Iraq

[Monarch]

LONDON, England -- UK Foreign Secretary Jack Straw says the threat of military action is the only way to get Saddam Hussein to accept weapons inspectors.

Straw, who is due to deliver a speech to the United Nations on Saturday, said the "dismal truth" about the Iraqi regime was that it would refuse to respond to international pressure unless it knew it risked being attacked.

Earlier Straw said "the only way" to get weapons inspectors back into Iraq was by "the complete and united resolve of the U.N., led by the Security Council."

This should be accompanied by "clarity that if the weapons inspectors are not allowed back, then the will of the U.N. has to be enforced by other means which inevitably would mean military action," he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme.

British Ministry of Defence officials have confirmed that the British Army is to launch a major logistics exercise, but denied it was a preparation for military action against Iraq.

Operation Log Viper is being launched to test the capabilities of the 101 Logistics Brigade based at Aldershot, Hampshire.

Troops will move all forms of vital supplies from clothing and petrol to ammunition and medical supplies to RAF Woodbridge in Suffolk and the military port at Marchwood near Southampton.

An MoD spokesman told the UK Press Association: "This is an exercise that has long been planned to test our logistics capabilities."

Asked if it would be fortunate to have the supplies in place should action be launched on Iraq, the spokesman added: "That is speculation. There are no plans on that front and this exercise will stop on October 12 when the troops will return to their base."

The last major exercise by the Armed Forces, Saif Sareea II in Oman last year, ended with servicemen and women staying behind to join the war against terrorism in Afghanistan.

In a meeting with African leaders in New York on Friday, U.S. President George W. Bush reiterated his request for a U.N. resolution, demanding that Saddam disarm his weapons programmes.

"I am highly doubtful that he will meet our demands. I hope he does, but I'm highly doubtful," Bush said.

"The reason I'm doubtful is he's had 11 years to meet the demands. For 11 long years, he has basically told the United Nations and the world he doesn't care."

U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell was meeting all 14 other members of the U.N. Security Council to begin the process of agreeing an ultimatum for Iraq.

President Bush, outlining his request for a U.N.-imposed deadline on Saddam, said he was "talking days and weeks, not months and years", adding: "That's essential for the safety of the world."

---------------------

Just wanted to hear a few views on Iraq from my American friends. My country seems determined to stand shoulder to shoulder with America on the Iraq debate. I know Bush addressed the UN today and received some positive response to his proposels. Is there a chance we'll just be antagonizing the Muslim World further? Does Saddams regime need to be ended? Is he really as much of a threat as we are lead to believe? There seems to be so much opposition to attacking Iraq, I just wonder if we're doing it for the sake of it. Why are countries such as Canada backing off and offering no support?

 

[ferdville]

Unfortunately, history has shown that many countries continue to resist backing the United States in their efforts abroad. Yet these same countries were either bailed out by the U.S, in WW1 or WW2. I look for the same thing to happen again. Europe sat and watched a similar maniac, Adolf Hitler, as he flaunted all treaties and agreements. After invading one country, the Europeans would scold him - he'd promise to never to it again - and everyone was happy. Hitler played British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain for the ultimate patsy. As Hitler continued his evil ways, the Europeans appeased him again and again as he promised to be a good boy. Before you know it, Europe was engulfed in war. Without U.S. intervention, Britain would have fallen to the German forces. The U.S. gives billions of dollars of aid to European countries that continually fail to support our efforts. Thankfully, Britain appears to be standing firm on this one. Saddam has already demonstrated that he has chemical weaponry - he gassed at least 100,000 Kurds in the past. There are many reports by the intelligence community that he has tried to purchase materials that would allow him to produce nuclear weapons. The question is this - do you take pre-emptive action and stop him before he goes out of control? Or do you wait until he unleashes devistation on another country and say "Gee, we should have done something." Saddam has said many times that his goal is to control the entire Middle East. He invaded Kuwait not that long ago in an attempt to gain control there. Once again the U.S. swtepped in and stopped him. Unfortunately, they didn't take him out. I am not saying that this is an easy decision, because it is not. But Saddam has spent years refusing to follow even U.N. edicts. He does what he wants because no one will stop him. He executes Iraqui people as a regular matter. Anyone that speaks out against him is never seen again. The similarities between Saddam and Hitler are many. Hopefully, it won't take WW3 to bring him down.

 

[fletcher]

Hell look what the prime minister of canada said about the us and 9-11, he said we were partley to blame and then saw a poll that 84% of the the people there think the same way it had a -3% margin but what the hell. Nice freaking statement ,who will bail their ass out if someone tried to take them over,the us ,because they could not protect themself.

i find it hard to belive that , that many people to the north feel it was part of our fault, but his statement is a slap in the face of the us. and these were quotes right from him ran on msnbc today. unreal.

 

[just cover]

I have been sick and tired of almost all these countries that don't support us, tell us we are the world bully, that we are nothing but arrogrant people, and any chance they get go directly against us. England is the only country that has stood next to us in just about everything we have done and has been a staunch ally.

We support alot of htese countries in times of war or aggression and all we get back in return is it stuck in our ass. All of Europe is given all this aid and did they even send any help or support finacially, man power, etc. on 9/11. I didn't hear of any. Did you know that before the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait that they voted 90-95 % of the time against us in every single U.N. vote?

If these assholes in the middle east didn't have any oil we wouldn't give two shits about them. They all say they want to kill the aggressive Americans, but doesn't that go against their religion? I am not saying anything bad about the Muslim population in the US that are good American citizens. Hey this is the melting pot, but I think we need to rethink and analyze our immigration policy. My God every country in the middle east would like nothing better than to see us fall flat on our faces. WHY? Because with their oil they wouldCONTROL everything. Think about it.

I think it is time for us to stop handing out all this aid to these countries that all we get back in return is their middle finger.

just cover

 

[theGibber1]

What blows me away are the damn Germans!!!???

saying the US are being bullies and supporting Iraq

this god damn country is responsible for both World Wars..
the country alone has more blood on its hands and is responsible for more death than any country in history..

when did they become such pussies??

how dare any of them say the US is acting like reckless cowboys??

if not for the US the Russians would have murdered every single one of them at the end of the war...

then we turn around and give them money to rebuild and set up a govt..

what thanks do we get??


heres a bit from the O'Reilly show (i know alot of democrats hate O'Reilly but i love to watch his show..impossible to argue with. lol)

lots to read but everyone should read it


Hi, I'm Bill O'Reilly. Thank you for watching us tonight.

Germany turns on America. That is the subject of this evening's Talking Points Memo.

No nation on earth has been kinder to Germany than the United States. American dollars rebuilt that nation after it had embraced the evil dictator Hitler. American forces protected the majority of Germans from the Russians, who would have enslaved East Germany, which they did, and would have done the same thing to the West.

American dollars brought down the Soviet Union and the Berlin Wall, freeing millions of Germans in 1989. And what do we get for all that?

Well, German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder said today that Germany will not provide troops or money in the fight against Saddam Hussein. Schroeder said, "This country under my leadership is not available for an adventure." Schroeder's government says it is skeptical that Saddam is an outlaw and has illegal weapons.

Talking Points says the Germans have once again proved themselves an unworthy ally and an ungrateful nation. Even after Iraq invaded Kuwait and was defeated in the Gulf War, Germany continued to do back-door business with Saddam despite the embargo. Even after Iraq fired Scud missiles at Israeli civilians and gassed the Kurdish people, Schroeder remains skeptical.

Well, with all due respect, blank you, Mr. Chancellor. It's obvious that Schroeder is putting his political career ahead of what is right. He's up for reelection and down in the polls, so he's trying to tap into anti-American feeling.

In the coming weeks, you will hear the drum beat of, let's see the proof regarding Iraq and weapons of mass destruction. But in this very dangerous age, the proof is in the deeds. We all know Saddam tried desperately to develop biological and chemical weapons because scientists who have defected have told us that. And U.N. weapons inspectors found evidence of that.

That's why Saddam ordered them out. But some people simply cannot handle the truth.

The irony is that 65 years ago, few believed the Nazi regime was bent on murdering millions of civilians, despite reporting by William Schirer [CBS Newsman and later author of The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany] and others, despite Hitler's own words, despite the S.S. and the Gestapo. Millions simply would not accept the brutality of the Third Reich, and we saw what happened.

And here we are again. This time, Hitler has been replaced by Saddam, a murderer by all accounts, a terrorist, and perhaps a madman. Yet Gerhard Schroeder and his pals remain skeptical.

Well, the No Spin truth is that Germany has no credibility when it comes to savage dictators, and it owes the United States loyalty and support. Schroeder and the Germans that support him should be ashamed.



another bit



BILL O'REILLY, HOST: In the "Impact" segment tonight, did you know that German Americans are the largest ethnic group in the United States? And many of them cannot be very pleased this evening, because Germany says it will not help America remove Saddam Hussein.

Joining us now from Washington is Martin Wagner, a correspondent for German Public Radio.

So am I being unfair to Chancellor Schroeder?

MARTIN WAGNER, GERMAN PUBLIC RADIO: I think so, because I'm not going to defend Saddam Hussein, and Schroeder didn't defend Saddam Hussein. He is skeptical about a war. And I think that's quite reasonable, because war costs a lot, not just money but lives, and so it's quite prudent to think twice.

O'REILLY: All right. Now, he's our ally, right? I mean, Germany, ally of the United States, United States fighting its own war against terror, been attacked. All right? So why wouldn't he say, Look, you're our ally, we may disagree with your methods here, but we're going to back you up simply because, you know, you helped us in so many ways.

And when you're talking about money, Mr. Wagner, you know, you guys owe us big. You guys owe me big. I want you to send a nice present to my house this Christmas.

Because American taxpayers saved your butt time and time again. So raising money with the American people, that's not going to really fly over here, you know what I mean?

WAGNER: Yes, yes, yes. But it's not about money, it's not about flowers, it's about war. And to think about war twice, I think it's quite reasonable, point one. Point two, it's not just about a (UNINTELLIGIBLE) regime. You have to prove that this regime is dangerous to other people, to other countries in this region. (UNINTELLIGIBLE)...

O'REILLY: All right. So sending Scud missiles to Israel, attacking civilians and gassing the Kurds, that's not enough proof for you.

WAGNER: That's enough proof for me, because I was in Israel at this time in '91. That's enough proof that this is a terrible, dangerous regime, and I am convinced that Israel did the right thing many years ago to take out, to destroy the Iraqi nuclear reactor.

But at this point in history, the American government tells us, We are fighting terror. They have to show us the connection between Iraq and terror. There's a quite clear connection between Saudi Arabia and terror. But what about Saudi Arabia? What about Iran? What about Syria? So why Saddam Hussein? You have to have a good...

O'REILLY: All right. Well, here's why...

WAGNER: ... reason to go to war.

O'REILLY: ... because the United States intelligence services believe, based upon defectors who we have in custody now right in Washington where you are, actually they're not in D.C., they're in Virginia, that Saddam Hussein is busily working on a nuclear what they call dirty bombs, on smallpox, and on anthrax, that he has these weapons in development, and that as soon as they're operational, he will give them to whoever will do his bidding.

Now, I mean, what else more do you want? You know the guy's a killer, you were there, you saw it. You know he's unstable. The defectors say he's got this stuff. And we're talking about scientists who worked on it, OK? What more do you want?

WAGNER: I want what the government want, what the German government wants, because...

O'REILLY: Which is?

WAGNER: Which is to have proof. And...

O'REILLY: Well, that's not proof?

WAGNER: ... I'm quite sure, I'm quite sure, I'm quite sure...

O'REILLY: That's not proof? Defectors saying...

WAGNER: (UNINTELLIGIBLE)...

O'REILLY: ... that's not proof?

WAGNER: If the CIA gives the information to the German intelligence...

O'REILLY: Yes?

WAGNER: ... and this ends up at the desk of Chancellor Schroeder, he will go to war with America. I have no doubt about it. You don't have to forget, we have an election year, and Schroeder is fighting in these elections -- he has a hard time to win these elections. And so he's telling everybody carefully about war, and this sounds reasonable to the Germans. That's why he's telling this.

O'REILLY: I know why he's doing it, but that's sleazy, and it's putting himself above the war on terror. And you know, I made the analogy about 35 years ago, actually 65 years ago, excuse me, that nobody believed the Nazis, because they didn't have direct proof.

You know, FDR turned back the ship full of Jews that wanted to land in the United, because he didn't have direct proof, you know, because we couldn't get to Dachau, because you guys wouldn't let us get there.

So there wasn't direct proof. Even if we knew, based on eyewitness reports, based on correspondent reports, based upon their own words, but we didn't know. So for years we allowed these people to be slaughtered on your home territory. And it's the same scenario now. Doesn't that give you pause?

WAGNER: It gives me, but what about Syria? What happened in 1982 in Hama (ph)? So why Saddam Hussein? Why not in '91?

O'REILLY: Because he...

WAGNER: Why didn't Bush Senior go to Baghdad with his troops?

O'REILLY: Because he's considered by the United States government to be the most powerful threat because of the radioactive weapons and the biological weapons. That's why.

WAGNER: We don't know...

O'REILLY: You don't know.

WAGNER: ... in which state these weapons are.

O'REILLY: So the only way that you and Schroeder would be satisfied is if what? He sets off a nuclear device in Duesseldorf? Is that what it's going to take?

WAGNER: I think it's about containment, it's not about going to war. You have to contain a person like this.

O'REILLY: And if he hands a dirty bomb to a terrorist who goes out, how do you going to contain that, Mr. Wagner?

WAGNER: That's true, that's true, I agree.

O'REILLY: You know, if there's a doubt, you go with your friends. If there's a doubt, you support the people who made it possible for you, Mr. Wagner, and your countrymen to be free. All right? Yeah, there's a little doubt...

WAGNER: All right...

O'REILLY: ... but support the people that have given you freedom and a fine (UNINTELLIGIBLE). My final word.

WAGNER: We do.

O'REILLY: All right. We appreciate your time.



unreal how fast people forget, then turn their backs
:thefinger

 

[dr. freeze]

typical euro/liberal/idealistic but ignorant reply to the problem.....maybe if we can all live in happyville and imagine that everyone is a good person and that evil doesn't exist in the world we can remain in oblivious fantasy land.....

the policy of appeasement will never go away......history has repeated itself in europe ever since the Muslims first invaded a thousand of years ago....the same arguments were used then, and on through the ages til modern times with Napoleon, Kaiser, Hitler, and Lenin.....obviously appeasement does not work but the same futile mindset exists and may even by more prevalent over there today.....unbelievable!!!!

just think if the Jewish nation could have had the chance to take out Hitler when he was just getting started with his outrageous plans.....but I am sure the same detractors would have been there....the same shortsightedness.....here we are, carrying everyone's financial problems, bailing them out anytime, and can they lift a finger for us -- when we have their best interest in mind? Absolutely not!!! What is their rationale??? There is none as evidenced in this interview by O'Reilly and every interview done with these fools.

 

[fatdaddycool]

ssssssssssssssssss..........bang....................poof!!!!!!!!!!!!!!................

 

[THE KOD]

ssssssssssssssssss..........bang....................poof!!!!!!!!!!!!!!................

BOOM!





Scott-Atlanta

 

[fletcher]

How about Saudi what a piece of shit they are, they forget 10 years ago in the gulf war wey saved there ass from becoming dust mites, and they also forget who gave them the tech and support to build and run those oil fields ,THE US DID if not for our work and teaching them and supporting them with the know how and supplies, they would be walking around in the sand with sling shots and not in control of the oil that is in their ground.

fuk them all, the whole world could team up against us and England and Gb. and they would lose.

If we both cut off the forign aid we both give to the world and not buy shit from them and just from each other and yes by far we can both build anything we need it would just cost more,and keep our oil in alaska for our self which we ship out almost 70% we would do just fine.

I mean cut it all off food,med's and money and edu for all the scabs that come here to learn then go back to try to use it against us. That part of it is are fault let them learn in there own universities with their own prof. and do research on goats for their med needs and see how far they get. in fact cut them all off from coming into the country and ship the others out who are on student visa's and without proper paper work. Then see how the progress.

 

[selkirk]

our prime minister says a lot of nonsense, many world leaders do, sometimes you cannot even understand what he says.

hate to fight this Canada bashing but here are some basic facts:

1. help was offered by many countries and given in 9-11. Many Canadians offered/gave money and help.

2. Canadian airspace was open to all divereted planes that could not land in the US. many families in the maritimes took these (mostly American ) passengers in, and treated them well, many came back this year to thank them.

3. O Reilly is basically an idiot, who twists facts. just my opinion.

4. many ceremonies around the world were held on the one year anniversary.

5. most Canadians would not support action against the Iraq. unless it is backed by the UN

6. Saddam has always been evil, he bomb and killed over 20,000 kurds while an ally of the US. what was done then....not much.

7. Saddam would have had a nuclear weapon already, cdn. technology, and US $$ but Israel blew it up in the early 80s. US was against this action so was most of the world.

8. Saudi Arabia has funded OSB and many other terrorist suspects, they have the worse human rights record in the region. what is the US and UN doing about Saudi Arabia nothing.

9. Saudi Arabia is not even listed by the US as a terrorist state, but guess where Al Quada gets most of their funding.

10. 18 dead sailors from the USS Cole but the US pulled their lead investigator from the case because Saudia Arabia claimed he might cause a diplomatic incident. I doubt the Saudia Arabia was protecting some arab just sending OSB a $100 and working at the local market. however how many people have been arrested in Saudia Arabia or had international accounts froze, since the USS Cole bombing or since 9-11. zero. by the way Kuwait is also a major funder, but have seen very little arrests there either. well none Kuwait or Saudia Arabia millionaires

11. Saddam is hated by most religous extremists and it will be years before the US will be able to leave the region. You also may make Iran stronger.

12. a Canadians force (750)served with the Americans in Afganistan and some died due to friendly fire. Canada should spend about $500 million-$1 billion on our military, still the underfunded military is still well trained and carry out their tasks well, according to US commanders in Afganistan. We need to increase funding though.

13. invade Canada, who would, like to see them survive a Cdn. winter...40 below (LOL), history shows any invasion in Canada has been unsuccessful, it would be again.

as for Iraq I am not against military action, but would like a time table and perphaps backed by the UN. why did the UN and the US allow the weapon inspectors to get kicked out and do nothing.

no one will cry if Saddam and his regime is destroyed, hope it is, but American troops will have to stay for years, also there is a threat of civil war.

I hope the US finally fight terrorism on all fronts including Saudia Arabia, if you do not stop the funding it will never stop.

as for the Canadian Bashing it will continue.....best to get use to it.

thanks
selkirk

 

[selkirk]

"If we both cut off the forign aid we both give to the world and not buy shit from them and just from each other and yes by far we can both build anything we need it would just cost more,and keep our oil in alaska for our self which we ship out almost 70% we would do just fine"

nonsense. why do you think Saudia Arabia has so much power and say on the US, oil. Alaska would not have close to the amount the oil the US needs going forward, or at present.

cost a little bit more, try much more, the economy would grind to a halt and cause a world depression. if you do not believe this just look through history and tell me how well the US did when they put up massive tarrifs and more and more trade barriers. you would destroy the greatest economy in the world... the US, and it would not take long. of coarse the US government has already passed a number of trade barriers so maybe we can see the result...higher prices....


thanks
selkirk

 

[theGibber1]

O'Reilly twists the facts?

you cant twist a quote

Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien said this, quote, "I do think the Western world is getting too rich in relation to the poor world. And we're looked at as being arrogant, self-satisfying, greedy, and with no limits. And September 11 is an occasion for me to realize it even more," unquote.

personally i dont have problem with Canada........but there is no excuse for this:shrug:

 

[fletcher]

no one was bashing canada was stating what was said right from his mouth,i said i find it hard to believe the poll. I want to know who they polled because i am almost certain that% of the people from canada do not feel that way.

Saudi would not be able to have the oil and get it refined if it was not for the help we gave them. The oil is not the problem it is the cost.

i know someone high up with with exxon in the research division,we have more then enough oil and forms of fuel at our hands, but it would be more cost then what we get and my figures are right on how much we ship out from the pipe line.

also oil off shore lots of it once again cost but it is there,and pita freaks also a draw back. And there is plenty of clean burning coal that could be mined but is not because it's more simple just to buy.

Major vains of clean buring hard coal back east that could be mined and put many people back to work in ky,pa,wv,ind. then we have the west which has major coal vains not as clean burning but still does the job.

say what you want but the fact is the us is owed so much money from other countries and will never see it and over half of them are just waiting to stab us in the back, we cut off protection to saudi they would be taken over like a cheap whore and could not do shit about it. Where would these countries be with out us, Times are much different now then back in the depression times, we have way more tech skills and resources at hand to be got.


I love it when the countries that depend on others think they would cripple us,trust me the us and england would be the last to fall and last time i looked canada had the name north america,maybe they should break away from the continent and become west france then. And could say all they want about how the united states is the BIG BULLY HIS WORDS ON TV, and when push comes to shove see how far you get when someone comes to beat down your door.

 

[TIME TO MAKE $$$]

Well said Selkirk,

I was going to offer a few point but you discussed all of them at hand.

-40 degrees celcius?

Coldest ever in Toronto during my lifetime was -20 3 years ago, with wind gusts it felt like -50 LOL

I support the US no matter what the UN decides, SADDAM has to be ousted,

HE IS A BOMB WAITING TO EXPLODE

 

[TIME TO MAKE $$$]

Fletcher,

Most canadians do side with the US,


Sissy ass PM is a jackoff,

We need a tough guy not a whimp,

I would like to see Chretien's facial reaction if another country (with a superior army) attacked Canada and BUSH said " We are not getting involved"

:nono: :nono:

Chretien you fawking moron, support thy neighbour, who cares if everyone else in the world calls you a bully, the US is with you through thick and thin you moron!
:thefinger

Vent mode OFF

 

[selkirk]

"I love it when the countries that depend on others think they would cripple us,trust me the us and england would be the last to fall and last time i looked canada had the name north america,maybe they should break away from the continent and become west france then. And could say all they want about how the united states is the BIG BULLY HIS WORDS ON TV, and when push comes to shove see how far you get when someone comes to beat down your door."

of coarse that is not Canada Bashing. my apologies. look US does not have enough oil, by the way cost is important, just ask a motorist if he/she would like to pay double/triple at the pump.

would also like to see changes in Saudia Arabai.

nothing has changed, if you close off your borders with Tarrifs and trade barriers you will destroy the greatest economy in the world. there was softwood duties on Canadian softwood, it drove up the prices on houses. that is how trade barriers work, you increase costs, industries beome less competitive, you can try it this time but just read history...some things never change. a protectionist trade policy will destory the US economy and as a result the world economy.

I did not defend the statement as I think it was wrong, blaming all of the western world for the actions of murderers.

O Reilly does twist facts, just listen and you will see this.

As for "west France" quite a few Cdn. went over there in WW1, WW2, to defend France. ever heard of Vimy if not maybe another history lesson, one of the most important victories on WW1, and Cdn. soldiers pulled it off. We are not leaving North America we belong here!!@!

thanks
selkirk

 

[ferdville]

I just read last night about a rally held in BRITAIN by a large group of Muslims. The main theme of the rally was to praise Osama Bin Laden and criticize the U.S. Some of the rally leaders suggested a separate Muslim state be formed in Britain. There has ben an unprecedented flow of illegal immigrating Muslims throughut all of Europe in the past year. This could be a cause for concern.

 

[fletcher]

if you feel that you are grouped in the other countries that that fall into the aid and bash so be it,but i don't think you fall into that group but you must.

AND DID NOT SAY YOUR COUNTRY DID NOT BELONG IN N.AMERICA BUT MAYBE YOUR LEADERS SHOULD ACT LIKE THEY CARE ABOUT N.AMERICA INSTED OF BEING A FENCE POLL RIDER.

some of you just don't get it the world has to sides anymore and they will have to choose. it will only get worse. have to love the bleeding heart liberal's. yes everything will be fine and talk will make change well sometime talk is not enough it's been over 10 years of nice guy talk and many chances, and look where the world is people strapping bombs on back and blowing themself up with others,flying planes into buildings,sending bio-chems in the mail yeah talk works on people like this.

It's time to put some people out and others in line or it will be to late like the movie in the early 80's they day after that's where the world is headed because of countries who don't care what they do and other countries who are of the assumption that everything can be talked out, and why is this because they have some intrest at stake of their own.

 

[selkirk]

"if you feel that you are grouped in the other countries that that fall into the aid and bash so be it,but i don't think you fall into that group but you must. "

Where did I say Canada belongs in the aid and bash camp. four Canadians came home in body bags from Afganistan, and 750 served over there, does not that speak louder than words or a stupid quote. I think it does!!!!!!!!


AND DID NOT SAY YOUR COUNTRY DID NOT BELONG IN N.AMERICA BUT MAYBE YOUR LEADERS SHOULD ACT LIKE THEY CARE ABOUT N.AMERICA INSTED OF BEING A FENCE POLL RIDER

you said "canada had the name north america,maybe they should break away from the continent and become west france then. And could say all they want about how the united states is the BIG BULLY HIS WORDS ON TV, and when push comes to shove see how far you get when someone comes to beat down your door."


will not be part of West France anytime soon.
Canada sent 750 troops, 4 came home dead. ask their families about how much Canada cares about the situtation. you take one quote as how a nation feels, so be it. I agree but truth is Canada does not have much at this time of a clear foreign policy, that is a problem. Cdn. troops served in Afganistan and died that means a hell of a lot. at least to me, more than 1000 quotes or a billion polls.

I know someone who served over there, it is not his fault if they are underfunded. but he did more than me or you in fighting terrorism than most Cdns, or Americans will ever do.

Fletcher I agree with you on most things, terrorists have to be hunted down and destroyed. and destoyed or arrest the funders of terrorism. me and you agree on a great deal..except closing of your borders to trade...that would destroy the US and the World economy. Tarriffs cause prices to rise.

Time to Make Money $$$ agree with you on the PM he should retire time for Paul. and the weather some winters 20 below can be considered a warming trend. LOL.

thanks
selkirk

 

[fletcher]

good enough there is no since getting upset over things we won't have a choice in and that is the biggest problem of all.

They say vote vote vote but when all said and done what say do we have, except after the fact when we get to vote again. but if you don't vote you also have no right to bitch so i vote

have a good weekend and i do love canada when i was back home growing up would go with my dad every year fishing,he also goes hunting up there i never been ,would reather fish.


Have a great weekend
my biggest point was that stupid poll because i would say it would be about 25% tops that think that way and hell you might have close to that here. but 84% i don't buy it unless they polled 11 people.