[BartSimpson]

DerbyX DerbyX:

I will stack Streaker up against you or anyone else in terms of courage. You may think its cowardice to actually want peace in the world but quite frankly that is just sad dude.

It is not cowardice to seek peace. The bravest man who ever lived never raised a hand in anger.




Streaker does not agitate for peace, he agitates against the USA and against Western Civilization in general and he hides behind his peace sign as a camoflauge for his true desires, which are not at all peaceful. I've seen his type so many times over the years that the pattern is quite indelible.

In the White Poppy thread he made allusions to his true side when he said he didn't consider himself a pacificist and when he said he wasn't (completely - I forget the exact term) a pacifist.

I have no doubt that Streaker uses peace to justify violence. And if he has not done so already I would not put it past him to commit a violent crime to advance his ideology.

Is he a coward?

Let's see if he shows up on the CBC and the front page of the Globe & Mail later this year when he will supposedly fulfill his vow to wear a white poppy at the Remembrance Day memorial service.

If not, there will be your answer.

[BartSimpson]

DerbyX DerbyX:

If I quoted Micheal Moore as a source for criticism of the US how much validity would you give it?

(admit it. That was a good rebut.)

C'mon.

It's a good rebuttal, true. But Steyn (rightist as he may be) is a tad more mainstream than Moore is. Also, the speech is at least a decent analysis of actual facts whereas Mr. Moore himself has stated that he has no concern about facts.

Read the whole speech, by the way, to get a better context of what I highlighted.

[DerbyX]

$1:

It is not cowardice to seek peace. The bravest man who ever lived never raised a hand in anger.

good.

$1:

Streaker does not agitate for peace, he agitates against the USA and against Western Civilization in general and he hides behind his peace sign as a camoflauge for his true desires, which are not at all peaceful. I've seen his type so many times over the years that the pattern is quite indelible.

No. He agitates for peace by having every country to do the same.

He wants peace. I believe he is willing to do whats neccessary to get it.

The curent strategy won't.

$1:

In the White Poppy thread he made allusions to his true side when he said he didn't consider himself a pacificist and when he said he wasn't (completely - I forget the exact term) a pacifist.
[code]

I don't know.

I have no doubt that Streaker uses peace to justify violence. And if he has not done so already I would not put it past him to commit a violent crime to advance his ideology.

$1:

How fair of you. Convicting him of a crime you suspect he may committ.

No words are needed.

$1:

Is he a coward?

Let's see if he shows up on the CBC and the front page of the Globe & Mail later this year when he will supposedly fulfill his vow to wear a white poppy at the Remembrance Day memorial service.

If not, there will be your answer.

I don;t think so. Of course I can't ever know.

Can You?

[DerbyX]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

DerbyX DerbyX:

If I quoted Micheal Moore as a source for criticism of the US how much validity would you give it?

(admit it. That was a good rebut.)

C'mon.

It's a good rebuttal, true. But Steyn (rightist as he may be) is a tad more mainstream than Moore is. Also, the speech is at least a decent analysis of actual facts whereas Mr. Moore himself has stated that he has no concern about facts.

Read the whole speech, by the way, to get a better context of what I highlighted.

More mainstream then Moorse?

No way. Multiple highly regarded movies vs what?

Thiinner yes.

[BartSimpson]

DerbyX DerbyX:

$1:

It is not cowardice to seek peace. The bravest man who ever lived never raised a hand in anger.

good.

$1:

Streaker does not agitate for peace, he agitates against the USA and against Western Civilization in general and he hides behind his peace sign as a camoflauge for his true desires, which are not at all peaceful. I've seen his type so many times over the years that the pattern is quite indelible.

No. He agitates for peace by having every country to do the same.

He wants peace. I believe he is willing to do whats neccessary to get it.

The curent strategy won't.

$1:

In the White Poppy thread he made allusions to his true side when he said he didn't consider himself a pacificist and when he said he wasn't (completely - I forget the exact term) a pacifist.
[code]

I don't know.

I have no doubt that Streaker uses peace to justify violence. And if he has not done so already I would not put it past him to commit a violent crime to advance his ideology.

$1:

How fair of you. Convicting him of a crime you suspect he may committ.

No words are needed.

$1:

Is he a coward?

Let's see if he shows up on the CBC and the front page of the Globe & Mail later this year when he will supposedly fulfill his vow to wear a white poppy at the Remembrance Day memorial service.

If not, there will be your answer.

I don;t think so. Of course I can't ever know.

Can You?

If he shows up, as promised, either he'll be an attention whore and get himself in the papers or he'll get his butt kicked and, again, get himself in the papers. I'm personally hoping for the latter as I'll simultaneously be able to say I genuinely have more respect for him all while openly enjoying his getting his butt handed to him by some old duffer who's pushing 90.

If he shows up and manages not to make a scene of himself he could, of course, just take some pictures to prove he was there in which case I'd have to grant him his due and go off and lament the butt kicking he didn't receive.

[BartSimpson]

DerbyX DerbyX:

He (Streaker) agitates for peace by having every country to do the same.

I disagree.

He freely condemns the USA and the Western allies while I cannot think of one single circumstance where he has condemned anyone else for their actions.

His pacifism is purely one-sided.

And that isn't pacifism at all.

That's simply wanting the other guy to win.

[sasquatch2]

Yes Canada is not the potent military force it once was. time has marched on and weapon sytems are so costly the all militaries are smaller.

Besides it's simple economics....Canada cannot afford a military and a Liberal party at the same time.

[BartSimpson]

sasquatch2 sasquatch2:

Besides it's simple economics....Canada cannot afford a military and a Liberal party at the same time.

[sandorski]

Article is BS.

The only point that he makes that has anything to do with the subject is that Canada is primarily a Resource Economy and the US isn't.

One thing the US should adopt from Canada's current Economy is Government Budgetary Surpluses.

[Bacardi4206]

I will agree that the Canadian Healthcare system is far from perfect, but it is atleast a lot better than America's. Our system allow's every Canadian to achieve health care, your's? Your health care system fucks over more American's then it helps. The only reason why your waiting isn't as bad is because not as many American's are there to be treated because the majority of the percent gets denied because they can't afford it. Atleast in Canada, I can wake up everyday and know that if I ever get injured or need anything medical wise. I am covered.

As for our war cowardness? I believe you were talking about war cowardness because the quote was regarding Canada in WW2. Just because Canada doesn't get involved in many wars doesn't make us cowards. We promote peace, and that is what we do. If we have to fight, then we give our fights our best 110% as it is proved in our war history, expecially if you recall I believe it's spelled Vimy Ridge, something like that. Where both American soldiers, and British soldiers tried to take and failed. Where they failed, Canadian soldiers achieved, achieved it with the lack of good weapons like you had.

We don't go to wars because we are cowards, we don't go to wars because we are smart. Which is why we don't have records like Vietnam on our hands.

As well, going back to health care for a second. With stats, Canadian's live longer then American's do. Obviously we are doing something right?

Now speaking of stats, lets go to gun deaths. American's that die by guns are off the chart, Toronto is the most dangerious city in Canada, and doesn't even compare to the lowest stats cities in America.

IMO, that article has some nice points and is somewhat right but his points are only a couple pieces of the puzzle. If I did some re-digging then I could come with a whole book of points to against this article.

He only listed to negativity of our system, and country. If he listed to positives of it, hands down Canada has far too many posatives.

Take Health care for example, yes America has better waiting times and Canada has shit waiting times. Now lets look at the posative. Because of our system, every single Canadian can afford to pay there medical bills, therefor many Canadians go to hospitals, therefor why we got a shit waiting time. Many American's can't afford there medical bills, so they don't bother going to hospitals, or if they do. They just get denied, and don't recieve medical care. Therefore why your waiting time is better, because so many people are being denied and don't recieve medical care. Which is really sad seeing how America has a very larger population then Canada does. I would say hands down, that our posative is far greater then our negative in that situation. Wouldn't you agree?

[CanadianLynx]

Not if its regarding the enviroment

http://www.environmentalindicators.com/ ... xecsum.htm

The results prove that Canada has one of the poorest environmental records of the industrialized countries. The primary finding is that for the twenty-five environmental indicators examined, Canada’s overall ranking among OECD nations is a dismal 28th out of 29.

[Bacardi4206]

True, I will not deny that one but I know that the Canadian Government is trying hard to reverse that. Put a fight against global warming, the only reason they were skeptical about doing it sooner after global warming was considered a serious threat was because America's economy is collapsing, and it's taking Canada's economy for a ride. Putting a fight to global warming would further decrease our economy, so it had to be seriously debated.

America I believe is as well putting up a fight against Global Warming, expecially Al Gore.
Though America doesn't have the greatest enviroment record either. I can't really compare though because I don't have the stats between Canada and America on that so I don't know who's got a worse record.

Though on our part, it is kind of sad that we got a bad record because we have low population compared and things like this would be easier to manage compared to other countries.

[sasquatch2]

sandorski

$1:

Article is BS.

The only point that he makes that has anything to do with the subject is that Canada is primarily a Resource Economy and the US isn't.

One thing the US should adopt from Canada's current Economy is Government Budgetary Surpluses.

Lefties absolutely hate Steyn with a genuine, hysterical passion.....

No counter arguments----just genuine, hysterical passionate hate.

[BartSimpson]

Bacardi4206 Bacardi4206:

I will agree that the Canadian Healthcare system is far from perfect, but it is atleast a lot better than America's. Our system allow's every Canadian to achieve health care, your's? Your health care system fucks over more American's then it helps. The only reason why your waiting isn't as bad is because not as many American's are there to be treated because the majority of the percent gets denied because they can't afford it. Atleast in Canada, I can wake up everyday and know that if I ever get injured or need anything medical wise. I am covered.

You hope. If the hospitals are full or if your hospitals in your major cities do not have the same level of facilities you need that are offered by a private hospital in rural Montana, then you won't have to pay a bill mostly because you'll be deceased.

But you won't have to pay a bill.

$1:

As for our war cowardness?

Reread my words. I did not accuse you or Canada of cowardice.

$1:

As well, going back to health care for a second. With stats, Canadian's live longer then American's do. Obviously we are doing something right?

Take the illegal immigrants out of our stats and we're doing pretty good, too.

$1:

Now speaking of stats, lets go to gun deaths. American's that die by guns are off the chart, Toronto is the most dangerious city in Canada, and doesn't even compare to the lowest stats cities in America.

Really? Toronto is safer than Salt Lake City? I don't think so.

$1:

Take Health care for example, yes America has better waiting times and Canada has shit waiting times. Now lets look at the posative. Because of our system, every single Canadian can afford to pay there medical bills, therefor many Canadians go to hospitals, therefor why we got a shit waiting time. Many American's can't afford there medical bills, so they don't bother going to hospitals, or if they do. They just get denied, and don't recieve medical care. Therefore why your waiting time is better, because so many people are being denied and don't recieve medical care. Which is really sad seeing how America has a very larger population then Canada does. I would say hands down, that our posative is far greater then our negative in that situation. Wouldn't you agree?

This goes right back to Steyn's comments on the Canadian fascination with secondary needs such as health care. Yes, you have a nice health care system. Yet the military which protects it is woefully inadequate. Canada receives what I call an indirect military subsidy meaning that Canada can afford to have an inadequate military because Canada counts on the US military to provide for Canadian security.

Given how thinly spread the US military is anymore this defacto policy in Canada should be reconsidered.