22 February 2008

Let's just hope...

Curly, Larry and Steffi have their thinking caps on...

-- OTTAWA -- Parliament should give "overwhelming" support to an extension of Canada's mission in Afghanistan or risk the wrath of an enemy that strikes at weakness, the country's top soldier said Friday.

He warned that the Taliban are watching the political debate in Canada for signs of weakness.
And enough of that peacekeeping argle-bargle... let's take it to these jihadi donkeyheads.
Gen. Hillier said his troops need a robust mandate that goes beyond self-defence and allows them to go out and find insurgents.

In the 1990s in Bosnia, he said, UN troops were limited to self-defence and often couldn't intervene against ethnic cleansing.

If self-defence is the first priority, then why not just stay home?
There's a good question.

**********

Welcome... yet again... readers of proud patriot Canadian Cynic.

CC thinks I'm being a little too hard on the Taliban.

Of course, that's really no surprise... remember Canadian Cynic's message to Wanda Watkins, whose son Lane was killed in Afghanistan?
"With all due respect, Wanda, fuck you and your grief. It's not the job of the rest of Canada to continue to let its soldiers die just so you can sleep better at night."
A very proud moment in CC's puerile, profanity laced existence.

Of course, his disdain isn't limited to grieving mothers... there's also this little gem...

Hey, CC... got any good abortion jokes?

*


29 comments:

Anonymous said...

Gen Hillier asked Parliament for a statement pursuant to the "clarity of mission":
Parliament can respond:

1-Cut and run in 2011
2-Surrender in 2011
3-Advise the watching Taliban terrorists to cool it until 2011, at which time they will be able to continue their rage of murder, rape
ect on Afghanistan women: just like the old days.
4-Embarrass our brave Canadian troops, and advise parents of those that died that their death was for nothing.
5-Advise the world that Canada has surrender in the war against terrorism and that we are wimps who will continue to help our terrorist friends whenever possible.
6-Ensure all Canadians and the world that we do not have a legitimate small c-conservative government; just a socialist wimp for a PM

Neo Conservative said...

*
lemme see... jack bin-layton wants to drop troops into the hellhole that is darfur... steffi wants to invade pakistan and duceppe just wanders around in circles muttering gibberish.

i say we go with harper and hillier and continue to give the taliban their daily ass-kicking.

*

Filcher said...

So we allow our soldiers the Glory of dieing to prop up a corrupt brutal regime that releases Taliban prisoners for small bribes, that tortures them, that oppresses women, sentences journalists to death, supports war lords, supports opium farming and actively works at export of the drug.

I always thought our military should support what are Canadian values, and I see no Canadian values in that list. I can see the value of proper education, medical, social support, reconstruction, police training. Having more of our military die or be injured in this conflict, without a proper and clear end result is simply ridiculous.

" and advise parents of those that died that their death was for nothing."

And it is easier to tell mothers of kids that have not died yet this claptrap? Many of these deaths could have been avoided with proper equipment, it did not take a Manley Report to discover the dangers of ground transport, and the need for air transport.

"which time they will be able to continue their rage of murder, rape
ect on Afghanistan women: just like the old days. "

You forget that the US and NATO forces have been accused of these same types of crimes also in regards to Afghanistan, right?

"that we do not have a legitimate small c-conservative government; just a socialist wimp for a PM"

Harper's personal persona should not be a factor in determining whether more Canadian soldiers should be sacrificed for a failing state that does not reflect the values we should be supporting. The Afghanistan peoples deserve our help, but the present Afghani Government does not.

"i say we go with harper and hillier and continue to give the taliban their daily ass-kicking."

I am sure the Canadian military is willing to accept any able bodied man or women into the ranks. Just be sure to watch your back, as the present US strategy in Pakistan as regards Musharaff is likely to be very catastrophic for Afghanistan.

Neo Conservative said...

*
"Filcher said... I see no Canadian values in that list"

yeah... screw them, huh? why should we bother helping a country move from a bloody medieval theocracy to a modern democratic system?

oh, hell... let's just reach into the hat, shall we...

"Improvements in medical care since the Taliban fell five years ago have led to a marked decrease in Afghanistan's infant mortality rates - 40,000 fewer infant deaths a year."

i could go on, but you've obviously got your head so far up your ass... you wouldn't hear me anyway.

hey... say hi to cc for me...

*

Anonymous said...

someone has undergone a reinvention...hmmm, who could that be?...filcher?, filcher?...ahhh the hell with it, I'm going to read a book.

Cdn. Cynic Mole said...

So we adjourned the Cdn. Cyntie Round Table meeting last nite and resolved to back our skipper(Jackass Jack) in getting our troops out of Afstan and into Darfur with some Blue Helmets where according to Jack(ass) they are needed. Jack(ass) sez Peace Talks with the trustworthy and poppy stomping Mullah Omar is the way to go and that's good enough for us.

Prior to leaving we went to tuck Cyntie in his crib but Cyntie wouldn't go to sleep until we checked under his crib for shortassdouchebagneocon bloggers. He's never caught one but we know that they're under the crib. Lo and behold we discovered that they stole his beloved teddy bear Jacko.

Of course this a.m. the neoco blogroll which is chockfull of fucktardcuntdouchebags denied all wrong doing and claimed Cyntie is off his nut.

So Cyntie(an early riser)fired off a communique to S.Taylor post haste this a.m. voicing his total and complete disgust with the homophobicmisogynisticwhitesupremist neocons that stole his teddy bear and to end the missive he said "You must be sooo proud"...betcha that hit 'em where they live.

The blogging mewlingfucktardneocons
are programmed by their homophobic
baby eating leader "Big Daddy", according to Cyntie, to blow-up towers, possess hidden agendas in their skivvies and stomp on all and any homeless reprobates near their feet.

Thankfully Canadians can count on us at the Canadian Cynic Round Table to Stand on Guard for Thee.

ps. I love you LuLu.

Filcher said...

"yeah... screw them, huh? why should we bother helping a country move from a bloody medieval theocracy to a modern democratic system?"

What do you base the premise they are moving to a modern democratic systemm... oh, sorry, I forgot that the suspension of human rights, torture and corruption are the modern democratic system as envisioned by the right.

But seriously, what can we find to support, as far as the Afghanistan government is concerned? And I am talking about the Government and not the People.

""Improvements in medical care since the Taliban fell five years ago have led to a marked decrease in Afghanistan's infant mortality rates - 40,000 fewer infant deaths a year."

I won't dispute the figures, but these are likely because of iniatives in reconstruction and development in the country financed by organizations not part of the Afghanistan government.

The figures are still far to high, still placing it way below nearly every other country in the World, after 6 years of occupation. I am not saying the decrease should not be applauded, but it is a matter of too little being done.

"hey... say hi to cc for me... "

I would consider doing so if it was in any way relevant to what I posted.

"someone has undergone a reinvention...hmmm, who could that be?...filcher?, filcher?...ahhh the hell with it, I'm going to read a book."

You likely don't kmow me.

Just make sure it is right side up.... And the duckie dies .
(sorry, couldn't resist Leslie Neilson in Scary Movie :))

" Cdn. Cynic Mole said..."

You have lost me on this one CCM. I cannot for the life of me see where placing White North American soldiers in the middle of an African civil war is going to help ease tensions. Only if there is a comprehensive strategy to contain the violence within Darfur should Canada be involved in any more than a support role.

If you are saying I am part of a programmed group sent to disrupt your discourse, that is fine, but wrong. If you simply desire to be exposed to opinions you agree with, and not see where there may be inaccuracies, then it is simply an incestuous relationship between you and the blogger, nice and feels good for awhile, perhaps, but bereft of any actual long term benefit or growth. (well... eliminates the mother in law I guess)

Neo Conservative said...

*
sorry, filch... i happen to believe that what canada is doing for the afghan populace, in the main, is a noble and worthwhile thing.

sure, there are scumbags in the infrastructure... it's the freakin' third world, bro... but sometimes you've gotta do what you can... and hey, disrupting the world's largest heroin pipeline... well, that's just ice-cream.

i'm not exactly sure what it is about the previous taliban regime that you found so appealing, but hey, bro... you're entitled to your opinion.

just like i'm entitled to mine.

*

Anonymous said...

Cyntie has a "bunker"mate?...quelle
surprise, eh?

Filcher said...

"sorry, filch... i happen to believe that what canada is doing for the afghan populace, in the main, is a noble and worthwhile thing."

i have no problem helping the people, but the government is corrupt and not worth the effort. We should be focusing our efforts on reconstruction, combat missions in Afghanistan should not be our problem, it is the US's. We should be focussing on programs that stress the rebuilding, and implementation of education and health care, and the training of security and law enforcement in Afghanistan.


"sure, there are scumbags in the infrastructure... it's the freakin' third world, bro... but sometimes you've gotta do what you can..."

No. Supporting governments that torture prisoners, that execute people for religious laws, that is thoroughly corrupt, is no better than supporting the government that was just deposed. The Taliban relied on the warlords for support to stay in power, this is exactly what the new government has as a power base also. When you have two governments that are supposedly far different, but supported by the same power groups, how can you claim they are vastly different?

"and hey, disrupting the world's largest heroin pipeline... well, that's just ice-cream."

How much opium and heroin was grown under the Taliban?
http://www.unodc.org/pdf/pakistan/report_2002-02-28_1.pdf

"i'm not exactly sure what it is about the previous taliban regime that you found so appealing, but hey, bro... you're entitled to your opinion."

I find nothing appealing about the Taliban regime. I also find little to cheer about with the present government, though.

"just like i'm entitled to mine."

I respect your right to have a different opinion, and I thank you for the civility shown to my oppossing views. I find it unfortunate that you feel that throwing our soldiers at the problem will resolve it without addressing political and social problems within Afghanistan.

Anonymous said...

Filcher, I think you're more Filchmonger than Filcher...

are we done here? yeah we're done here.

Anonymous said...

Scintillating discussion.

Neo...your wife (Gladys) is yelling at you to get the hell off the computer and get ready for your appointment with the proctologist. At your age, you can't let that swelling prostate go unchecked now.

Neo Conservative said...

*
"filch says... Supporting governments that torture prisoners, that execute people for religious laws, that is thoroughly corrupt..."

see, there's the rub... that's the very definition of pretty much every country in the third world.

we engage them, on their terms, at least initially... or simply let them continue on as they are. china is equally disgusting, in terms of human rights... but their economic clout gets them a pass.

how "fair" is that?

and unfortunately, it is soldiers, whose primary function (yeah, i know we're not supposed to say it out loud) is to break stuff and kill people... who have to lead the way.

you don't have to agree with the methodology here, but to think otherwise is naivety of the first order.

turning this thing around is like making sausage... if you saw how the stuff was actually produced... you'd never eat it again.

anyway... always nice to have somebody actually engage on the topic... even if i totally disagree.

*

Neo Conservative said...

*
"cc licker anonybot whispers... your appointment with the proctologist... swelling prostate"

funny, how all i ever get from canadian cecilia's crew is vaguely homoerotic gibberish.

misfits and dullards all.

*

Anonymous said...

Hell yeah! Kick some raghead butt!

...er, what? Me? Well, uh, you know, I totally would myself but the knee is acting up a bit and brrr it's a little too chilly out and besides the Leaf game is on tonight and then I have to take Bobby to his soccer game tomorrow. But otherwise I would totally be over there kicking some donkeyhead ass.

Neo Conservative said...

*
"canadian cynic cries... Hell yeah! Kick some raghead butt!"

cc thinks I'm being a little too hard on his taliban buddies.

of course, that's really no surprise... remember canadian cynic's message to wanda watkins, whose son lane was killed in afghanistan?

"With all due respect, Wanda, fuck you and your grief. It's not the job of the rest of Canada to continue to let its soldiers die just so you can sleep better at night."

a very proud moment in cc's puerile, profanity laced existence.

*

Anonymous said...

Cyntie's like a blind man trying to wipe his ass...doesn't know when to stop.

Are we done here?...yeah, we're done here.

Filcher said...

If you are going to post criticism of another blogger, isn't it more honest to post a link to the thread in question, rather than to the headline?
For those who are honest and able to question for yourselves this is the link to the "Yeah ... six more dead soldiers ... whatever. " at Canadian Cynic. Read and judge for yourself.

http://canadiancynic.blogspot.com/2007/07/yeah-six-more-dead-soldiers-whatever.html

Neo Conservative said...

*
wow, filch... i sure hadn't taken you for a cc-licker.

now, you seem to be implying that your sole concern here is to hold people to "a higher standard".

say... how about you start by defending this shameful screed, written by your new best friend?

"With all due respect, Wanda, fuck you and your grief. It's not the job of the rest of Canada to continue to let its soldiers die just so you can sleep better at night."

you want a link?

here you go.

tell you what, i'm feeling generous... here's another.

*

Filcher said...

I had to look in the archives of CC for the posts you refer to.

so because CC has posted some very controversial and snide articles I am supposed to either defend cc or be so offended I give up MY basic opinion? I am sure that CC is capable of either defending his words or not defending them if he so wishes.

As for my view; I will quote from my first post here:
"So we allow our soldiers the Glory of dieing"

I see no reason to allow more soldiers to die simply because soldiers have already died. That Mrs Watkins is upset about her son's death is understandable and CC was rude and snide in the manner he refers to it, but his point that simply allowing soldiers to die because others have died is wrong thinking, is acceptable IMO.

Or am I missing something here?

Neo Conservative said...

*
"filch says... Or am I missing something here?"

well, filch... maybe you need to read slower.

if you actually believe that i am a more egregious offender, on any level of logical, intellectual or emotional discourse, on any subject... than canadian cynic... you are certainly beyond the reach of any reasoning i might offer.

i truly haven't the slightest idea what you're looking for here... perhaps cc does indeed have what you need. i trust he has been at least as communicative as i have tried to be here.

if you're looking for some sort of personal affirmation... i suggest you head over to fuzzy-bunny rabble.ca... where there is always someone willing to groom a fellow seeker.

*

Filcher said...

"if you actually believe that i am a more egregious offender, on any level of logical, intellectual or emotional discourse, on any subject... than canadian cynic... you are certainly beyond the reach of any reasoning i might offer. "

i did not intend to imply that. I know neither CC or Your blogs well enough to pass any judgement on them.

I merely pointed out that to post a image of a post headline could be seen as bias when the post itself was in a different context.

I agree with you that CC culd have handled the Wanda Watkins problem more diplomatically, although the basic point made by CC is one that I agree with, namely that there is no reason to support an approach simply because others have already died for it. This is especially true when there is reason to suspect that a coherent strategy and proper equipment is sorely lacking, and when the values that are being sacrificed for are contrary to the ideals of the nation and perhaps even the men making the sacrifice.

Anonymous said...

Geez, is Cyntie sooo desperate to rehabilitate his insanity that he would hire an "image/makeover"
(propagandist) dude...or did you volunteer Filcher?...I'm going with volunteer.

Filcher?...filcher?...that's a rather interesting nic, if anything Filcher, you must be a popular fellow over at the cyntie cesspool.

Neo Conservative said...

*
"filch says... CC culd have handled the Wanda Watkins problem more diplomatically... the basic point made by CC is one that I agree with"

well, filch.... seeing as every second word out of cc's mouth apparently has to be "cunt"... i guess "undiplomatic" is one way to put it.

i'm curious, filch... how exactly would you characterise pissing all over anyone's grieving mother?

as for your "being in agreement" with this guy... my feeling is that cc's bitter, profane, misogynistic rants totally obscure any points he might choose to make.

his whole shtick consists of viscious, personal attacks, primarily on members of the blogging tories aggregator.

any time i refer to cc... it is simply in direct response to one of his personal attacks. he sends people here... i give them my side of the story.

now filch, you are perfectly free to associate yourself with that sort of thing, but please don't expect me to respect it... and by extension, you or your opinions.

if you think that you can drop by here and blithely criticise my stand, without similarly holding up cc's vile spew to the light of day... you are more naive and hopelessly biased than i imagined.

but hey... feel free to join lol kevron, ti-guy and red tory and sneak around regurgitating cc's vile trolls with your drive-by non-blogging profile.

you can tell a lot about a man by the people he chooses to associate with... i just don't know how you can stand the smell.

work it out, filch... you're a big boy.

*

Filcher said...

"i'm curious, filch... how exactly would you characterise pissing all over anyone's grieving mother?"

What does this actually have to do with my point that saying "because soldiers already have died more should die" is not a reason to continue?

I have stated I do not agree with CC's snide and rude remarks to Wanda Watkins. It still does not render the point invalid.

You should learn to deal with what I say rather than what CC says, or anyone else says. I have ignored other comments in this thread that have been aimed at me because they are not your opinions, I should be given the same courtesy.

"if you think that you can drop by here and blithely criticise my stand, without similarly holding up cc's vile spew to the light of day... you are more naive and hopelessly biased than i imagined."

When CC posts at this site, then I imagine I will have a reason to criticise him for what he says on this site. As this is your site, and deals with your opinions,perhaps we should focus on what you write, and my criticisms of it.

If I post an offensive remark, and am called on it, I will apologise. I will not apologise for remarks made by others of a like opinion, although I will say I can not support the rudeness.

If I do a search of your opinions, or those of the right, will I find personal attacks on war veterans, (Jack Murtha, John Kerry, et al) grieving mothers (Cindy Sheehan,Code Pink) and the left? Of course I will, so don't hold me to any higher standard than you are able to hold yourself.

"you can tell a lot about a man by the people he chooses to associate with... i just don't know how you can stand the smell."

Obviously I am posting on these boards, and I believe it is in a non hostile and non critical manner, so I am associating with you. That I disagree with you is one thing, that you cannot explain to me why allowing soldiers to die simply to support a mother who has lost a son is commendable or even logical thinking is also understandable, if you have no expalanation.

Attack me all you want, it still does not change the validity of my point.

"as for your "being in agreement" with this guy... my feeling is that cc's bitter, profane, misogynistic rants totally obscure any points he might choose to make."

Again, what CC posts, and what I have posted here, are 2 different things. That you and your supporters are more interested in attacking me on another's post that I have nothing to do with shows inability to actually deal with criticism or debate the facts.

Have a nice day.

Neo Conservative said...

*
"filch says... You should learn to deal with what I say"

see filch... that's where you're wrong.

feel free to disagree, or express your opinion, but sorry... i am hardly accountable to you, or anyone else from cc's profane ratpack, for that matter.

the premise that you and cc apparently share... that anyone is "allowing soldiers to die simply to support a mother who has lost a son" is so ludicrous, it requires no defense.

never mind his disgusting personal attack on a grieving mother... what sort of simpleton accepts such sophistry in the first place? you gorge on cc's ridiculous, abusive babble... and you now expect what?

sorry, filch... no sale here.

but hey... i've got a pretty good idea where you can take your empty blogger drive-by profile and find a receptive audience.

i certainly hope you enjoy cc's talk of "dead nigger this" and "cunt that" as much as he enjoys spewing it.

because people like that deserve each other.

*

cynic swarm said...

In the past 72 hrs. or so you've had emisaries (o.k. a m@, a crabgrass and now a filcher) sent over from the cyntie cesspool to...? I don't know, to do what?
Have you cease and desist from shining a light on that horrid detestable cockroach masquerading as a human?...pathetic really that these folk are unable to put politics aside and kick one of their own to curb where it belongs.

I've seen this Balb...err Filcher act played elsewhere...heh heh, this guy slays me..."No Sale" Balb
err Filcher...make your exit to the left of the stage, regroup and
reload in a cool spot, maybe a bunker, crack open a crock of mead,
pass out the "straws" and suck-it up princess...err "Filcher."

Filcher said...

"cynic swarm said...
In the past 72 hrs. or so you've had emisaries (o.k. a m@, a crabgrass and now a filcher) sent over from the cyntie cesspool to...? I don't know, to do what?
Have you cease and desist from shining a light on that horrid detestable cockroach masquerading as a human?...pathetic really that these folk are unable to put politics aside and kick one of their own to curb where it belongs."

I find it amazing that no one has been able to answer a simple question. Why does the death of soldiers mean we must keep sacrificing soldiers to what may be a failed mission?


"I've seen this Balb...err Filcher act played elsewhere...heh heh, this guy slays me..."No Sale" Balb
err Filcher...make your exit to the left of the stage, regroup and
reload in a cool spot, maybe a bunker, crack open a crock of mead,
pass out the "straws" and suck-it up princess...err "Filcher." "

I don't know who you think I am, but I am not a regular poster on any actual political blog. I posted in the last few weeks under the name of Niven, but I do not remember where, exactly.


"Neo Conservative said...
*
"filch says... You should learn to deal with what I say" "

Actually a perversion of what I said, unless you add "rather than what CC says,". I don't care what CC says, how rude he is, etc. That you have a problem with him has nothing to do with what I post. If you can't answer me fine, just admit it, but do not draw a line between me and him. There are other people with the same basic opinions as cc, without being supporters of him.

(Neo, if you look in the thread pertaining to this one on CC, you will see that I posted a comment, which was favorable to you. It should also be noticeable they did not have any better idea of who I am than you do.)

"the premise that you and cc apparently share... that anyone is "allowing soldiers to die simply to support a mother who has lost a son" is so ludicrous, it requires no defense.'

It is one of the reasons that is used, "if we cut and run these lives are deminished in value." Unless there is evidence of an effective strategy to gain control of the country, and better equipment for the troops there, this is what we are doing.

"but hey... i've got a pretty good idea where you can take your empty blogger drive-by profile and find a receptive audience."

My blogger profile is empty because I prefer not to fill it out. FYI, I live in NW Ontario, am unemployed due to lumber slump, and have worked for the same company since the early '70's.

I apparently won't be missing much, Neo. You aren't discussing policy here, or concerns of any import, it is mainly a group of people patting themselves on the back over their ability to insult those that may have some concerns about the direction Canada is going.

Neo Conservative said...

*
"filch "finds it amazing"... Why does the death of soldiers mean we must keep sacrificing soldiers to what may be a failed mission?"

geez, filch... you mean like sacrificing virgins?

is that what we're doing here? this must be "the policy & concerns of import" you're bringing to the table, right?

again... this is simply another empty, specious premise. i mean, where do you get this stuff?

oh, right... i remember... your buddy cc.

the real problem here is... your threshold for 'amazing' seems to be just a tad lower than most of the people in my world.

see, filch... it's a war... people get killed. that's why it's not called 'circle of friends'.

and if you had the stones to accuse general hillier, to his face, of sacrificing soldiers... my guess is, he'd put you on your ass.

again... you wanna slap around a grieving mother... i know a place where they just eat that shit up.

i just can't imagine why you'd waste your time here... when cc and the boys are so much more appealing.

make sure you say hi for me.

*