Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Standard member uzless
    The So Fist
    19 Oct '10 17:03
    It's easy to understand why americans are so uninformed about the world when even their senior politicians are clueless about reality....

    WASHINGTON—The Canadian government is yet again trying to set the record straight about 9/11 hijackers and where they didn’t come from.

    Ambassador Gary Doer has written to Republican Senate candidate Sharron Angle, who last week referred to the U.S.-Canadian border as “the most porous border” the country has.

    Angle, a tea party-backed candidate running a close race in Nevada against Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, said “what we know is our northern border is where the terrorists came through.”

    In his note to Angle on Monday, Doer emphasized that “none of the 9/11 hijackers entered the United States from or through Canada.”

    He said extensive investigations by U.S. law enforcement authorities have established that all of the hijackers entered the U.S. directly from third countries – not Canada – with visas issued by U.S. diplomats.

    This is not the first time Ottawa has had to inform U.S. politicians that their perception of Canada’s involvement in the 9/11 terrorist attacks is wrong.

    In April, 2009, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano raised eyebrows when she stated the oft-repeated myth as a fact.

    She later insisted she knew there was no Canadian connection to 9/11, but within days Arizona Senator John McCain, the 2008 Republican presidential candidate, repeated the claim.

    Republican Newt Gingrich also had to apologize to the Canadian ambassador in 2005 for making the same claim.

    http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/877591--ottawa-tells-tea-party-backed-candidate-9-11-hijackers-didn-t-come-from-canada?bn=1
  2. 19 Oct '10 19:06
    Originally posted by uzless
    It's easy to understand why americans are so uninformed about the world when even their senior politicians are clueless about reality....

    WASHINGTON—The Canadian government is yet again trying to set the record straight about 9/11 hijackers and where they didn’t come from.

    Ambassador Gary Doer has written to Republican Senate candidate Sharron Angle, w ...[text shortened]... cle/877591--ottawa-tells-tea-party-backed-candidate-9-11-hijackers-didn-t-come-from-canada?bn=1
    I was pleasantly suprised that all these different people realized that the United States shares a border with Canada.
  3. 19 Oct '10 19:16
    Originally posted by uzless
    It's easy to understand why americans are so uninformed about the world when even their senior politicians are clueless about reality....
    Yes you clearly have a problem when your populace gets their information from politicians. In the rest of the world we know perfectly well that most of what politicians say is nonsense and get our information from more reliable sources. Sadly, for too many of us, that tends to be the media which is only a small step up from politicians.
  4. Standard member bill718
    Enigma
    19 Oct '10 19:48 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by uzless
    It's easy to understand why americans are so uninformed about the world when even their senior politicians are clueless about reality....

    WASHINGTON—The Canadian government is yet again trying to set the record straight about 9/11 hijackers and where they didn’t come from.

    Ambassador Gary Doer has written to Republican Senate candidate Sharron Angle, w ...[text shortened]... cle/877591--ottawa-tells-tea-party-backed-candidate-9-11-hijackers-didn-t-come-from-canada?bn=1
    Interesting point. Have you ever wondered why Canada does not feel the need for such a tight secutity on there boarders? Or why Bin Laden targeted America, and not Canada? Perhaps this has something to do with the fact that America (despite it's honorable intentions)...

    1. Frequently treats other countries as inferiors?

    2. Stations American combat troops in other countries against the will of the people in those countries?

    3. Frequently pressures other countries to adopt American culture

    4. Frequently chooses to use military force, where diplomacy and compromise would achive just as much.

    *Would Americans like it, if another country did these things to America? You bet they wouldn't!

    *Does Canada do any of these things?? I don't think so.

    In World War 2, American and Canadian troops fought together against the Nazi's. Since then Canada seems to have forged a reputation as a country of well educated, respectful, people, who choose to use military force only as a last resort. Because of this, Canada is less of a terrorist target. Perhaps America could learn a few things from our neighbors to the north.
  5. 19 Oct '10 20:00 / 4 edits
    Originally posted by bill718
    Interesting point. Have you ever wondered why Canada does not feel the need for such a tight secutity on there boarders? Or why Bin Laden targeted America, and not Canada? Perhaps this has something to do with the fact that America (despite it's honorable intentions)...

    1. Frequently treats other countries as inferiors?

    2. Stations American combat tro terrorist target. Perhaps America could learn a few things from our neighbors to the north.
    Even if the US had maintained a totally pacifist and neutral stance, it would still be the world's biggest superpower economically and culturally. The US is thus the world's biggest symbol of "modernity" -- in which the law treats all religions the same (in theory at least) -- in which laws are produced via a democratic process (in theory at least) -- in which women are given the same rights as men (in theory at least).

    These things are a major threat to people in countries where there is strong opposition to these concepts. They greatly resent The West, especially since the West has been so prosperous. So terrorists are going to target the West, and especially the nation that is the prevailing #1 power in the West.

    Perhaps, in the future, if China surpasses the US, the terrorists will shift their focus to go after the new secular king in town. But for now, the US is going to be the prime target no matter how well it behaves.
  6. Standard member bill718
    Enigma
    19 Oct '10 20:06
    Originally posted by Melanerpes
    Even if the US had maintained a totally pacifist and neutral stance, it would still be the world's biggest superpower economically and socially. The US is thus the world's biggest symbol of "modernity" -- in which the law treats all religions the same (in theory at least) -- in which laws are produced via a democratic process (in theory at least) -- in wh ...[text shortened]... g in town. But for now, the US is going to be the prime target no better how well we behave.
    Maybe...I have my doubts though, especially since American troops have been stationed in the middle east for quite awhile. This is the one of the reasons Bin Laden gave for the 9/11 attacks. I don't agree with Bin Laden's actions of course, but America's stance in the middle east has been very far from pacifiist, and neutral.
  7. 19 Oct '10 20:22 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by bill718
    Maybe...I have my doubts though, especially since American troops have been stationed in the middle east for quite awhile. This is the one of the reasons Bin Laden gave for the 9/11 attacks. I don't agree with Bin Laden's actions of course, but America's stance in the middle east has been very far from pacifiist, and neutral.
    Clearly, the US involvement in the affairs of various Muslim countries has made it easier for the terrorist leaders to make their case to recruits that the US is evil and depraved.

    But, secretly, the terrorist leaders are probably very happy with the US' military presence, since it provides so much excellent propaganda material (and an ever-present target for roadside bombs). Very happy.....unless the US operations lead to the establishment of real populist or democratic movements....which would be a major threat to the status quo.
  8. 19 Oct '10 20:23
    yes...we certainly could not treat a bully like Sadam Hussain with pacifism. He and his sons were raping women and killing those that he felt like killing.

    In Afganistan...the Taliban are doing much the same thing...they use religion as an excuse...but the reality is that they want to keep the population in the middle east scared and uninformed of the benifits of freedom. Clueless...hardly...compasionate...absolutly
  9. 19 Oct '10 20:33 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by highdraw
    yes...we certainly could not treat a bully like Sadam Hussain with pacifism. He and his sons were raping women and killing those that he felt like killing.

    In Afganistan...the Taliban are doing much the same thing...they use religion as an excuse...but the reality is that they want to keep the population in the middle east scared and uninformed of the benifits of freedom. Clueless...hardly...compasionate...absolutly
    The same things are also happening in many other countries around the world.

    A good moral argument could be made that the US (or someone) needs to become the world's policeman to force all the dictators to behave themselves and ensure that justice and decency prevail in every nation.

    But this would cost a huge amount of money and troops - money and troops that Americans aren't willing to spend or provide - and it would be too easy for this global police effort to develop into an oppressive global empire in which most of the world's nations would become de facto territories of the US and never mature into independent prospering states.

    and yet -- there should be some way of ensuring that there's "liberty and justice for all" no matter what nation they live in -- but what's the answer?
  10. 19 Oct '10 20:37
    yep....I wish we could solve all the world problems. It sickens me the way some people are forced to live in this world.
  11. 19 Oct '10 20:38
    but helping to fix some is better than fixing none.
  12. 19 Oct '10 20:55
    Originally posted by highdraw
    but helping to fix some is better than fixing none.
    Too bad sponsoring an ineffective regime with rampant corruption doesn't really help much.
  13. 19 Oct '10 20:58
    well hopefully the population will recognize that the ineffective regime needs to be changed and make those changes. At least the violence that was going on there is mostly between our forces (the US military) and those who seek to do harm to the innocents
  14. 19 Oct '10 21:02
    Originally posted by highdraw
    yes...we certainly could not treat a bully like Sadam Hussain with pacifism. He and his sons were raping women and killing those that he felt like killing.

    In Afganistan...the Taliban are doing much the same thing...they use religion as an excuse...but the reality is that they want to keep the population in the middle east scared and uninformed of the benifits of freedom. Clueless...hardly...compasionate...absolutly
    Is that why we sold him weapons?
  15. 19 Oct '10 21:04
    Originally posted by highdraw
    well hopefully the population will recognize that the ineffective regime needs to be changed and make those changes. At least the violence that was going on there is mostly between our forces (the US military) and those who seek to do harm to the innocents
    So how should they get rid of dictator Karzai? They can hardly elect him away...