# Shame on Calgary (Canadian Forces Content)



## Hamm Guitars (Jan 12, 2007)

5000 Yellow ribbons (in support of Canadian Troops) were donated to the City of Calgary to be displayed on all city of Calgary owned vehicles and to be made available to the public who might also like to display one on their vehicle.

Mayor Bronconnier and 10 concellors voted against displaying the ribbons in supprt of Canadian troops (Mciver motion) and then changed the motion to allow the City of Calgary to sell the donated ribbons to the general public in city facilities. These ribbons were donated by a private individual/company (Sean Burnand of Canwest Labels) who could have easily recouped his costs bell selling the ribbons himself.

Only 4 concellors in the city of Calgary voted to support Canadian Troops.

If you are a constituent of the City of Calgary, please let your Mayor and the 'Terrible Ten' that voted against supporting our troops know how you feel about this.


----------



## kat_ (Jan 11, 2007)

Hamm Guitars said:


> Only 4 concellors in the city of Calgary voted to support Canadian Troops.


No, only 4 voted to put the decals on city vehicles. That is not the same thing as supporting Canadian troops. A sticker on a car will not keep the guys overseas from being shot at. It's just a sticker.


----------



## Guest (Jul 27, 2007)

Yes.. It's just a sticker... 

If you want to really 'support the troops' then lobby your government to get them the hell outa the Middle East!


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

ClintonHammond said:


> Yes.. It's just a sticker...
> 
> If you want to really 'support the troops' then lobby your government to get them the hell outa the Middle East!




Absolutely.


:food-smiley-004:


----------



## Michelle (Aug 21, 2006)

ClintonHammond said:


> Yes.. It's just a sticker...
> 
> If you want to really 'support the troops' then lobby your government to get them the hell outa the Middle East!


Absolutely, I agree Clinton! As for the City of Calgary, selling things that were donated is very low.


----------



## hoser (Feb 2, 2006)

selling them is pretty low, but I wouldn't have one of those on my vehicle either.


----------



## Guest (Jul 27, 2007)

When you give someone something, it's theirs to do with as they please... If they turn around and sell it, that's their business.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

hoser said:


> selling them is pretty low, but I wouldn't have one of those on my vehicle either.


Neither would I.


Say a bit off topic, but where can I get one of those Darwin fish logos for my van? I always found those amusing.


----------



## Guest (Jul 27, 2007)

Milkman said:


> Say a bit off topic, but where can I get one of those Darwin fish logos for my van? I always found those amusing.


I will say when I was driving through the southern US with one of these on my vehicle people were noticeably chiller towards us. But they are hilarious.

http://evolvefish.com/


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

iaresee said:


> I will say when I was driving through the southern US with one of these on my vehicle people were noticeably chiller towards us. But they are hilarious.
> 
> http://evolvefish.com/


I go to the Southern states often, but I always fly and rent a car at the other end.


Still, I'd love to get one. I get weary of the constant symbols of faith everywhere I look.


Edit

Just ordered a couple. Thanks for the link.


----------



## Hamm Guitars (Jan 12, 2007)

You'd be suprised at how much moral support returning troops get out of those little stickers. (I don't have one on my car either BTW). Same goes for the bridge/overpass memorials.

From what I am told, the City of Calgary does not want to support the war in Afghanistan, so they don't want to put the stickers on their vehicles.

Not supporting our troops because you don't agree with the war that they are fighting is allot like neglecting your children because your wife is not as hot as she was before you got her pregnant.


----------



## Guest (Jul 27, 2007)

"You'd be suprised at how much moral support returning troops get out of those little stickers."
According to what or whom? 

"Not supporting our troops because you don't agree with the war that they are fighting is allot like neglecting your children because your wife is not as hot as she was before you got her pregnant."
I'd appreciate it if you'd define what you mean by "Support".... Cause what could possibly be more supportive than getting them OUT of a dangerous place they have no business being in in the first place?

"I get weary of the constant symbols of faith everywhere I look."
+1!


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Hamm Guitars said:


> You'd be suprised at how much moral support returning troops get out of those little stickers. (I don't have one on my car either BTW). Same goes for the bridge/overpass memorials.
> 
> From what I am told, the City of Calgary does not want to support the war in Afghanistan, so they don't want to put the stickers on their vehicles.
> 
> Not supporting our troops because you don't agree with the war that they are fighting is allot like neglecting your children because your wife is not as hot as she was before you got her pregnant.



I support our troops. I do NOT support their activities in Afghanistan. Our soldiers are doing the job they've been tasked with and they deserve our respect and support for that.

I would not display an emblem that implied support of our activities in Afghanistan.


People like to brand those who are against this war as unpatriotic or anti-soldier.

That's nonsense IMO.


----------



## Hamm Guitars (Jan 12, 2007)

ClintonHammond said:


> "You'd be suprised at how much moral support returning troops get out of those little stickers."
> According to what or whom?


According to them. I do my part for a non-profit organization that has both active and verteran members of the Canadian forces - some of which are currently deployed. Those little stickers mean something to the people that matter. More so, when a city outright declines to put them on government vehicles it hits their news feeds. They don't hear about John Q Public putting a sticker on their car, but they definately heard what the city of Calgary has done.

Imagine what that does to your day when you are trudging around in 60 degree heat in full gear wondering when the next roadside bomb is going to jump up and bite either yourself or one of your buddies.



ClintonHammond said:


> "Not supporting our troops because you don't agree with the war that they are fighting is allot like neglecting your children because your wife is not as hot as she was before you got her pregnant."
> I'd appreciate it if you'd define what you mean by "Support".... Cause what could possibly be more supportive than getting them OUT of a dangerous place they have no business being in in the first place?


Support is standing up for them when someone (like the City of Calgary) disrespects them.

The Canadian Military Troops are not complaining about performing their duty in Afghanistan, at least the ones I've heard from are not. 

If you are going to fight a war, its best to fight it in another country than to wait untill they bring it to yours.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Hamm Guitars said:


> If you are going to fight a war, its best to fight it in another country than to wait untill they bring it to yours.



What war? Afghanistan has not attacked Canada. We're in there kicking a$$ in a very American way.


Rest assured, Islamic extremists have LONG memories and know how to hold a grudge.

All we're doing is motivating them to attack Canada.

If I was an Afghani I'd be looking for any way possible to harrass and generally harm any occupying soldier.


Again, the best way to support our troops IMO is to bring them home.:smilie_flagge17:


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

jroberts said:


> I'm not a big fan of "ribbon campaigns" generally. Firstly, it's purely a token of support that seems to relieve people of any moral obligation to do anything substantive about a cause. Secondly, these ribbon campaigns seem mostly to be an attempt to establish those who are "with us" and those who are "against us". If you don't wear a yellow ribbon, you hate the troops. If you don't wear a red ribbon, you are anti-gay. If you don't wear a white or pink ribbon, you hate women. The whole thing doesn't sit well with me.


Although I never really articulated it like that, I feel the same way.


----------



## Hamm Guitars (Jan 12, 2007)

Were are not at war with Afghanistan. If we are at war with anyone, it is the Islamic Extreamists. That is why we are still over there, as the job is not yet done, and won't be finished for some time.

Don't confuse the Afghan and Iraq wars - Canada in Afghanistan is nothing at all like the US in Iraq - there are no paralells what so ever (other than the obvious death and destruction, war thing). The Afghani people's reception of NATO troops has been good, it's just the bad guys that will be holding a grudge.

Canada is a NATO country and we have to honour our agreements and do our part. We are not about to welch on our word as a country. We kept our integrity when Jean Cretien refused to go to war in Iraq under pressure from the US. Why would we suddenly start doing the wrong thing?


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Hamm Guitars said:


> Were are not at war with Afghanistan. If we are at war with anyone, it is the Islamic Extreamists. That is why we are still over there, as the job is not yet done, and won't be finished for some time.
> 
> Don't confuse the Afghan and Iraq wars - Canada in Afghanistan is nothing at all like the US in Iraq - there are no paralells what so ever (other than the obvious death and destruction, war thing). The Afghani people's reception of NATO troops has been good, it's just the bad guys that will be holding a grudge.
> 
> Canada is a NATO country and we have to honour our agreements and do our part. We are not about to welch on our word as a country. We kept our integrity when Jean Cretien refused to go to war in Iraq under pressure from the US. Why would we suddenly start doing the wrong thing?



Who are WE to say the Taliban are the bad guys?

Do you suppose they think they are?


No need to carry this on. I mean no offence to you but we'll simply not agree on this. The ONLY way I would EVER try to kill another human being is if he or she posed a direct and iminent threat to me or my family.

That means invasion. In that case I would be remarkably similar to the freedom fighters in Iraq or the Taliban in Afghanistan.

I'd smile to their faces and stab them in the back any chance I got. You'll never have a fight with me unless you pick one, and then all's fair.

If the Ahghanis want their freedom, they should fight for it themsleves not have it handed to them. It's meaningless that way.


----------



## Stratin2traynor (Sep 27, 2006)

Milkman said:


> I support our troops. I do NOT support their activities in Afghanistan. Our soldiers are doing the job they've been tasked with and they deserve our respect and support for that.
> 
> I would not display an emblem that implied support of our activities in Afghanistan.
> 
> ...


I second that. Well said Milkman.



Hamm Guitars said:


> Were are not at war with Afghanistan. If we are at war with anyone, it is the Islamic Extreamists. That is why we are still over there, as the job is not yet done, and won't be finished for some time.
> 
> Don't confuse the Afghan and Iraq wars - Canada in Afghanistan is nothing at all like the US in Iraq - there are no paralells what so ever (other than the obvious death and destruction, war thing). The Afghani people's reception of NATO troops has been good, it's just the bad guys that will be holding a grudge.
> 
> Canada is a NATO country and we have to honour our agreements and do our part. We are not about to welch on our word as a country. We kept our integrity when Jean Cretien refused to go to war in Iraq under pressure from the US. Why would we suddenly start doing the wrong thing?


The question you should be asking yourself is how and why the Islamic Extremists became extremists in the first place. The US is now at war to make a select number of people a lot of money. Simple as that. IMO. I have no idea why we are there other than we were being intimidated by the US to go. 

The current "war" in Afghanistan will only serve to fuel the fire of the extremist assholes that just want to blow shit up. 

I would like nothing more than to have our troops brought home!


----------



## Guest (Jul 27, 2007)

jroberts said:


> Firstly, it's purely a token of support that seems to relieve people of any moral obligation to do anything substantive about a cause.


To quote Bill Maher, "Put a magnetic ribbon on your car. It really is the least you can do." He had a bunch more brilliant little quotes like that in When You Ride Alone You Ride with Bin Laden.


----------



## Guest (Jul 27, 2007)

Hamm Guitars said:


> Were are not at war with Afghanistan.


That's right. I thought it was a peace keeping mission. We're there to keep law and order and prevent tribal law from trouncing their fragile democratic state of existence.


----------



## Wild Bill (May 3, 2006)

Milkman said:


> What war? Afghanistan has not attacked Canada. We're in there kicking a$$ in a very American way.
> 
> 
> Rest assured, Islamic extremists have LONG memories and know how to hold a grudge.
> ...



I must have missed something. Did not Canadians die when the Taliban destroyed the Twin Towers in New York?

Besides, from what I've heard about Islamic extremists they don't care about anything we do to motivate their revenge. The mere fact of our existence is abhorrent to them! They want a fundamentalist Islamic world, if necessary at the point of a gun.

Unless we are all willing to immediately put our women into burkas and take our daughters out of school we are a target. The only thing that might be an issue is where we stand on their priority list.

As for the politicians in Toronto and Calgary, I suggest that as well as sporting ribbons we should send them all white feathers...

If my local politicians made such a decision I would be angry as hell! They have no right to speak for me on such issues! I voted for them to be efficient at picking up my garbage and plowing my street with their excessive taxes they levy upon me. I had no opportunity to vote for a municipal politician about an international matter. At the very least they could have had a poll or local plebescite instead of arrogantly assuming that everybody shared their politics!

My family on both sides has much military history and to refuse to sport a simple ribbon on a police car, fire or garbage truck is a dispicable insult and one that not just myself but I suspect a great many other fellow citizens will not forget at the next vote! 

Maybe I'm wrong. We shall see...


----------



## Guest (Jul 27, 2007)

"Did not Canadians die when the Taliban destroyed the Twin Towers in New York?"
immaterial.... 

"They have no right to speak for me on such issues!"
Ummm... ya they do... that's their job.

" I would like nothing more than to have our troops brought home!"
+1!

"We are not about to welch on our word as a country."
Could you please not use bigoted language.... 

"Those little stickers mean something to the people that matter."
Every solider and vet I've ever talked to says they're a load.... and a waste of money. So, whose pointless, unsupported anecdote is right? It doesn't matter.

"Imagine what that does to your day when you are trudging around in 60 degree heat in full gear wondering when the next roadside bomb is going to jump up and bite either yourself or one of your buddies."
So, bring them home. It's the only humane thing to do.

"Support is standing up for them when someone (like the City of Calgary) disrespects them."
Standing up for them how? Specifically? "Joingoistically" stomping your foot and saying "I support the troops" accomplishes what exactly?

And how has Calgary's decision to NOT make an empty pointless gesture 'disrespected' soldiers? 

"If you are going to fight a war"
This is NOT war.... the rest of your statement is therefore moot...


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Wild Bill said:


> I must have missed something. Did not Canadians die when the Taliban destroyed the Twin Towers in New York?
> 
> Besides, from what I've heard about Islamic extremists they don't care about anything we do to motivate their revenge. The mere fact of our existence is abhorrent to them! They want a fundamentalist Islamic world, if necessary at the point of a gun.
> 
> ...



I guess we both missed something. I thought Al Quaeda dropped the World Trade Centre, and that was due in no small part to the USA's foriegn policies and school yard bully medleing in the affairs of the Middle East.


Yeah they might someday want to attack Canada so we should go to their country first and wage war?


Yikes


As for the politicians, they represent all of us, not just those who support the slaughter taking place in the Middle East.


----------



## Wild Bill (May 3, 2006)

ClintonHammond said:


> "They have no right to speak for me on such issues!"
> Ummm... ya they do... that's their job.


Let me be sure I understand you.

Are you saying that municipal politicians have a right to speak in their constituents' names on federal issues, with no attempt to seek their views beforehand?

I thought I was voting for a ward councilor and a mayor to look after the garbage. Why should I bother voting federally?

It makes my libertarian hackles rise...


----------



## Guest (Jul 28, 2007)

"It makes my libertarian hackles rise.."
That's like shooting fish in a barrel....

How is choosing to NOT make an empty gesture a Federal issue???


----------



## Wild Bill (May 3, 2006)

Milkman said:


> I guess we both missed something. I thought Al Quaeda dropped the World Trade Centre, and that was due in no small part to the USA's foriegn policies and school yard bully medleing in the affairs of the Middle East.


Mea culpa. You're quite right it was Al Quada.

Afghanistan merely provided a home and training ground.

I must also have forgotten that there was no such terrorism before the USA invaded Afghanistan. Why, the country was a veritable Eden and a bastion of civil rights before Bush went in! Every woman in the country would attest to that!

Then again, if it's out of sight and out of mind why care about them? It's just another marvelous and colourful facet of Taliban culture...



Milkman said:


> Yeah they might someday want to attack Canada so we should go to their country first and wage war?


If the threat is serious enough a pre-emptive strike is only common sense. Diplomacy and economic sanctions are mandatory first weapons but if they don't work do you have any other alternative besides just standing there with a bullseye on your forehead?

Should Israel wait until after Iran nukes Tel Aviv (the very words of their leadership!) before any strike? Would there then be any point?

Your point reminds me of teachers advising the kids that were being picked on in school to just talk nicely to the bullies...



Milkman said:


> As for the politicians, they represent all of us, not just those who support the slaughter taking place in the Middle East.


Seems to me they didn't bother to find out how many citizens supported or didn't support our middle eastern role. Or how many citizens felt that showing a ribbon was not just support for the troops but actual support for that role.

They simply acted by their own personal beliefs and didn't give a hoot if they represented majority feeling.

Would you have felt the same if they had taken the opposite side? 

More simply, I'm asking if you only approve because they agreed with your own views.

As for municipal politicians representing all of us on federal matters, I ask the essentially the same question I put to CH:

Why bother having different levels of government at all?


----------



## Wild Bill (May 3, 2006)

ClintonHammond said:


> "It makes my libertarian hackles rise.."
> That's like shooting fish in a barrel....


Sorry. I was about to give you an answer about the "empty gesture" but I fell asleep after reading yet another ad hominem shot.

If you won't play nice then goodbye!

I'm looking for an argument and you give "getting hit on the head lessons".

It gets kinda same-y after a while...


----------



## Guest (Jul 28, 2007)

" I'm looking for an argument..."

Arguing with you is like having a battle of wits with an unarmed man....


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Wild Bill said:


> Mea culpa. You're quite right it was Al Quada.
> 
> Afghanistan merely provided a home and training ground.
> 
> ...



Enjoy the debate.

I think your wrong, but I have a gig this afternoon and don't feel like arguing (puts me in the wrong frame of mind).

Perhaps you should enlist?


----------



## Wild Bill (May 3, 2006)

ClintonHammond said:


> " I'm looking for an argument..."
> 
> Arguing with you is like having a battle of wits with an unarmed man....


Bye! Just can't keep my eyes open!

:zzz:


----------



## Wild Bill (May 3, 2006)

Milkman said:


> Enjoy the debate.
> 
> I think your wrong, but I have a gig this afternoon and don't feel like arguing (puts me in the wrong frame of mind).
> 
> Perhaps you should enlist?


Geez, I'm older than the equipment we give them! 

I'm too wrinkled and fat to pass any physical.

BTW, when a soundman also plays does he get into arguments with himself?:smile:

Back in the early 70's when I last mixed for a band I swear if they sang flat they expected me to fix it with the treble...:smile:


----------



## Guest (Jul 28, 2007)

"Bye!"
Don't go away mad....


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Wild Bill said:


> Geez, I'm older than the equipment we give them!
> 
> I'm too wrinkled and fat to pass any physical.
> 
> ...



That's a big part of the problem. It's generally old angry guys like you and I who send young men and women off to fight and die. I think you should have to be at least 50 to be a soldier. Let all the old cranky bastages kill each other off, LOL.

I'm not a soundman today (well once the system is up and rnning) but when I do sound generally the performers are respectful.

When they aren't I don't accept further engagements with them. That's the beauty of not depending on music for a living. It reduces my limitations in many ways.


----------



## Wild Bill (May 3, 2006)

Milkman said:


> That's a big part of the problem. It's generally old angry guys like you and I who send young men and women off to fight and die. I think you should have to be at least 50 to be a soldier. Let all the old cranky bastages kill each other off, LOL.


Good point! Look how many Islamist terrorists use young people and even children to be suicide bombers. You rarely see the same fire and brimstone preaching imam that brainwashes those young impressionable minds strapping on the dynamite sticks himself!

The sad thing is that the most useless and expensive army is the one that's second-best! Unlike previous wars where we could take a year or so to train an army and/or a couple of thousand pilots we no longer get any such time at all. Today's war is a "come as you are" war. The men, munitions and equipment you have when it starts are all you're going to have. It will be over before you can even begin to start ramping up.

What shape are we in?

It always comes down to the fact that we have little or no control over our enemies' actions. It was never true that it takes two to fight. If someone thinks he can get away with something and uses force it means you must have enough force to resist him. You and I might want a country with no need for an effective military but if someone attacks our interests we have only two choices: fight back or cave in!

Look at the Arctic, that we have always considered part of Canada. We've never done anything or established much of a presence there but we always assumed the world would be nice and not challenge us.

Now the US and other countries see global warming as opening up a year-round Northwest Passage for shipping. They want it defined as international waters. Since we haven't spent much to establish any presence by international law we really don't have a claim! We also have the Hans Island dispute with Denmark (really about resources in the area) and now Russia trying to claim the entire Arctic as an extension of her continental shelf! Russia HAS icebreakers and a real Arctic presence. So do the Americans in Alaska. Meanwhile Canada holds up a 1955 schoolbook atlas showing how it's all the same white colour on the map and assumes the world will respect our sovreignity...

Canada has had a huge economic advantage in hiding behind America's skirts and letting her spend the money while our politicians could buy votes diverting defense monies toward social programs. We did it for so long that now few other countries consider us a relevant player. We just have so few and such primitive resources that we don't matter. Well trained and brave soldiers - both of them! And we armed them with flintlocks and sent them out against lightning.

So now we have a huge catchup job to do, buying modern equipment and recruiting. 



Milkman said:


> I'm not a soundman today (well once the system is up and rnning) but when I do sound generally the performers are respectful.
> 
> When they aren't I don't accept further engagements with them. That's the beauty of not depending on music for a living. It reduces my limitations in many ways.


Shades of the Seinfeld "Soup Nazi"! 

"No mid boost for you!" "No more volume to monitors!"

I'm the same way with unreasonable customers. I WANT them to go to a competitor!:smile:


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Wild Bill said:


> Good point! Look how many Islamist terrorists use young people and even children to be suicide bombers. You rarely see the same fire and brimstone preaching imam that brainwashes those young impressionable minds strapping on the dynamite sticks himself!
> 
> The sad thing is that the most useless and expensive army is the one that's second-best! Unlike previous wars where we could take a year or so to train an army and/or a couple of thousand pilots we no longer get any such time at all. Today's war is a "come as you are" war. The men, munitions and equipment you have when it starts are all you're going to have. It will be over before you can even begin to start ramping up.
> 
> ...



Or we could just evolve and consider the possibility that peace is possible without strength of arms. Yeah I know, you may say I'm a dreamer.

(but I'm not the only one).

As for the soundman stuff, no if I'm hired to work with a band as a soundman, I work for them and do whatever I can to make them happy and to make them sound as good as possible. If they're dicks I just don't take any more dates with them.

That's VERY rare.:food-smiley-004:


----------



## Wild Bill (May 3, 2006)

Milkman said:


> Or we could just evolve and consider the possibility that peace is possible without strength of arms. Yeah I know, you may say I'm a dreamer.
> 
> (but I'm not the only one).


We share the dream. We just argue about practical ways to make it happen!

The problem is getting everybody to evolve at once. Otherwise it's like unilateral disarmament. The other side says "Hot Damn!" and takes a free shot at your ass.

Many of the violent problems are coming from cultures where at a wedding they don't throw rice or confetti as we do. They fire "Baryshnikoffs" into the air!

It might be safer for us to wait till they catch up before we do any evolving.



Milkman said:


> As for the soundman stuff, no if I'm hired to work with a band as a soundman, I work for them and do whatever I can to make them happy and to make them sound as good as possible. If they're dicks I just don't take any more dates with them.
> 
> That's VERY rare.:food-smiley-004:


Yeah, the noise of a few yammerheads can make you forget that most folks are pretty decent! Like Opus the Penguin, we should stop to kick a few dandelions once in a while...:smile:

:food-smiley-004:


----------



## Guest (Jul 29, 2007)

"It might be safer for us to wait till they catch up before we do any evolving."

Bigot.


----------



## Hamm Guitars (Jan 12, 2007)

I think we have sucessfully breached the 'no politics' rule....

The whole point of starting this thread was about respecting those that serve us and our country in our armed forces.

They are doing their job, they are not complaining about their mission and when they see their country refusing the do 'the _*least*_ they can do', I personally find it repulsive. We have enlisted men and women overseas, they are not looking to turn their tails and run, they are soldiers and they are acting in our best interests - and from what I hear they want to complete their mission (without their hands tied behind their backs) regardless of what you might hear politicians say. 

We live in the real world, there are both extreamly violent people and also whole countries of people who do not think for themselves. The whole 'one world' thing is very idealistic and I personally would like to see nothing more, but I doubt it will ever happen.

Sitting around pasively and ignoreing a problem only makes it worse. If you need to look at a perfect example look no further than what happened in WWII. Amazing how soon we forget...


----------



## Guest (Jul 29, 2007)

"respecting those that serve us and our country in our armed forces"
With empty, meaningless pieces of plastic? Very respectful indeed.... 

"I personally find it repulsive."
That ONE CITY (not the country) refuses to make an empty gesture? That's repulsive? I can't imagine why.... 

"The whole 'one world' thing is very idealistic... but I doubt it will ever happen."
Especially not with that attitude....


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Hamm Guitars said:


> I think we have sucessfully breached the 'no politics' rule....
> 
> The whole point of starting this thread was about respecting those that serve us and our country in our armed forces.
> 
> ...



This has been the rationale used throughout history to continue the behaviour which has led to all wars.

I'm tired of it and I refuse to play.

Like I said, if you come to my woods looking for a fight I'll give you one. Why should those defending their country and beliefs be any different.


----------



## Wild Bill (May 3, 2006)

Milkman said:


> This has been the rationale used throughout history to continue the behaviour which has led to all wars.
> 
> I'm tired of it and I refuse to play.
> 
> Like I said, if you come to my woods looking for a fight I'll give you one. Why should those defending their country and beliefs be any different.


Ah, Milkman. If only it were that simple.

It only makes sense to deal with an enemy while he's still the size of Bobo the Chimp. If you wait till he's the size of King Kong he'll flatten you!

If King Kong comes to your woods what kind of a fight do you expect to put up? How long would you last?

And even if you're willling to die for your principles, what about your family?

For that matter, if the national defense policy of the ruling parties is based on your philosophy how could I not be terrified about what could happen to MY children??!!

The first duty of any government is to defend its citizens. If it can't or won't do that then sooner or later everything becomes moot.


----------



## Wild Bill (May 3, 2006)

*Hurrah for the "ignore" list!*



ClintonHammond said:


> "It might be safer for us to wait till they catch up before we do any evolving."
> 
> Bigot.


Well, you can't get much more personal an attack than that!

CH, you're now on my "ignore" list! 

I don't care if it matters to you or not. I'm not trying to make any statement or intending to sneak back and later read what you had to say about me.

I simply find your approach rude and as I've said before, ad hominem attacks bore the ass of me. I find them lowbrow to the max.

I no longer care to see what you post, so I won't.


----------



## Guest (Jul 29, 2007)

Thinking that you are more evolved than any other human, without evidence, is bigotry, plain and simple.

Calling a bigot a bigot isn't ad hominem, but you go ahead and jam your little fingers in your ears and shout "Lalalalalalala" instead of trying to defend what you KNOW is indefensible.... 

Either way, you're still a bigot... and being on your ignore list is a breath of fresh air.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Wild Bill said:


> Ah, Milkman. If only it were that simple.
> 
> It only makes sense to deal with an enemy while he's still the size of Bobo the Chimp. If you wait till he's the size of King Kong he'll flatten you!
> 
> ...


We could do this all day.

I'm more frightened for my children because of the same old "fight the enemy on his turf BEFORE he attacks us" paradigm.


We've been doing things your way since the dawn of history.

Doesn't seem to work IMO.


----------



## Soupbone (May 17, 2007)

*?*

This whole thread is Bullshit! It should be deleted.:zzz:


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

It would appear to have run its course


----------

