# Anti-war protesters get fast start on PM



## JasonH (12 Dec 2003)

Anti-war protesters get fast start on PM

canada.com 
Thursday, December 04, 2003

VANCOUVER - Paul Martin has yet to be sworn in as prime minister, but he‘s already attracting protesters.

Demonstrators from an anti-war group are planning to picket a Liberal party fund-raising dinner in downtown Vancouver Thursday night.

Martin is scheduled to be the keynote speaker at the $290-a-plate dinner at the Sheraton Wall Centre Hotel.

Members of the StopWar.ca coalition say they will picket outside the hotel to demand the withdrawal of Canadian troops from Afghanistan.

They are also protesting any possible participation in the U.S. National Missile Defence program, the latest effort at a "Star Wars"-style anti-ballistic missile defence for the continent.

Martin will be sworn in as prime minister on Dec. 12. 

 http://www.canada.com/vancouver/globaltv/story.asp?id=D39DEEB2-7834-484E-A922-6A7F739F6F56


----------



## 311 (12 Dec 2003)

Arn‘t we in Afgahnistan to free the people from the tyranny of Al Quada, who treat woman poorly amoung one of the many human rights violations. Arn‘t we in Afgahnistan to stop terrorism ?

Maybe the people at StopWar.ca should get there priorties straight. I‘d be interested in what they would have to say after a terrorist killed their family.


----------



## meni0n (12 Dec 2003)

Bunch of ignorant hippies.


----------



## winchable (12 Dec 2003)

These are the same people who think rememberance day is a celebration of murder, shortsighted ill-informed people.
Peace can only be won with a sword.
For them, peace can only be won by whining and making life hard for everyone around them.


----------



## jutes85 (12 Dec 2003)

What is their problem? Its not like our soldiers are getting killed almost everyday like with the Americans in Iraq. They make sure that terrorists stay out of countries like Canada and the US, bunch of hippies.


----------



## winchable (12 Dec 2003)

Soldiers dying at all is no good, even if it isn‘t everyday.
But for the most part I doubt they‘re there because soldiers are dying, service is voluntary so it‘s not like they‘re protesting the draft.
They‘re most likely protesting because they think the war is a human rights infraction against someone.


----------



## jutes85 (12 Dec 2003)

Exactly, it was the soldier who decided to join the army, he knew of the risks involved.


----------



## winchable (12 Dec 2003)

Yeah, which is why they‘re not there to protest that...


----------



## Gibson (12 Dec 2003)

Some country could have nukes pointed at us with soldiers murdering and stealing grain from the poor while beating their women into submission and ethnically cleansing them afterwards.  If we sent troops in there to stop it even with all UN Nations supporting it, there would be protests.  Some people, regardless of reason or just cause still protest.  If they were around 50 years ago they would have protested against D-Day.

To me personally it‘s come to a point where protests are almost a normal thing and if we sent troops overseas and there weren‘t any protests then we should have cause for concern!  I‘ve seen organizers woo students at my school into protesting with promises of DJ‘d parties afterwards and what not.  Half the people walking the line are in it ‘cause some cute girl asked them to go, it‘s a useless form of expressing yourself as people just write it off as the result of a bunch of nutcases.  For the most part they are right too.


----------



## stukirkpatrick (12 Dec 2003)

This appalls me.  Sure, peace and love are nice theories, but the world does not work that way.  It seems to be human nature to be aggressive towards others.

Why pull Cdn troops out of Afghanistan?  They are there to stop the vicious infighting that exists between the warlords, not just hunting terrorists.
They are probably doing more good for the people than if they just weren‘t there in the first place.         :evil:  

Ok no more ranting.


----------



## combat_medic (12 Dec 2003)

I think what everyone (on both sides of the debate) is missing in this debate is a healthy dose of perspective. Peace can not _only_ be won by a sword, nor is it _never_ the answer.

Sometimes, peace can be accomplished without force of arms, and I think most people here would agree that it would be the most preferable option. However, we should still be alert and prepared for a forcible solution. Neither one is the answer, and neither is entirely right or wrong. There is a time and place for both, and most intelligent military and political leaders will understand the appropriate time and place for their application.

Being either a "hippie" or a "warmonger" is to be narrow minded, and to lose perspective. Both sides seem to be losing sight of the issues at hand, and are debating war and peace as mere philosophical principles. Let‘s not be overly hasty at beating our swords into plowshares, or our plowshares into swords.


----------



## Bert (12 Dec 2003)

That is the most "on the fence" post I‘ve ever read.


----------



## combat_medic (12 Dec 2003)

Trust me, I‘m never "on the fence" when it comes to any issue, but I do believe in considering all courses of action when making a decision, and not narrowing your field of vision to only one limited viewpoint.


----------



## 311 (12 Dec 2003)

I don‘t think the issue is wiether or not we like war, no one wants war. However, given what we are doing in Afgahnistan, I don‘t think we should be taking flak for it. We are clearly helping. We don‘t have to be there, but if we all want to feel safe tonight, then we do. Helping opressed people, and taking out terrorists is a good thing. I would have to say that the people at StopWar.ca are stupid, nieve and no very little of what is actually going on. I believe as some posters said above, that there just protesting , for the sake of protesting.


----------



## Enzo (12 Dec 2003)

I hear what you‘re saying Medic.

As for legitimate protest. It may not be for everyone, but it‘s a right that we enjoy. I don‘t mind, gives people (including us) something to talk about.

Besides, if you can meet a cute girl, why not?

Cheers, I‘m going along with the local bikini models to protest brussel sprouts at Thrifty‘s. I can‘t stand those things and as long as those ladies will have me, I‘ll be there.


----------



## winchable (12 Dec 2003)

I must say I have never seen a cute girl at a protest.
Where is this bikini model brussel sprouts protest?

I think the topic in general has been one that has been thought about for some time. The 70‘s vietnam war protests: Where freedom to do things such as protest government policies etc., was being protected by the very same army that the protesters were protesting.
Whether or not they were actually protecting freedom with the action in vietnam is another topic, and my new years resolution is to keep my controversial statements to a minimum on this forum.


----------



## JSA (12 Dec 2003)

Hey Che, let er rip.  It‘s a free country.  If folks don‘t like what you think, they‘ll get over it.  I don‘t try to start a fight but if I‘m right I won‘t back down.  I always remember best the days I was in an rifle section as a peon, boys said just about anything and if they thought what you said was stupid they told ya.  We had a good saying that could usually identify if you‘d said something boneheaded, ‘your talking like a tree fell on your head‘.  A very polite way to tell someone that their making a jack__s out of themselves.  Back to the original post, Protester‘s have a right to protest and I have a right to tell them I think their wrong, or if they won‘t listen I can ignore them.  Free country...at least for now.  Don‘t lose it!  js


----------



## Enzo (12 Dec 2003)

Che - Sorry, the protest didn‘t work out. We were on our way to Thrifty‘s but it was a long walk. Thirst overcame us and we went into the pub. Would you believe that a group of Labatt‘s Poster girls were in there holding a beer bong demo. A few later, ended up protesting bathing suits in the hot tub of their hotel.

I love protests...


----------



## winchable (12 Dec 2003)

Actually JSA you‘d be surprised how some people never seem to let things go these days.

As for the protesters i have to agree, if they are allowed to protest, then I‘m allowed to tell them I think they‘re wrong.
I found the best way of dealing with protesters is to ignore them most of the time all they can do is yell stupid stuff like "baby Killer", etc.
Which is fine because words are about all they can throw, if they throw anything else or make it a physical thing then they open up a new dimension, but I have yet to come across any that have.
Although I‘m sure if one were to look in the paper they would see the protesters hurling rocks at the police and the police hurling gas back, but I personlly haven‘t met any of those kind.
So as long as they‘re only loud, and not violent then they have a right to wave their little signs and call me a baby killer. That doesn‘t make them right but, like you said JSA, free country.


----------



## winchable (12 Dec 2003)

I‘m not sure if that was a protest or a bordello you were visiting Enzo =)

Why "Thrifty‘s" for a brussel sprouts protest anyways? Thriftys is a clothing store last I checked. Or is it something different on the far side of the world?


----------



## Enzo (12 Dec 2003)

Thrifty‘s is a grocery store chain on Vancouver Island.

What began as a protest became an important celebration of life of course. it was a beautiful moment shared by many young, healthy, fit ladies and myself...

...then I woke up.


----------



## 311 (12 Dec 2003)

Right thats it. Im gonna go down to parliment tommarow and im gonna protest the protesters. Im gonna make a website called StopProtestingOurMilitaryThereDoingNothingWrong.ca

... Now to think of some slogans...


----------



## Enzo (12 Dec 2003)

I‘m going to protest you protesting the protesters.


----------



## Danjanou (12 Dec 2003)

Protesters are a fact of life boys and girls and right now Iraq is flavour of the month to the granola brigade. 

Give it time and they‘ll discover some obscure tree sloth in the Amazon endangered by a multi national corportaion and they‘ll all leave us alone for a couple of months.

Hey I‘m not going to bore you with how much fun it was wearing a uniforn in the late 1970‘s early 1980‘s and getting called a "baby burning warmongering facist" on a regular basis (thanks sis BTW).

What I do find almost funny is the naivety of the present generation of profesional protesters. It‘s almost like they discovered an old photo of their baby boomer parents in the 1960s and decided to try it.

Kind of like the "meet you for a latte at Starbucks and then we‘ll go and protest the WTO."

Yeah they p!ss me off with both their self rightousness and their ignornance, but it‘s not worth the effort getting worked up over them. The twits who held a protest outside the 3 PPCLI Bronze Star Medal ceremony are one example. Those idiots who habitually show up here in Toronto demanding the Mayor turn Moss Park and Fort York into homeless shelters (mind the homeless, excuse me address challenged, would love FYA with all its bars) are another. 

They just don‘t get it. Try arguing with them and using such concepts as logic, and examples from the real world and they get all defensive and start quoting their holy writ. Trust me I‘ve done it, and those that know my background just stare at me as if I have two heads. One actually called me the most dangerous thing she‘d ever met " a redneck with a genius IQ." I took it as a compliment.

I do make an exception for some groups. The Vietnam Vets who chose to protest after doing their service in country and groups such as veterans against nuclear weapons etc., rate some respect from me. I may not agree with their point of view but they earned the right to express it.

By that criteria I even respect our forum token semi socialist Che. Hey I‘ll even buy you a beer Che when I‘m in Halifax at the end of the month or if you prefer a latte (The coffee shops at Pizza corner still a going concern?) and talk politics. I may not agree with everything you say here companero but unlike the sandal wearers you in my opinion erasned the right to say it.


----------



## 311 (12 Dec 2003)

Just to strengthen my position...when Canada initially supported sending troops to Afgahn, protestors dumped pink paint on a sherman outside the Halifax armouries. Now ain‘t that somethin‘... Protesting is a right, but being a protestor is more then just "I hate the military". It‘s about knowing wtf your talking about, doing it with purpose. If the people at StopWar.ca could give me one reason why we shouldn‘t be helping the Afgahn people (a good reason..), I might respect them a bit. This is much deeper, this is about everytime i‘ve had some ****head yell at me while im on the way to the armouries...I think my favorite was when the U.S. invaded Iraq, and a guy told me to "go fight for the rich man". WTF !! We wern‘t even in that war !!


----------



## Enzo (12 Dec 2003)

I only had one incident that stays with me. I was at a friends for a xmas party in ‘97. I was due to depart for BMQ a few weeks hence. The people there were mainly friends of her boyfriend; educated UVic crowd. This guy decided to ‘talk‘ to me about my decision to join the Infantry. In front of the assembled, he asks me "why I‘d want to murder innocent women and babies." Here‘s the thing, my girlfriend looked at him as if he was nuts. How was he raised to believe that this was an appropriate thing to say in a conversation with a man he had only met? Not to mention that those around us chuckled and looked to me as if I had to explain myself?

I didn‘t respond, my look summed it up. I was p/o‘d. I was looking for a reason to go anyway, informed my friend that I was off and why. Buddy enjoyed his moment.

I thought to myself that he didn‘t now, nor would he ever get it. He lived in a country where he could say such a thing and be relatively safe as there are laws (which I respect) that prevent me from assaulting his priviledged *** . And that people such as I are a part of the system which ensures that for people such as him.

He doesn‘t need to get it. I do. I can live with that. I also enjoyed that one moment after he asked that when his feeling of safety waivered, seated as he was surrounded by his friends. I stood at that point and there was nothing to be misread in the focus I had upon him. I‘m 6‘4" @ 215 pounds. I don‘t beat on woman, children or priviledged 5‘9" fools.

If they choose disrespect, walk on, carry yourself with pride. If they act, then use your heads and see the day through.


----------



## winchable (13 Dec 2003)

Turn to the other cheek, that‘s right enzo, if anything they want to get a rise out of you so they can point out your "baby killing streak."

The most frustrating moment I‘ve had that relates to this topic, wasn‘t a protest, it was a university lecture.
I was in a lecture one day, and there were announcements about the rememberance day ceremony the next day, when a girl in the audience shouted out "YEAH CELEBRATE MURDER, WAR IS MURDER."
I think she thought more people would support her(and given the liberal aspect of my university at the time I too thought alot of people would support her) but most people looked like she had crawled out from underneath a rock and was breathing fire.

Danjanou, there are more coffee shops and bars in Halifax than anywheres else in Atlantic Canada, and if you‘d like a romp through the Semi-socialist military infused satiric grey matter that is my brain in person; I‘d be more then welcome to accomodate you.


----------



## Slim (13 Dec 2003)

> Originally posted by Thunder:
> [qb] Arn‘t we in Afgahnistan to free the people from the tyranny of Al Quada, who treat woman poorly amoung one of the many human rights violations. Arn‘t we in Afgahnistan to stop terrorism ?
> 
> Maybe the people at StopWar.ca should get there priorties straight. I‘d be interested in what they would have to say after a terrorist killed their family. [/qb]


Thunder
You‘re absolutley right...If you want an answer then just start asking them, the ones who organize these farsicle get togethers, who pays their bills. 
If they actually told you the truth You would probably be stunned that the government allows it to go on at all.  :skull:


----------



## nULL (13 Dec 2003)

i think the reason people say such things is the persistant generalization that members of the armed forces are, more or less, uneducated and joined merely to escape from a poor background. at least, that is the viewpoint held by my mother, and many others i‘ve spoken to. 

perhaps another reason (and this is my own personal belief) that you soldiers get labelled "warmongers" is the habit to never back away from a fight. have any of you actually looked at war and thought "gee, i‘m glad the government isn‘t getting involved in that!" i dunno...i‘m not a person who shuns the military, but even i thought that the justification for the second gulf war was pretty sketchy. of course, i knew my opinions mattered not a whit, but this board was generally full of people who thought attacking was a great idea. 

now, this may be getting a little off topic, but why was iraq a "great idea" (ridding the world of a tyranical dictator) but things such as a "peace keeping" are spoken with contempt? just a question


----------



## Infanteer (13 Dec 2003)

The only reason protesters bother me is that they p*ss away all the benefits that this society has accorded to them to be social nuisences who generally have no conception of the reality of the situation.

If they believe so firmly in what they protest for, maybe they should show some b*lls and go join the Taliban like John Walker Lyndh.  Despite being a terrorist caveman, his conviction alone has earned my respect.  

Until these protesters do that, they are nothing but sheep, bleeting in the nice field protected from the wolves by the sheperd.



> perhaps another reason (and this is my own personal belief) that you soldiers get labelled "warmongers" is the habit to never back away from a fight. have any of you actually looked at war and thought "gee, i‘m glad the government isn‘t getting involved in that!" i dunno...i‘m not a person who shuns the military, but even i thought that the justification for the second gulf war was pretty sketchy. of course, i knew my opinions mattered not a whit, but this board was generally full of people who thought attacking was a great idea.


nULL, here is your answer







People like to argue against the war for many reasons, but the fact remains that America‘s war on terror (OIF included) remains the ONLY effort to destroy a foe set against your way of life.
This is probably why most soldiers support the war...the time for talk was swept away on September.  Perhaps the protesters have figured a way to reason with wealthy, educated men who would willingly crash planes into buildings, but until they show us, force remains the only method of dealing with them.

For all the anti-war arguments that fly around (I live in Lotusland, so I see it every day), I have yet to see these people present a viable course of alternative action to deal with the problem.  They would rather vent frustration on some mythical organization (usually a shadowy extension of the state) that is launching a vicious campaign to conquer the world, steal everybodys money, and strip everybody of their subsidized education.  So, I issue a challenge to anyone who does not support the effort to eliminate terrorism.

What should we do?


----------



## Slim (13 Dec 2003)

Infanteer

Good post...well thought out!


----------



## 311 (13 Dec 2003)

I think labeling people in the army as "poor" is a thing of the past. Most people either have a degree already or are in the process. Also, as this board proves most people are educated.

Getting rid of Saddam was a good thing because, 
A)He was a tyrant
B)He seemed to want to hurt everybody around him
C)He was a threat to our(NATO) security. How much you wanna bet if he got his hands on some badass stuff, he would have given it to Bin Laden?


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (13 Dec 2003)

Hey Che...Timothy‘s on Spring Garden is always good or the Trident on Hollis...


----------



## Gibson (13 Dec 2003)

Some of the people I respect the most are sitting on the fence.  They won‘t go to a protest because they haven‘t educated themselves enough about the issues.  They also won‘t support war for the same reason.

People need to look at both sides of the issue before making judgements and from my experience that hasn‘t been done with protests for the most part.  Some are really good and actually research the issues but that‘s few and far between based on my experience.  I had a friend who was going on about how UN economic sanctions were hurting the Iraqi people and stuff he completely ignored the fact that the Hussein government was having people killed and violating their human rights everyday.  He just chose to ignore it.

Trust me, if you hang around the left-wing University crowd you see some smokin‘ girls.  I just wish they were as impressed with DEU‘s as the rest of them


----------



## John Mac (13 Dec 2003)

Protesters are a fact of life, just like STDs. And, like the example, they are something which can be considered the cost of doing business. While they are most often quite full of it, they , in some ways, represent what we are protecting. They can be compared to drunks in a bar: some of them are quite credible, and others have their heads right up their ar__es. Either way, they are Canadians and whether we like it or not, they are within their rights.


----------



## nbk (13 Dec 2003)

I agree with most of what you are saying, btu I can also see both sides.

I do realize that protesting is "popular" for kids now a days. As you have stated it gives them a greater sense of self, and this is the wrong reason to go protesting.

I do believe that we should be peacekeeping in Afghanistan (and Bosnia, yeah remember Bosnia?) because we participated in that war. We have to finish what we started. If the yanks want to bug out and go fight the other guy, then we should at least stay behind and finish what we started.

However I can also see the other side of the story. Yes the Taliban was backwards to us. Yes they abused women and had what we would consider an archaic system and culture. But people do forget that *it was still their culture*. It does not matter how backwards and "human rights violating" it looks to us, because it is not our country. If they do not like it, they will come live in our country, we do not need to go destroy their culture.

If we left them alone, they would leave us alone.
They would not pose a threat to us.

Think about it for a moment. How would you like it if the Taliban came over here and forced us to live under a strict Islamic system? My guess is that you would not like it. So why are we forcing them to live under what we decide is "right"?

The Taliban did not come to power just because they were the biggest bullies on the block, but because they had support of the public, this is why they were not overthrown by their own people.


----------



## gate_guard (13 Dec 2003)

NBK,

I do see your point of view but your line of thought is scary. At what point do you draw the line? In WW2 for example, if it had been known earlier that the Jews were being murdered, would you just say that it‘s part of the German culture and we have no right to interfere? I know it‘s a stretch, but how far is it from a regime that actively seeks out opposition and eliminates it like the Taliban and Saddam. Churchill tried your tactic of "if we leave them alone, they‘ll leave us alone", and it didn‘t work too well. I am an advocate of respecting any particular society and it‘s norms, but there has to be a line where you say enough is enough. The problem in this case is demarcating that line and I don‘t think any one human is qualified enough to decide that, yet someone has to and often it‘s the U.S. making these decisions whether we like it or not.


----------



## Infanteer (13 Dec 2003)

> However I can also see the other side of the story. Yes the Taliban was backwards to us. Yes they abused women and had what we would consider an archaic system and culture. But people do forget that *it was still their culture*. It does not matter how backwards and "human rights violating" it looks to us, because it is not our country. If they do not like it, they will come live in our country, we do not need to go destroy their culture.


See that picture I posted above.  Maybe I buy into Huntington‘s cultural clash, but when push comes to shove, it becomes us against them.  If destroying rabid Islamic sects is what it takes, than so be it.  Are you implying that we should lay down and accept these attacks as part of their cultural expression?



> If we left them alone, they would leave us alone.
> They would not pose a threat to us.


The world doesn‘t work that way.




> The Taliban did not come to power just because they were the biggest bullies on the block, but because they had support of the public, this is why they were not overthrown by their own people.


So that Northern Alliance we supported was just a bunch of strangers, right.  The Taliban WERE the biggest bullies in an area which has been a turf war since day one.  Anti-war crowds seem to forget about the pictures of all those young girls who got to take their veils off and go learn to read and write.



> Think about it for a moment. How would you like it if the Taliban came over here and forced us to live under a strict Islamic system? My guess is that you would not like it. So why are we forcing them to live under what we decide is "right"?


I guess it‘s a dog-eat-dog world.  Might equals right, eh.  Like I said, if you can give me a better solution, I am all ears.


----------



## nULL (13 Dec 2003)

banning religon would be a good start. getting rid of all forms of religous fundamentalism would benefit everyone. who needs the pope telling people condoms don‘t wory? who needs fanatics crashing planes into buildings or telling women how to treat their bodies (...abortion?)

i dunno, getting rid of religon, while unrealistic, would be the perfect solution if you think about it.


----------



## Infanteer (13 Dec 2003)

Well, that solution is completly ludacris owing to the complexities of the human conciousness.

So nULL, your back to step 1.  Give me a workable solution that provides an alternative to war.


----------



## Korus (13 Dec 2003)

Banning religion would just make it worse. Say you‘re a devout <insert religion here>, and all of a sudden what you were raised to beleive would be banned.. Would you be pissed off? Would you rise against opression?

Yes, there are violent fundamentalists of all religions, and yes, that is bad. But what about the non-violent majority? Is every Christian bombing abortion clinics, is every Muslim crashing airplanes into buildings? No.

Forcing atheism on people is not right, nor would it get rid of hatred all of a sudden.


----------



## Infanteer (13 Dec 2003)

> But what about the non-violent majority? Is every Christian bombing abortion clinics, is every Muslim crashing airplanes into buildings? No.


The Muslims who have set themselves against us associate themselves with groups that have some sort of hierarchy, logistical centers and loci of support, making them vulnerable to attack.  That is why the West is prosecuting the war in the manner it is, contary to the myth that American is seeking to wipe out Islam and the cultures of South Asia, a myth the anti-war crowd would like us to believe.


----------



## nbk (13 Dec 2003)

gate_guard : Thank you for your response.
We declared war on Germany in 1939 due to the fact that they had taken over Poland illegally, which forced Britain to go to war, due to the fact that Britain and Poland had an agreement. It was a violation of a non-secret alliance, and therefore Britain was correct in taking action against Germany. As we were still considered Britain‘s spawn at the time, we were justified in helping protect Britain.

What would have happend had Britain not had an agreement with Poland? Impossible to say. Russia may have defeated Germany singlehandedly. They also may not have. America seemed to be doing fairly well for themselves until Japan attacked in 1941. Japan was a country which directly attacked and acknowledged attacking the united states by declaring war. Therefore the USA was justified in retaliating against Japan, and its ally Germany (and other Axis nations).

Infanteer - I am looking at the picture above, and I see american buildings, in an american city, getting smashed by american airlines. I realize there are Canadians in the american buildings, who are supporting the american government by working in those buildings, but other then that, I do not see any attack on Canada.

Upon reading your post, I also realize that you have unfortunately bought into the bush propaganda line that "they attacked us because they hate our freedom". This is a pure and simple lie. They attacked you because:
a) Unconditional support for Isreal
b) American military bases in the holy land (Saudi Arabia).

They could not care less about your "freedom". Again, if they loved it so much, they would move to america. As many of them do.

As for the better solution you desire, consider this: Leave those countries alone, build up a military based on *defending Canada*, make it impossible for anyone to attack us, barbed wire and anti aircraft guns on every coast, battleships patrolling every inch of sea, barbed wire and minefields for kilometers in from the sea and a network of terrorist vaporising sattelites in orbit.

Let _them_ bicker and fight things out so that they can end up progressing into a more "enlightened" society, as we have.

Yes this may include going through horrible wars, as we in the west have, but they will emerge as we do in the end. They will end up better off. Its how the world works. 

*I don‘t mean by the following comparison to insult middle easterners at all, because I have nothing but respect for their culture,*  but if you want an analogy: one can not expect to sit a caveman infront of a computer and expect him to start surfing the internet right away. He must learn about electricity, learn about electronics, learn abstract concepts such as moving a mouse to move the pointer on the screen and then learn that there is a bigger world out there that he can communicate with. He wants to smash the computer and use the glass and metal as cutting tools. He cannot be taught how to use the computer, as you do not even speak the same language as the caveman. Anything you knew about his culture was lost to the ages. if you try to get near him to show him, he will try to smash your head and eat your brains. It is just something he must learn by himself over a few million years of evolution.


----------



## JSA (13 Dec 2003)

Don‘t be so ‘open minded that your brain falls out.  js


----------



## winchable (14 Dec 2003)

NBK,
I agree with your last point/analogy:
It is very similar to the way in which the Europeans colonised Africa, they pushed it so hard and so quickly into a European lifestyle,assuming the natives would accept it simply because it is more "advanced", that it did more harm then good..
While the Middle East situation is a little different in that they have been exposed to western culture quite a bit more then the original african had, it runs along the very same lines.


----------



## Slim (14 Dec 2003)

Please realize, all of you, that there are elements within the hard line Muslim community that would like nothing better than to see us either enslaved as sub human ( infidels, yes they DO use that word!) or have us killed outright.
I respect other cultures as much as the next man but I have no problem with removing power from a group that do nothing but exploit and destroy anyone they can get their hands on.
I don‘t ever want to have to fight that war here!
They do...think about it...!


----------



## nbk (14 Dec 2003)

> Originally posted by JSA:
> [qb] Don‘t be so ‘open minded that your brain falls out.  js [/qb]


Haha even though that was at my expense, I thought that was cute.


----------



## Infanteer (14 Dec 2003)

> Infanteer - I am looking at the picture above, and I see american buildings, in an american city, getting smashed by american airlines. I realize there are Canadians in the american buildings, who are supporting the american government by working in those buildings, but other then that, I do not see any attack on Canada.


That is all you see?  I see the symbol of the liberal capitalist/democratic system.  The attack on the Pentagon was a similar attack.  Do you really believe Al Queda thought they could actually disable the US military with what they did?  Canadian society is so intergrated with that of the US that to believe that the attacks were not targeting us is wishful thinking at best. 



> Upon reading your post, I also realize that you have unfortunately bought into the bush propaganda line that "they attacked us because they hate our freedom". This is a pure and simple lie. They attacked you because:
> a) Unconditional support for Isreal
> b) American military bases in the holy land (Saudi Arabia).
> They could not care less about your "freedom". Again, if they loved it so much, they would move to america. As many of them do.


Your ability to read into my beliefs on the war are a bit off, if this is what you have drawn from my posts.  There is a war against differing ways of life going on.  The underpinnings of our modern society demands that
a) We support the right to exist of a sovereign democractic nation in a region determined to eradicate it.
b) We ensure regional stability in an area that holds important natural resources neccessary to the everyday life of almost everybody in the West.  If you think we could ignore this reagion, you are again relying on wishful thinking.



> As for the better solution you desire, consider this: Leave those countries alone, build up a military based on defending Canada, make it impossible for anyone to attack us, barbed wire and anti aircraft guns on every coast, battleships patrolling every inch of sea, barbed wire and minefields for kilometers in from the sea and a network of terrorist vaporising sattelites in orbit.
> 
> Let them bicker and fight things out so that they can end up progressing into a more "enlightened" society, as we have.


Again, another silly propostion.  Our way of life and the world we live in demands that we are open and interactive with the rest of the world.  How can you realistically expect Canada, a trading nation built up of many peoples, to "board up all the windows and doors".  The friction that has come from our societal interaction is playing out, and this is Social Darwinism flowing along its natural course.



> Yes this may include going through horrible wars, as we in the west have, but they will emerge as we do in the end. They will end up better off. Its how the world works.
> 
> I don‘t mean by the following comparison to insult middle easterners at all, because I have nothing but respect for their culture, but if you want an analogy: one can not expect to sit a caveman infront of a computer and expect him to start surfing the internet right away. He must learn about electricity, learn about electronics, learn abstract concepts such as moving a mouse to move the pointer on the screen and then learn that there is a bigger world out there that he can communicate with. He wants to smash the computer and use the glass and metal as cutting tools. He cannot be taught how to use the computer, as you do not even speak the same language as the caveman. Anything you knew about his culture was lost to the ages. if you try to get near him to show him, he will try to smash your head and eat your brains. It is just something he must learn by himself over a few million years of evolution.


I never said we were there to democratize the region.  I never said it was the best course of action either, because history shows it to be contingent on other factors such as rule of law, liberal economy, and a degree of political freedom within society...which are non-existant throughout most of the region.
What we are doing is imperialism, and given the set of circumstances, I say it is warranted.   *We are not leaving South Asia for a while*, and military occupation is a form of behavioral moderation in the area to protect the interests of our way of life.  Some flower-child can give me a rant onto why imperialism is bad, but he, like you, has yet to present a better course of action.


----------



## winchable (14 Dec 2003)

Thankyou infanteer for the oh so subtle name calling.
I never disagreed with the action, and I agree with you in that it is probably warranted, I just said it paralelled the historical situation of Europe and Africa. So for once we don‘t lie top far apart with our stances, as you are correct, I cannot present a better course of action. I also don‘t think my last post qualified as a rant, but I know you enjoy picking on me so it‘s alright.

And the reason I have such idealistic (and I realise they are for the most part impossiible) goal‘s, is because of something I learned in the army actually. If you aim high on the target when you are far away from it, you will hit the center, you won‘t hit your high and lofty goal but you will hit the best situation.
So even if it isn‘t the best option, it is a better option then if you had aimed straight at the center and fallen short of that.


----------



## Infanteer (14 Dec 2003)

> Thankyou infanteer for the oh so subtle name calling.
> I never disagreed with the action, and I agree with you in that it is probably warranted, I just said it paralelled the historical situation of Europe and Africa. So for once we don‘t lie top far apart with our stances, as you are correct, I cannot present a better course of action. I also don‘t think my last post qualified as a rant, but I know you enjoy picking on me so it‘s alright.


Read my post again, it was a response to nbk‘s post, but the complaint department thanks you for your concern.



> And the reason I have such idealistic (and I realise they are for the most part impossiible) goal‘s, is because of something I learned in the army actually. If you aim high on the target when you are far away from it, you will hit the center, you won‘t hit your high and lofty goal but you will hit the best situation.
> So even if it isn‘t the best option, it is a better option then if you had aimed straight at the center and fallen short of that.


I am still trying to figure out what the h*ll  this has to do with the argument.


----------



## winchable (15 Dec 2003)

It wasn‘t a complaint infanteer so its headed to the wrong department, and if I wasn‘t the other flower child you were referring to then disregard the last post (although I‘m sure you already have.)
And the second part relates to all of the arguments in general, involving my idealist platitudes that I‘ve spouted in the course of this thread and others.
And I suppose you‘re going to respond by calling me an idiot or that i should do as I‘m told, and that‘s going to spiral into name calling again. So I‘ll just say go ahead and disregard the whole message anyways, for the sake of continuing the debate in the right direction.


----------



## Marauder (15 Dec 2003)

> However I can also see the other side of the story. Yes the Taliban was backwards to us. Yes they abused women and had what we would consider an archaic system and culture. But people do forget that *it was still their culture*. It does not matter how backwards and "human rights violating" it looks to us, because it is not our country. If they do not like it, they will come live in our country, we do not need to go destroy their culture.
> If we left them alone, they would leave us alone.
> They would not pose a threat to us.
> Think about it for a moment. How would you like it if the Taliban came over here and forced us to live under a strict Islamic system? My guess is that you would not like it. So why are we forcing them to live under what we decide is "right"?
> The Taliban did not come to power just because they were the biggest bullies on the block, but because they had support of the public, this is why they were not overthrown by their own people.


My God. Even with the increasingly pinko anti-American tone this board is taking, this is unreal. That is the most disgusting, morally bankrupt, and ignorant post I have seen on this board. Congratulations, you have made me physically sick. I‘ve heard plenty of pinkos try the "moral equivalency" crap before, but you are simply all 31 flavours of f$cked up. I despair that there are people who live under the warm blanket of freedom and equality that are so willing to throw away the lives of women and children because they were born into the "wrong" culture.
nbk, where was it that we went so wrong as to have little trolls like you simply abandon the notion of universal right and wrong??? To reiterate... my God.


----------



## Infanteer (15 Dec 2003)

> It wasn‘t a complaint infanteer so its headed to the wrong department, and if I wasn‘t the other flower child you were referring to then disregard the last post (although I‘m sure you already have.)
> And the second part relates to all of the arguments in general, involving my idealist platitudes that I‘ve spouted in the course of this thread and others.
> And I suppose you‘re going to respond by calling me an idiot or that i should do as I‘m told, and that‘s going to spiral into name calling again. So I‘ll just say go ahead and disregard the whole message anyways, for the sake of continuing the debate in the right direction.


I still don‘t know what you are getting at.  Do you have something to contribute to the debate, or are you just going to keep calling me a meanie.

Marauder, keep it coming brother.


----------



## 311 (15 Dec 2003)

To anyone who cares, I emailed StopWar.ca the other day ( Friday )and still have not recieved a responce. They most be really busy people.


----------



## JSA (15 Dec 2003)

Where did we go wrong when some of you all can seriously compare our society (with all it‘s faults) to the Taliban (who were shooting women in the back of the head on a sports feild and televising it for all to see).  I don‘t know where you folks are from but if that‘s what defending us...  js


----------



## nbk (15 Dec 2003)

[EDIT]Actually, nevermind...you guys are welcome...


----------



## btk_joker (18 Dec 2003)

Proper techniques of dealing with hippies can be found at the following site:

 http://www.devo.com/tft/hippie/tactics.html 

As well as other useful information.


----------



## scm77 (18 Dec 2003)

The people of Afghanistan have had decades of war between Afghanis and the Soviets and more recently the Northern Alliance and the Taliban.  Now ISAF is there to try to give the Afghans some sort of peaceful future, and stopwar.ca wants us out.  I don‘t think they realize that wars gave them the freedom to protest against the PM.  Something that a war has also given the Afghan people.


----------



## Enzo (18 Dec 2003)

Can‘t we send those "stopwar.ca" people in the RCR‘s stead? Put up or shut up.


----------



## Slim (19 Dec 2003)

> Originally posted by Enzo:
> [qb] Can‘t we send those "stopwar.ca" people in the RCR‘s stead? Put up or shut up. [/qb]


ENZO
They don‘t have time to deploy anywhere...What with the full protest schedule lined up for this summer. Where can you find time to go stop a war when you‘re doing that?


----------



## Enzo (19 Dec 2003)

Summer? That‘s for panhandling on the island isn‘t it?


----------



## Enzo (19 Dec 2003)

Oh, I‘m gonna catch ****  for that


----------



## Gunnar (19 Dec 2003)

After all, it‘s still "their culture".

Okay, let‘s just say that I have a long history of Viking blood.  Now, part of my history indicates that the Vikings used to sail to faraway lands, rape and enslave people, steal their stuff, and bring everything (slaves included) back home to party.

Well, what right do you have to discriminate against my lifestyle and my beliefs?  It‘s my CULTURE, after all.  And it shouldn‘t matter to you that I choose to exercise my cultural freedoms on your sorry *****, should it?

Oh...you mean you have an army, and police to prevent that sort of thing?  Why?  It looks like your culture is repressing MY culture.  Is that nice?  Is that designed to make me feel good?  I feel like a victim here, being judged by YOUR moral standards...

Maybe if we all just sit down and discuss it, the problem will go away...we can discuss our cultural differences, and you can explain that I should rape and enslave only my own people.  That would be such an improvement, especially for the people being raped and enslaved.  After all, people are all different, and if you‘re getting raped as a Canadian, it will feel a lot different that if you were an Afghani...it would probably matter less to you personally too, right?

Merry Christmas = Eid Mubarak...it‘s only a cultural difference.

$8 an hour minimum wage, freedom to eat fast food, stay out late = staying in the house all the time with an abusive husband and being turned into a baby machine against your will...it‘s only a cultural difference.

Yeah.  Whatever.

Freedom hasn‘t been "imposed" on the Afghanis, all that happened is that a particularly brutal group of thugs has been informed "Don‘t mess with the West, got it?" (Which means, "they wouldn‘t leave us alone").  A less brutal group of thugs in currently in power, and it allows more freedom to the people forced to live there because we‘re still holding the whip hand.  

Besides, how exactly do you impose freedom?  "You, over there, with a brain and beliefs that allow you to make choices....Make some choices that determine your overall welfare...Now!  And don‘t ask my permission!  And feel free to ignore me, immediately!"


----------



## Enzo (19 Dec 2003)

No, really Gunnar, don‘t hold back. Tell us how you truly feel


----------



## Slim (25 Dec 2003)

He‘s right though!


----------



## pte anthony (1 Jan 2004)

God **** hippies nothing but a bunch of sh**ty nose  whiney toilet licking maggots in my opinon.
I HATE HIPPIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
   :soldier:


----------



## Enzo (1 Jan 2004)

Monger, have you hugged a tree lately? Go cuddle with a bunny


----------



## The_Falcon (2 Jan 2004)

Ah Hippies. Man I love to hate them. Going through highschool and being a reservist was quite interesting at the best of times, dealing with left-wing students and teachers, trying to convince me what I was doing was morally wrong etc. (this was before the Iraq war, i graduated June of 02,so Sep 11 and afghanistan still fresh in everyones mind). When they had something intelligent to say I was happy to debate them, but most often they were just spouting off whatever ill informed garbage the Teachers were feeding them. Even now I still have to deal with these idiots, seeing as how I parade out of Moss Park Armoury in Downtown Toronto. We have people protest outside on a fairly regular basis ( about once a month, not very large about 100 odd people). Most of whom want the place turned into a homeless shelter (thats a whole other issue here in T.O.). **** on Rememberance Day as our unit marched passed that bastion of liberal-commie enlightenment known as the univeristy of toronto, I noticed the odd person saying/doing something derogatory towards us. Most of them b**** for the sake of b*****ing, and that majority has no clue what they are talking about.  Oh well it is their right, even though they would like us to stop allowing people in other nations to enjoy that same right.


----------



## dbrock (2 Jan 2004)

I Live in Califronia now and I have had it with these granola eating twits.   :soldier:


----------

