If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Canada threatens to pull soldiers from Afghanistan unless NATO supplies reinforcements, round bacon   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 26
    More: Misc  
•       •       •

207 clicks; posted to Politics » on 29 Jan 2008 at 8:05 PM (6 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



26 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread
 
2008-01-29 04:53:13 PM
What a bunch of a hoosers, eh?
 
2008-01-29 04:57:07 PM
Good. Good. Good.
 
2008-01-29 05:12:59 PM
www.bobcesca.com

We need reinforcements.
 
2008-01-29 05:13:46 PM
The U.S. be speaking muslim by nows if'n it weren't fer Canada!
 
2008-01-29 05:58:24 PM
I've got puke breath....
 
2008-01-29 06:41:21 PM
log_jammin: The U.S. be speaking muslim by nows if'n it weren't fer Canada!

Durka Durka? Muhammad Jihad!

/durka
 
2008-01-29 07:04:56 PM
Good.
 
2008-01-29 07:32:09 PM
The only thing to say is:

Salam.
 
2008-01-29 07:42:16 PM
Why? Are their arms tired from throwing empty Molson bottles at insurgents? Or maybe they want to replace their aging APCs:

www.hotlinkfiles.com

Either way, are we really gonna miss both of their soldiers when they leave?


/I keed, I just can't pass up a chance to slap Canada around
 
2008-01-29 08:11:43 PM
Real Canadian Bacon is'nt round subby! and it's not called Canadian bacon either.
 
2008-01-29 08:16:10 PM
And Timbits.
 
2008-01-29 08:16:39 PM
"Canada has done what it said it would do and more. We now say we need help. I think if NATO can't come through with that help, then I think -- frankly -- NATO's own reputation and future will be in grave jeopardy."

Wow, if Bush Lite is making back away noises you know the mission is in trouble.

Canada's total bill so far for our commitment in Afghanistan approaches 7 Billion at this point.

/Course, most of that was fer beer, natch.
 
2008-01-29 08:19:45 PM
Next they'll want some dijon ketchups...
 
2008-01-29 08:24:35 PM
Canadian Bacon was a rather funny movie. Micheal Moore was much better at entertainment than he is at left wing propaganda pieces.
 
2008-01-29 08:24:59 PM
GIS for "round bacon":

www.baconunwrapped.com

Was subby talking about Vancouver?
 
2008-01-29 08:48:53 PM
Canadians, including French Canadians, are used to getting killed so the French don't ; but I think we're all scratching our heads about dying for the Germans and Italians.
 
2008-01-29 10:17:21 PM
I love Canada. I love Canadians. Marty Short. John Candy. Kids in the Hall. And so many more.

If it wasn't so damn cold up in Canada, I would move there.

/Raised in the Sonoran desert. 50 F is cold.
 
2008-01-29 11:10:54 PM
quatchi: 7 Billion dollars is not a lot of money when you are talking about government dollars.
 
2008-01-30 12:06:57 AM
SemperLieSuckah: quatchi: 7 Billion dollars is not a lot of money when you are talking about government dollars.

It is when you're talking about a country with 1/10th the tax base of America and a much smaller economy.


We should pull out. Why are we sticking our asses out for the results of the American war? If we're the only ones doing it, why bother? Let the Americans stand alone.
 
2008-01-30 12:26:20 AM
starsrift: The United States is not the only country al-Qaeda has attacked. They have also attacked Britain and Spain, with other plots foiled before they were able to come to fruition.

Also, the GWOT is not just a war on al-Qaeda, it is a war against all terror organizations. Since Munich, they've only gotten more powerful and more menacing. Instead of engaging in the political process, these people are using terror tactics to try to get their way because they know that their ideals are NOT going to be accepted, ie: the Caliphate and Sharia courts.

This is not just the U.S.'s war, but a lot of Europeans (and Canadians) seem to think so. Perhaps it will take THEM being attacked directly before they will stand up and do something.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/front/


Also note that yes, the U.S. has the capacity to fight the war in Afghanistan all by ourselves, but there is an important political message of the entire western world being against these hoodlums and taking an active stance to ensure their failure.
 
2008-01-30 12:27:46 AM
So what? America can always find another country's soldiers to hold their coats.
 
2008-01-30 12:38:08 AM
SemperLieSuckah: starsrift: The United States is not the only country al-Qaeda has attacked. They have also attacked Britain and Spain, with other plots foiled before they were able to come to fruition.

Also, the GWOT is not just a war on al-Qaeda, it is a war against all terror organizations. Since Munich, they've only gotten more powerful and more menacing. Instead of engaging in the political process, these people are using terror tactics to try to get their way because they know that their ideals are NOT going to be accepted, ie: the Caliphate and Sharia courts.

This is not just the U.S.'s war, but a lot of Europeans (and Canadians) seem to think so. Perhaps it will take THEM being attacked directly before they will stand up and do something.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/front/


Also note that yes, the U.S. has the capacity to fight the war in Afghanistan all by ourselves, but there is an important political message of the entire western world being against these hoodlums and taking an active stance to ensure their failure.


FTFM
 
2008-01-30 12:54:31 AM
SemperLieSuckah: starsrift: The United States is not the only country al-Qaeda has attacked. They have also attacked Britain and Spain, with other plots foiled before they were able to come to fruition.

Ah, yes, the fearsome bombers of London who blew themselves up and didn't hurt anyone else. Terrifying, them. Well deserving of retaliation.

Also, the GWOT is not just a war on al-Qaeda, it is a war against all terror organizations. Since Munich, they've only gotten more powerful and more menacing. Instead of engaging in the political process, these people are using terror tactics to try to get their way because they know that their ideals are NOT going to be accepted, ie: the Caliphate and Sharia courts.

It's interesting how the American "War on Terror" has started in other countries, and not in America.

This is not just the U.S.'s war, but a lot of Europeans (and Canadians) seem to think so. Perhaps it will take THEM being attacked directly before they will stand up and do something.

Fail. America asked for allies to fight with them, and some countries answered. It's a duty, as an ally. Including my beloved country. And while Harper has a hard-on to lick American boots, it doesn't change the fact that many, many of us Canadians are tired of sending our young men and women off to fight, and die, for America's war that even America doesn't seem to be interested in fighting any more.

Also note that yes, the U.S. has the capacity to fight the war in Afghanistan all by ourselves, but there is an important political message of the entire western world Canada being against these hoodlums and taking an active stance to ensure their failure.

Why should we support aggression that Americans themselves won't support, and the directives of a President that American's can't wait to be rid of? If America is so capable, why do they keep complaining about having troops getting not enough time off between rotations into Iraq and not enough recruitment?
 
2008-01-30 01:13:08 AM
starsrift: Ah, yes, the fearsome bombers of London who blew themselves up and didn't hurt anyone else. Terrifying, them. Well deserving of retaliation.

It's official. You have no idea what you are talking about in reference to a major world event.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_July_2005_London_bombings

52 dead, 700 wounded

You are talking about this failed attempt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/21_July_2005_London_bombings

and it seems that it doesn't even concern you that they even TRIED to kill HUNDREDS of people after succeeding in such an endeavor earlier that month.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madrid_train_bombings

151 dead, 2,050 injured, but that was because the original plan failed due to inconsistent train timing. The original intent was for 15 bombs to go off inside the train station killing around 3000 to 5000 people



It's interesting how the American "War on Terror" has started in other countries, and not in America.


What is that supposed to mean?

Fail. America asked for allies to fight with them, and some countries answered. It's a duty, as an ally. Including my beloved country. And while Harper has a hard-on to lick American boots, it doesn't change the fact that many, many of us Canadians are tired of sending our young men and women off to fight, and die, for America's war that even America doesn't seem to be interested in fighting any more.
You completely changed the subject.

Why should we support aggression that Americans themselves won't support, and the directives of a President that American's can't wait to be rid of? If America is so capable, why do they keep complaining about having troops getting not enough time off between rotations into Iraq and not enough recruitment?

We CAN do it, but peoples' stateside rotations would be much shorter. Right now the rule is that for every year of deployment they must come stateside for a year. That's pretty lax historically. Most Americans wholly support the War on Terror, that is a strawman argument. The Iraq War is controversial, but most Americans in the polls I've seen do not advocate immediate withdrawal from there. That would be amazingly stupid. Most want us to gradually draw down as the Iraqi government becomes capable of filling the void.
 
2008-01-30 11:20:46 AM
quatchi

We pumped twice that amount into corrupt native leaders on reservations last year alone quatchi, so they can live off reserve in big houses traveling the country while their youth huff gas and hang themselves. 7 billion is hardly a huge chunk of canada's budget. We put 9.2 into paying back our debt (up when the liberals were in power, 2005 budget), and 39 billion into provincial level infrastructure.

Here. Canadian government spending and revenues quatchi. Let me show you.

Old age security benefits, guaranteed income supplement and spouse's allowance$27,870,984,000

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_federal_spending%2C_2004

"Bush lite".. right...
 
2008-01-30 11:39:36 AM
What i find funny is that while liberals made increases (or promised them) to military spending roughly on par with the conservative governments (about 15 billion to 2 0billion) and it was the liberals who actually took us to war in afghanistan, yet it's Harper who's bush lite.

In the 2005 budget, the Liberal government promised a nearly $13-billion boost in military spending for the next five years. The Conservatives' budget in 2006 allocated $1.1 billion to the Canadian military over two years, as part of $5.3 billion in funding coming over the next five years.

As well, during the last week of June 2006, Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced $15 billion in spending on military vehicles, including transport planes, heavy-lift helicopters, troop carrier ships and trucks. The spending will be spread out over several years.


If you actually try to ask them why harper is bush lite, what policy, specifically he's engaged in that makes him bush like, you get no real answer. Well, a response along the same lines as starsrift's.

Everybody known our military is suffering from rampant neglect. The liberal government knew it, and moved to do something about it as did the conservatives. Making sure our military has vehicles that work isn't militarism, although i've definantly heard candians describe it as such.

Actually, i think that happened on fark. I wonder if too many people are watching ad's like this one:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=68toCAiPIjo

dur... stephen harper is making Canada a police state..
 
Displayed 26 of 26 comments



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report