holdfast Posted September 21, 2009 Report Posted September 21, 2009 War Resisters? ou mean Deserters, too bad they cant conentrate on passing bills to inflate Canada instead of Deflate Canada for Bloody votes. Imagine, an open door while our Soldiers are fighting and dieing. Quote Sep 17, 2009 05:39 PM THE CANADIAN PRESS OTTAWA – A Liberal MP has introduced a private member's bill aimed at letting American "war resisters" stay in Canada. Gerard Kennedy's bill would allow foreign military deserters – or those who refuse mandatory military service – to stay in Canada if their action is based on "sincere moral, political or religious objection." MPs have already voted twice to support war resisters, but that was through motions that are not binding on the government. Kennedy's bill would be binding because it would amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. Private members' bills rarely become law, but passage is more likely in the current minority government situation. Most war resisters in Canada are U.S. military personnel who have refused to participate in the Iraq War on the grounds that it's illegal and immoral. At least two have already been deported to the U.S.
BITEME Posted September 21, 2009 Report Posted September 21, 2009 Tell you what if you want to desert I dont want you here you stay at home and take your lumps. Whatever happened to "MALES" Show some backbone
POLLIWOGG Posted September 21, 2009 Report Posted September 21, 2009 Do Canadian soldiers have a legal option to disobey an illegal order?
jughead Posted September 21, 2009 Report Posted September 21, 2009 War Resisters? ou mean Deserters, too bad they cant conentrate on passing bills to inflate Canada instead of Deflate Canada for Bloody votes. Imagine, an open door while our Soldiers are fighting and dieing. Quote Sep 17, 2009 05:39 PM THE CANADIAN PRESS OTTAWA – A Liberal MP has introduced a private member's bill aimed at letting American "war resisters" stay in Canada. Gerard Kennedy's bill would allow foreign military deserters – or those who refuse mandatory military service – to stay in Canada if their action is based on "sincere moral, political or religious objection." MPs have already voted twice to support war resisters, but that was through motions that are not binding on the government. Kennedy's bill would be binding because it would amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. Private members' bills rarely become law, but passage is more likely in the current minority government situation. Most war resisters in Canada are U.S. military personnel who have refused to participate in the Iraq War on the grounds that it's illegal and immoral. At least two have already been deported to the U.S. So these Freedoms you are always talking about, does that only include the freedom for people to do things and say things you agree with or is there room for the idea that maybe other people might not share your opinions despite the fact they may be intelligent, patriotic and good citizens?
JohnF Posted September 21, 2009 Report Posted September 21, 2009 It's an interesting issue. On one hand folks in North America enjoy a constitutional right to express their disagreement with laws. On the other there's the issue of going beyond the expression of free speech and acting to help lawbreakers from another country or your own, and worse, trying to get your government to involve itself by condoning active disregard for another country's laws. That gets serious, conspiracy to subvert legally enacted laws. If the shoe was on the other foot and the American government or a few Americans were harbouring lawbreakers from Canada we'd be up in arms. There are a few questions at play here: 1. The ethics and morality of each war 2. The sanctioning of lawbreaking 3. The morality of forced participation by citizens in political decisions to embark on military actions 4. How many of those evaders were happily accepting pay cheques and benefits as career soldiers or weekend warriors as long as they weren't expected to actually do any of the nasty stuff. I know of one lady in the States who was really upset, as in offended, when she found out that she was being called to active duty and sent to the Middle East. This same lady had been fairly obnoxious about gloating to anyone willing to listen about the great setup she had in the Reserves and all she really had to do was go away to camp every now and then. Suddenly this whole Reserves thing wasn't such a rosy deal for her. The long and the short of it is that these folks are breaking the law and should Canada & Canadians condone that? JF
Guest Johnny Bass Posted September 21, 2009 Report Posted September 21, 2009 Canada has always been a sanctuary. Since most Canadians are against the war? I would say that most Canadians support protecting these people. The war itself is illegal and all about corporate greed, so why should people die so corporations can get rich? I personally wouldn't fight this war either. It would be a shame if I was forced to. Even though it is their job?I'm sure when they signed up they were signing up to protect their country,not fight countries who pose no threat to their homeland. This war has nothing to do with patriotism but imperial greed.If they were deserting as their country was being attacked,then they should be punished. Plus, if these people dont want to fight they shouldn't be on the battlefield. They would only be a liability.
Dara Posted September 21, 2009 Report Posted September 21, 2009 Some people really oughtta mind their own business. Why jump up and yell that we will protect you if you break the laws in the country you live in. It is specifically pointed to one country and all it will do is cause a whole lot of crap for no good reason.
Dara Posted September 21, 2009 Report Posted September 21, 2009 (edited) Canada has always been a sanctuary. Since most Canadians are against the war? I would say that most Canadians support protecting these people. The war itself is illegal and all about corporate greed, so why should people die so corporations can get rich? I personally wouldn't fight this war either. It would be a shame if I was forced to. Even though it is their job?I'm sure when they signed up they were signing up to protect their country,not fight countries who pose no threat to their homeland. This war has nothing to do with patriotism but imperial greed.If they were deserting as their country was being attacked,then they should be punished. Plus, if these people dont want to fight they shouldn't be on the battlefield. They would only be a liability. Who gets to make the decision that a war is legal or not? You sign up for the crap...fill the bill. Its not Vietnam where was a draft Edited September 21, 2009 by Dara
Guest Johnny Bass Posted September 21, 2009 Report Posted September 21, 2009 Who gets to make the decision that a war is legal or not? You sign up for the crap...fill the bill. Its not Vietnam where was a draft Ummm The United Nations? And they deemed the war illegal. But hey. Money talks and power is above the law. Might makes right. and then you have all the supporters that wait for the crumbs to fall from the table.
BITEME Posted September 21, 2009 Report Posted September 21, 2009 Bottom line is this dont come here looking to hide man up in your own country
Guest Johnny Bass Posted September 21, 2009 Report Posted September 21, 2009 Bottom line is this dont come here looking to hide man up in your own country If someone came looking for you,would you hide in your own house?lol Man up? Basically your saying they should A)go get killed for corporate greed or B)go to jail for refusing to die for corporate greed. hmmmmm.I pick none of the above. nuff said.
JohnF Posted September 21, 2009 Report Posted September 21, 2009 If someone came looking for you,would you hide in your own house?lol Man up? Basically your saying they should A)go get killed for corporate greed or B)go to jail for refusing to die for corporate greed. hmmmmm.I pick none of the above. Seems to me anyone who has signed up for military duty in the last 50 years is incredibly unaware if they don't realize there are going to be ideological issues with most military actions. IOW if they knew what they were agreeing to they better not whine when called to do the job they're paid for. This thread is less about the morality of war, and more about the morality of people signing up for a job then refusing to do it on a technicality they knew they were bound to run up against at some point. JF
blaque Posted September 21, 2009 Report Posted September 21, 2009 I vote John F for common sense award of the year. (seriously) I dont think ive ever read one of your threads and went Always the voice of reason.........
blarg Posted September 21, 2009 Report Posted September 21, 2009 The feminisation of North America continues unabated. They joined the MILITARY, if there weren't prepared to fight when told to they never should have joined. Or did they think it was going to all peace and love and hugs from their mommy..our society is becoming more weak and pathetic each day. For the record im against staying in Afghanistan, but if you joined the military to get a job, or to get an education, and didn't think you'd have to fight, too damn bad.
Photoz Posted September 21, 2009 Report Posted September 21, 2009 RANT TIME! When these people signed up, I don't think defending some druglord's poppy fields was what they had in mind. The people over there have lived a certain way since medieval times . . . . do you think that sending troops over there to jam our way of living down their throats is going to change 'em? WE (Canadians, Americans, British & other foreigners) are the trespassers. They have every right to try to take back their countries (and their oil) from us. If they (Afgans, Iraquis etc.) came onto our shores, to shove THEIR way of living down MY throat, I'd grab whatever weapons available to me, and fight to the death . . . . but go to a region where you're hated by most, tolerated by some, and helplessly get picked of, one by one, by assassins and their deadly roadside bombs, car bombs, etc. without ever being given a chance to fight back . . . NO THANK YOU! Surely there are other places that NEED troops, that those who wish to serve their country, WITHOUT killing hundreds of innocent civilians (I think they're known as colateral damage) could be sent. DAMN . . . . I HATE it more every time I hear one of ours gets blown up, never having had a chance to defend themselves!
Cookslav Posted September 21, 2009 Report Posted September 21, 2009 This thread is less about the morality of war, and more about the morality of people signing up for a job then refusing to do it on a technicality they knew they were bound to run up against at some point. Give that man a cigar! By the way Photoz, I like you but with all due respect the situation is a wee bit more complicated then that. Heck I don't like what’s happening there any more then you do but all I need to do is look at the atrocities to children...especially little girls That happen under the Taliban rule.... When leadership not only condones but participates, and advocates public disfigurement of young girls for daring to read a book or go to school I say hang 'em all. I don't care what religion, race, creed, color or country your from...In my books that leadership needs to be removed under the rational of decency. "MOST" soldiers that sign up are behind the humanitarian side of the mission. There is plenty of debate on why we are there in the first place but that’s a mute to the point of why we stay. I don't want Canada to be a safe haven for free loaders who joined up looking for a free education and some cash only to then change their mind when they realize they have to get their hands dirty....wrong on so many levels IMO
Radnine Posted September 21, 2009 Report Posted September 21, 2009 So these Freedoms you are always talking about, does that only include the freedom for people to do things and say things you agree with or is there room for the idea that maybe other people might not share your opinions despite the fact they may be intelligent, patriotic and good citizens? The short answer Jughead is no. Anybody that wants out of that organized insanity is okay by me and welcome to hang their hat here (as long as it isn't made out of Kevlar). Jim
Greencoachdog Posted September 21, 2009 Report Posted September 21, 2009 (edited) Who gets to make the decision that a war is legal or not? You sign up for the crap...fill the bill. Its not Vietnam where was a draft That's the most intelligent thing I've ever heard you say!... and I agree! Edited September 21, 2009 by GCD
Photoz Posted September 21, 2009 Report Posted September 21, 2009 No offense intended, but I guess my main beef is the way our lads are getting 'picked off' one or 2 at a time, with no way of defending themselves. Somebody likely has this info . . . how many of the 132 have we lost in actual fire-fights . . . . where they could put their fighting skills into play, and how many were sitting ducks who had no way to defend themselves? And how many OTHER countries in that region practice the attrocities that are so prevalent in Afganiston? How do we make 'em all 'see the light? As for deserters . . . . you did sign up . . . . if ya changed your mind, step up, refuse to go and take your punishment . . . . IN YOUR OWN COUNTRY!
jediangler Posted September 21, 2009 Report Posted September 21, 2009 (edited) If the recruitment commercials and posters told the truth instead of pitching an education and good paying jobs as the result of joining up, maybe there wouldn't be so many going AWOL. Show them coming home in bodybags, committing suicide in record numbers and suffering the physical and mental injuries that will haunt them as long as they live. Then show them the fat cats counting their profits from the war machine and how what they are doing over there is making MORE terrorists, not less. If the reasons were really humanitarian, why aren't they in Tibet or any number of other places worldwide where injustices are being committed? I say come on up if you want to live in peace. Edited September 21, 2009 by jediangler
Cookslav Posted September 21, 2009 Report Posted September 21, 2009 If the reasons were really humanitarian, why aren't they in Tibet or any I'm Not saying humanitarian reasons are why we went in the first place...I'm saying its why I'm glad we've stayed. Its needed, and someone has got to do it....I'm glad Canadians are a part of it. There may be other issues in the world but we're in Afgahnastan right now... If we can keep those buggers out of power long enough to grow a generation of educated children to replace them then its worth it IMO We can't stop the Fat cats, but maybe we can inspire a generation, and let women read. (not a bad side effect of the war if you ask me)
misfish Posted September 21, 2009 Report Posted September 21, 2009 I'm Not saying humanitarian reasons are why we went in the first place... Canada as a whole, didnt have a choice. Being USA neighbour,it was expected,or was it demanded ? Thats all I got to say about that.
Guest ThisPlaceSucks Posted September 21, 2009 Report Posted September 21, 2009 i have no problem with this. the military is a job like any other... if you morally disagree with where your "job" is headed you should have every right to quit.
Guest ThisPlaceSucks Posted September 21, 2009 Report Posted September 21, 2009 and perhaps those of you who are suggesting that they shouldn't have that right should be the ones fighting instead. you know where your local canadian forces office is don't you?
Recommended Posts