive terrorist regimes, and the hardplace is staying and hope we can work some miracle to make things better off for the afghani's. another downturn to the hardplace is that the taliban likely want revenge, and it will be easier for them to organise revenge if they regain Afghanistan... That is how OUR lives are at stake.
either way, they have tasted freedom and rights the way we canadians know freedoms and rights, so hopefully, either way, if the taliban and Al-queda do gain control of Afghanistan again, and begin their own practices, the people of Afghanistan will rebel against them.
ridenrain @ Mon Oct 15, 2007 12:31 pm
Streaker Streaker:
ridenrain ridenrain:
Which lives?
The lives of the hundred Canadian troops died to when they volunteer to go and help the thousands of Afghan women they save, or the tens of thousands of Afghan children who now recieve medical care and education.
These people now can enter the 20th century instead of being inprisoned in the 14th century.
The lives of the hundred Canadian troops died to when they volunteer to go and help the thousands of Afghan women they save, or the tens of thousands of Afghan children who now recieve medical care and education.
These people now can enter the 20th century instead of being inprisoned in the 14th century.
$1:
If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich.
Maybe they would have gotten out of the 14th century a whole lot sooner if the west wasn't always interfering.
Please name me one country that has benefitted from isolation.
Since you can't see you're way around the horrors and tragedy the European, Judea-Christian world has wrought on the world, perhaps it's time to renounce you're participation and go live in that dirt floor cave. Ensure to send a check for all teh health care, education, security, etc.
All of these self lothing monologs always remind me of the "what have the Romans ever done for us" part in "the life of Brian".
It's the empty rhetoric of pimply-faced students in Che t-shirts.
EyeBrock @ Mon Oct 15, 2007 1:00 pm
Streaker Streaker:
When human lives are in the balance there are always good reasons to question what we're doing.
It doesn't look like the volunteers who signed up since 2003, since we went to Afghanistan, agree with you streaker.
The humans who's lives are in the balance signed up to serve and fight.
Obviously that is not something you would ever do, so I'll leave you to snipe at our volunteers, who to a man and woman believe in the mission.
After all, most lefties love to diss the troops but would never put themselves in harms way for any cause, even leftie ones.
CapeApe @ Mon Oct 15, 2007 1:12 pm
EyeBrock EyeBrock:
Streaker Streaker:
When human lives are in the balance there are always good reasons to question what we're doing.
It doesn't look like the volunteers who signed up since 2003, since we went to Afghanistan, agree with you streaker.
The humans who's lives are in the balance signed up to serve and fight.
Obviously that is not something you would ever do, so I'll leave you to snipe at our volunteers, who to a man and woman believe in the mission.
After all, most lefties love to diss the troops but would never put themselves in harms way for any cause, even leftie ones.
let the leftist stay home and bottle feed themselves 
Regina @ Mon Oct 15, 2007 3:29 pm
If it was easy...............the French would be doing it.
Canadian_Mind @ Mon Oct 15, 2007 3:55 pm
EyeBrock EyeBrock:
Streaker Streaker:
When human lives are in the balance there are always good reasons to question what we're doing.
It doesn't look like the volunteers who signed up since 2003, since we went to Afghanistan, agree with you streaker.
The humans who's lives are in the balance signed up to serve and fight.
Obviously that is not something you would ever do, so I'll leave you to snipe at our volunteers, who to a man and woman believe in the mission.
After all, most lefties love to diss the troops but would never put themselves in harms way for any cause, even leftie ones.
Eyebrock, I would likr to take exception to this. On most issues I consider myself a Liberal. But the military is one of those things that makes some people call me a "small c Conservative." I support Harper, and hope he gets a majority next election if we are still at war. I will almost always support a conservative government in wartime because they get the troops what they need. Only exceptions to this are if the Conservative party members are downright crazy, or there is a Liberal leader who is incredibly promising military wise; Iggy is one of these potential people. if he was in power I would probrably be supporting the Libs right now.
And just because I call myself Liberal doesn't mean I am one of the lame ducks that follows my leaders around everywhere. Dion has proven himself to be spineless, and as such I've learned not to like him as a leader... He had his chance.
EyeBrock @ Mon Oct 15, 2007 4:58 pm
Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:
EyeBrock EyeBrock:
Streaker Streaker:
When human lives are in the balance there are always good reasons to question what we're doing.
It doesn't look like the volunteers who signed up since 2003, since we went to Afghanistan, agree with you streaker.
The humans who's lives are in the balance signed up to serve and fight.
Obviously that is not something you would ever do, so I'll leave you to snipe at our volunteers, who to a man and woman believe in the mission.
After all, most lefties love to diss the troops but would never put themselves in harms way for any cause, even leftie ones.
Eyebrock, I would likr to take exception to this. On most issues I consider myself a Liberal. But the military is one of those things that makes some people call me a "small c Conservative." I support Harper, and hope he gets a majority next election if we are still at war. I will almost always support a conservative government in wartime because they get the troops what they need. Only exceptions to this are if the Conservative party members are downright crazy, or there is a Liberal leader who is incredibly promising military wise; Iggy is one of these potential people. if he was in power I would probrably be supporting the Libs right now.
And just because I call myself Liberal doesn't mean I am one of the lame ducks that follows my leaders around everywhere. Dion has proven himself to be spineless, and as such I've learned not to like him as a leader... He had his chance.
Hey, no disrespect meant to Liberals.
After all, Liberals put us in the mission.
For that I have to admit there is a backbone somewhere in Liberal-la-la-land.
If you look at it that way I'm one good ballsy policy away from being a Liberal.
Chretien had balls. I didn't agree with his policies, but he kicked arse.
Don't think we all hate you just cos you are a Lib.
We are all Canadians. We all love our country.
We just differ on how it's run!
DerbyX @ Tue Oct 16, 2007 5:47 am
EyeBrock EyeBrock:
Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:
EyeBrock EyeBrock:
Streaker Streaker:
When human lives are in the balance there are always good reasons to question what we're doing.
It doesn't look like the volunteers who signed up since 2003, since we went to Afghanistan, agree with you streaker.
The humans who's lives are in the balance signed up to serve and fight.
Obviously that is not something you would ever do, so I'll leave you to snipe at our volunteers, who to a man and woman believe in the mission.
After all, most lefties love to diss the troops but would never put themselves in harms way for any cause, even leftie ones.
Eyebrock, I would likr to take exception to this. On most issues I consider myself a Liberal. But the military is one of those things that makes some people call me a "small c Conservative." I support Harper, and hope he gets a majority next election if we are still at war. I will almost always support a conservative government in wartime because they get the troops what they need. Only exceptions to this are if the Conservative party members are downright crazy, or there is a Liberal leader who is incredibly promising military wise; Iggy is one of these potential people. if he was in power I would probrably be supporting the Libs right now.
And just because I call myself Liberal doesn't mean I am one of the lame ducks that follows my leaders around everywhere. Dion has proven himself to be spineless, and as such I've learned not to like him as a leader... He had his chance.
Hey, no disrespect meant to Liberals.
After all, Liberals put us in the mission.
For that I have to admit there is a backbone somewhere in Liberal-la-la-land.
If you look at it that way I'm one good ballsy policy away from being a Liberal.
Chretien had balls. I didn't agree with his policies, but he kicked arse.
Don't think we all hate you just cos you are a Lib.
We are all Canadians. We all love our country.
We just differ on how it's run!
Geez Eyebrock,
As time goes by you seem to be posting about how you are more and more Liberal or likely to vote Liberal.
If I use your Sig as a reference I'd have to say that you ar not from the UK but are in fact from Ork.
Johnny_Utah @ Tue Nov 13, 2007 4:47 am
ridenrain ridenrain:
Does the left need a reason to slag a soldier?
The Left just uses Soldiers in Political Fear Mongering TV Ad's..
Johnny_Utah @ Tue Nov 13, 2007 4:50 am
Streaker Streaker:
Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:
either way lives are in the balance dude. the question is whether lives are immidiately in the balance, or if they will be in the balance in the future.
Very true, but maybe if the west didn't have such a long track record of poking its nose in Afghanistan's business, fewer lives would be in the balance today and in the future.
In the long run, adventures like the one we're currently involved in tend to make things worse.
So in you're World after 9/11 the West shouldn't have gone into Afghanistan?
Instead of blaming the West blame the USSR who invaded and occupied Afghanistan as they started this mess..