[PublicAnimalNo9]

Public_Domain Public_Domain:

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

Delwin Delwin:

Any reference to the actions of a religion or culture before the year 1900 is an absolute moot point since all of humanity was a bunch of barbaric pricks.

Great, so by that logic we owe the Natives NOTHING for what happened prior to the 20th century, right?

Isn't that your current standpoint anyway?

Why do people always throw something they agree with into their argument about how bad their opponent's logic is?

Not quite. We definitely owe those who were directly and negatively affected by the residential school system, but that was after 1900.
I also never claimed he was using bad logic. But since he referred to the actions of any group prior to 1900 as being moot because we were all such pricks then anyway, I just wondered if he was willing to apply that equally or does it only apply when it suits his personal causes?

[Delwin]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

Delwin Delwin:

Any reference to the actions of a religion or culture before the year 1900 is an absolute moot point since all of humanity was a bunch of barbaric pricks.

Great, so by that logic we owe the Natives NOTHING for what happened prior to the 20th century, right?

Absolutely not, ISIS should certainly be held accountable for all of the atrocities that they committed before 1900 as well as the current ones. Could you please list the pre-1900 atrocities they committed ?

Or are we to be held accountable for all Christian atrocities not just Canadian ones ? Should we be making reparations to Australia's Aborigines ?

[Zipperfish]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

So you're saying that the current White House crowd is gonna do exactly the same thing the previous White House crowd did?

How's that for irony. You can change the President, you can change the party but you can't change the policies.

Who's really running Washington because apparently it isn't the Presidents?

Millionaires working for billionaires.

[BartSimpson]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

Millionaires working for billionaires.

Where can I sign up?

[Zipperfish]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

Millionaires working for billionaires.

Where can I sign up?

Convince 51% of voters that you're going to "change the way business is done in Washington!"

[bootlegga]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

bootlegga bootlegga:

While I fervently wish we spent more on defence, the US will NEVER look at us as anything close to an equal - we're considered a virtual client state by most American administrations, no matter how much "contribution" we make.

Absent a competent military Canada will inevitably find itself in the same predicament as Ukraine does today. I've consistently stated on CKA that Canada's relationship with the USA is always one Presidential election away from a problem.

And in this case the Presidential election in question may have been in 2012.

I'm not saying that Obama will go all Canadian Bacon on you, but it'd be foolish to rule it out and it'd be foolish to think he won't kick you to the curb if it suits his anti-white, anti-colonial sentiments.

Canada needs an adequate defense to deter potential aggression from the US, not to mention to fulfill its NATO obligations.

But when I can get out on Interstate 5 and see a convoy of CF troops that represents a solid percentage point of your total forces that's not a good thing. It's also bad for your culture in general not to foster the military arts and the manly culture that comes with it. Fey countries never fare well in the real world.

Canada has a competent military - it's just exceptionally small for so large a country. We should be spending somewhere in the vicinity of $30 billion minimum, but far too many people think we live in a safe Kumbaya-type of world, so they'd rather have tax cuts.

As for countering US aggression, there is no way that any conventional forces our country could field would ever deter a nation 10 times our size.

Even if we did decide to go all North Korea and field some massive military force, it would be totally unsustainable and you'd just have to wait a decade or so until it all came crumbling down anyways.

[Nuggie77]

BRAH BRAH:

Canada held it's own as a member of NATO in Afghanistan an example would be operation anaconda.

[BartSimpson]

Nuggie77 Nuggie77:

BRAH BRAH:

Canada held it's own as a member of NATO in Afghanistan an example would be operation anaconda.

Agreed. But now we're up against a resurgent Soviet Russia. Priorities have to change especially given that the Russians claim parts of Canada's Arctic via their spurious arguments about the Lamanosov (sp?) Ridge.

[peck420]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Agreed. But now we're up against a resurgent Soviet Russia. Priorities have to change especially given that the Russians claim parts of Canada's Arctic via their spurious arguments about the Lamanosov (sp?) Ridge.

Nice to see nothing has been learned from the past.
Crying shame that it will be the wrong priorities changed.