• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

OT: American Politics

Re: OT: Canadian Politics

Not that I care, but she wasn't provided the means of upholding her religious views, she was given the choice to remove her head covering in private with a female officer. She refused. Interesting that she didn't have a problem doing it to get her photo ID for driving. Hmmm. Convenient little religious barriers she has. Either way, she shouldn't have any case here at all. Simply wasting every ones time.
 
Re: OT: Canadian Politics

This is one of those very few times where "then go the **** back home" is an acceptable response to an immigrant. When your religious ideals are so out of step with the codified ideals of our country, then perhaps immigrating here isn't the best idea.

I'm entirely cool with altering certain out dated standards (the RCMP mountie hat thing for example...I've got zero qualms about a Sikh wearing a turban if he meets all other job requirements) to be more inclusive. Positive identification for taking a citizenship test isn't really something we should be making many allowances on.
 
Re: OT: Canadian Politics

Not that I care, but she wasn't provided the means of upholding her religious views, she was given the choice to remove her head covering in private with a female officer. She refused. Interesting that she didn't have a problem doing it to get her photo ID for driving. Hmmm. Convenient little religious barriers she has. Either way, she shouldn't have any case here at all. Simply wasting every ones time.

Word it anyway you like. We can't alter the rules here to allow annonymous drivers and citizens. Positive ID has been a staple of this country since it's inception, and one Pakistani refugee should not be able to change that.
 
Re: OT: Canadian Politics

This is one of those very few times where "then go the **** back home" is an acceptable response to an immigrant. When your religious ideals are so out of step with the codified ideals of our country, then perhaps immigrating here isn't the best idea.

I'm entirely cool with altering certain out dated standards (the RCMP mountie hat thing for example...I've got zero qualms about a Sikh wearing a turban if he meets all other job requirements) to be more inclusive. Positive identification for taking a citizenship test isn't really something we should be making many allowances on.

Yup. I don't know why people feel like it's so wrong to say that occasionally. Religious crazies values and culture and whatnot is often grossly out of line with what is acceptable as Canadian norms. It does not offend the principle of religious freedom to point that out.
 
Re: OT: Canadian Politics

Toronto Star endorses John Tory. While stating that Chow would also be a good choice. So long as people don't vote for another goddamned Ford.

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/edit...he_best_choice_to_lead_toronto_editorial.html

John Tory is the best choice to lead Toronto: Editorial

Toronto is about to make a decision that will reverberate across the country, choosing among three extraordinary candidates for mayor. Two stand out by virtue of their excellence while the third is exceptional for precisely the opposite reason – and would represent nothing short of disaster.

At stake is the effective administration of Canada’s largest city. And it’s vital that voters choose well next Monday.

They are lucky to have Olivia Chow in the race. She has emerged as Toronto’s political conscience, speaking for the disadvantaged and proposing thoughtful policies to improve their lives. She describes her core value as: “Everyone counts.” That’s a message this city needs to hear; compassion should guide the actions of whoever becomes mayor.

They are just as fortunate to have John Tory on the ballot. He has an impressive record as a successful leader in business and at the helm of organizations as varied as the Canadian Football League and the urban advocacy group CivicAction. That would stand him in good stead heading the City of Toronto, a corporation with a $9.6-billion operating budget.

But Tory offers more than a track record as a capable manager. He has a well-earned reputation as a caring conservative who knows the city can succeed only if it works for all its people. He has distinguished himself in working for the community, in activities as varied as chairing the United Way campaign to grassroots efforts aimed at bringing jobs to disadvantaged youth.

Either Olivia Chow or John Tory could make a fine mayor for Toronto. But at this time, with the challenges the city faces now, we believe Tory is the clear choice to bring Toronto together, make progress on the key issues and put the chaos of the past four years behind us.

Which brings us to Doug Ford (open Doug Ford's policard), the third extraordinary candidate in this race. His platform is simple: a continuation of the legacy of his brother, departing mayor Rob Ford (open Rob Ford's policard) – minus the “drunken stupors” and crack cocaine. That would mean four more years of dysfunction and division at city hall.

Despite that, Toronto remains one of the world’s best places to live, work and do business. But the staggering incompetence of the Ford administration has resulted in lost opportunities and waning influence in a city that once did much to set the country’s urban agenda. It’s a dismal record of bullying, ethics violations, service cuts, costly public transit flip-flops, and policy failures that include an ill-judged effort to seize control of waterfront development and a lost bet on a downtown casino.

The distractions of the past four years must end. New direction is needed. For that we need insightful leadership, a bold urban vision and a mayor able to draw people together from across the political spectrum behind a common goal: building a great city.

Tory is best placed to deliver what Toronto needs now. Choosing between him and Chow has not been easy. Chow’s policies resonate with those who believe Toronto can prosper only as a progressive city, and worry that the deepening divisions between haves and have-nots threaten our future. Having an experienced, capable, visible minority woman heading one of the world’s most multicultural cities presents an inspiring prospect.

But Toronto’s agonizingly long mayoral campaign has shown Tory to be the candidate most effective in reaching across party lines, rallying support, and convincing people to pull together. It’s telling that he is leading in almost all parts of the city – including the heart of “Ford Nation” in Etobicoke and downtown areas where Chow could be expected to run strongest. That’s vital for progress at city hall, especially after the bitterness of the Ford era.

Tory is also best-positioned to wring gains from Ottawa and Queen’s Park. That’s essential if substantial progress is to be made in building public transit, expanding low-income housing, and fixing the city’s crumbling infrastructure. Tory could serve as a compelling advocate, both by using his extensive contacts in government and by assuming a leadership role in the Greater Toronto Area and beyond. We can’t help but feel that Chow would be less effective.

As head of Canada’s sixth largest government Toronto’s mayor is well-placed – indeed obligated – to pursue municipal advocacy on a national stage. Rob Ford never bothered. But Tory is ideally positioned to do so, given his broad background and his work at CivicAction.

Much depends on the results, including the success of Tory’s much-hyped SmartTrack transit plan. We’ve expressed skepticism about whether this massive expansion of rail service can be delivered in just seven years and at no cost to Toronto ratepayers. But Tory insists he will make it happen. If he succeeds it would constitute remarkable progress and, with that in mind, it’s fair to give Tory his chance.

He told the Star’s editorial board last week he expects to win city council’s approval for SmartTrack, along with federal and provincial backing, by the end of his four-year term. He conceded it will be “a real problem” for his plan if those approvals don’t materialize. And by that he will be judged.

We like much of Tory’s platform. He’s sound on improving the code of conduct at city hall, on attracting more business to Toronto, on arts funding and on keeping the land transfer tax. We like his pledge to expand bike lanes, spend more on planting trees, and on collecting data to help reduce energy consumption in city buildings. And Tory is generally in favour of expanded childcare and more opportunities for young people, although we wish he would commit to specific goals in these areas, as Chow has done.

We disagree with some of Tory’s policies, such as his backing of a three-stop Scarborough subway extension when light-rail makes more sense. But we didn’t support everything David Miller stood for when we endorsed him, over Tory, back in 2003.

At this time in Toronto’s history the city needs a diplomat and a unifier; a skilled administrator with a social conscience; and a compelling urban advocate. This city needs John Tory as its mayor.
 
Best part was, the sanctions had worked completely..

Sanctions never work, they're put into place frequently by nations to create the illusion of action where none actually exists.


Saddam was completely neutered, had no functioning weapons programs of any consequence at all. He had just enough military strength to maintain his borders, keep militants from burrowing too deep into Iraqi society, and keep Iran wary of a resurgence.

When you take a look at where Iraq was at the time, it's almost exactly what the U.S would want in there right now.

On a humanitarian side, way less Iraqi civilians would have been killed than what we've seen occur instead.

The mistake wasn't made when the U.S finally took Saddam out, it was made when they put him in power in the first place.

This also applies to Fulgencio Batista, the Shaw of Iran, and on and on. In promoting dictatorship over the years, the U.S seriously undermined their own credibility throughout the world, when it comes to promoting democratic values. Because of this, they now face the spectre of a multitude of nations, some even allies, openly ridiculing what otherwise would have been considered earnest attempts at doing so.

That of course is the end result of a string of American administrations disastrous infatuation with the realpolitik, at the expense of ethics and morality.
 
The US really had two choices, leave Hussein where he was or oust him and have a strong presence remain to help "govern" Iraq. Unfortunately, leaving them to their own devices, and a horde of US weaponry, wasn't one of those choices.

The template for this already exists in the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan, a treaty that still exists today.
 
Sanctions never work, they're put into place frequently by nations to create the illusion of action where none actually exists.

Nonsense. The economic sanctions had crippled Iraq's ability to project anything resembling power in the region. You appear to have an extremely selective, and revisionist remembering of history.

If anything, the sanctions were too "successful" in that they went far beyond simply cutting the legs out from under Saddam, but created civilian conditions that lead to ~ 1 million dead. Continue to pretend though that nothing is happening unless if it happens really fast and goes "BOOM".




The mistake wasn't made when the U.S finally took Saddam out, it was made when they put him in power in the first place.

This also applies to Fulgencio Batista, the Shaw of Iran, and on and on. In promoting dictatorship over the years, the U.S seriously undermined their own credibility throughout the world, when it comes to promoting democratic values. Because of this, they now face the spectre of a multitude of nations, some even allies, openly ridiculing what otherwise would have been considered earnest attempts at doing so.

That of course is the end result of a string of American administrations disastrous infatuation with the realpolitik, at the expense of ethics and morality.

You're still wrong about the first bit, but bang on with the last.
 
Sanctions never bring anyone anywhere they didn't want to be in the first place.

The most prominent example of this is South Africa.

So you're arguing that Iran really wants to be at the table without a nuke rather than not at the table, with a nuke?
 
So you're arguing that Iran really wants to be at the table without a nuke rather than not at the table, with a nuke?

Iran is going to have nuclear weapons, whether or not sanctions are applied. When they do have those weapons, they will show up at the table, and be taken more seriously.
 
Nonsense. The economic sanctions had crippled Iraq's ability to project anything resembling power in the region. You appear to have an extremely selective, and revisionist remembering of history.

If anything, the sanctions were too "successful" in that they went far beyond simply cutting the legs out from under Saddam, but created civilian conditions that lead to ~ 1 million dead. Continue to pretend though that nothing is happening unless if it happens really fast and goes "BOOM".

The conditions for those deaths were created by the schism, years of Saddam's repressive regime, countries like Iran and Russia actively undermining (realpolitik rears it's ugly head yet again) America's efforts, various sects of radical Islam doing same, and the myopic, don't want to get involved because it might make me a target, so called allies of the U.S. who still haven't learned the lessons of two world wars.

As for the casualty figures themselves, a comparison of pre and post Gulf Wars numbers, including those still missing, is quite illuminating. Start with the over one million in the Iran-Iraq war that everyone thought was so delightful.
 
Re: OT: Canadian Politics

Doug Ford called a female reporter for the Toronto Star a "little bitch" but denies he said it despite 3 people hearing him say that.

Doug Ford has 336 illegal campaign signs removed, compared to 25 for Chow and 21 for Tory.
 
Back
Top