[N8 v2.0]

Fifty years of pride in Canada disappears

Michael Walker
National Post

Saturday, March 22, 2003

VANCOUVER - I wasn't born a Canadian. I was born in Newfoundland and became a Canadian at age four when as a result of a referendum Newfoundland left British colonial status behind to join the Canadian federation. For more than 50 years I have been a Canadian.

For more than 50 years I have been proud to be a Canadian. I was proud to be a Canadian when Canadian diplomats helped settle the Suez Crisis. I was proud to be a Canadian when collective action had to be taken the last time an expansionist megalomaniac decided to march down the Korean Peninsula. I was proud to be a Canadian when Canadian peacekeepers moderated Cyprus. I was proud on the infrequent occasions Canadian leaders took a tough stance during the Cold War. I was proud when Canadian troops played their role in the liberation of Kuwait, and more recently Afghanistan.

Today, I am embarrassed to be a Canadian. I am embarrassed to be represented by a Prime Minister who is so detached from reality and a sense of Canada's true interests. I am embarrassed by a political system which is impotent in the face of a Prime Minister descending into perfidy. I am embarrassed that the Prime Minister was accorded a standing ovation in Parliament by his party for having decided to let others take up Canada's cudgel in the war against terror.

I am embarrassed by the ignorance of history and the evil possibilities of human nature that are revealed in the fact that six out of 10 Canadians are against the United States taking action against Iraq without the United Nations' support in spite of the fact that a clear majority believed that the United Nations should have authorized the war. I am embarrassed that my countrymen evidently believe more in the preservation of the UN than they do in the values the UN was created to preserve.

I am embarrassed by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation which wears its antipathy for the war effort as a badge of honour.

I am embarrassed by Member of Parliament Carolyn Parrish who noted, "Damn Americans: Hate those bastards," and by the fact that while she was roundly criticized by even the left-wing Toronto Star, under our electoral system there isn't a "damn" thing we can do about her.

I am embarrassed that MP Parrish is a moderate by comparison with left-wing MP Bill Blaikie who accused President Bush of "planning every minute of his life to kill as many Iraqi children as he can in the name of oil or whatever it is that's really on the agenda." I am embarrassed that I live in a country where such a tiny, spite-encrusted intellect could be elected to the nation's Parliament.

I am embarrassed by the naiveté of the Canadian Liberal Parliamentarian, Colleen Beaumier, who visited Iraq and returned to tell Canadians, "President Hussein has spoken to his ministers and said some of these 'anti-freedom and anti-human rights' laws are harsh and they have to be revisited." What with such a nice man running Iraq, aren't those Americans beastly for what they are doing.

I am not embarrassed by the student demonstrators who use excessive language to press their case, for we expect them to be ignorant -- that is why we call them students. But what can explain their teachers encouraging them to do this?

Like a very large and growing number of Canadian families, some of our children now reside in the United States. They are there because of the mutual interest reflected in the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement and its provision for easy migration. I am embarrassed for them that their new neighbours might associate them with the Canada of Jean Chrétien.

I am embarrassed that my U.S.-born grandson, and hundreds of thousands of grandchildren of other Canadians, will one day say: "Why did Canada take Saddam Hussein's side in the war against terror," because as a child, not having the benefit of diplomatically crafted subordinate clauses, he will see clearly that in war, if you are not with them you are effectively against.

I am embarrassed that my many American friends and collaborators might, if even for an instant, associate me with the views expressed by my government and the Members of Parliament who have supported it in its present stance.

I am most of all embarrassed because we Canadians, who have so much to be grateful for from our longstanding collaboration with the United States, are turning our backs on our continental friends and partners in preference for the company of posers, scoundrels and genocidal lunatics.

© Copyright 2003 National Post

 

[Serial Midget]

Perfidy = deep doo-doo?
Cudgel = obligation?

I like this guy!

“I am not embarrassed by the student demonstrators who use excessive language to press their case, for we expect them to be ignorant -- that is why we call them students. But what can explain their teachers encouraging them to do this?”

 

[LordOpie]

well said!

except, the guy's an ass for this... "Today, I am embarrassed to be a Canadian."

It's ok to have issues with your country, heck, I do. But I'd never ever say I'm embarrassed to be an American.

Too bad he didn't consult me before publishing

 

[BurlyShirley]

Originally posted by LordOpie
well said!

except, the guy's an ass for this... "Today, I am embarrassed to be a Canadian."

It's ok to have issues with your country, heck, I do. But I'd never ever say I'm embarrassed to be an American.

Too bad he didn't consult me before publishing

I agree, except that i applaud him saying he's emberassed, that is, if thats truly the way he feels, and he's not just writing to stir emotion.
If i were emberassed to be an American, i'd damn let people know.

 

[Spud]

Originally posted by Serial Midget
Perfidy = deep doo-doo?
Cudgel = obligation?

Perfidy is a war crime - ditching your uniform and firing on the other side in civvy's, I believe is the formal definition?

Good scrabble word.

 

[rbx]

i had a gut feeling that N8 was going to post this

so the guy is embarrassed that canada is sending the largest sum of money in humanitarian aid(100 million dollars) to the iraqi people?

that canada will also play an important role in rebuilding iraqi?
of all the peace keepers that died in service in past wars?

when slavery was still in effect in the u.s who welcomed the slaves?

shame on him for quickly forgetting all that his country has done!

 

[Serial Midget]

Originally posted by rbx
shame on him for quickly forgetting all that his country has done!

Word. It's one thing to be ashamed of your govornment's actions and policies - quite another to be ashmed of your county and fellow countrymen.

 

[Damn True]

Sad that his govt. has caused him so much personal struggle.
I can see being embarrased of the actions of your govt. or of the actions of an element of the populace. I'm sure we can all recall times when we have felt that way. But your country and those who shaped it are nothing to be ashamed of.
Even Nations with periods in their history blighted by the actions of horrible men can look to better times in their history as positives and at the negative as opportunity for learning and growth.

 

[LordOpie]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
I agree, except that i applaud him saying he's emberassed, that is, if thats truly the way he feels, and he's not just writing to stir emotion.
If i were emberassed to be an American, i'd damn let people know.

i can't help but think that most people who write this stuff have an agenda.

 

[Silver]

Maybe the Canadians weren't too stoked on getting bombed by a National Guard pilot hopped up on "go pills" (D.A.R.E. told me drugs were bad, guess it doesn't apply to pilots) in Afghanistan and decided to wait this out.

Or maybe Chretien doesn't remember where he is anymore, that's entirely possible as well.

 

[rbx]

Originally posted by Damn True
Sad that his govt. has caused him so much personal struggle.
I can see being embarrased of the actions of your govt. or of the actions of an element of the populace. I'm sure we can all recall times when we have felt that way. But your country and those who shaped it are nothing to be ashamed of.
Even Nations with periods in their history blighted by the actions of horrible men can look to better times in their history as positives and at the negative as opportunity for learning and growth.

well said thank you DT

 

[LordOpie]

Originally posted by Silver
Maybe the Canadians weren't too stoked on getting bombed by a National Guard pilot hopped up on "go pills" (D.A.R.E. told me drugs were bad, guess it doesn't apply to pilots) in Afghanistan and decided to wait this out.

Or maybe Chretien doesn't remember where he is anymore, that's entirely possible as well.

I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not, so I'll toss out a few more facts about that situation. The US pilot asked for permission to take out the site where the Canadians were. NOT ONE person knew it was Canadians... NOT even the Canadian military liaison who's job it is to know. No one told him that they were doing maneuvers in the area. While the pilot was hopped up on go pills, it's a common practice for all pilots of all gov'ts -and- the pills had nothing to do with it as he only followed orders with permission from the Canadians.

 

[Silver]

Nah, I was being sarcastic (not about the go pills though, I find it that abhorrent for reasons pertaining to the drug war).

From what I have read though, the pilot asked for permission to engage and was told to wait, but rolled in anyways.

That article kinda pissed me off, the National Post is a full on right wing rag. It's kinda like taking stuff off of Fox News in the States.

 

[LordOpie]

Originally posted by Silver
Nah, I was being sarcastic (not about the go pills though, I find it that abhorrent for reasons pertaining to the drug war).

From what I have read though, the pilot asked for permission to engage and was told to wait, but rolled in anyways.

That article kinda pissed me off, the National Post is a full on right wing rag. It's kinda like taking stuff off of Fox News in the States.

Don't get me started on the drug war :angry:

I was under the impression that he was under fire, he rolled, but had permission just before he engaged... or more specifically was given discretionary powers, but was told that there were no friendlies there.

Well, I really hope that pilot doesn't get in trouble. Last I heard was that he was not allowed to leave his home state... Indiana?

 

[Silver]

Hmm, I thought I read that the pilot saw flashes on the ground and thought he was being fired at, asked for permission to engage, and was waiting for that to come back when he saw more flashes and attacked.

I'll have to look up what actually happened this weekend, I guess

 

[Drunken_Ninja]

there is nothing to be ashamed of.

The U.N. could have reached a reasonable comprimise to disarm Iraq and even change the regime without use of force. Saddam Hussein could have been countered politically. 'Serious Consequences' is a very ambiguous statement.

The U.S. was too trigger happy to engage in politics because their multi-billion dollar, 6 month old military equipment was aging too quickly. Americans are only too thrilled to exploit a failing dictatorship.

While I cannot vouch for Saddam Husseins actions at this time, they could be seen as being brought on by the use of force in the given situation.

I can understand that americans could be embarassed. Especially when I hear things like 'we don't care how long this campaign lasts we will stay until we see things right'. The U.S. never gave the diplomatic process or the U.N. a chance to diffuse the problem. The american media and U.S. president were to busy propagating war to notice that the UN was succeeding, to even care.

Jean Chretien however acted with integrity for once. It was unexpected and welcome by many people here. He accidentally did the right thing for once. I'd give him alot more credit for his actions but he often makes more mistakes than he gets things right.

 

[llkoolkeg]

Originally posted by Drunken_Ninja
there is nothing to be ashamed of.
---B.S. I would be ashamed if the U.S. turned its back on our Canadian friends. Your denial is shocking.---
The U.N. could have reached a reasonable comprimise to disarm Iraq and even change the regime without use of force. Saddam Hussein could have been countered politically. 'Serious Consequences' is a very ambiguous statement.
---B.S. How do you reason with or vote out a tyrannical murderer? Your naivete is shocking.---
The U.S. was too trigger happy to engage in politics because their multi-billion dollar, 6 month old military equipment was aging too quickly. Americans are only too thrilled to exploit a failing dictatorship.
---B.S. Are you suggesting our cruise missles' freshness date was elapsing? Been reading those conspiracy-theory comic books again? Your gullibility is shocking.---
While I cannot vouch for Saddam Husseins actions at this time, they could be seen as being brought on by the use of force in the given situation.
---B.S. Look at the history of the Ba'ath Party since his original murderous coup! Your duplicity is shocking.---
I can understand that americans could be embarassed. Especially when I hear things like 'we don't care how long this campaign lasts we will stay until we see things right'. The U.S. never gave the diplomatic process or the U.N. a chance to diffuse the problem. The american media and U.S. president were to busy propagating war to notice that the UN was succeeding, to even care.
---B.S. If the 13+ years of glacial progress the U.N. can point to as evidence for disarming Iraq is to be considered "success", then exactly how do you define failure? Do you live in a cave? Your concept of reality is shocking.---
Jean Chretien however acted with integrity for once. It was unexpected and welcome by many people here. He accidentally did the right thing for once. I'd give him alot more credit for his actions but he often makes more mistakes than he gets things right.
---B.S. With integrity like Jean Chretien's, I would prefer to align myself with scoundrels! Say what you want about GeeDubya, but at least he is not a weak, sniveling little benchwarmer like that cheek-spreading Chretien! Your provinciality is shocking.---

BTW, a cudgel is a small baton.

 

[Silver]

So basically, you're saying that if I walk into a bar, whip out my huge dick and piss all over the bar, the patrons, and their drinks, THEY are the assholes because they won't buy me a round afterward?

That's the Bush administration's idea of diplomacy in a nutshell. I see Rumsfeld is getting pissy at Syria now too....this is going just as planned, isn't it?

 

[SandMan]

Originally posted by Drunken_Ninja
there is nothing to be ashamed of.

The U.N. could have reached a reasonable comprimise to disarm Iraq and even change the regime without use of force. Saddam Hussein could have been countered politically. 'Serious Consequences' is a very ambiguous statement.

The U.S. was too trigger happy to engage in politics because their multi-billion dollar, 6 month old military equipment was aging too quickly. Americans are only too thrilled to exploit a failing dictatorship.

While I cannot vouch for Saddam Husseins actions at this time, they could be seen as being brought on by the use of force in the given situation.

I can understand that americans could be embarassed. Especially when I hear things like 'we don't care how long this campaign lasts we will stay until we see things right'. The U.S. never gave the diplomatic process or the U.N. a chance to diffuse the problem. The american media and U.S. president were to busy propagating war to notice that the UN was succeeding, to even care.

Jean Chretien however acted with integrity for once. It was unexpected and welcome by many people here. He accidentally did the right thing for once. I'd give him alot more credit for his actions but he often makes more mistakes than he gets things right.

Very well said Drunken_Ninja!

 

[DRB]

Originally posted by Drunken_Ninja
there is nothing to be ashamed of.

The U.N. could have reached a reasonable comprimise to disarm Iraq and even change the regime without use of force. Saddam Hussein could have been countered politically. 'Serious Consequences' is a very ambiguous statement.

The U.S. was too trigger happy to engage in politics because their multi-billion dollar, 6 month old military equipment was aging too quickly. Americans are only too thrilled to exploit a failing dictatorship.

While I cannot vouch for Saddam Husseins actions at this time, they could be seen as being brought on by the use of force in the given situation.

I can understand that americans could be embarassed. Especially when I hear things like 'we don't care how long this campaign lasts we will stay until we see things right'. The U.S. never gave the diplomatic process or the U.N. a chance to diffuse the problem. The american media and U.S. president were to busy propagating war to notice that the UN was succeeding, to even care.

Jean Chretien however acted with integrity for once. It was unexpected and welcome by many people here. He accidentally did the right thing for once. I'd give him alot more credit for his actions but he often makes more mistakes than he gets things right.

Saddam could have disarmed. Saddam could have opened his country up completely to the arms inspectors. Saddam could have created an open and free society that didn't revert to torture and murder. Saddam could have complied with the UN resolutions over the years. The French could have not supplied Iraq with nuclear technology. The Russians could have not supplied Iraq with chemical and biological weapons technology. Saddam could have not invaded Kuwait the first time. Saddam could have not used chemical weapons on a regular basis. 12 years is a very long time last time I checked.

There were a lot of bad decisions being made. I'm just not sure you have identified the right people for making them.

 

[LordOpie]

Originally posted by Drunken_Ninja
The U.N. could have reached a reasonable comprimise to disarm Iraq and even change the regime without use of force.

Really. Ok genius, tell us how?

While I cannot vouch for Saddam Husseins actions at this time, they could be seen as being brought on by the use of force in the given situation.

Wow, you're sympathy for a murderous dictator is frightening.

The U.S. never gave the diplomatic process or the U.N. a chance to diffuse the problem.

Again, moronic... what about the 17 resolutions and 12 years?

Again, Drunknut, you continue to impress.

 

[Stellite]

Originally posted by rbx

so the guy is embarrassed that canada is sending the largest sum of money in humanitarian aid(100 million dollars) to the iraqi people?

No, the US will be the largest provider of money, Canada may be number 2.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Silver
Maybe the Canadians weren't too stoked on getting bombed by a National Guard pilot hopped up on "go pills" (D.A.R.E. told me drugs were bad, guess it doesn't apply to pilots) in Afghanistan and decided to wait this out.

Or maybe Chretien doesn't remember where he is anymore, that's entirely possible as well.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wow, nice to know how you can change the subject to something negative against the US, when it was a Canadian being talked about. IF you don't like it, it's easy enough to leave it as there is no one holding a gun to your head telling you to stay like in Iraq.



As for the Speech, I think it was good that voiced his opinion and dislike of what he sees happening. However, he shouldn't be embarrassed about being Canadian. He has freedom for now and he should voice his opinion and what I'm sure many others feel.

 

[rbx]

Originally posted by Stellite
No, the US will be the largest provider of money, Canada may be number 2.

for a country thats not participating in the war effort it still nothing to sneeze at.

 

[BurlyShirley]

achoo!

 

[Stellite]

Originally posted by rbx
for a country thats not participating in the war effort it still nothing to sneeze at.

No sneezing here. I agree that it is more than most countries are willing to do and applaud the effort. Canada has always provided humanitarian support when participating in actions such as what is happening.

 

[Drunken_Ninja]

Originally posted by DRB
Saddam could have disarmed. Saddam could have opened his country up completely to the arms inspectors. Saddam could have created an open and free society that didn't revert to torture and murder. Saddam could have complied with the UN resolutions over the years. The French could have not supplied Iraq with nuclear technology. The Russians could have not supplied Iraq with chemical and biological weapons technology. Saddam could have not invaded Kuwait the first time. Saddam could have not used chemical weapons on a regular basis. 12 years is a very long time last time I checked.

There were a lot of bad decisions being made. I'm just not sure you have identified the right people for making them.

In answer to your question I suggest looking up the definition for retrospective determinism.

 

[rbx]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
achoo!

i am sure the people starving in iraq wont sneeze at that help!!
how easy are people to forget when they are well fed and closed that every bit of help counts!

and the last time i checked most of the u.s allies are not even close in the amount of humanitarian aid that canada is sending!

 

[Stellite]

Originally posted by Drunken_Ninja
In answer to your question I suggest looking up the definition for retrospective determinism.

yes, but it doesn't seem to work in cases like yours. And again, you stray from the original discussion to slam a country that has better intentions that most of the world, except for it's close friends.

DRB has it right and if were to listen to you or the french we would have another hitler who would have the nuclear bomb and be able to deliver it.

North Korea will be the next big issue and I for one hope we stay out of it and let Korea's neighbors handle this one. China and Russia have plenty to worry about there.

 

[Drunken_Ninja]

Originally posted by llkoolkeg
---B.S. I would be ashamed if the U.S. turned its back on our Canadian friends. Your denial is shocking.---

> The U.S.A turned its back on the U.N. and in doing so turned its back on Canada in this particular situation. Canada made its own decision.

---B.S. How do you reason with or vote out a tyrannical murderer? Your naivete is shocking.---

> the u.n. had diplomatic power until the U.S. abandonned it creating a rift. Success was slow but it was apparent.

---B.S. Are you suggesting our cruise missles' freshness date was elapsing? Been reading those conspiracy-theory comic books again? Your gullibility is shocking.---

> the gullibility of americans is quite shocking as a matter of fact. I am not sure how little education it takes to cause a whole nation to swallow that much propaganda whole.

---B.S. Look at the history of the Ba'ath Party since his original murderous coup! Your duplicity is shocking.---

> Yes of course. In america one is guilty until proven innocent. Who wouldn't have seen that coming?

To think that the Ba'ath party might be capable of redeeming itself or become dissolved through political pressure is the source of the connundrum that slowed the diplomatic process in the first place.

---B.S. If the 13+ years of glacial progress the U.N. can point to as evidence for disarming Iraq is to be considered "success", then exactly how do you define failure? Do you live in a cave?

> you would be indicating the failure of leadership of the US. In fact. To begin look at how many resources were put into war as opposed to the peace process in the behalf of the US.

 

[Drunken_Ninja]

Originally posted by Stellite
yes, but it doesn't seem to work in cases like yours. And again, you stray from the original discussion to slam a country that has better intentions that most of the world, except for it's close friends.

>The end is not justified by the means.

DRB has it right and if were to listen to you or the french we would have another hitler who would have the nuclear bomb and be able to deliver it.

>America never tried to find an alternate means to continue the disarmament of Iraq. The French just pointed out that war was not being used as a means of last resort. It was the primary objective of the U.S. all along to destroy the infarastructure of iraq, conquer its people and steal its wealth by also profiteering from contracts to rebuild iraq.

North Korea will be the next big issue and I for one hope we stay out of it and let Korea's neighbors handle this one. China and Russia have plenty to worry about there.

>Sure pass the buck why don't you?

 

[Drunken_Ninja]

There is alot of rhetoric being used on both sides of this debate. It is very difficult to support any argument here.

While I would like to point out that war might have been avoided I recognize that this is merely speculation.

So is the speculation that Iraq has biological and nuclear weapons.

America is having a hard enough time justifying the war against terrorism in Iraq. With a president who believes that action and reaction is brought about by violent conflict; not many people believe that what will be brought about is going to be everlasting peace.

The argument that Canada has turned its back on its friends simply is propaganda. Lashing out at Canadians for belief that there is a better way is immature.

America may still see its folly when the actual casualty reports come in. What is acceptable collateral damage and what is and what not humane is what americans would debate and canadians rebuke.

What is most disgusting is the overwhelming joy president Bush does not conceal when declaring that america will prevail through conventional weapon superiority.

 

[LordOpie]

Originally posted by Drunken_Ninja
So is the speculation that Iraq has biological and nuclear weapons.

*shakes head*

you really need to pull your head out of the sand, or ass, whichever may be the case.

There's no speculation. Iraq had/has bio/chem weapons and was ordered by the UN to dismantle them. It was up to Iraq to prove that was done.

 

[Damn True]

Why then are we finding humongous cache's of chem-bio suits all over Iraq?
Ninja, you are swallowing the left's rhetoric hook line and sinker.

We know he has the stuff, we have the records of the sale from French and Ruskies. He has ordered his troops to use the stuff. His troops have been issued chem-bio suits. He has used the stuff in Kurdistan and against Iran.

What part of that offers any sort of doubt that Hussein posseses chem-bio weapons. Would you prefer to wait for him to use them again?

You are appaling. The lack of fortitude of your Prime Minister is shameful. His conduct is reprehensible and amounts to tacit support of a despot. If you agree with said conduct you should be ashamed of yourself.

 

[slein]

CANADA is supporting the war effort with three of our naval vessels and some soldiers on exchange. our gov't hasn't come right out to support the US's efforts in words, yet our effort, however small, is there. at the end of the day, we are there for our southern brothers, despite some silly opinions that people in both countries have of each other.

what people don't realise is that CANADA has a long standing committment to the UN that we are attempting to fulfil. what is unfortunate is our leader is holding on to power when there is good sentiment to have a new person in control. CHRETIEN thought that pepper spray was something you put on steaks, to give you an idea how a politician becomes out of touch with the world. to his honour, he is the longest standing leader in the free world, so a lot of leaders respect his opinion. it was painfully clear, due to vetoes, that a UN resolution on IRAQ was not forth coming as it should have. i know that FRANCE, RUSSIA and GERMANY had their reasons, secret or not. the CANADIAN solution had a lot of merit... but CANADA does not have a seat on the security council. thus, no one cared. the UN failed to provide an adequate timeline to deal with IRAQ when it was evident that something had to be done. kudos to the US for doing something, albeit their solution is not the nicest thing to do.

i don't necessarily like the fact that the US couldn't wait for a diplomatic solution.... however, such a solution was not forthcoming, due to petty squabbling. intestinal fortitude is quite lacking in the UN. we should scrap it and go with the G8. CANADA does a lot of things in the world, most right and some wrong. not outright supporting the US to save face in the UN is a tragic mistake. we would have liked a UN endorsed solution, but it wasn't coming. as for our elected leaders speaking out against the US, well, they should shut their cock suckers.

SADDAM has WMD's? yes... he was in material breech. progress was being made, and that progress was slow, however it is stunted due to the war. everyone should stop bitchin about it, and focus our support for the people risking their lives to make the lives of other's better. we should focus on the civilians whose voice is continuing to be oppressed by those who have no idea what life is about. i'm hoping that this mess is over sooner rather than later.

i just realised that i don't have a point. SLEIN OUT.

 

[Damn True]

You made some very good points.
Thank you.

 

[LordOpie]

Originally posted by slein
CANADA is supporting the war effort with three of our naval vessels and some soldiers on exchange. our gov't hasn't come right out to support the US's efforts in words, yet our effort, however small, is there. at the end of the day, we are there for our southern brothers, despite some silly opinions that people in both countries have of each other.

what people don't realise is that CANADA has a long standing committment to the UN that we are attempting to fulfil. what is unfortunate is our leader is holding on to power when there is good sentiment to have a new person in control. CHRETIEN thought that pepper spray was something you put on steaks -- HAHA! (Opie), to give you an idea how a politician becomes out of touch with the world. to his honour, he is the longest standing leader in the free world, so a lot of leaders respect his opinion. it was painfully clear, due to vetoes, that a UN resolution on IRAQ was not forth coming as it should have. i know that FRANCE, RUSSIA and GERMANY had their reasons, secret or not. the CANADIAN solution had a lot of merit... but CANADA does not have a seat on the security council. thus, no one cared. the UN failed to provide an adequate timeline to deal with IRAQ when it was evident that something had to be done. kudos to the US for doing something, albeit their solution is not the nicest thing to do.

i don't necessarily like the fact that the US couldn't wait for a diplomatic solution.... however, such a solution was not forthcoming, due to petty squabbling. intestinal fortitude is quite lacking in the UN. we should scrap it and go with the G8. CANADA does a lot of things in the world, most right and some wrong. not outright supporting the US to save face in the UN is a tragic mistake. we would have liked a UN endorsed solution, but it wasn't coming. as for our elected leaders speaking out against the US, well, they should shut their cock suckers.

SADDAM has WMD's? yes... he was in material breech. progress was being made, and that progress was slow, however it is stunted due to the war. everyone should stop bitchin about it, and focus our support for the people risking their lives to make the lives of other's better. we should focus on the civilians whose voice is continuing to be oppressed by those who have no idea what life is about. i'm hoping that this mess is over sooner rather than later.

i just realised that i don't have a point. SLEIN OUT.

Made good points too.

 

[rbx]

good post slein

 

[Drunken_Ninja]

Originally posted by Damn True
Why then are we finding humongous cache's of chem-bio suits all over Iraq?

>he hasn't used chem weapons in this war and no one has found them yet

Ninja, you are swallowing the left's rhetoric hook line and sinker.

>he made mistakes and may have seen the error of his ways? Allegedly has weapons of mass destruction. The chem suits are scary but not illegal.

What part of that offers any sort of doubt that Hussein posseses chem-bio weapons. Would you prefer to wait for him to use them again?

>I don't think that any will be found. Furthermore the Iraqis people are getting slaughtered. (regardless of the technology being used) America doesn't need any help to fight this war. 'Operation Kick Some Terrorist ass' will see other fronts that this country can agree on.

The lack of fortitude of your Prime Minister is shameful. His conduct is reprehensible and amounts to tacit support of a despot. If you agree with said conduct you should be ashamed of yourself.

>Jean Chretien acted on behalf of what most canadians think is right. Bullying Iraq into submission seems to be working for the U.S. . Regime change was never agreed upon when 'serious consequences' were mentioned in light of resolution 1441. We are a soveriegn nation and can make our own decisions.

Same old scaremonger tactics used on behalf of the U.S. to justify their position. Do you even grasp what 100 billion dollars can actually do instead of fighting a war?

I can tell you that it could feed the entire Iraqi people for 6 months. It could solve aids. It could halve the poverty of all the impoverished people in the world.

 

[Drunken_Ninja]

Prime Minister’s Jean Chrétien’s response to a question on Iraq during Question Period in the House of Commons
"I want to set out the position of the Government of Canada. We believe that Iraq must fully abide by the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council. We have always made clear that Canada would require the approval of the Security Council if we were to participate in a military campaign.
Over the last few weeks the Security Council has been unable to agree on a new resolution authorizing military action.

Canada worked very hard to find a compromise to bridge the gap in the Security Council. Unfortunately we were not successful.

If military action proceeds without a new resolution of the Security Council, Canada will not participate.

We have ships in the area as part of our participation in the struggle against terrorism. Our ships will continue to perform their important mission against terrorism."

 

[Damn True]

My God you are deluded.

Made mistakes?
May have seen the error of his ways?
Right, and Michale Jackson has never had plastic surgery.

Fact-Hussein is taking hostage the families of men to conscript them into service under the threat of killing their wives and children if they do not fight.

Fact-Hussein has employed troops of teenage and pre-teen boys (but the libs balk at Hitler comparisons) and threatend to kill their mothers if they do not fight.

Does this sound like a man who has seen the error of his ways? The fact that you can for an instant, even consider giving this guy another, after 12 years of chances amounts to nothing more than tacit approval and displays a yellow streak as wide as Canada itself.

Fact-Hussein used chem weapons against Kurds. Which means he has them.

Fact-Hussein used chem and bio weapons against Iran. Which means he has them.

Fact-Husseins troops have been issued orders to use chem-bio weapons. Which means he has them.

Fact-Husseins troops have been issued chem-bio suits. What are the suits for if not to protect his troops from chem-bio weapons? Circumstantial, but it dosent take a genius to surmise that this means he has them.

Fact-Husseins troops have been issued atropiene. An antidote for (DRB, help me out here I went to SEER 7 years ago) some sort of chem-bio weapons. Circumstantial, but it dosent take a genius to surmise that this means he has them.

Fact-Hussein has fired at least one misslie a day that was either an Al-Sammud or Al-Hussein missile. They know the type because of the distance covered. Hussein, under 687, 688, and 1441 is not supposed to have them. He claimed not to have them. Yet.....he fired them which means he has them.

You don't have to grow a pair of nuts, be a man and stand up for what is right. That is what the United States of America is for. But I would think you could at least, as a thinking (I would hope) person realize that this operation is more justified now than it has ever been.