Australia, Criticizes Canada

News Forums

Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 25 Next

BartSimpson @ Fri Aug 19, 2005 10:58 am

Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:

@Bart: a dozen? wouldn't you rather have 40 timbits?

I'm obviously missing out on a great Canadian experience here...gotta check this out.

Found it: http://www.timhortons.com/

And will put it on my things-to-eat list for November - business trip to Montreal.

BartSimpson @ Fri Aug 19, 2005 11:32 am

Hester Hester:

Australia is going in a direction the rest of the world doesn't want to go.

Considering that of the 192 countries in the world (including the Vatican) the vast majority of them are not free or democratic as we know it then I'd say the "rest of the world's" opinions are irrelevant.

For some reason the farce of Libya chairing the UN Human Rights Commission comes to mind.

Australia is exercising national sovereignty and Canada seems to prefer submitting its national sovereignty to international governance.

I'd rather have national sovereignty, thank you very much.

Jusin @ Fri Aug 19, 2005 11:41 am

RUEZ RUEZ:

Are we supposed to care what an Australian thinks of us? I don't.

Yes, they are our cousins, slightly off, but part of our Commonwealth. All that coming from an Australian I can take with a grain of salt, because, everyone knows, how hard they wotk, readying Australia for what will be an epic power struggle.

We are different from them, but have the same roots, same morals, same work ethics. To all my Australian Cousins OI

p.s. after Canada, thats where I would choose to live

Tman1 @ Fri Aug 19, 2005 2:10 pm

Well looks like the Aussies are competing with UK for the rights to get on their knees for the U.S, Howard the Duck can criticize all he wants because he has no right to. All though I do understand with their need to be ready and more alert.

BartSimpson @ Fri Aug 19, 2005 2:16 pm

Avro Avro:

$1:

I'd rather have national sovereignty, thank you very much.

That got you in the mess in Iraq because you completely ignored the international community who were right all along (Blix vindicated). I take comfort in knowing that no Canadian soldiers are dying needlessly in a forgien nation or countless Iraqis have not been killed by us, but why should you care.......it's not you it's a movie on TV. Quite frankly for a smart guy I am kind of shocked at your faithful support of this bullcrap.

"A proof is a proof and it is not a proof until it is proven"

Laugh if you want but he was right.

Insert ideolgy here__________________________ :roll:

because I know it's coming.

Hans Blix was not being allowed to complete his inspections by Hussein and Blix only started preaching patience after many years of preaching that Iraq was developing such weapons. It is his original testimony that the Bush Administration was acting on.

It was Blix, and Koffi Annan, and Clinton, and Albright, and the rest of the freaking world that warned about Iraq making a nuke and then Bush acted on the info.

The info was wrong long before Bush came along. In Bush's position I imagine another person may well have done the same thing.

BartSimpson @ Fri Aug 19, 2005 2:24 pm

Tman1 Tman1:

Amazing info here: http://www.navy.gov.au/

Little old Australia builds their own submarines instead of buying second hand British subs that have only ever killed Canadian sailors. They have state of the art frigates. And the tone of the site is positive and militant - which is a good set of traits to have in a military organization.

Canada may want to take notes and consider doing some of the same things.

Tman1 @ Fri Aug 19, 2005 2:27 pm

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Tman1 Tman1:

$1:

Little old Australia builds their own submarines instead of buying second hand British subs that have only ever killed Canadian sailors

So? accidents happen even on hi-tech subs.

$1:

They have state of the art frigates.

So? So do we.

$1:

And the tone of the site is positive and militant - which is a good set of traits to have in a military organization.

Like terrorism?

I do take note and think Canada should to a degree do the same but to participate in a dick measuring contest with UK and Australia for America? Nope sorry not gonna happen.

BartSimpson @ Fri Aug 19, 2005 2:33 pm

Tman1 Tman1:

$1:

Little old Australia builds their own submarines instead of buying second hand British subs that have only ever killed Canadian sailors

So? Accidents happen even on hi-tech subs.

And Canada should have some of those as opposed to the Royal Navy's decomissioned castoffs.

Tman1 Tman1:

$1:

They have state of the art frigates.

So? So do we.

Canada had even better stuff on the drawing boards and never built the ships. Canada could have an even better Navy than the USA. It would just be nice to see Canada leading the way for a change instead of playing catch up with the big boys.

$1:

And the tone of the site is positive and militant - which is a good set of traits to have in a military organization.

Like terrorism?[/quote]

[huh]

You lost me on that one. Sorry.

Tman1 @ Fri Aug 19, 2005 2:38 pm

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Tman1 Tman1:

$1:

Little old Australia builds their own submarines instead of buying second hand British subs that have only ever killed Canadian sailors

So? Accidents happen even on hi-tech subs.

And Canada should have some of those as opposed to the Royal Navy's decomissioned castoffs.

Tman1 Tman1:

$1:

They have state of the art frigates.

So? So do we.

$1:

And the tone of the site is positive and militant - which is a good set of traits to have in a military organization.

Like terrorism?

You lost me on that one. Sorry.[/quote]

$1:

And Canada should have some of those as opposed to the Royal Navy's decomissioned castoffs.

I suppose

$1:

They did? News to me. Besides, we upgrade the ships with hi-tech up to date technology so they are hi-tech, whats the problem? Why do we need a better navy then the U.S? Our navy does just fine. Could be a little larger but it's just fine.

$1:

You lost me on that one. Sorry.

Terrorists are militants. They also have militant sites that promote positive morals on being militant. You want terrorist traits to be in the military?

Scape @ Fri Aug 19, 2005 2:47 pm

US allows NZ to join military exercise

NZ is really 'distancing' themselves.

BartSimpson @ Fri Aug 19, 2005 2:56 pm

Tman1 Tman1:

Terrorists are militants. They also have militant sites that promote positive morals on being militant. You want terrorist traits to be in the military?

A militant military is a good thing. A militant police officer is a good thing, especially in a crime-ridden neighborhood. A militant network security specialist is a good thing, too.

An example of a non-militant military would be France in 1940 and the US at Pearl Harbor in 1941.

Militancy is simply a behavioural condition of paying attention to, and being devoted to one's task at hand.

I'd rather a militant military than a slack-assed military. :wink:

JayRoc @ Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:00 pm

I have to Agree that Canada should rebuild our military. There was a time when we had a respectable military force. A time where we could be proud of our military and not laughed at by other Countries. During that time we were still distinctly Canadian and not Bullies, I beleive we could remain a peace keeping nation and still protect our country from terrorists. I hate to think of what we would do if they did bomb a city like Vancouver or Toronto.

hwacker @ Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:00 pm

Avro Avro:

......and yet the little shit still lives here when he can live anywhere.

Hey Tallywacker, if ya hate Canada so much then leave......nobody is stopping you.

Hate Canada, I don't think so, hate people like you that run this socialist wasteland, yep sure do.

Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 25 Next

Board index » Politics » Improve Canada!