TranceAddict Forums

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Canada - Toronto & Southern Ont.
-- Gotta love the federal gov
Pages (2): [1] 2 »


Posted by Tudo Beleza on Nov-22-2002 06:31:

Gotta love the federal gov

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/021121/6/qea9.html


Posted by Swamper on Nov-22-2002 07:09:

Behold, this is our Navy.


Posted by Vanilla on Nov-22-2002 07:23:

quote:
Originally posted by Swamper
Behold, this is our Navy.



You're forgeting the couple submarines that are in West Edmonton Mall.


Posted by dEsidEL on Nov-22-2002 07:53:

KarateKid

haha i was about to post this same article just before you did , but then i remembered about what just happened when i posted the article about US Georgraphy skills.. people turned it into a flame war !

so heh don;t say i didn't warn ya !!


Posted by Tudo Beleza on Nov-22-2002 17:24:

quote:
Originally posted by dEsidEL
haha i was about to post this same article just before you did , but then i remembered about what just happened when i posted the article about US Georgraphy skills.. people turned it into a flame war !

so heh don;t say i didn't warn ya !!


hehehe yah i know, i was shocked at the flaming that started, becuase i posted teh same article in the main forum, chill out or what ever, and no flames were noticed. hehehe, i hope we can keep this thread flame free.


Posted by dEsidEL on Nov-23-2002 10:46:

KarateKid

honestly .. i think a lot of it has to do with the TO room specifically. our city is very multicultural and i've noticed that a lotta ppl off this particular city forum are extremely nationalistic and take their culture seriously ..

so often with all the diverse range of people we have, sometimes it's very easy to rub elbows whenever political or cultural issues are brought up .. someone says something and accidentally slips a comment, it's taken the wrong way and BOOM u gotta flame war in the TO forums.. honestly i really dunno if this much fighting goes on in any other city forum .. hell maybe we fight more here than in the politics forum ..


Posted by Fir3start3r on Nov-23-2002 17:33:

quote:

"Canada ranks third from the bottom among NATO countries in military spending. Ahead only of Luxembourg and of Iceland, which does not even have a military. Canada should be ashamed of itself."


My sediments exactly...
Sad.
Very, very, sad...


Posted by dEsidEL on Nov-23-2002 19:33:

KarateKid

see we don't need an army cuz we're the US's largest trading partner.. so if someone attacks us it would be in the US bests interest to protect us .. aren't we glad that we're protected under the NORAD nuclear umbrella without having to spare a single expense.. ??


Posted by Fir3start3r on Nov-23-2002 19:54:

quote:
Originally posted by dEsidEL
see we don't need an army cuz we're the US's largest trading partner.. so if someone attacks us it would be in the US bests interest to protect us .. aren't we glad that we're protected under the NORAD nuclear umbrella without having to spare a single expense.. ??


That's great of someone was going to attack us but we have a lot of other obligations outside our own country...
(I know or think you were probably being sarcastic )

I think Canada has been using this as an excuse for way too long.
It's only now that other countries are starting to see the feeble existance of our own forces.
The charade is over...

If it takes someone ELSE to tell us that our military has a problem then it must really be in a state of repair...


Posted by jon jon on Nov-23-2002 20:44:

quote:
Originally posted by Fir3start3r
My sediments exactly...
Sad.
Very, very, sad...

The arms race like everything else (drugs, tattoos are other solid examples) are a 'too each their own" philosophy. Personally I take pride in knowing my country doesn't blow 80 Billion dollars (which is just the size of the U.S increase THIS YEAR!?!) on guns. I don't really think military spending is necessary because we border with Rambo. Have an army, call them peacekeepers and rock on. I love the Canada with no guns. All we are saying is give peace a chance.


Posted by Dj Smitty20 on Nov-24-2002 23:03:

Well, Bush is a moron....plain and simple.

Besides, he shouldn't even be president. Al Gore won that damn election anyway and we all know it....and I'll tell you something...all this crap going on right now wouldn't be nearly as bad as it is with Gore as President. Gore and Clinton and the Democratic candidates/presidents are actually educated people who have realistic and workable policies for the economy and environment, whereas Bush's Republicans have no idea what to do with the enormous potential that is the American economy. THAT is why we keep hearing Bush rant on about terrorism and Iraq....because that's the only thing that is keeping the support for him up. That also proves how dumb dumb most of the Yanks can be. Certainly, terrorism is an issue but I'd be worried about the economy and environment first because Americans are spending money they just do not have and the shit is going to hit the fan very soon.

Oh well, it doesn't matter.....China will be running the show in 50 years anyway (I hope I'm dead by then!)

As for Chretien and the Liberals apologising to the American government and Bush. GO FUCK RIGHT OFF!! Should Chretien's aide go suck Bush's cock too? Get stuffed.....I wish Trudeau were still Prime Minister. He'd tell Bush where to get off just like he told that idiot Reagan.


Posted by jon jon on Nov-24-2002 23:29:

quote:
Originally posted by Dj Smitty20
Oh well, it doesn't matter.....China will be running the show in 50 years anyway (I hope I'm dead by then!)


yep (and just to clafiry I hope you're dead too)


Posted by Fir3start3r on Nov-24-2002 23:52:

quote:
Originally posted by halo20
The arms race like everything else (drugs, tattoos are other solid examples) are a 'too each their own" philosophy. Personally I take pride in knowing my country doesn't blow 80 Billion dollars (which is just the size of the U.S increase THIS YEAR!?!) on guns. I don't really think military spending is necessary because we border with Rambo. Have an army, call them peacekeepers and rock on. I love the Canada with no guns. All we are saying is give peace a chance.


You're right.
I'm not for spending an obsurd amount of money either.
You can't expect compare any country against the budget of the United States. They have capital and budget to do that.
But what I am opposed to is absolutely no military; it's shameful that a country such as ours, with years of being a peacemaker can't back that up when counts.
There's only so much piggy backing we can do with the States and personally, we shouldn't have to.
There are situations in this world where other countries in need ASK for our help and we can't properly provide.
So it's not that we need military at home so much as we need a peacekeeping military to help others; what we're so famous for.
We should be able to keep to our obligations to others, there's no excuse for years of neglect.


Posted by Dj Smitty20 on Nov-25-2002 14:01:

quote:
Originally posted by halo20
yep (and just to clafiry I hope you're dead too)


Wow, that's a very insightful comment man. Your IQ must be over 190!
What's the matter? Are you a Yank living in Canada or one of those traitorous Canadians who thinks we should just become the 51st State?
The TRUTH really does hurt doesn't it, you American-loving idiot?


As for Canada's military, it used to be one of the best fighting forces in the world in WW1, WW2 and Korea. Since then, it has just deteriorated into the mess it is now. Don't just blame Chretien and the Liberals. Mulroney did nothing to boost military spending at all. All he did was invoke the GST and sign the FTA and NAFTA.


Posted by jon jon on Nov-25-2002 17:48:

quote:
Originally posted by Fir3start3r
There are situations in this world where other countries in need ASK for our help and we can't properly provide.
So it's not that we need military at home so much as we need a peacekeeping military to help others; what we're so famous for.
We should be able to keep to our obligations to others, there's no excuse for years of neglect.


Dude, did I not start off my reply in explaining too each their own. Of course I understand your point, and just because you type a little blurb on your personal feelings doesn't mean I'm gonna change my opinion. But since you're so adamante about debating this....

(-) When other countries needs out help, who are you to justfiy which country gets that help and which doesn't?? Should we just go running to every single country that asks, even if some of those countries have openly committed war crimes? What about the U.N? Isn't that there job? Whaddaya think?


Posted by jon jon on Nov-25-2002 17:53:

quote:
Originally posted by Dj Smitty20
Wow, that's a very insightful comment man. Your IQ must be over 190!
What's the matter? Are you a Yank living in Canada or one of those traitorous Canadians who thinks we should just become the 51st State?
The TRUTH really does hurt doesn't it, you American-loving idiot?


hahahhah What the fuck? hahahahha

First of all I was agreeing with your comment about China, I thought I quotted you, guess I forgot after all. Then your little stint about me being a 'Yank living in Canada' is just fuckin gay. I thought I put a little tongue happy face after the "I hope you die comment"?? Why do I even bother honestly? I'm so fedup of the ignorance on this board. I was making a crack about what you said, IE: "I hope I'm dead by then". Now that's insight. Please take the time to explain how you established the fact that I'm an "American-loving idiot". I'd love to hear your rebutal, please. Nothing would please me more than to see this brilliant piece of work.


Posted by Fir3start3r on Nov-25-2002 18:44:

quote:
Originally posted by halo20
Dude, did I not start off my reply in explaining too each their own. Of course I understand your point, and just because you type a little blurb on your personal feelings doesn't mean I'm gonna change my opinion. But since you're so adamante about debating this....

(-) When other countries needs out help, who are you to justfiy which country gets that help and which doesn't?? Should we just go running to every single country that asks, even if some of those countries have openly committed war crimes? What about the U.N? Isn't that there job? Whaddaya think?


Well that's easy.
Part of being a democratic G7 country is that there are certain obligations (as mentioned above) in helping developing countries (or others) try and turn their situations around.
Not every country has the resources we (G7) have.
Of course, we aren't going to just going to walk into any country that asks; there is a process and you have already alluded to it; the UN. (check mark for you )

Canada has multiple roles in this world.
We've never been a country to just watch things happen or turn down a request for assistance; and I don't think we should start.
Having a military isn't nessecarily the big evil monster it's made out to be here or being suggested.
Lets stop thinking about what a military means to us and think about how it can assist others in time of need (through the proper channels of course).


Posted by jon jon on Nov-25-2002 19:14:

quote:
Originally posted by Fir3start3r
Well that's easy.
We've never been a country to just watch things happen or turn down a request for assistance; and I don't think we should start.


Are you really that naive? Do you really think we rush out to solve all of the worlds issues whenever they demand it. Canada like every other country picks and chooses its causes. And since when does being G7 equate being more helpful. lol I have many friends who would argue it's the other way around.

There are countless wars being fought at this moment (in the hundreds) and most are not justfiable causes, in which case yea we should be helping someone out somewhere. So why aren't we?


Posted by Fir3start3r on Nov-25-2002 21:36:

quote:
Originally posted by halo20
Are you really that naive?

No.
quote:
Do you really think we rush out to solve all of the worlds issues whenever they demand it. Canada like every other country picks and chooses its causes.

It's not about choice as much as obligations.
Let's enlighten shall we?
quote:

Objectives

Article 1

The objectives of the World Federation of United Nations Associations are


(a) To be a peoples' movement for the United Nations;

(b) To co-ordinate and further the activities of its Members and to promote the establishment of new United Nations Associations;


(c) To co-operate, where appropriate, with other organizations whose objects include the support of the United Nations and its development;


(d) To promote tolerance, understanding, solidarity and co-operation among men, women and children throughout the world without distinction as to race, sex, language, religion or political orientation;


(e) To contribute to the removal of obstacles to peace, to work for justice, security and disarmament, and to promote the development of peaceful co-existence and co-operation among nations;


(f) To strive for the recognition of and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms throughout the world and for the recognition of the responsibilities and duties which those rights involve for individuals, groups and States;


(g) To promote economic development, enhancement of social progress and better standards of life;


(h) To promote research, information and education about the goals of the Charter of the United Nations and the work of the United Nations system.

Source

Now where exactly in there did we see 'pick and choose' because we feel like it?

Hell, if I had the choice to do or not do my laundry or wash my dishes, I would, but it's not about choice all the time.
Sometimes we have responsibilities...

quote:

And since when does being G7 equate being more helpful. lol I have many friends who would argue it's the other way around.


Responsibility yet again; Canada is the chair this year...(actually known as the G8- Group of 8 - because of the European Union)
quote:

The seven largest industrialized democracies - the United States, Germany, Japan, Canada, Great Britain, France and Italy - began meeting informally in 1975 in response to the oil crisis, and formal summits began in Tokyo in 1986. In addition to being the most powerful economies, the G7 governments are also the leading sponsors of the world's dominant multilateral institutions such as the United Nations, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, NATO and others.


quote:

There are countless wars being fought at this moment (in the hundreds) and most are not justfiable causes, in which case yea we should be helping someone out somewhere. So why aren't we?

Canada is in several countries (I can't find a list right now but I'm sure it exists) keeping the peace.
Sometimes it's a matter of resources, even for us.
That's why we rotate with other countries in doing the peace keeping.
You're right, sometimes it doesn't seem justifiable, but sometimes we aren't there for the local politcal agenda as much as being there just to keep some basic human rights in check.


Posted by jon jon on Nov-25-2002 22:20:

The fact that you would post UN dogma answers my first question, yes you are naive.

The framework for the UN means dick. Haven't you been following the news? FACT: The UN is the U.S.A's lapdog, the day you figure that out is the day we start reasoning here.

Dude, you're confusing the argument. I love Canada, and it does a great job of peacekeeping, YES! I AGREE WITH YOU! But the politics are much more complicated than you think. I can't spend my whole night explaining 'engagements of war', just please accept the fact that just because we are in UN we are not the all mighty world security guard and neither is it. Should we increase military spending? Probably. I just said it would be cool if we didn't have to, fuck it. Let's be peaceful on our own, let's prove our pacifist nature by actually adopting that ideology and using it in that context.

So you've managed to define for me what G8 means. Wooo hoo. How does that change my opinion about military spending. Again, can I not have my own opinion. I don't get it. This board is so hardcore about forcing it's opinion on someone else.


Posted by TheDemon on Nov-25-2002 22:38:

quote:
Originally posted by Dj Smitty20
Wow, that's a very insightful comment man. Your IQ must be over 190!
What's the matter? Are you a Yank living in Canada or one of those traitorous Canadians who thinks we should just become the 51st State?
The TRUTH really does hurt doesn't it, you American-loving idiot?


As for Canada's military, it used to be one of the best fighting forces in the world in WW1, WW2 and Korea. Since then, it has just deteriorated into the mess it is now. Don't just blame Chretien and the Liberals. Mulroney did nothing to boost military spending at all. All he did was invoke the GST and sign the FTA and NAFTA.


dont be surprised he posted that comment. he called me an idiot for no reason. he's iq 190, nah man. but iam pretty sure thats his waste size. muahahhahaahhhaha


Posted by jon jon on Nov-25-2002 23:51:

quote:
Originally posted by TheDemon
he called me an idiot for no reason


ahem...

quote:
Originally posted by TheDemon
Power to the Jihads.


I believe that is why I called you an idiot, myself and half the board. Thanks for coming out bud.


Posted by jon jon on Nov-25-2002 23:56:

---this is the thread that makes TheDemon apparently a real smart guy---


Posted by Dj Smitty20 on Nov-26-2002 04:52:

Um....yes, my waste line is 190? That would put me at about 2000lbs!!
Actually I'm a 33 waste if you REALLY must know..oh AND I'm 5'10 with brown hair and green eyes. ******!

Now, HALO....by you saying "I hope you're dead too".....well that reads as an insult, no matter how sarcastic it was with that stupid smile at the end.

And you idiots can say what you want...all of what I said is true. Who are you guys going to vote for? Ernie Eves provincially and Stephen Harper of the idiotic yank cock sucking Alliance? Just to increase military spending....meanwhile letting all our valued and worthy programs like medicare the CPP and EI go to shit?
It's a good thing the Libs, for all their fuck ups, are still in power and will continue to be under Martin or, better yet, Allan Rock.


Posted by jon jon on Nov-26-2002 05:57:


Pages (2): [1] 2 »

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.