SkyDekker

Produced Hannity's show....shocker.

Can't say I disagree either, but it is an absolutely stupid statement to make for somebody like him. It will eventually be used for an excuse for some atrocity perpetrated by Russians.

Or the Japanese, cause without them the US would have happily continued making money off the Nazis while the holocaust took place. (yes both are stupid takes)

Nah, just think that when you ask somebody a question you should be willing to answer the same question. Please point out where I said you should know exactly what to do. You are manufacturing "outrage". Not seeing the irony that BIGUN answered a question you posed to Brent to start that conversation I guess, eh? Yes. If you take time to re-read my comment you'll, well probably not, see that I said exactly that. Because that is all you have said, that the US should follow the North Atlantic Treaty. That is all you have suggested so far.

In post #32 you ask "tell us what you would do". I rephrased that question for you, since you never answered it yourself. After asking the questions, all you did was hide behind "NATO wouldn't agree to it". If asking you to answer your own question is too abrasive for you, then you have likely been shielded a little too long. Not sure you understand how NATO works. But for NATO to take action (outside of an article 5 response) it would have to be approved through the North Atlantic Council, of which the US is a member. Part of that process is the NAC deciding, generally based on already agreed upon principles, how each country would contribute. Hence, all you have really said so far is that you believe the US should live up to their North Atlantic Treaty obligations.

I know what BIGUN referenced. Let me rephrase the question for you then. Should NATO forces come to an agreement to actively enter Ukraine and fight against Russia, you agree that is the right course of action? So far you have been hiding your opinion behind "NATO won't agree anyways".

You aren't arguing in good faith here. BIGUN (and myself) made comments around what we think should be done. You are arguing about what NATO might agree to doing. Those are two very different things. I certainly agree (and I think BIGUN as well) that there is no interest within NATO to get into direct conflict with Russia at this point.

Yes there is, it is contained within the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which forms part of the 1982 Constitution Act. However both the Limitations Clause and the Notwithstanding clause of the "Canadian Constitution" result in the rights not being absolute, like they are in the US constitution. In short and high level, the Notwithstanding Clause allows provincial or territorial governments/parliaments to create laws that contradict the constitution. The Limitations Clause results in courts having to apply the Oakes Test if the court finds a right has been infringed.

I have seen a fair bit of commentary that claims that the ending of the Afghanistan War caused the invasion of Ukraine. Fox News claimed that the "Russia Investigation" caused the Ukraine invasion. That is part of "blaming the US", as quoted from that article.

January 6th committee has claimed that Trump was part of a criminal conspiracy and the GOP is entirely silent. I remember a time where everything Clinton did needed multiple investigations. Now, nothing. Keep that in mind when somebody claims both sides are just the same....

For the record, I have no interest in the US shredding their constitution, it is the interpretation of some of the amendments I don't agree with. I am a huge fan of the third amendment. You should know that many in the Canadian "freedom convoy" kept talking about their first amendment rights.

You aren't really known for your complex examples and reasoning.

Didn't stop you from using Hungary as an example.....until you found out your right wing twitter buzz word didn't make sense. Sure it is. And the Republicans tend to oppose any actual recognition that racism exists and tend to oppose any program that would try and reduce it.

It's like reading America First Committee statements.

The European Court of Justice ruled Hungary broke EU law in how they have dealt with asylum seekers and migrants. Why am I not surprised that is what you want to modeled after. Thank you for proving my point. You are generally just opposed to things in stead of actually standing for something. Where in the US are kids forced to go to a particular school without any other options? Where is this actually a problem?

Chilling read, thank you for posting. Some of what is mentioned in that article we definitely see on here: "I mean he has got swathes of the Republican Party — and not just them, some on the left, as well as on the right — masses of the U.S. public saying, “Good on you, Vladimir Putin,” or blaming NATO, or blaming the U.S. for this outcome. This is exactly what a Russian information war and psychological operation is geared towards. He’s been carefully seeding this terrain as well. We’ve been at war, for a very long time. I’ve been saying this for years."

Those are buzz words, not policy. Don't believe me, here are some simple questions you will not be able to answer: When were the borders secure? At what illegal immigration level and smuggling level would you consider the border secure? Energy independence or just not importing oil? What taxation rate is low? Where would income come from? Trickle down economics has constantly been shown to be ineffective. Low regulation is not what Republicans want. What they want is only to regulate other people. Republcians are very busy regulating what women can do with their bodies, regulating what gay children can and cannot do, including what their parents can and cannot do. Republicans are trying to ban books. Texas town passed a resolution to replace "hello" with "heaveno". You don't want low regulation, you want regulation on everything but white Christian men. Pro-police? January 6th shows that to be bullshit as well. Pro-immigration? What does that mean? More topless models on genius visas, followed by "chain migration"? Focus on the individual vs identity/group? So no need to honour the flag, or veterans? Taking a knee during the anthem no longer an issue? Those are all issues that relate to focusing on identity/group over individual. School choice? Do you mean that schools should be forced to teach that maybe god really did create earth, a Christian god of course? Like I said, buzz words. Republicans have nothing but buzz words.

As much as that sounds wonderful, there is no way of verifying this and could just be part of information warfare.

Like I said before, the Republicans have nothing substantive to offer. Their reply was all the standard talking points, all against something, nothing they can actually stand for, stand behind. The same we see here, the only response so far is that he misspoke and said Iranian in stead of Ukrainian.

Let's be honest, for you it really won't matter what he says. Like most republicans you don't stand for anything anymore, all you know is you are against anything the Democrats do.

Thankfully, unlike the US, Ontario has an independent investigative body who will be looking into this.

If you think Trudeau is a strongman.....I am not even sure how one would finish that sentence. The premise itself is so laughable.

Would be much better to have a strongman determining what everybody should think, right Brent?

Now updated to 40 mile long line.....