I wonder if True-Doh!'s a stockholder?
https://www.foxnews.com/world/justin...ribery-scandal
Printable View
I wonder if True-Doh!'s a stockholder?
https://www.foxnews.com/world/justin...ribery-scandal
That pale faced guy is corrupt,lock him and everybody associated with him up,but that would kill the whole Canadians have the best politicians that money can buy concept.
SNC was the first pick for the new Detroit bridge project until the US put a cleavet in there where any cases of fraud makes the bridge contract void and shuts it down,all of the sudden SNC was pulled.
If there is any link to SNC and the bridge and or a subsidiary of SNC,it becomes a dead in the water deal.I am sure DIBC will be all over this.
Any person who runs for any political office does so for one of three reasons: [[1) What's in it for me? [[2) Overwhelming ego. [[3) 1 and 2 combined.
^^^^
Thank you, oh elder sage of DetYes.
;););):rolleyes:
Looks like true-doh!'s problems continue to grow.
https://thetyee.ca/Analysis/2019/03/...-Martyn-Brown/
The 'SNC-Lavalin' scandal is indeed damaging the Liberal brand in polling, though Trudeau is taking the larger personal hit.
Here's the thing, I think many Canadians care less about the original issue than are offended by how vapid and reactive Trudeau has seemed in addressing it.
He was always a bit of a pretty face.......articulate, but not an intellectual heavyweight like his dad.
But in his attempts to diffuse/deflect this scandal he's come off as dismissive, defensive and clearly following his talking points to the letter.
It just hasn't looked good at all.
The only thing is, when we go to the polls this fall, Canada's federal electoral choices are not currently appearing all that good.
We have Trudeau and the Liberals who are certainly very corporate friendly, can't seem to balance a budget and outside of legalizing pot, assisted suicide and improving child benefits don't have a great list of accomplishments to show for 4 years in power.
We have Andrew Scheer and the Conservatives.....he's about as milque toast as you get.
He was also heavily lobbied by the same company that lobbied Trudeau and said nothing about it till it became public.
He bumbled the response to the NewZealand shooting; and has managed to offend the Libertarian wing of his party enough that they've left to form their own party, The People's Party, and are threatening to split the vote on the right.
Jagmeet Singh is leader of the NDP, Canada's lefty party which has sometimes held power in the western provinces and once in each of Nova Scotia and Ontario, but never federally.
He has not had a tour de force start as party leader, and the party is near historic lows in the polls.
The aforementioned People's Party is now on the hard right.....
While the Greens and their leader Elizabeth May are on the upswing, but far from being contenders for power.
Eesh.
Maybe if you guys give Trump dual citizenship he could run both countries for the betterment.
MCGA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian Visitor
Hmmmmmm.... SSDC, same shit, different country.
People in the US cry about a two party system,which is really the socialist,normal Democrats and the Republicans,where as Canada seems to have 5 or more different parties,and every province seems to have a different view,like separate countries located under the same flag,seems like it would be difficult to get anything done.
It is true that are more different parties, but in general they find it easier, not more difficult to 'get things done'.Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard
That's because we tend to get 'majority governments' in Canada. Keep in mind the executive and legislative are together in Canada, there is no one with a veto.
Also none of the provinces have a senate.
The Federal government does have a senate, but its not elected and almost always approves any bill approved by the House of Commons.
The other thing to remember is that federally, only 2 parties have ever held power; and in most provinces that is true at any given time, though the parties may differ from those at the federal level.
Let's take the current Federal Parliament [[House of Commons) as example.
The Liberals got 39.5% of the vote, but got 184 seats [[a majority) of 338 seats total.
By comparison:
The Conservatives had 31.9% but got only 99 seats
The NDP had 19.7% and got 44 seats
The Bloc Quebecois got 4.7% and 10 seats
The Greens got 3.5% and 1 seat
That means the Liberals form government and can basically pass anything they want, because they can out vote all the other parties combined.
[[when Conservatives are in power its usually similar)
Canada's parliamentary system is also much more tightly whipped than yours....rarely do members of a party vote differently from the party leader.
We do get the odd minority government [[where the government requires the support of another party to pass laws) but these aren't very common and don't tend to last a full term.
Prime Minister Trudeau said that ""I think if there were no tensions, if there was no escalation recently in the region, those Canadians would be right now home with their families."
I agree but there are an infinite number of "ifs". For example-
If the U.S. was not in Iraq.
If the Ukrainian airline has grounded it flights.
If Trump would have remained ok with Hizbollah picking off Americans.
If the Iranian army hadn't shot down the airliner.
If Soleimani had remained in Iran.
If the rocket would have missed the target.
If Trudeau hadn't opened Canada's door to so many Iranian immigrants.
If weather wouldn't have grounded the plane.
etc..
I think Trudeau's remark was a low blow directed at Trump and could have been extended to all the other U.S. politicians who sent and have kept American troops in Iraq for almost 17 years. The CEO of a Canadian corporation took it a step further a couple of days ago when he accused "a narcissist in Washington" of "collateral damage" that killed 63 Canadians'. CEO Michael McCain said that "Canadians needlessly lost their lives in the crossfire" which is amazing since the U.S. didn't fire shots into Iran.
Trudeau's new beard works though.
In the interview he made the comments in almost a whisper mode.
Canadian special forces are on the ground over there,they are not shooting dice in some back alley,Canada is knee deep in the tensions that have been there over 50 years so why play the innocent victim card?
I agree the beard suits him at least he looks old enough to vote now.
The one thing I notice is where ever there is a hot spot the United States involvements are splashed in the papers across the globe,but we are not alone,every other country is right there also but receives no mention,maybe those countries base it on the less thier citizens know the better they are off?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard
Canadians are well aware our forces are in Iraq, primarily involved with training the Peshmurga [[the Kurds).
But in that mission our troops haven't killed any high ranking Iranian generals.
Our special ops people keep their work quite while its on-going just as is the case with U.S. special forces.
They too though haven't been killing any high-ranking Iranian generals.
They may be up to some other things the Iranians wouldn't appreciate............but that's a different discussion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by oladub
You have bits and pieces of a point in there, but they are ruined by a lack of restraint.
What in the hell does the level of Canadian immigration have to do with acts of war?
If you gave any answer other than nothing, you should be ashamed of yourself.
Racism and Xenophobia have no place in this world, none, zero, nada.
****
Sure there are plenty of folks in the west who can share blame for the mess that is the middle east, going all the way back to long-dead French and British diplomats that drew the current national borders up.
The issue here is what precipitated the immediate actions.
The answer, is only the killing of a high ranking Iranian general, who was not on U.S. soil and who has never directed an attack against the U.S.
The U.S. clearly carried out an unlawful assassination of a foreigner, on foreign soil, which is an act of war.
That does not let Iran off the hook in anyway whatsoever.
Nor did Trudeau suggest otherwise.
Further, before anyone suggests different, the Iranian general in question was a problem, an enemy, a promoter of disorder and a sh#t disturber in the 1st degree.
He won't be missed.
That still doesn't make killing him strategically sensible or lawful.
The list of names of dead Canadians looked Iranian. Canada has brought in 110,000 Iranian immigrants. That is Canada's choice. Immigrants from other countries or native Canadians were not on the list. I posed my list of "ifs" as being among the infinite number of ifs. You are entitled to elect whomever you want to elect in Canada. I am not contesting that. In the States, Article 1, Section 8, Congress is supposed to determine whom and where immigrants come from. When Japan killed 2,500 Americans at Pearl Harbor, FDR put an immediate halt to all Japanese immigration. If you think that's "racism and xenophobia" too bad. When Saudis and an Egyptian killed 3,000 on 9/11 in the name of their religion, W. Bush, the idiot, agreed to let in 10,000 additional Saudi students. I noticed that a couple of days ago, the Saudi pilot who killed three Americans was declared a terrorist and 21 other Saudi pilots were sent home.Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian Visitor
Iranians are Caucasians so your reference to racism is ridiculous.
The Iranian general was not on Iranian soil and he didn't have an Iraqi terrorist visa. Unfortunately, U.S. forces were stuck in a war in Iraq. To the extent they are there, I would prefer not to see them picked off with roadside explosives and ambushes. Maybe they don't mean anything to you but Trump was right to take out an Iranian military man who was using Hezbollah to kill Americans. Doing so just boosted Trump to his highest popularity in 3 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian Visitor
BS. The foreigner was a armed combatant, a military man, fighting against the United States in a combat zone. Killing him was an act of self-defense. FDR must have been xenophobic too. Good for him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian Visitor
All of the people killed on that plane were Iranian X-pats that were visiting relatives over the holidays.
Call It racism or what ever one wants but bottom line is 50% of Iran wants to be in the Democratic fold and the other 50% are radical to the bone.
The guy that pulled the trigger,he did not do it out of his own accord,that is not how thier military works,while he is a murder to some he will forever be a hero and will receive his 57 virgins no matter what happens to him from now on,to the other 50%.
CV you do not know now or forever what Canadian SF is doing over there or and if they are removing people from society,and you will never know.
The guy they took out,his only job in every waking moment was to figure out how to kill westerners across the world,no matter where they may be and useing any means necessary.
That was some precision missile shooting and only damaging the vehicle target.Good job.
The US has been involved with a “war” on terrorism for the last 20 years,the only ones that oppose the taking out of a top instigator are his supporters.
With all of the traitors popping up in our government, I am glad it was done then reported,because just like in the previous administration they would have warned the guy with a time and date of the launch.
To add iceing on the cake,the royals have chosen Canadian taxpayers to foot the bill while they move there so they can get away from being on the British taxpayers dole.
They are not citizens,they will not have permission to work there but because Cali girl does not like Trump she has ordered Canada to accept them and pay thier way.
Gullible countries that choose to accept people like that would have no problem allowing known terrorists onto their soil under the guise of it would be racist not to.
Right, sure, and what does that have to do w/the price of tea in China? You chose to single this out as if it were somehow a contributing sin. Given you view on immigration and 'others' I have little doubt here that you view people you deem unlike yourself as less worthy of rights and freedoms, I hadn't realized you devalue their very lives as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by oladub
Entirely off topic and in no way related whatsoever.Quote:
In the States, Article 1, Section 8, Congress is supposed to determine whom and where immigrants come from. When Japan killed 2,500 Americans at Pearl Harbor, FDR put an immediate halt to all Japanese immigration. If you think that's "racism and xenophobia" too bad. When Saudis and an Egyptian killed 3,000 on 9/11 in the name of their religion, W. Bush, the idiot, agreed to let in 10,000 additional Saudi students. I noticed that a couple of days ago, the Saudi pilot who killed three Americans was declared a terrorist and 21 other Saudi pilots were sent home.
No action was taken by an Iranian immigrant to Canada against Canada or Iranians or anyone else.
Had this incident taken place in Britain would you be suggesting that it was Canada's fault for accepting British immigrants? Ya, I didn't think so.Quote:
Iranians are Caucasians so your reference to racism is ridiculous.
I don't recall any declaration of war against Iran by either the United States or Iraq [[in contemporary times).Quote:
The Iranian general was not on Iranian soil and he didn't have an Iraqi terrorist visa. Unfortunately, U.S. forces were stuck in a war in Iraq.
As such there was no legal justification for killing this person at the time and place they were.
That does not make that person any less a terrorist; but the fact they were a terrorist does not confer the right of assassination to the United States, particularly when said terrorism is not in the United States.
If your nose gets bloody from butting into someone else's business, suck it up buttercup.
No disagreement, what's your point?Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard
That's true, in so far as they don't remove anyone of such notoriety that everyone notices, and they don't brag about it.Quote:
CV you do not know now or forever what Canadian SF is doing over there or and if they are removing people from society,and you will never know.
Oops, on both counts for the U.S.
Actually there is no evidence of that whatsoever. The man was in charge of operations in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen. He certainly orchestrated many awful things which I don't defend in the least. But let's keep this accurate. There is no evidence whatsoever he has ever ordered any kind of attack in 'the west'.Quote:
The guy they took out,his only job in every waking moment was to figure out how to kill westerners across the world,no matter where they may be and useing any means necessary.
This is the type of bullshit that incites anti-American feelings among people the world over. But I won't hold it against your countrymen when you speak, as I expect Americans to forgive us for Don Cherry.Quote:
The US has been involved with a “war” on terrorism for the last 20 years,the only ones that oppose the taking out of a top instigator are his supporters.
Be that as it may, the U.S. attacked Afghanistan in order to facilitate construction of an oil pipeline, and for no other reason.
The U.S. invaded Iraq not to promote freedom but to serve its economic interests.
Period.
Moreover, the U.S. hasn't declared a war against anyone in the region, and as such doesn't even have a flimsy pretense for its actions.
I shed no tears for the Iranian General, but taking in him out in the manner that it was done, was reckless and illegal. Period.
What the hell does this have to do with the topic? Right, nothing.Quote:
To add iceing on the cake,the royals have chosen Canadian taxpayers to foot the bill while they move there so they can get away from being on the British taxpayers dole.
They are not citizens,they will not have permission to work there but because Cali girl does not like Trump she has ordered Canada to accept them and pay thier way.
Its also entirely inaccurate. But I won't further waste my breath or typing on someone who cares so little about facts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian Visitor
You type about caring little about facts but yet you have not provided any which backs up your claim that taking out the Iranian general was illegal.
You cannot just print it and it becomes true.
The previous administration used drones in 500 targeted attacks under the same circumstances,how come no back lash then?
The royals security is provided by the RCMP,I may be no expert on Canada But is not the RCMP funded by the Canadian taxpayers?
Sorry i forgot,to some, government money is free money.
Yes it is relevant because it continues a pattern of Canada showing up as weak,kinda like we were under the Obama administration.
Did the royals ask the Canadian taxpayers if they With okay with the arrangement?
No they told you how it was going to be,they are not even citizens.
Now they shoot down a plane with your citizens on board and the first thing you ask for is money in exchange and demand accountability.
People do not hate the United States across the world because of its actions,they hate us because of what we represent,which is no different then what Canada,England and many other countries represent.
Notice how the rest of the countries are now pulling out of the Iranian nuke deal?
They are a dictatorship,the very essence of being a dictator is you do the dictating,nobody dictates to you.
They have been slowly chipping away at the agreement every sense it was established.
Now please provide your facts that prove the Iranian general that was in charge of terrorist operations across the world played no role in terrorist attacks outside of Iranian borders.
That is the difference currently between the US and Canada,if you attack our citizens no matter where they are in the world there will be retribution.
I need to present evidence that murder is illegal? Really?Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard
There was, you weren't paying attention, as usual. But there was less, because no passenger jets were shot down as a result.Quote:
The previous administration used drones in 500 targeted attacks under the same circumstances,how come no back lash then?
Canada hasn't agreed to provide anyone paid security. Ms. Markle already has legal status here from living here for 7 years while filming the TV series suits. She and Harry dated in Toronto.Quote:
The royals security is provided by the RCMP,I may be no expert on Canada But is not the RCMP funded by the Canadian taxpayers?
No one from the UK[[or the U.S.) requires a Visa to move to Canada for six months or less, so long as you can legally enter, you can legally stay for that amount of time.
The U.S. paid money in similar circumstances; that ask is normal; its not money for the state but for the victim's families. The other ask is for a transparent investigation w/Canadian involvement.Quote:
Now they shoot down a plane with your citizens on board and the first thing you ask for is money in exchange and demand accountability.
You were expecting what? That we invade?
You have no idea what anyone else, anywhere else thinks of the United States except when I tell you.Quote:
People do not hate the United States across the world because of its actions,they hate us because of what we represent,which is no different then what Canada,England and many other countries represent.
You don't travel much, if at all. You don't speak English well, so I assume most other languages are out of the question too.
Learn to be quiet rather than attempt to speak about matters you know nothing about.
As to how other countries people's perceive the United States. You know there's a survey for that, right?
https://reputationinstitute.files.wo...trak.png?w=640
U.S. is the 34th most reputable country in the world.
That's below Brazil and Indonesia.
Now you're a mindreader? My topic in post 11 had to do with "Prime Minister Trudeau saying that ""I think if there were no tensions, if there was no escalation recently in the region, those Canadians would be right now home with their families" and a Canadian CEO who said that "Canadians needlessly lost their lives in the crossfire." There was no crossfire. Iranians mistanely shot the plane down. Period. Trudeau's anti-American statement had two "ifs". I pointed out there are an infinite number of "ifs" and listed the first several that came into my head including the weather. You then tried to switch the subject to racism and xenophobia even though Iranians are Caucasians. You should at least have defined your definition of race to prevent seeming silly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian Visitor
No one said there was. My topic was that Trudeau and a Canadian CEO had tried to blame Trump for Iran having shot down 176 passengers. Trump was no more responsible for doing that then for having 56 people trampled in Tehran.Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian Visitor
That's a poor analogy. The United States in not involved in a military conflict in Britain. Also, General Soleimeni was not an "immigrant". He was an Iranian combatant with a long history of killing Americans in Iraq helping Hezbollah do so.Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian Visitor
Congress failed to declare war in Iraq instead giving its' power to declare war to W. Bush. However, out troops found themselves in a war against Saddam, then ISIS, and now they are caught up in a 1,700 year old conflict between Sunnis and Shiites. One of our barracks was destroyed, the barracks having been evacuated minutes earlier. The missile was fired from Iran as was the missile that struck the airliner. I want the troops home ASAP. They don't belong there. However, as long as they are stuck there in a war, they have a right to defend themselves and the Commander in Chief has an obligation toward that end. Removing Soleimani was self defense. Too bad you are on the other side with Trudeau and your CEO.Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian Visitor
It seems like you are more the 'buttercup" butting into American business. Keeping American troops alive is the President's business.
The United States is not in a legal military conflict with Iran!Quote:
Originally Posted by oladub
So its a perfect example. At no point has the U.S. President declared such a war.
Therefore there was no legal basis, even under American law, for the assassination. Period.
[quote
Also, General Soleimeni was not an "immigrant". He was an Iranian combatant with a long history of killing Americans in Iraq helping Hezbollah do so. [quote]
General Soleimeni has never personally killed a single American. His proxies doubtless have; but US soliders and proxies have killed far more people around the world; is that justification in your mind for any third-party country to assassinate U.S. Generals? I don't support that. I don't imagine you do. No double standards allowed!
The U.S. military did not just 'find itself' anywhere. Its there on purpose, where it has no business.Quote:
Congress failed to declare war in Iraq instead giving its' power to declare war to W. Bush. However, out troops found themselves in a war against Saddam, then ISIS, and now they are caught up in a 1,700 year old conflict between Sunnis and Shiites.
Good try, Iran phoned ahead and explicitly stated its targets and attack times 2 full hours ahead. That's why there were no American deaths.Quote:
One of our barracks was destroyed, the barracks having been evacuated minutes earlier.
For the last time, there is NO war. Only illegal military action.Quote:
The missile was fired from Iran as was the missile that struck the airliner. I want the troops home ASAP. They don't belong there. However, as long as they are stuck there in a war...
No it wasn't. HE was no immediate threat. By that logic Iran can attack Trump or any US general based in Washington. Plenty of folks in DC have tried to cause Iran trouble over the years and indeed succeeded quite a bit.Quote:
they have a right to defend themselves and the Commander in Chief has an obligation toward that end. Removing Soleimani was self defense.
I don't support that leap of logic. Not for Iran, not for the U.S. American soldiers are welcome to fire on anyone firing a gun at them or a missile, not at someone having a chat.
You mean I'm on the side of virtually every country on earth, the majority of the world's people, and the law.Quote:
Too bad you are on the other side with Trudeau and your CEO.
The U.S. took action which put Canadian lives in harms way. as Iran must bare responsibility for its role, so must those in the United States that set the wheels in motion.Quote:
It seems like you are more the 'buttercup" butting into American business. Keeping American troops alive is the President's business.
If Mr. Trump actually cares about U.S. soliders let him pull them all back, from everywhere outside the United States.
They'll be safe at home; provided, of course, you stop training Saudi Terrorists at US military bases!
[QUOTE=Canadian Visitor;585363]The United States is not in a legal military conflict with Iran!
So its a perfect example. At no point has the U.S. President declared such a war.
Therefore there was no legal basis, even under American law, for the assassination. Period.
[quote
Also, General Soleimeni was not an "immigrant". He was an Iranian combatant with a long history of killing Americans in Iraq helping Hezbollah do so.Quote:
General Soleimeni has never personally killed a single American. His proxies doubtless have; but US soliders and proxies have killed far more people around the world; is that justification in your mind for any third-party country to assassinate U.S. Generals? I don't support that. I don't imagine you do. No double standards allowed!
The U.S. military did not just 'find itself' anywhere. Its there on purpose, where it has no business.
Good try, Iran phoned ahead and explicitly stated its targets and attack times 2 full hours ahead. That's why there were no American deaths.
For the last time, there is NO war. Only illegal military action.
No it wasn't. HE was no immediate threat. By that logic Iran can attack Trump or any US general based in Washington. Plenty of folks in DC have tried to cause Iran trouble over the years and indeed succeeded quite a bit.
I don't support that leap of logic. Not for Iran, not for the U.S. American soldiers are welcome to fire on anyone firing a gun at them or a missile, not at someone having a chat.
You mean I'm on the side of virtually every country on earth, the majority of the world's people, and the law.
The U.S. took action which put Canadian lives in harms way. as Iran must bare responsibility for its role, so must those in the United States that set the wheels in motion.
If Mr. Trump actually cares about U.S. soliders let him pull them all back, from everywhere outside the United States.
They'll be safe at home; provided, of course, you stop training Saudi Terrorists at US military bases!
What part are you confused on,we have been at “war” against terrorism for the last 20 years,you know after 9-11 when everybody said they would not forget?
Iran is know as a terrorist state,not that difficult to understand that if you are a terrorist doing terrorist actions against the United States sooner or later you can bet you will be introduced to a high speed flying device that goes boom.
The plane was filled with X-pat Iranians returning home from visiting relatives for the holidays.
They are considered traitors to the regime.
Why do you think the pro democracy Iranians are protesting against the dictatorship,because Iranians were targeted.
The airport where the plane took off was miles away from actions and was in not in harms way,which is why the plane took off.
That plane was specifically targeted because of it passengers and had nothing to do with current actions other then the opportunity presented itself.
So quit trying to blame the US because Canada wants to follow Pelosi and work on hope and prayers.
That plane was not the only one that took off.
Not one,But two missiles launched,that does not happen by mistake.
You make a lot of claims about the legality of it all but yet still have offered no proof,why?
Iran warned Iraq who in turn warned us,why did they do that?
Because the only reason they launched was to save face,they knew full well that had an American been killed then the palace would have been dust and the regime change would be done by now.
The CIA has had travel restrictions for Americans going to Iran,how come Canada did not while knowing full well tensions were there.
Grow a set,instead of looking for others to blame,they picked a weak target because they knew full well Canada would do nothing.
You guys have bigger problems then the US involvement in the Middle East.
Canada has been there right alongside the entire time,you can try and justify like you did but they are there assisting the western world,so they are just as much as a target as an American.
What if I said,the United States hacked the launch system in order to shoot down the plane,which in turn started the unrest that was needed to implement regime change from within.
See you do not know,it is only what you think you know and are led to believe.
Presidents can't constitutionally declare war. Only Congress can. You are correct about that. That goes for Korea, Vietnam, Bombing Serbia, Libya, Iraq, Syria among other un-declared conflicts. However, to the American soldiers being shot at and mined, they are wars. We agree, I think, that they should come home from Iraq ASAP. We disagree on the safety of U.S. troops as long as they are stuck there. You would rather limit the Commander in Chief's ability to defend American troops.Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian Visitor
That's almost like saying that Goering "never personally killed a single American". If General Soleimeni was sent to Iraq to kill Americans, he was put in jeopardy by his own government that same way American PFCs were put in jeopardy by our government. General Soleimeni doesn't get a free pass to help kill Americans except from you guys.Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian Visitor
Agreed, but unlike you and Trudeau. I'm not going to tie our soldiers hands while they are being shot at.Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian Visitor
[QUOTE=Canadian Visitor;585363]Good try, Iran phoned ahead and explicitly stated its targets and attack times 2 full hours ahead. That's why there were no American deaths.
Iran may have "phoned" Iraq 2 hours before attacking U.S. airbases but according to one interviewed soldier, he was evacuated from a bombed barracks a few minutes before it was destroyed. Trump notably held his return fire.
Tell that to American soldiers that are being targeted with roadside bombs and Iranian missiles. You continue to confuse declared wars with proxy warfare when convenient.Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian Visitor
Yes, Iran and its proxies can strike American generals in Iraq just as it targets other u.S. military personnel. Iran, meanwhile, is targeting American military personnel through Hezbollah. American soldiers were not allowed to strike back at missile launch sites in Iran.Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian Visitor
And I am siding with the plight of U.S. Troops even if you side with Islamists, Communists, Russians, Europeans who prefer that the U.S. protect its oil supply, and Trudeau believing that anyone but Iran was responsible for shooting two rockets into a Ukrainian plane. I am unaware of any U.S. law that does not allow the Commander in Chief to take out hostile military personnel in combat zones who are involved with killing Americans. Maybe Democrats will pass something to that end.Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian Visitor
I already covered that. Trudeau's quote was based on two ifs and excluded the possibility of other ifs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian Visitor
Iran set wheels in motion by killing an American contractor and by attacking our Embassy. Enough was enough. You can hope that Americans will elect someone more likely to send Iran more plane load of money [[1.)[[2.)instead.
I agree with your last two sentences. Europe can pick up where we left off to protect its oil supply if it chooses to do so. My guess though is that should Trump remove our mid-east troops, there will be howls from *"virtually every country on earth" and the Democratic Party as there was when Trump pulled back troops from the Turkish border before Turkey invaded Syria.Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian Visitor
Technically true, however there is a blanket use of force authorization covering Iraq. Soleimani was in Iraq at the time [[going to a wedding?!?)Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian Visitor
imagine you do. No double standards allowed!
The U.S. military did not just 'find itself' anywhere. Its there on purpose, where it has no business.
Now *that's* quite a logical leap. You could argue if Iran hadn't ordered the assault on the American embassy, the US probably wouldn't have hit Soulimani. It's quite a jump to go from there to the US being responsible for Iran shooting down a passenger airplane under control of it's own air traffic control, in a known domestic flight path, near one of it's own airports.Quote:
The U.S. took action which put Canadian lives in harms way. as Iran must bare responsibility for its role, so must those in the United States that set the wheels in motion.
Also, keep in mind that attacking the US embassy, in political terms, is exactly the same as attacking the US itself. You could argue the legalities of the response, but this is inexcusable behavior.
Just take a step back and look at the big picture for a moment. Iran backs a paramilitary group that attacks an embassy. One of it's top generals is killed in Iraq. It fires a bunch of missiles at Iraq in retaliation and ends up killing a few Iraqis and no US personnel. During the funeral of the general, 50 people die in a stampede. Then they shoot down a passenger plane taking off from one of their own airports.
And you think this all makes the US look bad? I'm no fan of US foreign policy, and agree we should pull out of the middle east as much as is possible, but holy cow there is no way Iran is even remotely in the right in this case.
At no point did I in any way whatsoever suggest 'Iran is in the right'.Quote:
Originally Posted by JBMcB
Right in that quote you took of mine, I said "as Iran must bare responsibility for its role"
That doesn't sound at all like 'Iran is in the right', because its not.
That Iran is in the wrong, very clearly, does not, however relieve the United States government of its responsibility in committing an illegal act, a murder, which they knew or ought to have known would result in some form of calamity and loss of life.
I don't expect they knew it would be a passenger liner being shot down by Iran.
But this hardly the first such instance, the U.S. having been responsible for the exact same misdeed in the past.
Had the United States government abided by international law, however, that aircraft would be in tact as would the many passengers lives.
That doesn't mean the U.S. is directly responsible, or intentionally so, nor does it let Iran off the hook in any way.
But really, with great respect your country needs to s#$t or get off the pot.
If the U.S. wants to rule the middle east, then all-in, go conquer it and rebuild their schools, their societies and stay for 4 generations. You get the costs and the benefits.
OR get out and stay out. This messing about is harmful to everyone.
^ had the passengers never boarded that flight
had the passengers never been born
had the plane never been built
had Iran never existed
had missiles never been developed
had the passengers never migrated to Canada they would have never been in that flight visiting relatives for the holidays.
You are just parroting your leader that told Iran,that’s okay,just send us some cash and we can blame it on the US.
If Canada wants to rule the Middle East then go all in and conquer it and rebuild their schools,maybe for the first time in thier history and yours even offer them a National school lunch program.
You guys are as deep in the crap over there as we are so how do you come off with it is America’s fault?
You act like Canada has zero blood on their hands and spend their days riding unicorns and acting like they are the poster child for humanity.
You are not,sorry to burst your bubble but just because your government has a good propaganda machine that hides the truth from their people,it does not resolve you from bearing your burdens of actions.
You guys sell weapons to terrorists and then act all righteous when terrorists strike back at you,can’t figure it out,eh?
You know what the difference is between the United States and Canada ?
When we sell weapons to terrorists and they use them against us,they learn really quick that we have tools in the box that they do not even see coming.
So they know better.
Your atonement is with your government and Iran,if thier issue is with us then they will let us know,they had an issue with your citizens on that plane and they let you know,what and how you wish to deal with it is on Canada and Canada only,deal with it without crying about United States actions that have zero to do with that situation.
Your leader needs to grow a set with that wako in Iran,he is a dictatorship that gives zero shits about a plane load of traitors in his eyes,and the first thing you do is tell him,bad boy,let’s start the money negotiations.
Now in the future when they need attention,pop goes another Canadian citizen.
You guys should have spanked them that very night,we would have had your backs,now they know the price Canada puts on its citizens life’s.
In 2016 there were forces from 16 different countries in the ground fighting ISIL,it is not just a US action.
Every one of those countries are on Iran’s target list of enemies but yet they shoot a airliner out of the sky filled with Canadians,wonder why?