Afghanistan

[BitVyper]

The 22% statistic is unfortunate. It suggests that 22% of Canadians prefer ideology and anti-American rhetoric over logic;

I didn't say "22 percent of Canadians hate America." I said that they don't believe the official story about 9/11, which HAS had enough flaws pointed out in it that I find that to be a perfectly rational response.

This, "you're either with us or against us" stuff is part of the problem people have with the current administration.

...but since the attacks on the WTC towers alone were more than enough to justify American retaliation, why would anyone in the U.S. want or need to stage a plane hitting the Pentagon and waste money in the process? It seems utterly unnecessary.

As I said before, I'm not really into the grand conspiracy theories, but the fact that those stories may not make sense doesn't make the alternative true. That's exactly the kind of logic conspiracy theorists like to employ.

Edit: Besides that, whether it's anti-America or not (and it really isn't) really has no bearing on whether or not it's valid.

Edit 2: And please remember, while you're busy implying that such Canadians are somehow unintelligent for being skeptical, that you're talking about me.

[Azisien]

It might be important to point out that, just because 22% of Canadians don't believe the official story does not mean they do believe Loose Change or some ridiculous conspiracy theory. The logic sounds very black and white, as Bit kind of said.

It's like you saying you don't believe in extraterrestrials. And then I say, well, I believe in extraterrestrials. And then, obviously I believe in all the VERY detailed conspiracy theories about specific SPECIES of extraterrestrials that affect our planet as of this moment.

Nope. I just happen to think it's a statistical impossibility given the universe's structure for there not to be extraterrestrials out there. But that's another topic I guess. Simply used for analogy purposes.

And I'm currently holding back on posting to the more original questions, until I can properly summarize them. Plus I can get an idea of what others think beforehand.

[Darth SS]

Big Mac, you live in Alberta. That means you have to follow the Alberta education curriculum just like me. If your teacher has never even mentioned the fall-out of 9/11 then something weird is going on in your town.



I'm not going to say I find the 22% statistic surprising, but I'm frankly kind of surprised it isn't lower. I question how many of those were people who frankly had no damn clue what "The Taliban" is, and just said, "The US is going to war? Obviously it was warmongering."

[BitVyper]

"The US is going to war? Obviously it was warmongering."

Didn't I just address this like, one post ago? To spell it out once again: As I recall (because it's been awhile since I read this), around 22% of Canadians don't believe the official story for 9/11. I said ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about America's motives for war. Statistics aren't enough to go on for that kind of thing. In fact, the statistic really proves nothing. I posted it in response to something else, as spelled out below.

Whether the skepticism is warranted or not really has nothing to do with why I posted that. Someone had said something to the effect that Canadians had an obligation to help, so I just thought I'd point out that a good chunk of Canadians are still skeptical about the reason. That's all.

Edit: That said, I do most certainly feel that a degree of skepticism of the event is entirely warranted. There are a lot of problems with the official story. As I said before, that doesn't mean I fall in with the conspiracy theory crowd, or even that I'm saying the government is lying. All I am saying, is that the current story seems to be missing a number of details.

[Solid Snake]

Originally Posted by BitVyper

Someone had said something to the effect that Canadians had an obligation to help, so I just thought I'd point out that a good chunk of Canadians are still skeptical about the reason. That's all.

Well, just to play Devil's Advocate with your reasoning, a full 78% of Canadians do understand what actually happened on 9/11, and I suppose in a democratic society it would make sense that the government's policies would reflect the opinion of the majority.

Just sayin', I don't think 22% is a statistically significant enough percentage to make Canadian leaders question their NATO commitments to Afghanistan. And as you yourself have pointed out frequently in rebuttal to our points, not all of that 22% even necessarily believe in a conspiracy theory that blames the U.S. government; a good percentage may simply believe that there are slight holes in the official story -- and if that's the case that still doesn't negate the reasoning for Canada's involvement in Afghanistan, it just means a couple specific questions regarding the 9/11 attacks haven't yet been answered.

Considering Al Qaeda has claimed responsibility for the attacks, and considering the Taliban refused to boot Al Qaeda from their country after Al Qaeda said they were responsible for the terrorism, that's a pretty damning piece of evidence against the former Afghanistani government even if in some weird alternate universe Al Qaeda was actually lying. In other words, even if Al Qaeda hypothetically weren't responsible for the 9/11 attacks, bin Laden and his kooks claimed responsibility for it and the Taliban still chose to harbor them. If the Taliban's going to harbor folks who claim they're responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocent civilians, I say, congratulations for digging their own graves. As for Canada's involvement; well in 2001 they chose along with the rest of NATO to invoke that article in which they considered the 9/11 attacks an attack on the alliance as a whole. It's not as if Canada was forced into Afghanistan against its will.

EDIT: Now, if what you're saying is "Canada has the right to ask the United States to answer specific questions regarding the nature of the 9/11 attacks in order to validate Canada's commitment to the region," well that's a bit more reasonable, though I think the 9/11 Commission Report covers a vast majority of the necessary bases in retelling the events, and 78% of Canadians seem to agree.

[Monstructor]

I like the fact that we're fighting a war, not just doing peacekeeping, because a country that would never fight a war has no balls. I don't want us to be at all like Sweden or Switzerland (speaking of which, I remember a Kids in the Hall sketch where one of the guys is going on about how he hates Switzerland. "Move over, America, there's a new asshole on the map!!!"). But I think we're fighting the wrong war for the wrong reasons. This is an American problem, and an American war. We have no stake at all in this conflict. Even if we win in Afghanistan, the Americans will get all the oil. We have our own oil at home. So why send our brave, valorous servicemen to die horrible deaths in some Godforsaken toilet in the middle of nowhere in the Third World? The fact of the matter is that oil is worthless compared to a man's blood. Not because he's a Canadian, but because he's a human being, and you'd have to be a true monster to spend a human life-especially one so noble as to be willing to fight, kill and die in his country's name-just to get oil (though I'm not claiming that Canadian soldiers are saints). I blame that damnable Harper for this. Aside from the fact that the man (if you could even call him a man) has no spine, let alone enough of one to stand up to the Americans, he actually *wants* us to be America's minion/bitch/slave/underling. Commander Knob may very well be the worst prime minister we've ever had, not to mention that he's a white supremacist or a Nazi or something. But hey, don't blame me, I voted for the other guy.

[Darth SS]

Originally Posted by Monstructor

But I think we're fighting the wrong war for the wrong reasons. This is an American problem, and an American war. We have no stake at all in this conflict.

Yes we do. Canada is the only country of the Al-Qaeda's five most hated countries that hasn't been killed. Besides that, you honestly can't tell me that making the world a better place is a bad ideal to be trying to achieve.

Even if we win in Afghanistan, the Americans will get all the oil. We have our own oil at home. So why send our brave, valorous servicemen to die horrible deaths in some Godforsaken toilet in the middle of nowhere in the Third World?

Last time I checked, Afghanistan isn't a big exporter or oil. I don't think they even have oil. At all. It's mostly an agriculture based country. Their current number 1 export is opium. Before that, it was grapefruit or something.

I mean, hell. Last time I checked, Afghanistan didn't qualify as third world. That's Africa pal. And, Canadians have been dying horrible deaths in godforsaken toilets in the middle of nowhere for a long time. It's called being a soldier. If you want examples, then there's Korea, Bosnia, Lebanon (most recently) and my personal favorite, Kosovo. Oh...were most of those peacekeeping missions? Wierd.

I blame that damnable Harper for this. Aside from the fact that the man (if you could even call him a man) has no spine, let alone enough of one to stand up to the Americans, he actually *wants* us to be America's minion/bitch/slave/underling. Commander Knob may very well be the worst prime minister we've ever had, not to mention that he's a white supremacist or a Nazi or something. But hey, don't blame me, I voted for the other guy.

First off, Harper didn't put the troops in Afghanistan. In fact, his MINORITY government put a motion in the House of Commons for them to stay until 2008. It passed with an overwhelming majority. That means that NDP, Liberals, and Bloc had to support him. Martin put the troops in Afghanistan.

Secondly, he's never said "Canadians should obey the US." In fact, he's gone off and said "Know what? Give us our softwood money back." He's condemned the war in Iraq, and done his best to foster trade relations with other countries so we're not so reliant on the US. He's definitely not a saint (*coughKyotocough*) but he's a damned sight better than a government that was in power for so long that it became complacent about everything. I mean, he's the first Prime Minister to raise the salaries of the soldiers you respect oh-so-much in a damn long time.

So, of course because he has a right wing political stance, he must be a Nazi. Truly, your ability to remain moderate and fair just...astounds me. Honestly, I'm in awe of how not-radical you are.

By your logic, I can call you a damn Commie because you must have voted farther left.

[Monstructor]

Firstly, I'm not liberal. And I didn't say that conservative=Nazi. And thirdly...well, I can't think of a way to finish this paragraph.


Edit: Also, I like Harper's views on homosexuals and gay marriage. And if you ban me for that, then you're a political correctness Nazi. I don't have to like gays if I don't want to, and if I'm not allowed to even imply that they're not my favourite minority then it really doesn't matter what the forum rules say.

[Mashirosen]

Monstructor, you're either retarded or trolling, I'm not sure which and don't particularly care. Banned again, maybe permanently, maybe not.

Edit: a month, what the hell. Smarten up in the meantime or find a more constructive hobby than threadshitting on our forums.

The rest of you, as you were.

[Fifthfiend]

And as ever there is Mashie, showing us how it's done.

'Threadshitting' is my new favorite word.