Quebec media lash out at soldier's death
DerbyX @ Fri Aug 24, 2007 5:23 pm
BartSimpson BartSimpson:
DerbyX DerbyX:
BartSimpson BartSimpson:
Forgive me, my friend, I do not.
Still, I agree with your sentiment to let them stew in their own mess. That means prohibiting their people from emigrating to civilized countries as a safety valve to prevent the need for reform and revolution in their homelands.
When they're ready to be a part of the civilized world then fine.
Still, I agree with your sentiment to let them stew in their own mess. That means prohibiting their people from emigrating to civilized countries as a safety valve to prevent the need for reform and revolution in their homelands.
When they're ready to be a part of the civilized world then fine.
Immigration formed the bulk of our discussion in we both agreed that our countries should restrict/bab immigration from countries known to produce extremists without remorse.
We kept getting interrupted with mysql errors every other post. About 8 months ago I think.
Ah, I recall giving up on posting here for a week or so.
Good to see we have common ground, though.
![[BB]](./images/smilies/beers.gif "Beers")
We always did. We both agree I'm great!
BartSimpson @ Fri Aug 24, 2007 5:26 pm
DerbyX DerbyX:
BartSimpson BartSimpson:
DerbyX DerbyX:
BartSimpson BartSimpson:
Forgive me, my friend, I do not.
Still, I agree with your sentiment to let them stew in their own mess. That means prohibiting their people from emigrating to civilized countries as a safety valve to prevent the need for reform and revolution in their homelands.
When they're ready to be a part of the civilized world then fine.
Still, I agree with your sentiment to let them stew in their own mess. That means prohibiting their people from emigrating to civilized countries as a safety valve to prevent the need for reform and revolution in their homelands.
When they're ready to be a part of the civilized world then fine.
Immigration formed the bulk of our discussion in we both agreed that our countries should restrict/bab immigration from countries known to produce extremists without remorse.
We kept getting interrupted with mysql errors every other post. About 8 months ago I think.
Ah, I recall giving up on posting here for a week or so.
Good to see we have common ground, though.
We always did. We both agree I'm great!
Yes, you are.
xerxes @ Fri Aug 24, 2007 6:02 pm
saturn_656 saturn_656:
xerxes xerxes:
Not all the French were collaborators in the war.
I'm not sure who I liked better, the Vichy gov't or the Free French under De Gaulle... the man was a real pri<k right up until the day he died and had been a major thorn in the side of the western alliance since WWII.
Ok, after the war he was a bit of a jerk, but I think he was a far sight better than the the Vichy. With LeClerc, he was one of the best generals the French had at the time and most importantly, he kept up the fight after the government conceded defeat (though I don't really see what other options they had. It was either concede defeat and try and save what they could of France or resist and die likely in vain)
EyeBrock @ Fri Aug 24, 2007 8:44 pm
sandorski sandorski:
RUEZ RUEZ:
sandorski sandorski:
Quebec has always been somewhat Isolationist when it comes to Foreign Conflict. WW1, WW2, and now Afghanistan(probably Korea too, but I dunno)were/are not popular in Quebec. Has nothing to do with Courage/Cowardice, just concepts of Foreign Policy.
So you're saying there isn't much they will fight for.Pretty much, but that doesn't mean they won't Fight. Just that the situation where they will has never presented itself.
There view is very similar to the US's attitude Pre-WW2. Far away conflicts both from one's Territory and influence just isn't worthy to Fight for.
The situation presented itself in the French-Indian war that ended in 1759.
In that one the then New French fought the British and Colonial American militia. That really is the last time the Québécois fought as a 'nation'. Those of us who know the history of Canada are well aware of Quebec's lack of stomach for any wars since 1759. It really goes to Quebec's lack of belief in it being an actual part of Canada. They still see themselves as nominally independent and we have done little since 1759 to change that.
Out of the 200 battalions raised during the First World war in Canada, 7 were from Quebec which then made up 35% of the population. Nothing has really changed since then.
DerbyX @ Fri Aug 24, 2007 8:46 pm
EyeBrock EyeBrock:
sandorski sandorski:
RUEZ RUEZ:
sandorski sandorski:
Quebec has always been somewhat Isolationist when it comes to Foreign Conflict. WW1, WW2, and now Afghanistan(probably Korea too, but I dunno)were/are not popular in Quebec. Has nothing to do with Courage/Cowardice, just concepts of Foreign Policy.
So you're saying there isn't much they will fight for.Pretty much, but that doesn't mean they won't Fight. Just that the situation where they will has never presented itself.
There view is very similar to the US's attitude Pre-WW2. Far away conflicts both from one's Territory and influence just isn't worthy to Fight for.
The situation presented itself in the French-Indian war that ended in 1759.
In that one the then New French fought the British and Colonial American militia. That really is the last time the Québécois fought as a 'nation'. Those of us who know the history of Canada are well aware of Quebec's lack of stomach for any wars since 1759. It really goes to Quebec's lack of belief in it being an actual part of Canada. They still see themselves as nominally independent and we have done little since 1759 to change that.
Out of the 200 battalions raised during the First World war in Canada, 7 were from Quebec which then made up 35% of the population. Nothing has really changed since then.
Thats not true. They have poutine now.
EyeBrock @ Fri Aug 24, 2007 8:49 pm
DerbyX DerbyX:
EyeBrock EyeBrock:
sandorski sandorski:
RUEZ RUEZ:
sandorski sandorski:
Quebec has always been somewhat Isolationist when it comes to Foreign Conflict. WW1, WW2, and now Afghanistan(probably Korea too, but I dunno)were/are not popular in Quebec. Has nothing to do with Courage/Cowardice, just concepts of Foreign Policy.
So you're saying there isn't much they will fight for.Pretty much, but that doesn't mean they won't Fight. Just that the situation where they will has never presented itself.
There view is very similar to the US's attitude Pre-WW2. Far away conflicts both from one's Territory and influence just isn't worthy to Fight for.
The situation presented itself in the French-Indian war that ended in 1759.
In that one the then New French fought the British and Colonial American militia. That really is the last time the Québécois fought as a 'nation'. Those of us who know the history of Canada are well aware of Quebec's lack of stomach for any wars since 1759. It really goes to Quebec's lack of belief in it being an actual part of Canada. They still see themselves as nominally independent and we have done little since 1759 to change that.
Out of the 200 battalions raised during the First World war in Canada, 7 were from Quebec which then made up 35% of the population. Nothing has really changed since then.
Thats not true. They have poutine now.
And that is a good thing! Non aggressive poutine though.....
DerbyX @ Fri Aug 24, 2007 8:52 pm
EyeBrock EyeBrock:
DerbyX DerbyX:
EyeBrock EyeBrock:
sandorski sandorski:
RUEZ RUEZ:
sandorski sandorski:
Quebec has always been somewhat Isolationist when it comes to Foreign Conflict. WW1, WW2, and now Afghanistan(probably Korea too, but I dunno)were/are not popular in Quebec. Has nothing to do with Courage/Cowardice, just concepts of Foreign Policy.
So you're saying there isn't much they will fight for.Pretty much, but that doesn't mean they won't Fight. Just that the situation where they will has never presented itself.
There view is very similar to the US's attitude Pre-WW2. Far away conflicts both from one's Territory and influence just isn't worthy to Fight for.
The situation presented itself in the French-Indian war that ended in 1759.
In that one the then New French fought the British and Colonial American militia. That really is the last time the Québécois fought as a 'nation'. Those of us who know the history of Canada are well aware of Quebec's lack of stomach for any wars since 1759. It really goes to Quebec's lack of belief in it being an actual part of Canada. They still see themselves as nominally independent and we have done little since 1759 to change that.
Out of the 200 battalions raised during the First World war in Canada, 7 were from Quebec which then made up 35% of the population. Nothing has really changed since then.
Thats not true. They have poutine now.
And that is a good thing! Non aggressive poutine though.....
Kingston. Bubbas. Ask for hot sauce gravy.
Flames out the ass.