Not sure what the point of NATO actually is since the end of the cold war, the Warsaw Pact disassembled so why didn't NATO?

 

Now since the fascist coup in the Ukraine the Russians have been painted as wanting to invade Europe, despite there being no actual evidence to substantiate it. So if the Europeans want to strut and spend money they can ill afford to waste on a new arms race then let them. However don't see why they should expect the US to pay for it.

someone just asked for a link to a terrorist's payout.

 

https://www.theburningplatform.com/2017/07/05/canadian-taxpayers-fund-terrorism-with-cad10-5-million-payout/

 

16 minutes ago, Rancid said:

Not sure what the point of NATO actually is since the end of the cold war, the Warsaw Pact disassembled so why didn't NATO?

 

The Warsaw Pact was not disassembled.... it crumbled.

 

nato is a more enduring alliance. Together we stand.... together we are stronger.... together we can face other emerging alliances which may not be our friends.

11 minutes ago, jb61 said:

someone just asked for a link to a terrorist's payout.

 

https://www.theburningplatform.com/2017/07/05/canadian-taxpayers-fund-terrorism-with-cad10-5-million-payout/

 

 

Canadians eh? LOL

 

18 hours ago, docshock13 said:

Say what you want about Trump. He is one man. 

If you are an American, you should be ashamed to align yourself with liberal, Marxist EuroTrash that the American (and Allied)  heroes liberated over 70 years ago. And for the record, I am not American. Though I wouldn't exist without American benevolence to my forebearers. If you feel disgraced by Trump (as an American) that is up to you. I also feel disgraced by my leader. Fortunately, that is our right (for the time being) and we can vote them out next election cycle.  If we are not careful, it may no longer be so. Careful where you tread. Your Marxist Utopia could end up a gulag (as has been illustrated in recent history). 

My entire family owes a debt to America and its people. 

More importantly, Canada has just rewarded a terrorist with $7.7 mil USD. Is that the kind of post-nationalist, PC world you want to live in? Grow up, "dude." 

Canada has not reward a terrorist with 7.7 mil USD.  He was fighting soldiers - not attacking civilians.

Just for fun I'd like to return to the topic of Trump's visit to Poland.

 

"President Donald Trump is headed back to Europe hoping to receive a friendly welcome in Poland despite lingering skepticism across the continent over his commitment to NATO, his past praise of Russian President Vladimir Putin and his decision to pull the U.S. out of a major climate agreement."

 

You may be wondering why Trump chose Poland of all places to visit first.

 

Here's a hint:   

 

"According to Polish media reports, Poland’s government promised the White House a reception of cheering crowds as part of its invitation. To make good on that pledge, ruling party lawmakers and pro-government activists plan to bus in groups from the provinces to hear Trump’s speech. 

 

The White House didn’t respond to a request for comment on those reports."

 

https://apnews.com/4aeff5f56d614bedacdde0a8e2cac030

20 hours ago, funandsuninbangkok said:

Europe cannot even defend itself. 

 

Trump is speaking truth to power. They need to raise their armies and face off the Russians. 

 

Why the hell should Amercans defend rich Europeans from poor Russians?

If you are an American, you are a sad example.  You want America to be a follower, not a leader.  Bow to China because the USA will be dead soon

People please stop with placing "man" and "Trump" in the same sentence.  He is no man, and that is one thing I can say for certain

4 hours ago, Rancid said:

Not sure what the point of NATO actually is since the end of the cold war, the Warsaw Pact disassembled so why didn't NATO?

 

Now since the fascist coup in the Ukraine the Russians have been painted as wanting to invade Europe, despite there being no actual evidence to substantiate it. So if the Europeans want to strut and spend money they can ill afford to waste on a new arms race then let them. However don't see why they should expect the US to pay for it.

Is that your euphemism for what happened to the Warsaw pact? It "disassembled"?

Yes I remember wel the tears of grief of the various members of the Warsaw pact as they watched the Russian troops depart their respetive nations and return to Mother Russia. It's said on some mornings you can see hordes of armed Eastern Europeans gazing east from their borders, with what we can only construe to be longing for the return of their absent comrades. To such an extent that they have invited Nato troops to share their nostalgia.

Fairer trade agreements, and no more free protection is the order of the day.  Very long overdue I think.

7 hours ago, farcanell said:

Canadians eh? LOL

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jul/04/canada-to-apologise-and-pay-10m-to-man-convicted-of-killing-us-soldier-in-afghanistan

 

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/omar-khadr-payment-apology-is-odious-conservatives-say/article35540496/?arc404=true

 

And it goes on the BBC, Al-Jazeera. Not sure what your point is about Canadians? 

 

7 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

Canada has not reward a terrorist with 7.7 mil USD.  He was fighting soldiers - not attacking civilians.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/omar-khadr-payment-apology-is-odious-conservatives-say/article35540496/?arc404=true

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jul/04/canada-to-apologise-and-pay-10m-to-man-convicted-of-killing-us-soldier-in-afghanistan

 

Or any news source you desire. 

9 minutes ago, docshock13 said:

 

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/omar-khadr-payment-apology-is-odious-conservatives-say/article35540496/?arc404=true

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jul/04/canada-to-apologise-and-pay-10m-to-man-convicted-of-killing-us-soldier-in-afghanistan

 

Or any news source you desire. 

Neither of those news sources contradict what I said. He was not a terrorist. He didn't attack civilians. In a battle he attacked soldiers. 

Edited July 6, 20179 yr by ilostmypassword

35 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Neither of those news sources contradict what I said. He was not a terrorist. He didn't attack civilians. In a battle he attacked soldiers. 

Bring it up with those who sentenced him as such then. Do some research, he and his father were affiliated with Al-Qaeda(.Five charges of war crimes, terrorism including killing an American soldier and providing material support for terrorism (from Wikipedia)). Further, some have argued (his law firm who wish to remain unnamed (for obvious reasons)) successfully that he was a minor and brainwashed and he could not be held legally responsible under Cdn law. The SCC has ruled in his favour, hence the payout.  So be it. Though, in my opinion (if I am allowed to have a dissenting one), I do not agree with its conclusions. I think it is wrong and it sets a bad precedent. 

Edited July 6, 20179 yr by docshock13
Amendment

15 minutes ago, docshock13 said:

Bring it up with those who sentenced him as such then. Do some research, he and his father were affiliated with Al-Qaeda(.Five charges of war crimes, terrorism including killing an American soldier and providing material support for terrorism (from Wikipedia)). Further, some have argued (his law firm who wish to remain unnamed (for obvious reasons)) successfully that he was a minor and brainwashed and he could not be held legally responsible under Cdn law. The SCC has ruled in his favour, hence the payout.  So be it. Though, in my opinion (if I am allowed to have a dissenting one), I do not agree with its conclusions. I think it is wrong and it sets a bad precedent. 

 And as "for providing material support for terrorism" it just means in his case that he worked for al-qaeda,  not that he committed any terrorist acts. And it's a law that has been justly the subject of much criticism. 

1 minute ago, ilostmypassword said:

 And as "for providing material support for terrorism" it just means in his case that he worked for al-qaeda,  not that he committed any terrorist acts. And it's a law that has been justly the subject of much criticism. 

It is still a crime on the books. Hence the conviction. Same like driving a getaway car. Not sure what your point is? If you have any issues with the US or Canadian criminal code, I suggest you lobby Congress or Parliament. Stop wasting everybody's time with inane retorts that actually contradict your argument.  In the meantime, I hear the Taliban is hiring and they offer benefits to die for. 

6 minutes ago, docshock13 said:

It is still a crime on the books. Hence the conviction. Same like driving a getaway car. Not sure what your point is? If you have any issues with the US or Canadian criminal code, I suggest you lobby Congress or Parliament. Stop wasting everybody's time with inane retorts that actually contradict your argument.  In the meantime, I hear the Taliban is hiring and they offer benefits to die for. 

It was a bs law created by the bush administration. And it only got to call what he did terrorist by redefining the word. And I'll go with the dictionary definition. "A person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims."

Politicians don't get to redefine words.

1 hour ago, docshock13 said:

And it goes on the BBC, Al-Jazeera. Not sure what your point is about Canadians? 

That the Canadians are paying a terrorist.... per your earlier post and per the links

 

canadians eh

46 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

It was a bs law created by the bush administration. And it only got to call what he did terrorist by redefining the word. And I'll go with the dictionary definition. "A person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims."

Politicians don't get to redefine words.

As I said in my last post, if u think the law is bs, petition to have it repealed. I did not make the law. But please stop haranguing me for having an opinion that differs from yours and with things that have nothing to do with the OP.  

In Poland, supposedly representing our country, Trump continues to show his hatred and disdain for it.  In addition to the topics listed below, I'm surprised he didn't take the opportunity to attack US war veterans (again) as well, a group he clearly has no respect for whatsoever.  Oh yeah, when speaking to a Polish crowd about Hitler's invasion of Poland, he said "that was tough."  What an utter classless buffoon.

16 minutes ago, farcanell said:

That the Canadians are paying a terrorist.... per your earlier post and per the links

 

canadians eh

Still not understanding your post. Try to make a salient point or argument. If you read the articles, the SCC has ruled in favour of the appellant (Omar Khadr convicted of 5 counts of war crimes, terrorism etc.) and awarded damages of over CAD$10.5 mil for abuses of HIS human rights (in the opinion of the justices).  Many Canadians and Americans disagree with this judgment including the widow of the deceased serviceman who is seeking an injunction. 

I am not going to be your Google. If you want to debate this issue fine, show up with reasonable arguments and not just trite comments. 

 

1 hour ago, docshock13 said:

Still not understanding your post. Try to make a salient point or argument. If you read the articles, the SCC has ruled in favour of the appellant (Omar Khadr convicted of 5 counts of war crimes, terrorism etc.) and awarded damages of over CAD$10.5 mil for abuses of HIS human rights (in the opinion of the justices).  Many Canadians and Americans disagree with this judgment including the widow of the deceased serviceman who is seeking an injunction. 

I am not going to be your Google. If you want to debate this issue fine, show up with reasonable arguments and not just trite comments. 

 

Lmao.... I made my "salient" points in post 30 ( or there about) to your rant.... which appears to be continuing

 

that said....  I shall try and clarify my later two word post, as I would hate you to go to bed all confused like.

 

its humor.

 

canadians eh..... I think it kind of funny that they are giving a truck full of dollars to someone you are holding up as a terrorist.... lol... come to Canada...get yer dollars here... humor... get it?

 

And.... I'm not sure what you think I want you to Google for me, other than that I asked for a link to the terrorist, getting rich in Canada... said link provided by another poster, even though it's considered both polite, and the done thing, to provide links yourself, when making claims

 

now... as to debating the issue.... revisit my origional post, which was a considered response ( vs humor) , and I will gladly debate your POV... although you might want to try and clarify what you wrote as it was , well.... rubbish really ( that's when I showed up with a reasonable argument vs trite comments, which you ignored)

 

Have a laugh... be happy... or not.... up to you

1 hour ago, docshock13 said:

As I said in my last post, if u think the law is bs, petition to have it repealed. I did not make the law. But please stop haranguing me for having an opinion that differs from yours and with things that have nothing to do with the OP.  

Lmao..... actually... don't bother replying as I would hate to be accused of haranguing you.... per your response to another poster who had a different opinion to yourself

 

you can't offer to debate and also spit the dummy when someone does exactly that 

????

Please stay on the topic of this thread.   The diversions are interesting, but off-topic.