[ridenrain]

Liberals put us in Afghanistan, now they want to pull us out for political reasons.. and we’re surprised?

Liberals signed Kyoto with no clue what it meant or required of Canada.
Martin had Belinda fix the Western seperation.. I guess that failed along with most of the things Martin did.
I could go on and on but the Liberals have the ability to tur gold into shit because all they can see is their own greed and power.

[Patrick_Ross]

Durandal Durandal:

Patrick_Ross Patrick_Ross:

Pakistan has been very cooperative. Why else would the Americans be helping their government update their military hardware? They gave Pakistan a refurbished squadron of F-16s just last year.

And the Americans also supplied Saudi Arabia with F-15's, but the Saudi top cleric still orders Muslims living in the UK to "live in a state within a state until you take over"... but that, your are not supposed to know.

And Saudi Arabia, on no less than two different occasions, allowed the Americans to use their territory as staging grounds for attacks on Iraq. They also punished Osama Bin Laden for decrying the American influence on Iraq.

$1:

Source : Dispatches - Undercover Mosque

And the Americans also supplied Egypt with Abrams when this same country was swearing the destruction of Israel not so long ago. Of course, moderates are in control now, but fundementalists are still active and nemerous :



Some good stuff from another Egyptien newspaper (Al Haram) :



"Hillary and Obama : a woman and a negro in the race to the White House -- Here is another proof of the decline of the West."

And when I think those two moonbats are pro-Islam...



So theses are our "allies", Patrick_Ross ? Well, they may be yours, but they are not mine !

Hillary Clinton, or Barak Obama? Personally, I prefer Obama.[/quote]

$1:

$1:

Despite the fact that in contrast to Iran, which was a fundamentalist state, Pakistan is a secular state.

Just like lovely secular Turkey wich still denies the Armenian Genocide.

$1:

Correction: some crazies within Pakistan threatened to behead the Pope.

Yes, that's true because the Pakistani parliament ONLY unanimously adopted a resolution condemning Pope Benedict XVI for his statements ( -- one chance they don't do this every time the get "offended") :

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,213923,00.html

[color=blue]Condemning the Pope for his comments on Islam (entirely understandable, by any means) is not the same as demanding his beheading.

$1:

And it's ONLY a top MMA leader and his supporters wich declared : wich declared :

"If I get hold of the pope, I will hang him !"

- Hafiz Hussain Ahmed

And it's ONLO his supporters who declared :

"Terrorist, extremist Pope be hanged !" and "Down with Muslims' enemies !"

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2006/09/ ... n_Pope.php

And is he the president of Pakistan? I thought not.

$1:

$1:

If you want to argue that some crazies within Pakistan represent the entire Pakistani state, fair enough.

Those crazies are much more numerous and have much more supporters than you think.

Here's what I have to back what I claimed earlier (ei : double game) :

Friend or Foe : The War on Terror In Afghanistan may be won or lost in Pakistan

Questions arise about the West's Policy towards Pakistan

Global Security - Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA)

Pakistan is just an "ally" because they have nukes, if you don't want to accept that, good for you, that's your opinion. Mine is that we will never win in A-stan if we don't take military actions against Pakistan (or at least some parts of it), but I can always dream.

Yet the actions of Pakistan -- increasing the security of their western border to prevent the passing of Islamic extremists between Pakistan and Afghanistan -- entirely contradict your theory of "calculated ambiguity". How do you think we are to define Pakistan, Durandal? According to your cynicism, or according to their actual actions?

$1:

$1:

By the same line of argument, Kevin Potvin's 9/11 comments shall henceforth be used to represent you and your ideas about 9/11. Why do you think 9/11 was beautiful, Durandal?

Do you sincerely think I think 9/11 was beatiful ? And what the heck does that Kevin guy has to do with what I'm saying ?

By suggesting that the comments of a few crazies within the Pakistani state should represent the sentiments of the whole, you are also suggesting that the comments of a few crazies within Canada should represent the sentiments of all Canadians. As such, Kevin Potvin -- one individual within Canada -- says 9/11 was beautiful. According to your own logic, this means all Canadians think 9/11 was beautiful.

According to you, it doesn't matter if your actual actions -- the things you have done -- contradict this very idea. By your logic, if you're Canadian, you think 9/11 was beautiful.

I'll ask you once more, Durandal: why do you think 9/11 was beautiful?

[Wada]

ridenrain ridenrain:

Liberals put us in Afghanistan, now they want to pull us out for political reasons.. and we’re surprised?

Liberals signed Kyoto with no clue what it meant or required of Canada.
Martin had Belinda fix the Western seperation.. I guess that failed along with most of the things Martin did.
I could go on and on but the Liberals have the ability to tur gold into shit because all they can see is their own greed and power.

You can rage on about the Liberals but understand this Liberal isn't calling for the troops withdrawal. I'm calling for the troops there to get with it and get the job done. If there are not enough troops then get the number there that can get the job done. Get it over with and quit this pussy footing around.

[LABBATTS50]

Wada Wada:

ridenrain ridenrain:

Liberals put us in Afghanistan, now they want to pull us out for political reasons.. and we’re surprised?

Liberals signed Kyoto with no clue what it meant or required of Canada.
Martin had Belinda fix the Western seperation.. I guess that failed along with most of the things Martin did.
I could go on and on but the Liberals have the ability to tur gold into shit because all they can see is their own greed and power.

I'm calling for the troops there to get with it and get the job done. Get it over with and quit this pussy footing around.

Well Wada, I am personally inviting you to go on over see what we are doing on the ground, and tell us to our faces to "get on with it and quit pussy footing around".

See how that goes over with the troops.

[Patrick_Ross]

Yeah! I mean, it's not like they're building a democratic state from scratch or anything.

[Durandal]

Patrick_Ross Patrick_Ross:

And Saudi Arabia, on no less than two different occasions, allowed the Americans to use their territory as staging grounds for attacks on Iraq. They also punished Osama Bin Laden for decrying the American influence on Iraq.

Bravo. Iraq wanted to take controll of the entire middle east, no wonder the Saudis let the Yanks kick Saddam ! It was in their own interst ! Not to mention "good" relations are necessary between SA and the US for economical reasons.

Saudi Arabia is funding islamic lobbies and hard-core mosques all over the world in order to take down the West. Assymetrical warfare. Wake-up dude.

I suggest you read America Alone from Mark Steyn, it will open your eyes on all these supposedly large majorities of supposedly gentle/moderates folks in Egypt, Saudi Arabia and elseweare.

It's good to vary your sources of informations, you know.

$1:

Hillary Clinton, or Barak Obama? Personally, I prefer Obama.

Please tell me you are jocking. The Saudis and Egyptians (and Pakistanis).

$1:

Condemning the Pope for his comments on Islam (entirely understandable, by any means)

Yeah, exept if you put the quote BACK INTO CONTEXT.

$1:

is not the same as demanding his beheading.

No, and a simple condemning (how dare they even ask that !) is not the same that having to pass a resolution in parliament, wich in itself in no big deal, but wich shows the extent of "moderation" of the country.

$1:

And is he the president of Pakistan? I thought not.

No, he is a leader from a very popular organistation in Pakistan.

$1:

Yet the actions of Pakistan -- increasing the security of their western border to prevent the passing of Islamic extremists between Pakistan and Afghanistan -- entirely contradict your theory of "calculated ambiguity".

Did you at least bother to read the pages I have provided ? Pakistan just did the contrary, they signed a peace treaty with the Taliban and let them do their stuff on the territory in northern Pakistan, where they get help from Jamaat-e-Islami and other jihadists organisations.

Musharraf used to fight the Taliban only because if he had not done so, the Americans would have "bombed his country into the stone age".

"Who is not with us is against us", Remember ? That was not so long ago when the Americans were still politically strong. Now they have weakened politically, so Pakistan changed their policy. Get it now ?

Patrick_Ross, maybe, after all, that Musharraf is a good guy and he really wants to destroy the Taliban, or maybe he is palying a game with Uncle Sam. Whatever are his real intentions, the fact remains that he does not have the support and power in his country necessary to help us win this war. Other parties, allied under the banner of the MMA, are very influencial and have a big impact on Pakistan's actions.

$1:

How do you think we are to define Pakistan, Durandal? According to your cynicism, or according to their actual actions?

According to their actual actions.

Here are parts of the texts from the sites I have posted in my previous message, wich you should read before we continue this debate because it will turn into a debate of dumb deaf persons :

"NATO has proven beyond any reasonable doubt, that Pakistan has permitted (or just not cared about) the infiltration of Taliban fanatics into Afghanistan, in order to help destabilize the central government in Kabul. As proof of such Pakistani actions, [...] the bodies of fallen Taliban infiltrants and mercenaries have been ferried back across the border, and handed over to their ISI minders."

"The religious alliance [MMA] won an absolute majority [hey, these guys are really hated by the Pakistanis aren't they ] in October 2001 regional elections. The Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal now rules the North West Frontier Province and Baluchistan. On November 25, 2002 the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal formed the government in the NWFP, after the alliance’s huge success in the province, at both the provincial and national level. In June 2002 the parliament in North-West Frontier Province approved legislation to make Sharia -- or Islamic teachings -- the governing law in the region. Since taking control of the province, the ruling Islamic alliance banned music on public transport, medical examinations of women by male doctors, male coaches for women athletes and male journalists from covering women's sports."

$1:

As such, Kevin Potvin -- one individual within Canada -- says 9/11 was beautiful. According to your own logic, this means all Canadians think 9/11 was beautiful.

Many Canadians DO think 9/11 was beautiful because the are so full af anti-americanism, but they just won't say it out loud. And heck, please don't compare us with Pakistan !

$1:

According to you, it doesn't matter if your actual actions -- the things you have done -- contradict this very idea. By your logic, if you're Canadian, you think 9/11 was beautiful.

Did I say ALL WITHOUT EXEPTION of Pakistan supports the taliban ? No, so don't put words into my mouth, thank you very much.

In WW2, did ALL Germans support the progroms against the Jews, the invasions of other countries, etc. ? No, and actually, many historians say just a minority did. Still, it was enough to make them a threat to countries thousands of kilometers away, and being threatened was enough for us to bomb them like hell.

$1:

I'll ask you once more, Durandal: why do you think 9/11 was beautiful?

No, unlike many (if not most) Pakistanis.

So much for such a country.

[Bodah]

Geeez if I was the Taliban and heard that forces are pulling out in 2009 what would I be thinking ?

"Victory !!!! all we have to do is sit our hands for the next two years not risking our lives, let the infidels rebuild our country. And when they leave we can take it all back.... excellent !, those Canadians not only do they not have the will to follow through with something but also are pretty stupid for announcing their exit date thats only two years away."

[Rihx]

I find it amusing how many people forget that we are not the only country fighting the taliban or involved in rebuilding the country. We pull out, someone else in nato comes in or expands their mission.

This mission is under a United Nations mandate, has everyone forgotten how long we were in cypres? We could leave in 2009 take a brake for a few years and go back again.

The possibility of other Non-Nato countries going in under the UN banner is a very good.

[Wada]

and as ass backwards as many might like to portray the Taliban I would guess that they would be wondering "who's gonna replace the Canadians?", because as long as NATO or the UN desire to keep up this OP then someone is going to replace the Canadians when and if they retire to the back lines, and if they are not going to relieve our troops then the sooner we get out the better.

[BartSimpson]

$1:

the time has come to take a stand," Coderre told reporters following a caucus meeting.

Excuse me, but Canada already took a stand so whatever this is, it is not the courageous act it is being portrayed as.

[Donny_Brasco]

Clogeroo Clogeroo:

Or we could do the right thing and protect the freedom of people who deserve it just as much as we do. They may not be from the same country as we are but they are still human beings and we shouldn’t brush them aside because we do not want to get our hands dirty.

Ya, freedom from the American trained and armed Taliban. Nice, they go create problems and our guys have to die when we volunter to clean up.

[Knoss]

$1:

If the Taliban is recieving any support internationally, the prime suspect lies not to the east, in Pakistan, but rather to the west -- in Iran.

Do the Taliban have access to the Irainian border?

[Durandal]

Donny_Brasco Donny_Brasco:

Ya, freedom from the American trained and armed Taliban. Nice, they go create problems and our guys have to die when we volunter to clean up.

The Americans trained/armed *some* mudjahedeen and the taliban are *some* musdjahedeen. The Americans created nothing and killed one thing : the USSR.

The "problem" has existed for 1400 years, and the Cold War was not the first time in history when we worcked with *some* mudjahedeen.

I strongly suggest you inform yourself a little bit more on "the problem" before making such statements.

[Patrick_Ross]

Durandal Durandal:

Patrick_Ross Patrick_Ross:

And Saudi Arabia, on no less than two different occasions, allowed the Americans to use their territory as staging grounds for attacks on Iraq. They also punished Osama Bin Laden for decrying the American influence on Iraq.

Bravo. Iraq wanted to take controll of the entire middle east, no wonder the Saudis let the Yanks kick Saddam ! It was in their own interst ! Not to mention "good" relations are necessary between SA and the US for economical reasons.

Saudi Arabia is funding islamic lobbies and hard-core mosques all over the world in order to take down the West. Assymetrical warfare. Wake-up dude.

I suggest you read America Alone from Mark Steyn, it will open your eyes on all these supposedly large majorities of supposedly gentle/moderates folks in Egypt, Saudi Arabia and elseweare.

It's good to vary your sources of informations, you know.

Good idea. I'd suggest you maybe get some information about Islam from some actual Muslims. Varying sources of informaiton and all.

$1:

Yeah, exept if you put the quote BACK INTO CONTEXT.

So where, precisely, does a condemnation of the Pope's comments (which you just admitted is entirely reasonable) devoid of any mention of beheading, require different context to reveal it's "true meaning"? Only if you're desperate to portray it as an act of sectarian violence mongering. But then you've altered the entire context.

Durandal Durandal:

...a simple condemning (how dare they even ask that !) is not the same that having to pass a resolution in parliament, wich in itself in no big deal, but wich shows the extent of "moderation" of the country.

The Pope makes comments that defame 90% of their population. God forbid their government should issue a statement!

$1:

No, he is a leader from a very popular organistation in Pakistan.

And, just to reiterate: Pakistan, a state that has cooperated in the war on terror.

$1:

Did you at least bother to read the pages I have provided ? Pakistan just did the contrary, they signed a peace treaty with the Taliban and let them do their stuff on the territory in northern Pakistan, where they get help from Jamaat-e-Islami and other jihadists organisations.

First off, provide some credible sources of information. Maybe somebody who isn't contradicting the Canadian, American and British intelligence services based entirely on cynicism.

Durandal Durandal:

Musharraf used to fight the Taliban only because if he had not done so, the Americans would have "bombed his country into the stone age".

"Who is not with us is against us", Remember ? That was not so long ago when the Americans were still politically strong. Now they have weakened politically, so Pakistan changed their policy. Get it now ?

Patrick_Ross, maybe, after all, that Musharraf is a good guy and he really wants to destroy the Taliban, or maybe he is palying a game with Uncle Sam. Whatever are his real intentions, the fact remains that he does not have the support and power in his country necessary to help us win this war. Other parties, allied under the banner of the MMA, are very influencial and have a big impact on Pakistan's actions.

So, you want to contradict the facts of the case -- things that have actually happened, and are actually more reflective of reality than words -- based entirely on cynicism. Somehow, you think this is supposed to be convincing? It isn't.

$1:

According to their actual actions.

Fair enough. Why don't you judge them according to their actions?

$1:

Here are parts of the texts from the sites I have posted in my previous message, wich you should read before we continue this debate because it will turn into a debate of dumb deaf persons

To reiterate, I have entirely disregarded those sites due to a lack of credibility. They aren't worth discussing, as their claims are entirely counter-factual.

$1:

Many Canadians DO think 9/11 was beautiful because the are so full af anti-americanism, but they just won't say it out loud. And heck, please don't compare us with Pakistan !

Hey, I'm merely drawing these conclusions based on your own logic! And, according to your logic, it doesn't matter that Canadian forces are in Afghanistan fighting the Taliban. Remember, according to you, actions don't matter -- only words. As such, according to Kevin Potvin's words -- who, according to your logic, speaks on behalf of all Canadians -- Canadians think 9/11 was beautiful.

$1:

Did I say ALL WITHOUT EXEPTION of Pakistan supports the taliban ? No, so don't put words into my mouth, thank you very much.

Like you're putting words into the mouths of Pakistanis?

$1:

In WW2, did ALL Germans support the progroms against the Jews, the invasions of other countries, etc. ? No, and actually, many historians say just a minority did. Still, it was enough to make them a threat to countries thousands of kilometers away, and being threatened was enough for us to bomb them like hell.

Those historians are deluded. In Hitler's Willing Executioners, Daniel Goldhagen reveals that the overwhelming majority of Germans knew precisely what was happening in the concentration camps, and accepted it.

Even by doing something so simple as tracing the routes of the death marches one discovers that they made no effort at all to avoid marching Holocaust victims through various German cities, towns and villages. In fact, the routes chosen confirm it, by demonstrating that instead of taking a direct route between the camps, they diverted them around the country side!

This was done so that Germans could witness the Jews -- whom, in the defense of the German people, it should be remembered that they were brought up to fear Jews, and were tought that Jews had malevolent magical powers.

Regardless, your argument actually supports my arguments more strongly than they support your own. Isn't it cool how I made you argue my point for me? Let's face it: I'm good.

$1:

I'll ask you once more, Durandal: why do you think 9/11 was beautiful?

How about it, Durandal? Why do you think 9/11 was beautiful? Inquiring minds want to know.

[Durandal]

Patrick_Ross Patrick_Ross:

I'd suggest you maybe get some information about Islam from some actual Muslims. Varying sources of informaiton and all.

Oh, I did that with many Muslims, one of them once told me "Islam is a religion of peace", but later said said "LOL LOL LOL you think you are gonna win ? We are 1.3 billion Muslims on the planet, you are never gonna win !" and also : "We are going to break you all ; more over we are reproducing like mosquitos !" (in his own words).

You know P_R, I discussed a lot with Muslims before making myself on their religion. But the most I know comes from [url=http://www.jihadwatch.org/]persons with a muslim bac
kground but that are not actually muslims[/url].

But hey, don't listen to me (and them), and in half-a-century, when our country will look like Kosovo or Nigeria, you will remember that Durandal guy.

$1:

The Pope makes comments that defame 90% of their population. God forbid their government should issue a statement!

Yep, and they make comments/actions that defame 90 % of our population EVERY DAY and ALL OVER THE WORLD, so why are our goverment not making a resolution in parliamment every day for every single shit that a muslim leader says/does ?

Should I quote Kadhafi (or Ahmedinajad) that both said (the Lybian was more precise) that Islam would conquer Europe, America and then rule the entire world ?

Where was the outrage, the nun's shootings, the beheadings, the church (or in this case mosques) burnings, the parliament resolutions, the victimisation ? WHERE WAS IT

$1:

And, just to reiterate: Pakistan, a state that has cooperated in the war on terror.

Exactly, that HAS cooperated, but that does not anymore.

Man, if Pakistan was a girl, you'd marry her wouldn't you !?

$1:

First off, provide some credible sources of information. Maybe somebody who isn't contradicting the Canadian, American and British intelligence services based entirely on cynicism.

"Some credible sources of information" ? You mean : information that does not contradict what you are saying.

Quoting NATO is contradicting the "Canadian, American and British intelligence" ? OK, if you say so.

$1:

So, you want to contradict the facts of the case -- things that have actually happened, and are actually more reflective of reality than words -- based entirely on cynicism.

What tabarnack facts ? Tou keep blabling about your "facts" and repeating "cooperative-ally-cooperative-ally-cooperative-ally-cooperative-ally", but heck WHAT HAVE YOU PRESENTED TO BACK THIS UP, AND TO PROUVE THAT THE INFO I HAVE PROVIDED IS WRONG ? Nothing at all.

Look, I have posted a link that explains who people are indoctrinated in pakistani madrassas (coranic schools) and then recruited to fight our soldiers in A-stan, you can't deny that, muslim kids are put in these hate-schools all over tyhe muslim world. Then what are you going to say ? "Madrassas don't exist, no credible source says so and bla bla bla" ???

$1:

Somehow, you think this is supposed to be convincing? It isn't.

Re.

$1:

Fair enough. Why don't you judge them according to their actions?

Heck, that's what I'm doing.

$1:

To reiterate, I have entirely disregarded those sites due to a lack of credibility. They aren't worth discussing, as their claims are entirely counter-factual.

And what is more credible ? The BBC ? Global Security is not credible ?

$1:

As such, according to Kevin Potvin's words -- who, according to your logic, speaks on behalf of all Canadians -- Canadians think 9/11 was beautiful.

You'r stuck on stupid with your Kevin Potvin, can't help you here.

$1:

Like you're putting words into the mouths of Pakistanis?

I'm putting no words in the words of any-one, I seak information, I look at news (not the MSM PC shit), and I see that many muslims - more than we think - around the word see 9/11 as a "great victory for islam" (even thaugh the think the Mossad did it ).

$1:

Those historians are deluded. In Hitler's Willing Executioners, Daniel Goldhagen reveals that the overwhelming majority of Germans knew precisely what was happening in the concentration camps, and accepted it.

Regardless, your argument actually supports my arguments more strongly than they support your own.

Ha, so the falsely-called historians who say that most of Germany didn't know about the holocaust are WRONG, and the rightly-called historians who say that most Germans did know about the camps and supported them are RIGHT.

To continue with that logic, the falsely-called experts who say that most of Pakistan do not support the jihad are WRONG, and the rightly-called experts that say that many-if-not-most Pakistanis support the jihad are RIGHT.



You often blast yourself like that ?

$1:

Isn't it cool how I made you argue my point for me?

Isn't it cool how I made you argue my point for me ?

$1:

Let's face it: I'm good.

Man, did your mummy give you enough affection ?

$1:

I'll ask you once more, Durandal: why do you think 9/11 was beautiful?

Answered before, your getting ridiculous.

$1:

How about it, Durandal? Why do you think 9/11 was beautiful?

Same thing here.