[Gunnair]

Blue_Nose wrote:

Gunnair wrote:

Concur, but what's more to address?

The lackadaisical attitude many have regarding the loss of their freedoms that they feel don't immediately and/or directly affect them, especially, as has been pointed out, the typical response of the very same people when strict control of guns or speech is brought up.

I don't think outrage under these circumstances is misplaced at all.

I don't think outrage is misplaced either.

Perhaps everyone should be given an airline ticket and passed through their Border Services. After copies have been made of their hard drives filled with illegally downloaded MP3s and bad internet porn clips, maybe the rage will rise then.

[robmik43]

I'm Canadian but not anti-American in the least.
U.S. border rules ?
THEIR country...THEIR right to make the rules.
Wow ....difficult to digest...it actually isn't about YOU.
Don't like it...? Instead of whining mainly to other Canadians
in some spleen-venting vein-bulging forum "debate"...just don't GO there.
All that highly sensitive / classified material on your
pathetic little tech toys can be kept safe for just
you and your 5000 closest friends...along with your
histories of accomplishment on Sudoku and Whack-a-Mole.

[Blue_Nose]

I'm not going there, robmik43, and it's apparently never the government's right to make the rules when it comes to gun control or restricting speech, so why is this different?

If you haven't noticed, there are Americans that visit this forum, and they participate in discussions concerning Canada, and vice versa.

And it's not just laptops - it's laptops, cellphones, documents, books, pamphlets and hard drives, basically ANY personal information or property you could be carrying, they'll take it and copy it.

Get a clue, read the thread, and come back later if you've got anything relevant to say.

[Wada]

I'd rather visit China and give them my tourist dollars.

[Stop_Veruca_Salt]

Although it is their country and they have the right to go as over board as they want on their borders, it is more than obvious that the U.S. govt is gravitating towards a more controlled state..I have been crossing the border regularly for forty years and can see the clamps tightening...

And a democratic party in control will put the country more toward a socialized movement which will blindly put the people under more government control...The Gop and Dems are two roads that lead to the same place....Its ingenious actually......And Zeitgeist II is coming out in a few months I believe..

[Arctic_Menace]

Stop_Veruca_Salt wrote:

Although it is their country and they have the right to go as over board as they want on their borders, it is more than obvious that the U.S. govt is gravitating towards a more controlled state..I have been crossing the border regularly for forty years and can see the clamps tightening...

And a democratic party in control will put the country more toward a socialized movement which will blindly put the people under more government control...The Gop and Dems are two roads that lead to the same place....Its ingenious actually......And Zeitgeist II is coming out in a few months I believe..

Half of me agrees with you, but the other half thinks that is jsut a huge conspiracy...

[Stop_Veruca_Salt]

Arctic_Menace wrote:

Stop_Veruca_Salt wrote:

Although it is their country and they have the right to go as over board as they want on their borders, it is more than obvious that the U.S. govt is gravitating towards a more controlled state..I have been crossing the border regularly for forty years and can see the clamps tightening...

And a democratic party in control will put the country more toward a socialized movement which will blindly put the people under more government control...The Gop and Dems are two roads that lead to the same place....Its ingenious actually......And Zeitgeist II is coming out in a few months I believe..

Half of me agrees with you, but the other half thinks that is jsut a huge conspiracy...

The "conspiracy theory", that is the best protection the "shadow govt" has....The fact that an orchestrated plan of events (that may have been started centuries ago) that leads to a new world order is just to grand to believe...I mean what has history shown of human nature with power.....

The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was to have every one believe he didn't exist...But who is really religious now a days anyways..

[Streaker]

lily wrote:

hwacker wrote:

lily wrote:

I await the responses to this with glee!

Oh you don't think there is a difference?

It’s huge, somebody looking for a job with the military as to somebody that knew damn well he'd be going to war no questions asked and signed up anyway.

That’s about as black and white as you could make it.

I would see the difference if he put in the minimum and then left the service, but he didn't.


I also have a sneaking suspicion that if someone else said what you said, someone like oh... let's say Streaker... the boys would have pounced all over it, with you leading the charge.


This topic has been the most entertaining read in a long time, for all sorts of reasons.

I agree. An enjoyable thread.

---------------------------------------------------

No doubt I'd make a lousy soldier, but if the Yanks were invading there wouldn't be time to sign up and receive training anyways.

I'd be in The Resistance, though.

[Chagrin]

I don't think an untrained civilian with a rifle would stand up against a tank or air strikes. Just saying.

[Gunnair]

Chagrin wrote:

I don't think an untrained civilian with a rifle would stand up against a tank or air strikes. Just saying.

Iraq and Afghanistan might suggest otherwise.

[Stop_Veruca_Salt]

Chagrin wrote:

I don't think an untrained civilian with a rifle would stand up against a tank or air strikes. Just saying.

That's why you have terrorists..Heard of Yasser Arafat.

[Chagrin]

Gunnair wrote:

Chagrin wrote:

I don't think an untrained civilian with a rifle would stand up against a tank or air strikes. Just saying.

Iraq and Afghanistan might suggest otherwise.

Except alot of them are armed. Most of your population isn't armed or even trained to fire a gun. They aren't supplied with RPGs or explosives, nor do they have IEDs.

This is pointless anyway, I shouldn't have even brought it up. No one in North America is going to invade one another, it's pointless talking about it.

[Gunnair]

Chagrin wrote:

Gunnair wrote:

Chagrin wrote:

I don't think an untrained civilian with a rifle would stand up against a tank or air strikes. Just saying.

Iraq and Afghanistan might suggest otherwise.

Except alot of them are armed. Most of your population isn't armed or even trained to fire a gun. They aren't supplied with RPGs or explosives, nor do they have IEDs.

This is pointless anyway, I shouldn't have even brought it up. No one in North America is going to invade one another, it's pointless talking about it.

Concur. It does, however, allow for some entertaining chest beating.

[Tricks]

lily wrote:

I suppose for you "enough" means one guy made a lukewarm rebuttal in addition to my post.

Pretty much. Beating a dead horse isn't much fun.

Quote:

Face it, Tricks - if some lefty had said something even remotely similar, you'd have been all over it.

Doubt it. Hwacker didn't generalise the entire military. He said some signed up because they couldn't do anything else, other signed up to actually fight. So while it was a dick thing to say, he could have said worse.

[Tricks]

Gunnair wrote:

Tricks wrote:

Gunnair wrote:

Right, you can stop there, the rest is embarrasing drivel of you riding the coat tails of your relatives' military service.

STFU already.

Idiot.

So people who haven't served can't comment on the support or lack thereof from there government when it comes to the military? Cause I call bullshit on that.

Of course not. Just hwacker.

Ok. Just making sure.