[Wullu]

Well Q-Q couple points that seem to have evaded you. This guy VOLUNTEERED for the US Army, then he VOLUNTEERED for airborne training. he then realised that someone might actually take a shot at him and all of a sudden gained a "conscientious objecter" frame of mind without gaining the strength of character to stand up and take the consequences. This...whatever it is, is nothing but a coward who does not have the even the courage of his own convictions.

Canada is a peace keeping nation? Since when? You have personal experience of this somewhere? Very few of the personnel we have abroad now or in the last 10 years wear the blue beret. Our ops in the last 15 years have consisted of the making of peace and the waging of war. I get so damned sick and tired of people who never bothered to wear the Queen's clothe assuming that those of us who do think of ourselves as peace keepers. We don't train to keep peace, we train to make it by the application of force when the diplomats have failed.

[Q-Q]

Wullu Wullu:

Well Q-Q couple points that seem to have evaded you. This guy VOLUNTEERED for the US Army, then he VOLUNTEERED for airborne training. he then realised that someone might actually take a shot at him and all of a sudden gained a "conscientious objecter" frame of mind without gaining the strength of character to stand up and take the consequences. This...whatever it is, is nothing but a coward who does not have the even the courage of his own convictions.

Canada is a peace keeping nation? Since when? You have personal experience of this somewhere? Very few of the personnel we have abroad now or in the last 10 years wear the blue beret. Our ops in the last 15 years have consisted of the making of peace and the waging of war. I get so damned sick and tired of people who never bothered to wear the Queen's clothe assuming that those of us who do think of ourselves as peace keepers. We don't train to keep peace, we train to make it by the application of force when the diplomats have failed.

Well you see, Wullu, the smart ones change their minds after gleaning more information. In fact, only a dummy refuses to change his mind once he sees the light. And why should he have the strength of character to stand up and take the consequences for not wanting to get shot at? His own bloody leaders have no strength of character--none--zilch--blaggards, the lot of them. Why should he be held to a higher accounting? He shouldn't!!

He also started to get some more information about the U.S. being in Iraq illegally. Of course, the U.S. administration construes anything and everything they do as "legal." In fact, they writes the rules. They don't even comply with the World Court. They are a law unto themselves. I say, when you have a nation operating under those conditions, all bets are off. He doesn't owe his country anything. It's called "getting smart." Unless he's a murderer (like those who HAVE done their country's bidding and gone off and shot the heads off of innocent people) or has robbed a bank (yeah, gotta keep our priorities straight), I welcome him here with open arms.

And on your last point. Do me a favour and READ!! I never said that Canada is a peace keeping nation. But it gets credibility for being one. I can't help that it is looked upon in that light. Everything is comparative, however, and compared to the U.S., we are positively pristine. I'm somehow getting the impression that you are in the Canadian military. I'm sorry for you. Get out. The only time we'll ever need a military is if the Americans invade our borders with force. They are the only ones we need to fear. The Americans will come to our rescue if we are invaded by another nation (but can you name a possible invader other than the U.S.?) for one reason and one reason only. They'll be damned if any other nation but their own will control our natural resources. As for the Canadian people, HA!! Or haven't you noticed, the neocons are not people lovers. They only understand $$$$$$$$$$$$ and they'll use whatever human fodder they can to make their dreams a reality. Wake up, Wullu!!

[yagsirovert]

Q-Q Q-Q:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Pissed Pissed:

I wouldn't go as far to call him a coward. I doubt he was afraid of he combat, he just had a moral issue with a stupid war. It takes more balls to stand up and for what you believe in.

We take lawful orders from civilians who determine what we should do. It is not our place to act based on any other criteria.

This jerk is a deserter and if you folks want him, you can have him.

Hmmm, you refer to the young man as a "coward," a "jerk." I don't think so, but now let's see if YOU qualify as a "jerk." A jerk is one who lacks the common sense to question authority whilst at the same time criticizing those who not only have cs but exercise it. A jerk is a mindless being who welcomes the opportunity to serve at the will of others notwithstanding that the orders he takes unquestioningly can and often does do egregious harm to yet still others. A jerk being mindless can't see the irony of a group of people such as Bushco--all draft evaders--at the expense of fellow citizens--is the very entity who is sending men and women overseas to kill and be killed. Bottom line: Bushco reaps the rewards; the plebes doing the fighting reap the dregs, including the loss of their souls if not their limbs. Oh yeah, let's take a vote and see who the jerk really is. The one person it is not is the guy who is a conscientious objector--a title we should all be brave enough to claim for ourselves.

Next time you come to the table, bring your smarts.

And may Canada not be cowardly; may Canada allow the guy to stay. Even more, may Canada even encourage other like minded young men and women to come and be saved from the obscenity of all unjust wars. However, I fear that Canada, too, is fast becoming gutless in face of the USofA bully. If Canada doesn't stand up on this issue, we'll lose even more credibility as a peace keeping nation.

He IS a coward and IS a jerk. When you join the armed forces you take orders, unconditionally. If you are not capable of doing that, don't join the armed services, pretty simple in my book. Supporting this cowardly jerk puts you in the same company. I feel slightly different then Bart, I want him back, I want him to suffer in the brig like the coward deserves.

[Q-Q]

He IS a coward and IS a jerk. When you join the armed forces you take orders, unconditionally. If you are not capable of doing that, don't join the armed services, pretty simple in my book. Supporting this cowardly jerk puts you in the same company. I feel slightly different then Bart, I want him back, I want him to suffer in the brig like the coward deserves.[/quote]

It's difficult to reason with those of the Neanderthal subspecies. But I can tell you that I am much more comfortable with a thinker than someone like yourself who OBEYS unconditionally. But that's okay the neocons love you--well, in a snickering way Just don't come home from fighting their wars and be needy--they just hate having to dole out resources for looking after dem dat looks after der interests. I'm wondering if there is any research being done on those who take such pride in following the orders of their "superiors." As war enablers, you're a scarey lot to any of us who are looking to advance the human race without spilling blood. And I'll lay you dollars to doughnuts that yer a Gawd fearin' person. Oh, tell me it isn't so!!

[Tricks]

$1:

It's difficult to reason with those of the Neanderthal subspecies. But I can tell you that I am much more comfortable with a thinker than someone like yourself who OBEYS unconditionally. But that's okay the neocons love you--well, in a snickering way Just don't come home from fighting their wars and be needy--they just hate having to dole out resources for looking after dem dat looks after der interests. I'm wondering if there is any research being done on those who take such pride in following the orders of their "superiors." As war enablers, you're a scarey lot to any of us who are looking to advance the human race without spilling blood. And I'll lay you dollars to doughnuts that yer a Gawd fearin' person. Oh, tell me it isn't so!!

$1:

But I can tell you that I am much more comfortable with a thinker than someone like yourself who OBEYS unconditionally.

In the military it is not your place to think unless you are an officer, you follow orders, end of story.

$1:

But that's okay the neocons love you--well, in a snickering way

Yeah they love people who will fight for their country. I love them too.

$1:

Just don't come home from fighting their wars and be needy--they just hate having to dole out resources for looking after dem dat looks after der interests.

what? Speak english you fucking hick

$1:

I'm wondering if there is any research being done on those who take such pride in following the orders of their "superiors."

If by superior you mean officer, then people don't question them unless they are clearly doing something stupid. But even then that is only your officer (i.e. an eltee to a capt). You never question orders from above.

$1:

As war enablers, you're a scarey lot to any of us who are looking to advance the human race without spilling blood.

so we have another pacifist? Great.

$1:

And I'll lay you dollars to doughnuts that yer a Gawd fearin' person. Oh, tell me it isn't so!!

I don't know where God takes place in this, but I don't fear him, because I believe there is no such thing.

[yagsirovert]

Q-Q Q-Q:

And I'll lay you dollars to doughnuts that yer a Gawd fearin' person. Oh, tell me it isn't so!!

You couldn't be more wrong

[Wullu]

Q-Q no one has ever been able to show me the invasion of Iraq was illegal, apparently you have a new source to prove this? If so please enlighten me.

[Wullu]

$1:

Do me a favour and READ!! I never said that Canada is a peace keeping nation.

and from your first post on this thread........

$1:

we'll lose even more credibility as a peace keeping nation.

Well, which is it?

[Wullu]

Avro Avro:

Wullu Wullu:

Q-Q no one has ever been able to show me the invasion of Iraq was illegal, apparently you have a new source to prove this? If so please enlighten me.

Show me that is wasn't.

I lost track of the number of Security Council resolutions that authorized the use of force if Saddam and his cronies did not abide by em. The most prominent of them was the one that called for the ceasefire at the end of Desert Storm. You will notice it was a cease fire, not and end of hostilities, the war of 1991 never actually ended. The UN good enough for ya Avro?

[DerbyX]

Wullu Wullu:

Q-Q no one has ever been able to show me the invasion of Iraq was illegal, apparently you have a new source to prove this? If so please enlighten me.

Illegal? You are probably right. Mind you there exists no real law or format to determine what is legal and not?

try immoral though.

$1:

I lost track of the number of Security Council resolutions that authorized the use of force if Saddam and his cronies did not abide by em. The most prominent of them was the one that called for the ceasefire at the end of Desert Storm. You will notice it was a cease fire, not and end of hostilities, the war of 1991 never actually ended. The UN good enough for ya Avro?

The same UN that the US will never ever listen too? That UN? What right has the US to enforce edicts from a source they themselves would ignore completely if it tickled their fancy.

BTW, my Iraqi christian co-worker who hates saddam and doesn't care who "liberated" Iraq (US, China, Russia, Aliens) tells me absolutely that US intelligence/intervention saved the lives of some 100,00 troops (probably an exageration) and possible defeat in the war. This same person says there is documented proof that saddam had the green light to invade kuwait.

All the lies and BS from the US is nothing. The fact is that they weren't greeted as liberators even by the people they put in power. The fact is that they haven't accomplished anything real and won't ever and the violence will continue.

[Q-Q]

Wullu Wullu:

Avro Avro:

Wullu Wullu:

Q-Q no one has ever been able to show me the invasion of Iraq was illegal, apparently you have a new source to prove this? If so please enlighten me.

Show me that is wasn't.

I lost track of the number of Security Council resolutions that authorized the use of force if Saddam and his cronies did not abide by em. The most prominent of them was the one that called for the ceasefire at the end of Desert Storm. You will notice it was a cease fire, not and end of hostilities, the war of 1991 never actually ended. The UN good enough for ya Avro?

And have you stopped counting the innumerable SC resolutions that Israel has ignored. Oh, I see, you're not up on that one.

In any event, under international law (which, of course, the US of A scoffs at), there are only two LEGAL ways a country can wage war against another--self defense (which the U.S. claimed but which was nothing but a monstrous joke--there were NO weapons of mass destruction let alone WMD aiming at the U.S., nor was Saddam connected with 911) and by agreement of the Security Council (which did not happen). The bloody invasion of Iraq was illegal and anyone with a brain at least the size of a pea knows full well that the invasion of Iraq was in effort to control ME oil PERIOD. As for any claim that Bushco got trigger happy because it wanted to free the Iraqi people of Saddam, puhlleeeese don't insult my intelligence. No strike that, you insult your own intelligence by believing the American propaganda machine.

[Q-Q]

Tricks Tricks:

$1:

It's difficult to reason with those of the Neanderthal subspecies. But I can tell you that I am much more comfortable with a thinker than someone like yourself who OBEYS unconditionally. But that's okay the neocons love you--well, in a snickering way Just don't come home from fighting their wars and be needy--they just hate having to dole out resources for looking after dem dat looks after der interests. I'm wondering if there is any research being done on those who take such pride in following the orders of their "superiors." As war enablers, you're a scarey lot to any of us who are looking to advance the human race without spilling blood. And I'll lay you dollars to doughnuts that yer a Gawd fearin' person. Oh, tell me it isn't so!!

$1:

But I can tell you that I am much more comfortable with a thinker than someone like yourself who OBEYS unconditionally.

In the military it is not your place to think unless you are an officer, you follow orders, end of story.

$1:

But that's okay the neocons love you--well, in a snickering way

Yeah they love people who will fight for their country. I love them too.

$1:

Just don't come home from fighting their wars and be needy--they just hate having to dole out resources for looking after dem dat looks after der interests.

what? Speak english you fucking hick

$1:

I'm wondering if there is any research being done on those who take such pride in following the orders of their "superiors."

If by superior you mean officer, then people don't question them unless they are clearly doing something stupid. But even then that is only your officer (i.e. an eltee to a capt). You never question orders from above.

$1:

As war enablers, you're a scarey lot to any of us who are looking to advance the human race without spilling blood.

so we have another pacifist? Great.

$1:

And I'll lay you dollars to doughnuts that yer a Gawd fearin' person. Oh, tell me it isn't so!!

I don't know where God takes place in this, but I don't fear him, because I believe there is no such thing.

Gee, I'm sorry, I was speaking Hickish cuz dems dat duz the biddin' of the neocons without question just ain't got no larnin' much less a command of English (that would be with a capital "E"). I was desperately trying to reach the right level of comprehension. So much for my efforts.

As for you not believing in a god, that's at least consistent with what you advocate be done to certain members of the human race--and I find that quite refreshing. Of course, then you wouldn't be swearing on any Bible in any kind of oath toward duty toward country. Yet another crock.

Yours in pacifism