Canada Has It's Own Share Of Leadership Problems

[Honky Tonk]

I wonder if True-Doh!'s a stockholder?

https://www.foxnews.com/world/justin...ribery-scandal

[Richard]

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.

[Ray1936]

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.

[Bigb23]

^^^^
Thank you, oh elder sage of DetYes.

[Honky Tonk]

Looks like true-doh!'s problems continue to grow.

https://thetyee.ca/Analysis/2019/03/...-Martyn-Brown/

[Canadian Visitor]

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.

[Richard]

Maybe if you guys give Trump dual citizenship he could run both countries for the betterment.

MCGA

[Honky Tonk]

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.

Hmmmmmm.... SSDC, same shit, different country.

[Richard]

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.

[Canadian Visitor]

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'.

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.

[oladub]

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.

[Richard]

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?

[Canadian Visitor]

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?

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.

[Canadian Visitor]

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.

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.

[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.

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.

Iranians are Caucasians so your reference to racism is ridiculous.

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 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.

The U.S. clearly carried out an unlawful assassination of a foreigner, on foreign soil, which is an act of war.

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.

[Richard]

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.

[Canadian Visitor]

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.

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.

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.

Entirely off topic and in no way related whatsoever.

No action was taken by an Iranian immigrant to Canada against Canada or Iranians or anyone else.

Iranians are Caucasians so your reference to racism is ridiculous.

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.

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.

I don't recall any declaration of war against Iran by either the United States or Iraq [[in contemporary times).

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.

[Canadian Visitor]

All of the people killed on that plane were Iranian X-pats that were visiting relatives over the holidays.

No disagreement, what's your point?

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.

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.
Oops, on both counts for the U.S.

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.

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'.

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.

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.

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.

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.

What the hell does this have to do with the topic? Right, nothing.

Its also entirely inaccurate. But I won't further waste my breath or typing on someone who cares so little about facts.

[Richard]

No disagreement, what's your point?



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.
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'.



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.

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.

Its also entirely inaccurate. But I won't further waste my breath or typing on someone who cares so little about facts.

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.

[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.

I need to present evidence that murder is illegal? Really?

The previous administration used drones in 500 targeted attacks under the same circumstances,how come no back lash then?

There was, you weren't paying attention, as usual. But there was less, because no passenger jets were shot down as a result.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

You were expecting what? That we invade?

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 have no idea what anyone else, anywhere else thinks of the United States except when I tell you.

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.

[Canadian Visitor]

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.

[oladub]

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.

Entirely off topic and in no way related whatsoever.

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.

No action was taken by an Iranian immigrant to Canada against Canada or Iranians or anyone else.

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.

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.

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.

I don't recall any declaration of war against Iran by either the United States or Iraq [[in contemporary times).

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.

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.

It seems like you are more the 'buttercup" butting into American business. Keeping American troops alive is the President's business.

[Canadian Visitor]

That's a poor analogy. The United States in not involved in a military conflict in Britain.

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!

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.

The U.S. military did not just 'find itself' anywhere. Its there on purpose, where it has no business.

One of our barracks was destroyed, the barracks having been evacuated minutes earlier.

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.

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...

For the last time, there is NO war. Only illegal military action.

they have a right to defend themselves and the Commander in Chief has an obligation toward that end. Removing Soleimani was self defense.

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.

Too bad you are on the other side with Trudeau and your CEO.

You mean I'm on the side of virtually every country on earth, the majority of the world's people, and the law.

It seems like you are more the 'buttercup" butting into American business. Keeping American troops alive is the President's business.

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!

[Bigb23]

[Richard]

[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.

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.