|
Author |
Topic Options
|
Posts: 9445
Posted: Wed Mar 23, 2016 9:15 pm
Trudeau better take his head out of his Fucking Ass! Brussels isn't the last.
|
Posts: 111
Posted: Wed Mar 23, 2016 11:17 pm
Must agree completely with Delwin in this thread. People seem to confuse the definition of the word WAR with the legal definition.Same word but two very different definitions. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/franaois-heisbourg/parisbrussels-attacks-tal_b_9522356.html?utm_hp_ref=canada&ir=CanadaTrudeau is correct in sticking to the legal definition regardless of what anyone thinks or how they feel about it. War is a term loosely used to describe any conflict, most of which rarely fit the legal definition. War on Drugs War on Asian Carp War on OMGs, Mafia, Triads, War on People Trafficking War on Poverty, Famine, disease and yes War on Terror
|
Posted: Wed Mar 23, 2016 11:32 pm
It's less about the terminology than it is about JT's lackadaisical and apparent "so what?" attitude that he has towards the entire problem. He's being ignorant on purpose and trying to force Canada back into the obsolete "aren't we nice" blue-helmeted peacekeeping-only role is the wrong approach to take with post-Sept 11 terrorism.
|
rickc
Forum Super Elite
Posts: 2962
Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2016 12:19 am
Wow four pages of semantics about the correct definition of the word: war. Fuck semantics. I hate semantics. Semantics waste time. We waste all our time debating trivial bullshit about the actual meaning of a single word, and we loose focus of the big picture .Lets get back to the big picture here. What is the big picture? What was the actual intent of the story that was posted at the beginning of this thread? That Trudeau is a fucking moron. An imbecile, a cretin, a wanker, a tosser, a dipshit, a dickhole, a douchebag, etc. We have an international following here. Pick one of those terms that best suits the part of the world that you are from, or currently residing in. They all apply. Its not to much to ask that when one of your allies comes under attack from a criminal gang of fanatical murdering lunatics, that your leader would issue some words of solidarity. Something along the lines of:" Our thoughts and prayers are with the people of Belgium. We stand in solidarity with the people of Belgium. Today we are all Belgians." See thats not so hard, is it? I possess a high school diploma, and I just did better than the professional student that is Trudeau. How about this one: "This aggression will not stand, man!!!" . Even "the dude" from the Big Lebowski sounds more eloquent, and instills more confidence in the populace than wonder boy Trudeau.
The guy is a total moron, and an international embarrassment. The only solace I get from this story is that there is a new total fuckup on the scene. Someone to help take the heat off of my own dipshit in charge. You see while Belgium was burning, my guy was kissing commie ass, doing the wave at a baseball game, and posing in front of pictures of Che Guevara in a third world shithole that time has forgot. Yeah thats some real leadership for the free world for you there. But hey I'm tired of my guy always being the lead story when it comes to being a tosser. It looks like your guy is more than ready to take the mantle, and assume the position. I guess I should say thanks.
|
Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2016 2:00 am
rickc rickc: The only solace I get from this story is that there is a new total fuckup on the scene. Someone to help take the heat off of my own dipshit in charge. Dear America, You're welcome. Love, Canada
|
Posts: 13404
Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2016 3:38 am
Proculation Proculation: My understanding of NATO is that if a nation is attacked, every members were attacked and are at war. France joined back NATO in 2009 and Belgium is there since the treaty in 1949. You are referring to Article Six and the French and Belgians COULD invoke it, I suppose. The kicker is that it is activated because of aggression from another nation state, not by acts of terror. The Americans, though, did invoke it after 9/11, presumably because of an attack originating from Afghanistan (I could easily have been said to originate from Saudi Arabia). ISUL is damned close to being a nation state. They have a government, social welfare system, even a conventional military and the Belgians could easily stretch the definition, in this case.
|
Posts: 15244
Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2016 5:54 am
rickc rickc: Its not to much to ask that when one of your allies comes under attack from a criminal gang of fanatical murdering lunatics, that your leader would issue some words of solidarity. Something along the lines of:" Our thoughts and prayers are with the people of Belgium. We stand in solidarity with the people of Belgium. Today we are all Belgians." See thats not so hard, is it? I possess a high school diploma, and I just did better than the professional student that is Trudeau. How about this one: "This aggression will not stand, man!!!" . Even "the dude" from the Big Lebowski sounds more eloquent, and instills more confidence in the populace than wonder boy Trudeau..
You're going off half-cocked without all if the facts and you're jumping to conclusions about which you should know better . Of course Trudeau and his government made speeches of solidarity following the attacks. These comments about not being at war with ISIS came at a different time, during conversation with the media. I don't blame you though, the news article in the OP provides almost zero context for the comments and is really just a sensationalist piece. For your edification: $1: Prime Minister Justin Trudeau joined world leaders expressing solidarity with the Belgian people on Tuesday, after deadly explosions tore through a metro station and airport in Brussels. Speaking to reporters on Parliament Hill on Tuesday, Trudeau firmly condemned the attack, which he called an "act of terror." "Like all Canadians, I was outraged when I woke up to the news that so many innocent citizens have been killed and injured," Trudeau told reporters. "What happened today in Brussels was an act of terror. Its goal was to take lives and instill fear." The prime minister urged action against terrorist threats worldwide, and said the Canadian government has offered "all possible assistance" to Belgian officials. "This cannot and will not be tolerated," he said. "Those responsible for carrying out these senseless attacks must be brought to justice." Trudeau also took a moment to express his condolences, suggesting the focus, in the immediate aftermath of the attacks, should not be retaliation. "Today, though, we mourn," he said. "We mourn the loss of so many victims, victims whose hopes were our hopes, whose dreams were our dreams. "Our thoughts and prayers are with the people of Belgium." Dion: 'A black Tuesday in Belgium' In a press conference earlier Tuesday morning, Foreign Affairs Minister Stephane Dion described the attacks as a "black Tuesday in Belgium," and said that his thoughts were with the victims and Canada's allies in Belgium and the rest of Europe. "Hearing the screams of children in the smoke of the Brussels metro only strengthens our resolve to combat terrorism in all its forms," Dion said. "We join the prime minister in adding our thoughts and deepest sympathies." http://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/politics/a ... -1.2827152The "not at war" comments came at a different time in the following conversations: $1: Trudeau, who made his comments during a CBC Radio interview, and Dion — speaking Wednesday in the House of Commons foyer — both said the conflict with ISIL does not fit the true definition of war. "A war is something that can be won by one side or the other and there is no path for ISIL to actually win against the West," Trudeau said. "They want to destabilize, they want to strike fear. They need to be stamped out." Dion suggested the notion of labelling the fight against extremists as an actual war might simply be outdated. "If you use the terminology 'war,' in international law it will mean two armies with respecting rules and it's not the case at all," Dion said. "You have terrorist groups that respect nothing. So we prefer to say that it's a fight" https://ca.news.yahoo.com/canada-not-wa ... 36304.htmlThere not so bad was it?? This is what I'm talking about when I mention conservative political correctness. Political correctness isn't just excessive over-policing of racially or sexually insensitive language but also for right wingers it's about over-policing insufficiently patriotic and capitalistic language. Conservatives aren't really against political correctness, they just want to enforce their own brand of it.
|
Posts: 53403
Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2016 6:27 am
llama66 llama66: I don't care what anyone says, Chretien was entertaining. Trudeau, needs to realize while we think we not at war with ISIS. ISIS is at war with us.
I was watching a documentary today about the 'das Reich' and I thought to myself that the Nazi's were totally evil. They Invaded nations, wiped villages from the map after they slaughtered all the citizens and deported the jews, gypsies, communists, homosexuals, persons with disabilities and others that didn't fit the image of the ideal 'Aryan'. For this the World rose up, united, battled and defeated the Nazi's, albeit at great cost to many in Europe.
Fast forward 70 years and here we have a group that has Invaded nations, wiped villages from the map after they slaughtered all the citizens that didn't fit the image of the ideal 'Muslim'.
What the fuck has happened to us? What happened to standing up to evil?
I'm fairly liberal, but I see the evil ISIS commits and I watch the west cower in fear/terror, and I think to myself what happened to the resolve that we once had, as Churchill once said,
'the time for half measures is over, now we live in a time of consequence'
For shame.
“Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God will not hold us guiltless. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act.” ― Dietrich Bonhoeffer  peck420 peck420: Proculation Proculation: My understanding of NATO is that if a nation is attacked, every members were attacked and are at war. France joined back NATO in 2009 and Belgium is there since the treaty in 1949. The attacked NATO member must invoke Article 5 for that to apply. The second Belgium does though, we are "at war" regardless of what Trudeau says...assuming, of course, that his next statement is not to withdraw from NATO. (Don't worry, even he isn't that stupid...) Edit to add: In theory, if Belgium invokes Article 5, and NATO takes that and invokes Article 51 (United Nations), the majority of the world would be obligated to assist in the removal of Daesh. Would really show the world which side everybody is on.  And that's what it might take to rid the world of those pretend Muslims.
|
Posts: 33691
Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2016 6:27 am
BeaverFever BeaverFever: Trudeau also took a moment to express his condolences, suggesting the focus, in the immediate aftermath of the attacks, should not be retaliation.
Ooooooh, pretty words while Canada runs away and hides.
|
Posts: 42160
Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2016 7:20 am
Let's send him over to give them a hug because they're feeling excluded.
|
andyt
CKA Uber
Posts: 33492
Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2016 7:21 am
BeaverFever BeaverFever: rickc rickc: Its not to much to ask that when one of your allies comes under attack from a criminal gang of fanatical murdering lunatics, that your leader would issue some words of solidarity. Something along the lines of:" Our thoughts and prayers are with the people of Belgium. We stand in solidarity with the people of Belgium. Today we are all Belgians." See thats not so hard, is it? I possess a high school diploma, and I just did better than the professional student that is Trudeau. How about this one: "This aggression will not stand, man!!!" . Even "the dude" from the Big Lebowski sounds more eloquent, and instills more confidence in the populace than wonder boy Trudeau..
You're going off half-cocked without all if the facts and you're jumping to conclusions about which you should know better . Of course Trudeau and his government made speeches of solidarity following the attacks. These comments about not being at war with ISIS came at a different time, during conversation with the media. I don't blame you though, the news article in the OP provides almost zero context for the comments and is really just a sensationalist piece. For your edification: $1: Prime Minister Justin Trudeau joined world leaders expressing solidarity with the Belgian people on Tuesday, after deadly explosions tore through a metro station and airport in Brussels. Speaking to reporters on Parliament Hill on Tuesday, Trudeau firmly condemned the attack, which he called an "act of terror." "Like all Canadians, I was outraged when I woke up to the news that so many innocent citizens have been killed and injured," Trudeau told reporters. "What happened today in Brussels was an act of terror. Its goal was to take lives and instill fear." The prime minister urged action against terrorist threats worldwide, and said the Canadian government has offered "all possible assistance" to Belgian officials. "This cannot and will not be tolerated," he said. "Those responsible for carrying out these senseless attacks must be brought to justice." Trudeau also took a moment to express his condolences, suggesting the focus, in the immediate aftermath of the attacks, should not be retaliation. "Today, though, we mourn," he said. "We mourn the loss of so many victims, victims whose hopes were our hopes, whose dreams were our dreams. "Our thoughts and prayers are with the people of Belgium." Dion: 'A black Tuesday in Belgium' In a press conference earlier Tuesday morning, Foreign Affairs Minister Stephane Dion described the attacks as a "black Tuesday in Belgium," and said that his thoughts were with the victims and Canada's allies in Belgium and the rest of Europe. "Hearing the screams of children in the smoke of the Brussels metro only strengthens our resolve to combat terrorism in all its forms," Dion said. "We join the prime minister in adding our thoughts and deepest sympathies." http://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/politics/a ... -1.2827152The "not at war" comments came at a different time in the following conversations: $1: Trudeau, who made his comments during a CBC Radio interview, and Dion — speaking Wednesday in the House of Commons foyer — both said the conflict with ISIL does not fit the true definition of war. "A war is something that can be won by one side or the other and there is no path for ISIL to actually win against the West," Trudeau said. "They want to destabilize, they want to strike fear. They need to be stamped out." Dion suggested the notion of labelling the fight against extremists as an actual war might simply be outdated. "If you use the terminology 'war,' in international law it will mean two armies with respecting rules and it's not the case at all," Dion said. "You have terrorist groups that respect nothing. So we prefer to say that it's a fight" https://ca.news.yahoo.com/canada-not-wa ... 36304.htmlThere not so bad was it?? This is what I'm talking about when I mention conservative political correctness. Political correctness isn't just excessive over-policing of racially or sexually insensitive language but also for right wingers it's about over-policing insufficiently patriotic and capitalistic language. Conservatives aren't really against political correctness, they just want to enforce their own brand of it. Thanks for putting things in perspective. As usual the righties here were just looking for a froth fest. That said, I still don't understand why they said it. And why both said it, like they discussed this beforehand. Quibbling over terminology isn't going to help the situation one bit. We are certainly in a fight with ISIS, which will take some of the same processes as war - ie killing jihaidis. But for sure, that, by itself won't solve the problem. ISIS isn't the first, it wouldn't be the last if nothing changes, even if we kill every ISIS member.
|
Posts: 15244
Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2016 7:41 am
$1: That said, I still don't understand why they said it. And why both said it, like they discussed this beforehand. Quibbling over terminology isn't going to help the situation one bit. We are certainly in a fight with ISIS, which will take some of the same processes as war - ie killing jihaidis. Exactly, it doesn't take a political genious to understand that those words make a terrible sound bite on the day after an attack. You would think anyone at their level would not have to stop and think in order to realize that, but would just know it instinctively. He can't give these right-tards ammunition, he knows that now they have nothing better to do all day except dissect and distort every single statement he makes. He shouldn't be offering up quotes on a silver platter to their propaganda machine.
|
Posts: 9445
Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2016 7:59 am
 The Left Tards circle the wagons around their drama teacher.
|
andyt
CKA Uber
Posts: 33492
Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2016 8:48 am
BeaverFever BeaverFever: $1: That said, I still don't understand why they said it. And why both said it, like they discussed this beforehand. Quibbling over terminology isn't going to help the situation one bit. We are certainly in a fight with ISIS, which will take some of the same processes as war - ie killing jihaidis. Exactly, it doesn't take a political genious to understand that those words make a terrible sound bite on the day after an attack. You would think anyone at their level would not have to stop and think in order to realize that, but would just know it instinctively. He can't give these right-tards ammunition, he knows that now they have nothing better to do all day except dissect and distort every single statement he makes. He shouldn't be offering up quotes on a silver platter to their propaganda machine. $1: I’m almost as wary of fear mongering by police and politicians like Conservative Jason Kenny, who earlier this week demanded the Liberal government declare that Canada is at war with the Islamic State, as I am of terrorists (absent evidence of real or increasing danger). http://www.vancouversun.com/news/daphne+bramham+afraid+should+terrorists/11805183/story.html In which case, replying that ISIS isn't a nation to be at war with makes perfect sense. Kenney was, as you put it, just feeding pc froth points to his base. Still, it wouldn't hurt Trudeau to be a little more jingoistic in his statements.
Last edited by andyt on Thu Mar 24, 2016 9:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
|
Posts: 14139
Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2016 9:28 am
BeaverFever BeaverFever: $1: That said, I still don't understand why they said it. And why both said it, like they discussed this beforehand. Quibbling over terminology isn't going to help the situation one bit. We are certainly in a fight with ISIS, which will take some of the same processes as war - ie killing jihaidis. Exactly, it doesn't take a political genious to understand that those words make a terrible sound bite on the day after an attack. You would think anyone at their level would not have to stop and think in order to realize that, but would just know it instinctively. He can't give these right-tards ammunition, he knows that now they have nothing better to do all day except dissect and distort every single statement he makes. He shouldn't be offering up quotes on a silver platter to their propaganda machine. Yeah, don't let the conservative supporters do what the liberal supporters did for 10 years. Only leftards should be allowed to dissect and distort every word spoken and every action taken by a sitting PM.
|
|
Page 4 of 5
|
[ 68 posts ] |
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests |
|
|