Guest Rob Assaf Posted March 21, 2003 Share Posted March 21, 2003 Is it just me or do other people get annoyed by what is going on right now? In cities across Canada today, huge rallies by bongo drumming students and other people who've probably never worked a day in their lives, protesting America disarming Iraq after 12 years of non-compliance while not a whisper was heard by these same people and in fact probably support our national gun registry which violates my rights. Just because I have a firearm possesion licence, the police can enter my home any time without cause or without a warrant. If I was suspected of operating a grow op or a meth lab, the police would have to go to a judge with SOME kind of proof and get a warrant to enter. There is a tip line where a ex-spouse can call and have my guns seized on her word alone, no proof required. But go in after 12 years to disarm an insane dictator and everyone goes crazy! I wish they'd all gone to Iraq and protested in front of the presidential palace a few months ago, when they were freed from their cells by the liberation forces, they'd be frigging grateful for the military and some common sense. I probably shouldn't watch the news while on holidays, hmm? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jinx Posted March 21, 2003 Share Posted March 21, 2003 You just don't get it. It is exactly this type of protest that guarantees our freedom, and is exactly why people in countries like North Korea are opressed. Because their government does not tolerate it, and shoots anyone who gets out of line. Would you like to see that in Canada? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cp fa Posted March 21, 2003 Share Posted March 21, 2003 I think you're the one who doesn't get it. The reason these people have the freedom to protest is because there are people who are willing to have their a$$es shot off to defend it, not the other way around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ex-SkyGeek Posted March 21, 2003 Share Posted March 21, 2003 Prime Ministers, Presidents, and other elected officials are chosen by a Country’s people (in a democratic society), to make such judgment calls for the collective good and security of the nation, on the peoples' behalf. I for one, Support the U.S. invasion even though our government does not. And I understand why our Government can not, without the backing of the international community, aka the U.N. But what do I know? IMHO. http://www.flightattendants.org/cgi-bin/_ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=12;t=000006 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest WA777 Posted March 21, 2003 Share Posted March 21, 2003 You can have a disagreement with your spouse but you don't have to punch them in the nose....Canada just loves to keep shooting itself in the foot.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Fax Posted March 21, 2003 Share Posted March 21, 2003 Jean Chretien's thought process on this is totally flawed...he is coming to his non-support stance based on his belief that Saddam doesn't have weapons of mass destruction. Did you catch that statement during his interview with the US reporter? Absolutely ridiculous and an embarrasement to this country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Fax Posted March 21, 2003 Share Posted March 21, 2003 Jean Chretien's thought process on this is totally flawed...he is coming to his non-support stance based on his belief that Saddam doesn't have weapons of mass destruction. Did you catch that statement during his interview with the US reporter? Absolutely ridiculous and an embarrassment to this country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Marion Vanderlubbe Posted March 21, 2003 Share Posted March 21, 2003 That is so wrong. "You can sleep peacefully because rough men stand ready to do violence on your behalf (sic)." Those same rough men that provide you with the freedom to protest may hope that you are judicious in the use of that freedom, but are the last to criticize the manner in which you use it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ex-SkyGeek Posted March 21, 2003 Share Posted March 21, 2003 I wonder how this will impact the very foundation of the U.N.? As Bush said, they don't need the approval of other countries to defend themselves. But what's the point of having a U.N. committee if a country can undermine all that the U.N. stands for so easily. What does message does that convey to the world about the usefulness of the efforts of the U.N.? Let's hope the U.S. comes out a winner and indeed does look like a good guy in the end (that they are right about chemical warfare in Iraq), because if it doesn't the hate for the U.S. will undoubtedly mount and being fellow westerners, Canada will not be immune to the thinking. I believe we refer to that as a "sweeping" generalization. That is why I support the U.S. in this war; I personally choose to believe that the Bush Administration has gathered enough intelligence to unquestionably warrant this invasion. For those of you laughing at my opinion(s), don't worry... I'm laughing at myself too, since I admittedly know as much about politics as I thought I did about the success Tango two months prior to the collapse of Canada 3000. Look who's still around! *boy, is my face red* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rob Assaf Posted March 21, 2003 Share Posted March 21, 2003 Yesterday in downtown Vancouver, these morons tied traffic up for hours during rushhour by lying in the streets. These bubbleheads are obviously NOT in the geography program because our PM turtled on public television and opted NOT to involve Canada in the Iraq war. Last I checked, Vancouver was still in Canada and not in the US (although not for lack of trying by the Eastern based govt of this country!) It didn't stop one carrier from launching a plane or a tank from crossing the border. I do have some respect for the young lady from Winnipeg who in disagreeing with the idea of war, opted to transport herself to Baghdad to make her statement. Now I don't agree with her stance, but I DO agree with her method of carrying out her statement. She's placed herself at risk to back her cause and is not inconviencing others who don't. All the protesters in Vancouver are is a mob, they will riot when the 'nucks win the stanley cup even though they may never have seen a game, or the next time a rock concert is cancelled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Moogie Posted March 21, 2003 Share Posted March 21, 2003 To those wondering how the Americans know that the Iraqi regime have weapons of mass destruction...THEY KEPT THE RECEIPTS!...oh...and speaking of mass destruction....seen the Baghdad skyline this morning? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest floatrr Posted March 22, 2003 Share Posted March 22, 2003 Say hypothetically for instance, Jean Cretien and cabinet, decided that it was best for Canada to wipe out all French speaking constituents. Mass genocide if you will. VX, mustard gas, biological weapons. Essentially wipe them all off the face of the earth! Do you not think that the world authorities would act? Saddam's organization has done exactly that. He has killed thousands of innocent people. He is no better than Hitler was. Do you think he should have just been left him alone to do his bidding? Weapons of mass destruction or not, this guy is still a danger to his own peoples lives. This is why I support the good ol USA in this campaign. It's time to take a stand against this dictator. Proudly Canadian, but not so proud of our leadership. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.