massive death toll in pakistan

[fable]

I personally believe should go to Nations that would utilize it the way it was meant and efficiently so, not to the coffers of Warlords.

Hmm, i personally beleive that the governments mean to line the coffers of warlords. Because its these "warlords" that have the power to overthrow the previous governments. This has been going on since the seventies. This is what is going on in present times, with elections that only represent a small population of the people and constitutions that are vague, rushed, and look out for the personal interest of occupying nations.

-the Iraq constituion is based in shia law, and yet it has been communicated time and time again that the shia law its based on is no better than radical islamism
-the Iraq constitution further aggrevates artifical splits between Kurdish and Shiit and Sunni groups
-the current Iraq government only has approval from a little more than 25% of the population
-the current resistance force is comprised of mainly state workers who were laid off in the hundreds of thousand by paul bremmer and associates
-only close to 1.5 billion dollars has been used of the US promised 33 billion dollars for reconstruction, which close to 75% has been used for cement barriers, military bases, and the green zone

--in Afghanistan, the northern alliance rules, and yet it is this N.Alliance that the very people of Afghanistan have denounced citing popular opnion that places them alongside the taliban for sheer corruption
--the taliban was put into power by the US as a move to stop soviet expansion

simple put, i just used these few examples to point out that it will be Canada that dictates how money is used in foregin countries, not the nation thats being aided in the first place, just like the US does.

also i wasnt trying to point out that our army is not ours. I was pointing out, that if we as nation unanimously agree that our goverment does not represent the needs and directives of the people, then why would we belive the army is, and if the army isnt carrying out an agenda that is supported by the people, but rather a governmental agenda, then why do we assume they are actaully "helping" other nations.

lastly, ill try to simplify as best as i can - please cite me any examples in history where the prescence of any occupying nation has actaully injected any legitimate level of democracy or a plan that would succeed in long term social stability?

can you lead me in the direction where i can find more info about the islands applying for colonization rights?

keep the discussion up mang

peace+'spect
fable

[mapleleaf4ever]

RE: Turks and Caicos: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turks_and_Caicos_Islands

In 2004, the province of Nova Scotia voted to invite Turks and Caicos to join the province, should the islands ever become part of Canada. This would bypass the problems with admitting Turks and Caicos as a separate province.

Also check this out... there's a movement for it actively. Almost like Cascadia.
http://www.cfatp.ca/

Originally Posted by fable

where the prescence of any occupying nation has actaully injected any legitimate level of democracy or a plan that would succeed in long term social stability?

heh that's never the point of Imperialism. So that's not possible. I'm talking economically beneficial to us... Canada. Not to the Islands we annex. Sure, they benefit from inheiriting a stonger currency, less tax to export and import resources from Canada, huge benefit to their Tourism Industry... But hey, who cares right?

[fable]

(shakes head)

i gotta credit you for being informed nonetheless

[FlorpIncarnate]

^ While I agree that Iraq and Afghanistan are FUBAR at the moment, I deny that it is a conspiracy by western governments. Instead, I posit, it is total incompetence by western governments.

Democracy as a system of government only works properly when won by the people themselves. The entire idea of "giving" democracy to (read: forcing democracy on) cultures as primitive (by western standards) as Iraq and Afghanistan is laughable at best. Obviously it's not going to work... these people have a cultural mindset conductive to Theocracies. Besides, most of these separate population groups want their own countries... they don't want to be associated with each other at all (actually, they want to kill each other). First it was the old-time western imperialists that forced them to live in one state, and then it was the warlord governments that succeeded them that forced them to live in one state. These people haven't been free to tend to their own affairs for a long, long time, and expecting them to just jump right on the democratic bandwagon with no problems is just so, so blind.

IMO there should be a Kurdistan, a separate state for Shia and Sunni Iraqis, and a separate state for the northern alliance in Afghanistian. Maybe THEN they can manage to support democracies... but I doubt it.

All in all the whole area is a mess, and the west would do to keep the hell away from it. Let them figure out how to deal with their own problems... our governments sure as hell aren't competent enough to solve them for them.

[mapleleaf4ever]

Originally Posted by fable

(shakes head)

i gotta credit you for being informed nonetheless

When I argue, I have the backing information 95% of the time. I already admittied I was a 'c' Conservative. So you shouldn't have been too surprised about my economic and military views. ;)

[fable]

While I agree that Iraq and Afghanistan are FUBAR at the moment, I deny that it is a conspiracy by western governments.

While it may not be the overt onjective of western government to create social chaos in a nation, it is their intent to garner a stranglehold in their economy!

Research what the paul bremmer administration attempted to pull off in iraq after things were "settled"

Researh the blatantly exploitative economic manipulation of US government sponsored US corporate take over of Iraq state sectors.

Democracy as a system of government only works properly when won by the people themselves. The entire idea of "giving" democracy to (read: forcing democracy on) cultures as primitive (by western standards) as Iraq and Afghanistan is laughable at best.

well said!

most of these separate population groups want their own countries... they don't want to be associated with each other at all (actually, they want to kill each other). First it was the old-time western imperialists that forced them to live in one state, and then it was the warlord governments that succeeded them that forced them to live in one state. These people haven't been free to tend to their own affairs for a long, long time, and expecting them to just jump right on the democratic bandwagon with no problems is just so, so blind.

er, Iraq has been consistently occupied since the 1920s and the reletive short period that they werent they were at war with Iran. Afghanistan has either the Soviet Union, The US, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and even India in their nation playing chess with Afghan lives since the seventies!

Most of "these populations" do NOT want seperate nation! this is the propaganda being spun by the likes of US and UK media. I would be lying if i said there want tension, and violence, but this was as a direct result of US intervention. They have, over the time period (since the early ninties) supported one of the three major ethnic groups against the other two, as a result, we have the current situation.

The Kurdish may have the strongest sentiment towards seperation but it is still salvgeable. The sunni groups are urging the shiit groups to not support the constitution referendum, and i trully believe that it is the very US occupation that will re-unite these fractured ethnic groups.

All in all the whole area is a mess, and the west would do to keep the hell away from it. Let them figure out how to deal with their own problems... our governments sure as hell aren't competent enough to solve them for them.

i utterly 100% agree!

[Harp]

have they found osama yet?