The Canadian Guitar Forum banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,740 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
...for the first time in forever the newscasts bring good news. barrack obama announces he will run for president, promising he will bring US troops home from iraq and bring universal healthcare to the US, and last night the dixie chicks dominated the grammies.

its a good day.

-dh
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,740 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
GuitarsCanada said:
Is that not the ticket they will all be riding on? I promise to bring the troops home?
...i think he may be the first to make it a platform/election promise. i can't imagine a republican running on this promise, but you never know - they are tripping over each other trying to distance themselves from bush.

not sure i see nixon's relevance, aside from pure coincidence.

-dh
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
15,823 Posts
It would just seem to me that this is the popular platform. Everyone is sick of the war and it's election season. Nobody is going to come out and say "I back the war and we are going to stay as long as it takes". Even the big supporters (like Hillary) are now on the End The War bandwagon. it's actually pretty funny to watch. They are all a giant pack of liars and cheats. What about a Clinton - Obama ticket? Sounds like thats the way it will go.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
822 Posts
I think Obama is certainly a contender and I'd love to see him get the nomination, but Hillary is the one the Republicans are worried about. Tom Delay(a Republican) recently said she would be the next president. I think they are now positioning themselves on how to beat her in 2012. They'll sacrifice a goat in '08. At this point a Clinton/Obama ticket would be a clear winner, but it's a long way from next November.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
526 Posts
Doesn't really matter who or how many times they say it, the US will never totally pull out of Iraq. They can't.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
319 Posts
U.S Policy

The U.S should not have been in Iraq in the first place.
Go Obama Go................I'd love to see a black president
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,967 Posts
The US should have removed Saddam back in the Gulf War, but the UN said no way. Had they done it back then, we'd be bitching about something else today. I think Ted Nugent would make a great president, far better than all the above named politicians. Nugent running as a Libertarian would be the greatest thing ever for the US......
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
69 Posts
PaulS said:
yep then they would all be out hunting instead of fighting wars.... :D
Aren't they doing that already?
Hunting Talibans, Al Quaeda, Palestinians, etc... :D

I have just so no whatever respect for politics, it's not funny.

It's not a matter for who'll be the best for the people anymore, it's more who'll be the least damageable to whatever the people have left.

It's pathetic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,381 Posts
The US should not pull out of Iraq. They went in under false pretenses and they should not be allowed to cut and run.

Can you imagine what would happen to all of the people, families and children of those who have embraced the idea of democracy and freedom if they were abandoned and left to fend for themselves? They would be slaughtered by the thousands and their blood would be on the hands of the US Government.

They had no business going in in the first place, now they have to stay and clean up the mess that they have made. Nato and the UN should not help them, but should not allow them to pack up and leave either. They have created a civil war in that country which they may have to fight for decades, but if they were to leave it would all be over in a matter of days.

I doubt very much that if the US does cut and run that they will allow any of the Iraqi Refugees that they will have created into their country.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,665 Posts
Hamm Guitars said:
The US should not pull out of Iraq. They went in under false pretenses and they should not be allowed to cut and run.

Can you imagine what would happen to all of the people, families and children of those who have embraced the idea of democracy and freedom if they were abandoned and left to fend for themselves? They would be slaughtered by the thousands and their blood would be on the hands of the US Government.

They had no business going in in the first place, now they have to stay and clean up the mess that they have made. Nato and the UN should not help them, but should not allow them to pack up and leave either. They have created a civil war in that country which they may have to fight for decades, but if they were to leave it would all be over in a matter of days.

I doubt very much that if the US does cut and run that they will allow any of the Iraqi Refugees that they will have created into their country.
Gee, am I the only guy here with a memory?

I agree that Bush and Co. have made a horrible mess but the idea of Nato and the UN forcing the US to do anything is laughable.

With what, pop guns? If the USA decides to cut and run they're gone! No one 's gonna stop 'em!

For years Canada and the other Nato countries have cut back their military so far that they have little resources to contribute. 90% of the military resources (that's 90% of the money spent!) came from Uncle Sam. So like it or lump it, NATO and the UN are irrelevant.

Not meaning to defend the Bush fiasco but if you think back to those times leading up to invading Iraq you should recall that even the UN thought that Saddam had nasty stuff hidden. Why not, when Saddam told the world he did. He also had phony bunkers and supposed nuclear manufacturing plants. He played a game of refusing to let UN inspectors inside these phony plants and eventually kicked the UN inspectors out. That's when even the UN publicly stated that Saddam was hiding something "BAD"! Saddam thought he could use a bluff as a tool but it went too far.

So the UN is far from lily white. What's more, if the US pulled out the UN and the rest of NATO are too cheap and toothless to do anything to help the Iraqi people anyway.

The UN and NATO always want the US to lead chiefly because they want the US to pay for it! Planes and tanks cost money. Politicians would rather spend that money at home to attract votes with projects like daycare spaces or canoe museums in their home riding.

They forget that "he who pays the piper calls the tune." Didn't anyone notice that when the UN couldn't get the US to go into Darfur none of the other countries stepped up to the plate. So hundreds of thousands of men, women and children are slaughtered because the rest of the world is just too cheap.

We actually have half of our fleet docked because we don't have money in the budget to pay for the fuel for them to sail coastal patrols! We also don't have enough crew in the forces to man more than half of them anyway!

We can't continue to let the US do all the expensive defending and expect to call the shots. Canada is perhaps the worst offender. We take it for granted that America is forced by geography to defend North America so we can get by on the cheap. If it wasn't for Uncle Sam we simply don't have the capacity to defend PEI! You could put the entire Canadian armed forces including all the cooks, clerks and bottle washers inside Sky Dome. We have less than 3000 soldiers that would actually fire a gun.

Britain is somewhat better but the rest of NATO isn't much. France has better resources but always cheaps out so they're no help. Same for Italy.

If the rest of the world pulled their share an inept American president could never get away with a mess like Iraq.

If y'all wanna bash Bush I'll add a cheer or two of my own but it would have more impact if we stayed within the bounds of reality here.:2guns:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,381 Posts
I was in Bahrain in 1999 when Ritter & Co. were performing their inspections. They would come to Bahrain on Fridays (the Moslem equivalent to Christian Sundays) and have a few pints in the hotel bar that I was staying/working in. I and a few others had a drink with them on a few occasions and they believed (off the record of course) that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction, although they were being jerked around by the Iraqi army with regards to their inspections and getting accurate counts on otherwise 'acceptable' weaponry.

Sadam was defiant, I'll give him that, but if he did have these weapons they would have been deployed as soon as the US invaded. There were no weapons of mass destruction, and there was never any intelligence that ever confirmed this, it was just a convenient excuse to mount the invasion.

As far as the UN and NATO go towards pressuring the US into doing the right thing, I was thinking more along the lines of economic sanctions than a show of military force. The US is not our enemy, they are our neighbours and they draw heavily on us for resources (water being a major one).

Their military is much stronger than ours, but you also have to account for the fact that their population is ten times what ours is. They have more tax dollars and more troops as a result of that.

I agree that we should be spending more than we do on our military, and I sincerely hope that we will be able to help out allies in the future if the need arises - but our priority is to protect our citizens, not to kill the citizens of other countries.

Canada has a defensive military, we are not equipped to mount an offensive attack against other countries and our political and social views are in line with that concept. The US has a powerful offensive military and their political and social views are in line with that concept as well.

Canadian snipers are currently the best in the world. - Just thought I'd throw that in their to lift up the moral a bit. The US actually wanted to decorate them with their medals.

Ask any military strategist on how well an offensive military holds up in a defensive position, like the one the US is currently getting into in Iraq and they will likely tell you that it is a situation that they would want to avoid at all costs. This is why they want to get out, casualties are mounting and there is no end in sight.

In any case war is an unfortunate situation for all those involved. I'm all for peace, but I don't think cutting and running is a solution towards that end.

This is all a little to heavy for a guitar fourm. I use my guitar as an escape from the harsh realities of life and I just realized that I may have over stepped some boundries here and caused two worlds to collide.

Sorry if I offended anyone with my political views or if I have given the impression that I am anti-US. I'm anti-Bush and I pretty much like people from everywhere.

I'm extreamly pro-Canadian.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,665 Posts
Hamm Guitars said:


Sadam was defiant, I'll give him that, but if he did have these weapons they would have been deployed as soon as the US invaded. There were no weapons of mass destruction, and there was never any intelligence that ever confirmed this, it was just a convenient excuse to mount the invasion.
No, there was a lot of evidence. It was just lies manufactured by Saddam himself! To be consistent, if you believe that Bush is dumb as dirt why would one be surprised he believed Saddam's bluff and thought he should take action?

Hamm Guitars said:

As far as the UN and NATO go towards pressuring the US into doing the right thing, I was thinking more along the lines of economic sanctions than a show of military force. The US is not our enemy, they are our neighbours and they draw heavily on us for resources (water being a major one).
Yeah, but they can still have a dumb leader. We've had lots!

MacKenzie King held seances to talk to his dead dogs. Chretien talked to imaginary homeless people and talked to folks in imaginary bars in Shawinigan.

Hamm Guitars said:

Their military is much stronger than ours, but you also have to account for the fact that their population is ten times what ours is. They have more tax dollars and more troops as a result of that.
Unfortunately, the ratio is FAR worse than 10:1!

Hamm Guitars said:

I agree that we should be spending more than we do on our military, and I sincerely hope that we will be able to help out allies in the future if the need arises - but our priority is to protect our citizens, not to kill the citizens of other countries.

Canada has a defensive military, we are not equipped to mount an offensive attack against other countries and our political and social views are in line with that concept. The US has a powerful offensive military and their political and social views are in line with that concept as well.
I would submit that we don't have a defensive military either. At least, not one capable of defending even illegal foreign fishing if it happens on both coasts at the same time.

Hamm Guitars said:

Canadian snipers are currently the best in the world. - Just thought I'd throw that in their to lift up the moral a bit. The US actually wanted to decorate them with their medals.
I agree we have great soldiers. Both of them.

We need more and should pay them better so they don't have to feed their families at food banks. This is public record.

Hamm Guitars said:

This is all a little to heavy for a guitar fourm. I use my guitar as an escape from the harsh realities of life and I just realized that I may have over stepped some boundries here and caused two worlds to collide.

Sorry if I offended anyone with my political views or if I have given the impression that I am anti-US. I'm anti-Bush and I pretty much like people from everywhere.

I'm extreamly pro-Canadian.

Actually, you are in precisely the RIGHT forum! This is the "open mike" area where pretty much anything goes, as long as we respect each other and don't call each other a**holes for any disagreement. I enjoyed the chance to chew things over with you and appreciated your viewpoint!
 
  • Like
Reactions: mandocaster
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top