# American/Canadian Relations



## RJG (27 Apr 2004)

I am a high school student in Toronto, thus I have many friends who are immigrants. I hear them constantly bashing the American government and it really disturbs me, for numerous reasons:

1. They were the first country to ever have a codified constitution which gaurunteed the rights and freedoms of its people.

2. They are our number one trade partner.

3. If someone attacked Canada, however unlikely, who would come to our aid; America.

I was just wondering if these attitudes that the people in my school have are only because they are young and ignorant, or if this was the general feelings towards America. I see the stats and everything else, but I would like to know from you, in your experiences, if people show a general hatred or extreme dislike towards America.

(edited for typo)


----------



## 1feral1 (27 Apr 2004)

Migrants from where? I reckon amongst the 3rd world, and throughout islamic countries the USA is hated, but maybe more so the govt, and not the people. However look where to terrorism is directed, not at the govt, but the people.

Sadly if the USA was to, say sit back and do nothing for the past, lets say 60 yrs, this world would be a worse place, and you INFACT may be speaking German (and I Japanese) and have no rights as YOU and I know them.

Europe, SE Asia, South America, and the ME would all be completely different places, and NOT for the better.

The USA is an ally of Canada, and other nations, including Australia.

Personally, I have always been treated 10/10 by the Americans I know, and they are welcome in my home anytime!

Oh, as for the UN, (a big usless paper tiger), they would not even exist if it wasnt for the USA, as the USA pays for most of it.

Who would feed the starving, and pay for all the BILLIONS of $$ the USA puts into other countries?

Whats happening in Iraq and Afghanistan, is the US and other allies are only trying to make it a better and more safe country, and taking the fight to the EN, before it comes here.

I am behind the war 100%, as sometimes there is just no other way. Sad, but a true fact of life. 

The US should have carried on back in 1991, but it was the UN mandate which prevented that. 

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## Gayson (27 Apr 2004)

I like americans

Sure the iraq thing is a little messed up, but I really hate it how people criticize the soldiers their, considering they are putting their lives on the line for their country.


----------



## 1feral1 (27 Apr 2004)

Sadly, what would the world say if the islamcis blew up more bombs 10 time worse than NYC on foreign soil (not the USA) maybe some place in Europe or the ME, or how about Canada, and then the USA would be critisised for not doing enough.

How true, eh!

Cheers,

WEs


----------



## muskrat89 (27 Apr 2004)

Open up all of the borders in the world, and see where everyone heads.

OK.. maybe not everyone, but you get the gist...

I‘ve been in the US about 14 years, altogether. Overall, I would say that I‘ve had far more opportunities here, than I had in Canada. That, however, is a function of many different things I imagine.


That being said - it‘s time to renew my Green Card, or get my citizenship. I still feel a little funny about becoming a US Citizen. I guess, for whatever reason, I am a Canadian at heart.    

I can tell you this - live here for any length of time, and it will clear up a lot of misconceptions, prejudices, and pre-conceived notions. Of course, it may confirm one or two also.    

I believe that the US is one of (if not THE) largest contributor of foreign aid in the world - people seem to lose sight of that pretty easy.


----------



## 1feral1 (28 Apr 2004)

How true Maskrat! Good post. 

When I got my Australian citizenship I was as proud as a new father, and I still am. I have not renewed my Cdn passport in yrs. Of all the certificates I have, my Australian citizenship is the only one that hangs on the wall.

However, I look it it as having the best of both worlds, and I will never forget in 1000 lifetimes where I came from (Saskatoon and raised in Regina).

Becoming a dual citizen is excellent, like a re-birth sorta, and I have never looked back. I have the same rights and privillages as being born in Australia, and I enjoy voting and other democratic rights here.

I find that Australia for me, has painted a brighter picture, and I reckon I have advanced much more here than I ever could back in deal ole Canada. 

Being so far away has made me ultra-independant, and more strong in every way, and its taught me that family is the most important thing ever, and I cant deny that for a moment. I sure miss em. Everday.

This is just for me though, but it has its price. I am a long ways from family and friends, and I have not seen a live hockey game in 4 yrs! Get me to a Pats game!

I tend to look it it as I am 30 second connection by phone, live on the INet, and 15 hrs to Vancouver (or door to door in 28 hrs). So its just a day trip.

That doesnt sound as bad as 22,641km covering 17 timezones, and having reversed seasons. It took the English to get from the UK to Australia 9 months back in 1788! It still takes 3 months for surface mail.

I say get bold and go out and get that second citizenship!

Good on ya.

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## Pieman (28 Apr 2004)

I also experienced a stong case of anti-american attitudes while I was in Europe. It is something that I had not experienced to that degree in Canada.

I would meet some people from various European countries and they would whine, gripe, complain, and moan on almost a constant basis how bad the Americans are, how much they hate them, how much they hate their policies etc. 

What is really funny is I would ask them what they did that day, and the responce would be something like:

"Oh you know, I went down to the mall. Bought a Brittany Spears CD (man she is hot!) Then I went to McDonalds and got myself a Big Mac and came home and watched ‘Party of Five‘"

I would respond..‘Funny, I thought you hated Americans...if you hate them so much, then why don‘t you stop buying their products! You retard.‘ 

Their answer would be something like: "Oh, well. They have a lot of interesting things there, it is the center of world culture now...blah blah blah...man I hope I can visit there someday.‘

????

A lot of this attitude boils down to pee-pee envy.  It also reflects the strong tribal mentality of Europeans, and I am convinced that is why there are so many wars and bloodbaths in that part of the world. Basically, EU people are really cool, but at the same time they are idiots.

I also feel that this attitude, in part, is responsible for a lot of the problems in the middle east, and their negetive view of the States.

Bottom line. Anyone who gripes and complains about something with no apparent justification, then it means there is some other reason for their anger/hatred. Start asking questions to those guys in your school, I bet you will find out they are big Brittany Spears fans too.


----------



## casing (28 Apr 2004)

Double


----------



## casing (28 Apr 2004)

It‘s human nature to despise what those you consider unfairly better off than you... whatever that "better off" might be (ie: higher standard of living, greater personal freedoms, etc).  The USA is in a catch 22.  Intervene and get roasted over the coals.  Sit idle and get roasted over the coals.  The dish du jour of modern times is Roasted USA.


----------



## RJG (28 Apr 2004)

As a child I attended a church that believe that America was the Antichrist and the little horn coming out of the beast in revelations. For those not familiar with the bible, they basically believed that America was the tool of the devil.

Need-less to say I no longer attend that church.


----------



## K. Ash (29 Apr 2004)

What church was that?


----------



## pte anthony (29 Apr 2004)

> Originally posted by Wesley H. Allen, CD:
> [qb]Sadly if the USA was to, say sit back and do nothing for the past, lets say 60 yrs, this world would be a worse place, and you INFACT may be speaking German (and I Japanese) and have no rights as YOU and I know them.
> 
> Oh, as for the UN, (a big usless paper tiger), they would not even exist if it wasnt for the USA, as the USA pays for most of it.
> ...


I like Americans and their "stick to em" attitude I believe the war in Iraq is justified. Besides it is comforting no matter what the average civilian feels or thinks to see someone takeing initiative on international matters such as present day Iraq, Gulf war, and Somolia. 

Thank god for the extensive funding of their Military or North America would have fallen into a foreign control because no matter how much I love Canada I  or you cannot ignore the fact that we could not stand alone or with a equally under funded American ally against some of the more powerful nations like Russia or China.


----------



## CDNBlackhawk (29 Apr 2004)

From My experiances their is a great deal of Anti Americanism in Canada or at least where i am from, and it pissed me off. People seem to forget that the states are usually always the first country to offer aid, whether that be Humanitarian or Military Aid. and IN the end its gets thrown back in their face.


----------



## Rick_Donald (30 Apr 2004)

Living in a border city I know all to well of the arrogance of Americans. But they are all too willing to admit this and take criticism from us well just as we take criticism from them from being to complacent and laid back. I think you‘ll find that the values and ideals that Americans hold dearly come pretty close to the ones that we "Canadians" hold dearly. In regards to young students and their "American-bashing" you need to look no further than their parents to find the source of their values and ideals.


----------



## Goober (1 May 2004)

Canadian-US relations is always a touchy subject. Remember, we (Canadians) are Americans too, as are Mexicans, Brazilians, Columbians etc...



> Originally posted by RJG:
> [qb] I am a high school student in Toronto, thus I have many friends who are immigrants. I hear them constantly bashing the American government and it really disturbs me, for numerous reasons:
> 
> 1. They were the first country to ever have a codified constitution which gaurunteed the rights and freedoms of its people.
> ...


Alot of people do bash the US government, and with good reason. Critisism is one of the most common ways to change things. Without it people think everything is ok. If its not broke, don‘t fix it right? You need to criticize and point out what you think is wrong.

Just because someone criticizes a countries government, it doesn‘t mean they think that about its people too.



> Originally posted by Wesley H. Allen, CD:
> [qb] Migrants from where? I reckon amongst the 3rd world, and throughout islamic countries the USA is hated, but maybe more so the govt, and not the people. However look where to terrorism is directed, not at the govt, but the people.[/qb]


The US is hated by people in any and every country. It is also loved by people in any and every country. Its simple because of its popularity, media, and historical actions.



> Sadly if the USA was to, say sit back and do nothing for the past, lets say 60 yrs, this world would be a worse place, and you INFACT may be speaking German (and I Japanese) and have no rights as YOU and I know them.


If the Nazi‘s ‘won‘ (does anyone win?) WWII, we may very well be speaking German. But we wouldn‘t be speaking Japanese if they made the US surrender. Japan hit Pearl Harbour, a military base, and uterly decimated it. It was a briliant military strike. Then the US came back and nuked aprox. 200,000 of Japan‘s citizens. In your first paragraph, you stated terrorism was against the people. This act by the US was terrorism, plain and simple. They wanted to most possible damage. Much like Osama and crew wanted when they hit the World Trade Towers in NYC.

Japan wanted to cripple the US military, not kill its innocent citizens.



> Europe, SE Asia, South America, and the ME would all be completely different places, and NOT for the better.
> 
> The USA is an ally of Canada, and other nations, including Australia.
> 
> Personally, I have always been treated 10/10 by the Americans I know, and they are welcome in my home anytime!


Your exposure must be very low then. There are *******s in all countries, meet enough citizens from any given country and you will meet thier *******s too.



> Oh, as for the UN, (a big usless paper tiger), they would not even exist if it wasnt for the USA, as the USA pays for most of it.
> 
> Who would feed the starving, and pay for all the BILLIONS of $$ the USA puts into other countries?


Check out this site, and you will see where they get that money:
 http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/ 



> Whats happening in Iraq and Afghanistan, is the US and other allies are only trying to make it a better and more safe country, and taking the fight to the EN, before it comes here.


The situation in Iraq is totally different than that of Afghanistan. The US was hit hard by an attack, the attack came from Afghanistan, the US and a few allies hit back and cleared it up. Then the Bush administration took this chance to finally go back and take Iraq. They used ‘weapons of mass distruction‘ as a cover, there never was any. A retired general (was active during the initial take over of Iraq) even admitted that. The Bush administration forcibly took over a country under false pretences of freedom. They say they are freeing the Iraqi people. Who are they, or we, to say what freedom is to another culture? Our western ways are perverse to most.



> I am behind the war 100%, as sometimes there is just no other way. Sad, but a true fact of life.
> 
> The US should have carried on back in 1991, but it was the UN mandate which prevented that.
> 
> ...


The US signed papers with the Iraqi‘s which said Iraq must disarm, which it did. Then when Bush jr. took office he decided that wasn‘t enough, Iraq must be his.



> Originally posted by Pte. Gayson:
> [qb] I like americans
> 
> Sure the iraq thing is a little messed up, but I really hate it how people criticize the soldiers their, considering they are putting their lives on the line for their country. [/qb]


The problem is, they are not putting thier lives on the line for thier country, they are for another country they think they are ‘freeing‘.



> Originally posted by Wesley H. Allen, CD:
> [qb] Sadly, what would the world say if the islamcis blew up more bombs 10 time worse than NYC on foreign soil (not the USA) maybe some place in Europe or the ME, or how about Canada, and then the USA would be critisised for not doing enough.
> 
> How true, eh!
> ...


I‘ve never known "The Islamics" to blow up anything. Thier religion teaches peace. Its terrorists that blow things up.

People confuse the two far too much. The Islam religion condems violence.



> Originally posted by muskrat89:
> [qb] ....
> 
> I can tell you this - live here for any length of time, and it will clear up a lot of misconceptions, prejudices, and pre-conceived notions. Of course, it may confirm one or two also.
> ...


I agree with that 2nd last paragraph. I work with US citizens every day. Thats my job. I work for AT&T Wireless. I sell them wireless phones, take payments, troubleshoot thier problems. Anywhere from 50-100 US citizens every day.

I can say that 90% of them are as nice as us Canadians. I can also say that 90% of them are very ignorant to anything that is not from their country. They don‘t teach World History in US grade schools, only "American History".

They have a very self centered view of the world. Which is fine and dandy if you don‘t want to participate in the world. If you ask a US citizen who won WWII, they will reply "We did".

Canada is truely a worldly country, that I‘m proud of.

As far as the US being the largest contributor to foreign aid. Noone can dispute, they got the money. Thats what you get with capatalism and a huge population. But check out that web page at the top of my post.



> Originally posted by Rick_Donald:
> [qb] Living in a border city I know all to well of the arrogance of Americans. But they are all too willing to admit this and take criticism from us well just as we take criticism from them from being to complacent and laid back. I think you‘ll find that the values and ideals that Americans hold dearly come pretty close to the ones that we "Canadians" hold dearly. In regards to young students and their "American-bashing" you need to look no further than their parents to find the source of their values and ideals. [/qb]


You can‘t blame it on thier parents alone. We have MPs calling Bush a moron, other US citizens, or senators idiots and other names.

"Anti-Americanism" comes from many sources, family, friends, media, and some of the actions the US does itself.

"Anti-Americanism" can do no good. It only spreads hate and anger. People assume all US citizens share the views of their government and media. This is not true in the least.

My personal view is that we (Canada-US) are very similar, and very different at the same time. We are joined at the hip, like it or not we are stuck together. We are like two sisters, we may squable, we may disagree on certain things, but we will always work things out between ourselves. That is my belief, and hope.

Just because we, as a country, don‘t join in the take over of Iraq, it doesn‘t mean we won‘t support them, and them us, in other endeavors.


----------



## DogOfWar (1 May 2004)

[No message]


----------



## karpovage (1 May 2004)

Correct on Pearl harbor WetGrunt. The Japanese failed to "decimate" all the infrastructure and ship building/repair facilities and dry docks. because of this blunder the U.S. was able to repair and rebuild the fleet much quicker to strike back.


----------



## DogOfWar (1 May 2004)

[No message]


----------



## DogOfWar (1 May 2004)

[No message]


----------



## Fishbone Jones (1 May 2004)

Goober,
You must be that relation of Gomer‘s from the Andy Griffith Show.


----------



## Rick_Donald (1 May 2004)

The States bombed Japan to end a long and costly war and bring peace to the Pacific. The war in Europe was over and everyone was sick and tired of a war that kept devouring America‘s young. How much longer do you think the Pacific war would have dragged on if not for the bomb?

Besides what about when the Japanese attacked Hollywood with a submarine and was beaten off by a single cigar smoking American pilot?


----------



## DogOfWar (1 May 2004)

[No message]


----------



## Goober (2 May 2004)

Woa, post a few OBJECTIVE opinions and you get flamed by trolls and moderators alike. Excuse me if I thought people could have an itelligent conversation here. I was through off by the web address. I seen a ".ca" at the end.



> Originally posted by The WetGrunt:
> [qb]
> 
> 
> ...


Re-read my post in its entirety, I never said anything about the terrorists targeting military targets. Please don‘t post ignorant remarks.

You said the Japanese mixed thier military bases in with civilian infrastructure... well guess what, so do we. I live in Halifax, our military arms and scattered throughout the civilian infrastructure to hide them.

I make one remake stating the US‘s terrorist actions of bombing 200,000 innocent citizens. And innocent men, women and children still to this day are feeling the effects of the radiation.



> Originally posted by The WetGrunt:
> [qb]
> 
> 
> ...


CNN is an acronym for the American Propaganda Network. I don‘t watch it. Please refrain from showing your ignorance. Read a book about Islam, or the Koran for that matter before you tell me Islam DOES NOT teach peace.



> Originally posted by The WetGrunt:
> [qb] Im a little sick of people attacking the decision really. Its been proven over and over agian to be the only real choice. It conserved lives. Thats not good enough for some people. They‘d rather call the Americans "terrorists". [/qb]


If the US really wanted to concerve lives they should focus on thier own intra-country problems and stop creating wars around the world.



> Originally posted by The WetGrunt:
> [qb] Im a little sick of people attacking the decision really. Its been proven over and over agian to be the only real choice. It conserved lives. Thats not good enough for some people. They‘d rather call the Americans "terrorists". [/qb]


Your just talking from your arse here. No need for a reply to that.


----------



## Goober (2 May 2004)

Before anyone posts any flames. Let me remind you to read the very first post in the thread, which asks what we think. I posted what I think in an objective way. Trolls please stay out.


----------



## Michael Dorosh (2 May 2004)

> Originally posted by Goober:
> Japan hit Pearl Harbour, a military base, and uterly decimated it. It was a briliant military strike. Then the US came back and nuked aprox. 200,000 of Japan‘s citizens. In your first paragraph, you stated terrorism was against the people. This act by the US was terrorism, plain and simple. They wanted to most possible damage. Much like Osama and crew wanted when they hit the World Trade Towers in NYC.


I suggest you hit the books a little more.

First of all, it is spelled Pearl Harbor, as it is an American installation and Noah Webster decided to lose the superfluous "u" when he helped create a distinctly American language.

But I digress...

Pearl Harbor was not severely damaged (actually, the literal definition of "decimated" is that 1 out of 10 people are killed), in fact, the Japanese ignored the fuel reserves altogether, and most of the ships hit at Pearl Harbor saw service again.  The harbor itself was not damaged all that badly, though a lot of aircraft were destroyed.  Many of these were obsoclescent types in any event.

The A-bombs (here we go again) were dropped because Allied planners anticipate 1 million Allied casualties would be suffered in an invasion of the mainland of Japan.  Experience in Okinawa showed that Japanese civilians would commit suicide and resist fanatically, and their casualties would also likely result in hundred of thousands of casualties, if not millions.

The bombs, in the end, were the only way to convince the Emperor not to listen to the ruling military elite, and seek peace.  They _saved lives_ in other words, many more than were lost.

Japan could have declared peace at any time.  They chose not to.  

They also waged aggressive war in China, and perpetrated genocide.  They routinely abused prisoners, including the 1500+ Canadians they didn‘t manage to kill at Hong Kong in December 1941.  Of those they did kill, some were laying in hospital beds at the time.  Others died in captivity.

And what did the US do after WW II?  Did Japan get punished?  No, they rebuilt the country and today Japan competes keenly on the world market - cars, electronics, even anime cartoons.  Japan has been helped enormously by the United States.

You really do need to do some research before making these kinds of claims.  Pearl Harbor was not a devastating attack looking back with hindsight (more people died in the twin towers than at Pearl Harbor, incidentally), and the atomic bombings actually ensured that Japan would be a world economic power today.  An invasion would have crippled the home islands and resulted in mass slaughter of the population, mostly by their own hands.


----------



## Jarnhamar (2 May 2004)

Whats a "troll"?

Very good points in your post michael.


----------



## Goober (2 May 2004)

I‘m sorry, maybe my opinions are a little skewed because I believe military targets should be just that. Military.

The killing of innocent civilians is the cowards way to do damage. Isn‘t that what people say about the WTC bombings?

Pearl Harbour is the harbour of Pearl City. Its a harbour, last time I checked my spelling of harbour was correct.


----------



## Goober (2 May 2004)

> Originally posted by Ghost778:
> [qb] Whats a "troll"?
> 
> Very good points in your post michael. [/qb]


Definitions of troll on the Web:

An outrageous message posted to a newsgroup or mailing list or message board to bait people to answer. Trolling is a form of harassment that can take over a discussion. Well meaning defenders can create chaos by responding to trolls. The best response is to ignore it. Also, the person who posts such messages. 
www.walthowe.com/glossary/t.html


A purposely stupid, inflammatory, or downright wrong article (closely related to flamebait). Its purpose is to get people mad and make them look stupid and gullible 
www.aol.com/netfind/newsgroup/glossary.html


Samuel Johnson, Dictionary - (1) To roll; to run round. 
etext.lib.virginia.edu/stc/Coleridge/resources/dictionary.html


This is the Scandanavian term for elf. Sometimes they are described as being hairy and ugly, although they are able to change their shape into anything they please. They are said to have lots of treasure, and live in beautiful palaces. 
www.pixietricks.com/dic/


Deliberately post an offensive or contentious message in a public message base, with the specific intent of provoking flames. 
associate.com/camsoc/ctt/gloss-t.html


A post that is intentionally inflammatory and which is typically an attempt to start a flamewar. One who posts trolls. 
www.sff.net/people/lucy-snyder/gloss.html


An annoyance usually on Messageboards who posts for the purpose of causing a disturbance. Often by making comments of a slanderous nature, accusatory, or just general pain-in-the-assness. 
www.sanguinarius.org/~sarasvati/terms.htm


A term used to define a public message (either on a USENET newsgroup or other public message board on an online service) that is posted for the sole purpose of offending people and/or generating an enormous flood of non-topic replies. (submitted by Brett Palmer) 
www.cyberalaska.com/alaska/webpage/dictionary.html


n. A mythical creature, first found in Scandinavian folklore, that is portrayed with a variety of personalities: as a friendly, mischievous dwarf or as a giant (often of evil disposition) who lives in caves or under bridges. Warcraft III art 
www.warcraftiii.net/articles/glossary.shtml


A rare creature that absorbs and feeds on ambient magical energy from the environment. 
www.khoras.net/Khoras/Glossary/T.htm


A feral race living primarily in the mountains, trolls are a tribal race somewhat taller than humans and far stronger. Their appearance is rather ghastly from their ability to crossbreed with virtually any race (which their repugnant behavior often indulges in, with or without consent). Trolls are best known for their amazing powers of healing ("regeneration") that will allow them to survive most wounds, even those thought mortal, and even regrow limbs (save for the head). [See also: Feral Race, Dark Troll] 
vergotha.com/info/glossary/pg10.html


the place to check in or buy at the door admission to an event. 
www.wm.edu/SO/SCA/new/define.html


The practice of trying to lure other Internet users into sending responses. 
www.afirst.com/definitions/definitions.htm


A troublemaker who deliberately posts provocative, hostile or annoying messages in a newsgroup or mailing list with the specific intent of starting a flamewar. The practice is known as trolling.Related terms: Flame, Flamewar, Post, POST, Mailing list, Newsgroup 
web14.compaq.com/mypresario/glossary/index.asp


An outrageous message posted to a newsgroup or mailing list to bait people to answer. Trolling is a form of harassment that can take over a newsgroup or mailing list. Well meaning defenders can create chaos by responding to trolls. The best response is to ignore it. 
www.lapasserelle.com/isc/Delphi_navnet/t.html


A troublemaker who deliberately posts provocative, hostile or annoying messages in a newsgroup or mailing list with the specific intent of starting a flamewar. The practice is known as trolling. 
www.cri-ent.com/Support/T.HTM

Courtesy of Google.ca


----------



## muskrat89 (2 May 2004)

> The killing of innocent civilians is the cowards way to do damage. Isn‘t that what people say about the WTC bombings?
> 
> Pearl Harbour is the harbour of Pearl City. Its a harbour, last time I checked my spelling of harbour was correct.


Boy, we‘re gonna have fun with you    

Oh - One definition of troll would have sufficed. If you‘re not going to be constructive, or at least pose your differing opinions in a mature manner, then move along.  

Not a suggestion.


----------



## Michael Dorosh (2 May 2004)

> Originally posted by Goober:
> [qb] I‘m sorry, maybe my opinions are a little skewed because I believe military targets should be just that. Military.
> 
> The killing of innocent civilians is the cowards way to do damage. Isn‘t that what people say about the WTC bombings?
> ...


The name of the military base is Pearl Harbor.

The concept of "legitimate targets" evolved during the 20th Century, beginning probably in the First World War.  By 1941, any city was considered a legitimate military target unless declared an "open city".

The bombing of Hiroshima was a legitimate act of war according to international convention, as at that time civilian populations were considered legitimate "military" targets.  I don‘t know if that was "legal" according to treaty and convention, but all sides targetted enemy civilians.  The people themselves were not the targets so much as civilian dwellings, factories, etc.  The idea being that if you deny a factory worker a roof over his head, he can‘t be effective at creating tools of war.

The difference between Hiroshima and WTC was that Japan and the US were in a high intensity conflict (war) and Al Queda had not issued a full declaration of war.  They also didn‘t represent the interests of any particular nation state and thus their interests may actually be irrelevant.

Slice it any way you want, Hiroshima was a legitimate target.  I would never call the B-29 crews who flew those long and dangerous missions "cowards" in any sense of the word.  They did a difficult job, and then the survivors had to live with the moral implications the rest of their lives.


----------



## winchable (2 May 2004)

*Cough*...well then. (Edit-That was directed at the list of definitions for the word "troll")

Pearl Harbor may have been a brilliant Idea initially (given that Yamamoto had few choices and was of course a patriot and an officer), but it was poorly executed.

The Japanese military (at the time, maybe not now anyone know?) had a system that placed a great deal of power in the hands of young fleet level officers.
Admiral (Nagumo?) (The officer directly responsible for the execution of the attack) made a decision to not send a third wave of planes which would have knocked out fuel reserves, finished off more ships, and perhaps even caught one of the carriers (They missed all the carriers by the way)
Nagumo was skittish and fled after the two waves, despite his own fighter losses being much better than projected.

So no it wasn‘t a brilliant attack by any means, at least it was poorly executed.
The idea was the best option given the choices that Yamomoto was faced with.

As for the Bomb, Mike hit the nail on the head.
I don‘t think anyone would choose 1 Million + Deaths and another five year period (another Europe) that would have included civilians and military alike, over, 200,000 dead in one sweep.

Of course it‘s easy enough to type out the numbers like they mean nothing, but that‘s exactly what the planners had to do.


----------



## DogOfWar (2 May 2004)

[No message]


----------



## Goober (2 May 2004)

> Originally posted by Che:
> [qb] *Cough*...well then. (Edit-That was directed at the list of definitions for the word "troll")
> 
> Pearl Harbor may have been a brilliant Idea initially (given that Yamamoto had few choices and was of course a patriot and an officer), but it was poorly executed.
> ...


Thank you for your post Che. I don‘t really articulate my thoughts too well with words, I‘m really a numbers guy. What you said here...

"Pearl Harbor may have been a brilliant Idea initially (given that Yamamoto had few choices and was of course a patriot and an officer), but it was poorly executed."

If I did a bit more research, this is what I would have initially said.

"I don‘t think anyone would choose 1 Million + Deaths and another five year period (another Europe) that would have included civilians and military alike, over, 200,000 dead in one sweep.

Of course it‘s easy enough to type out the numbers like they mean nothing, but that‘s exactly what the planners had to do."

A well precented opinion. Thanks!


----------



## Jarnhamar (2 May 2004)

Thanks for telling me what the web terms of troll/trolling were. I had no idea.


"Enmity and hatred will reign between us until ye believe in Allah alone." 
That comment speaks for itself. Hate everyone that doesnt believe in our god. How do you reason with that?

2 other points. (Sorry for going a little off the direction of the post)

1.It‘s easy to judge the decisions made in the past. These were decisions made during a "world war" that was going on for years. We are judging their decisions as we sit inside our comfy homes on our day off getting fat from fast food and wondering which movie we will go spend $25 on tonight.

2. no one wins when we discuss american/canadian armies-relations-politics or anything else. Most of us can brush the comments off. Most of us know when someone is making a jab on purpose and ignore it. (I admit im often bad for missing these subtle "jokes" myself and take offense). That being said some new readers come here and see comments directed against canadians(or americans, islam, civlians), take offense to it and comment back defensivly which brings the wrath of more members of the bored, usually established members where upon the new poster feels attacked and looses his cool. (I guess this can actually be said for a host of topics).
Anyways maybe people could just keep that in mind and before they feel like they are being attacked and explode, take a breather and don‘t post until your calmed down.


----------



## winchable (2 May 2004)

Allah just means God.
Not their God, your God, our God whoever‘s God.
Arabic for God.
Yes, Islam means submission to God(which of course taken out of context like anything comes across bad), however it translates into "Peace" as well, so take your pick. I will say however, that until you‘ve read the Qu‘Ran in it‘s original language, in It‘s entirety, it will be very difficult for you to understand a few quotes from a book that is considerably longer than a page.

There‘s quite a bit of violence and wrathfullness in any religious text, given that most of them were written in a time when arbitrators and foreign secretaries did not exist.

In any event, this argument where people call my religion a hateful awful thing gets tired and old. Give me one night in person with anyone who thinks Islam is an evil hate teaching religion and you‘ll see the difference in attitude when they get a [/B]PROPER[/B] lesson in Islam. This proper lesson is sadly, what many young Muslims who burn effagies and the like, are lacking. They fall for the same out of context quotes that people in the West fall for, only they use it for different means. Keep that in mind next time you quote passages and think that you are somehow better than a Muslim Propagandist.

Anyway that has nothing to do with American/Canadian relations. Which is a topic that should probably go into the pile of other circular arguments that religious debate belongs in. However, if anyone would like to continue that we shouldn‘t waste anymore thread space, PM me about it.


----------



## DogOfWar (2 May 2004)

[No message]


----------



## winchable (2 May 2004)

Alright; Last post on this.
In certain regional Arabic dialects, Islam has come to translate into Peace as well as the root meaning (which I‘m not arguing is submission to God)
It‘s not a matter of rhyme at all, it‘s a matter of how they spoken and how they are written in Arabic.

And yes, agree to disagree as I have done so many times on this argument.


----------



## DogOfWar (2 May 2004)

[No message]


----------

