NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,189506,00.html

I did not think the Canadians had it in them to do this. I'm quite literally surprised.

Ha ha! Hamas is broke. Fuckin' losers.

And that is the extent of my learned opinion on this subject.

Canada has money? :eek: *sound of preconceptions shattering*

"Waah! They didn't elect whom we wanted them to elect! Stupid democracy! Waah!"

wait. . . there's a country called Canada?


I always thought that was just a US subsidiary. I didn't know they can act on their own accord.

[/sarcasm]


Does Canada doing this change anything at all for Hamas?

Well Hamas has little to fear. The EU's still funding them, and the Arab world seems more than willing to fill the gaps.

But I'm suprised that Canada just decided to stop. I hadn't even heard that they were discussing it.

"Waah! They didn't elect whom we wanted them to elect! Stupid democracy! Waah!"
No nation is under any obligation to fund a regime that it disagrees with. They voted, they got the government they wanted, they also get the consequences.

"Waah! They didn't elect whom we wanted them to elect! Stupid democracy! Waah!"
They elected who they wanted and that's who's gonna rule there. We owe them money why? :confused:

No nation is under any obligation to fund a regime that it disagrees with. They voted, they got the government they wanted, they also get the consequences.
:)

No nation is under any obligation to fund a regime that it disagrees with. They voted, they got the government they wanted, they also get the consequences.

And I get to mock the West for praising democracy, but only when their puppet gets "elected."

And I get to mock the West for praising democracy, but only when their puppet gets "elected."

I wouldn't want to send money to a terrorist organization.

They elected who they wanted and that's who's gonna rule there. We owe them money why? :confused:

Why do we owe Israel money? Or anyone else? We don't. But they get the money anyway. Here, democracy didn't go the West's way, so now we sulk like crybabies.

I wouldn't want to send money to a terrorist organization.

Too bad the US, and the West, are infamous for doing just that. Oh, yeah, but Hamas aren't the right sort of terrorist...

"Waah! They didn't elect whom we wanted them to elect! Stupid democracy! Waah!"
No, this is more the reason:

the new Hamas-led government refuses to renounce violence and recognize Israel.

Canada shouldn't fund such a blatantly destructive mission.

Too bad the US, and the West, are infamous for doing just that. Oh, yeah, but Hamas aren't the right sort of terrorist...
So you support propping up terrorist organisations just because Reagan (among others) did it?

No, this is more the reason:

Canada shouldn't fund such a blatantly destructive mission.

Oh, yeah, I keep forgetting, we all of a sudden have a problem with funding terrorists.

So you support propping up terrorist organisations just because Reagan (among others) did it?

You support punishing the Palestinian people? See how easy this straw man business is?

Why do we owe Israel money? Or anyone else? We don't. But they get the money anyway. Here, democracy didn't go the West's way, so now we sulk like crybabies.
Exactly how it should work. If your country is going in a way we like we may give you aid. If it is not we are under no obligation to give you aid. Your government gets to do the same thing! :D

Exactly how it should work. If your country is going in a way we like we may give you aid. If it is not we are under no obligation to give you aid. Your government gets to do the same thing! :D

All governments do. It's just a bit hypocritical to use terrorism and violence as an excuse, when that hasn't been known to be something we retract funds for. On the contrary, play nice evil puppet, and we'll just look the other way.

You support punishing the Palestinian people? See how easy this straw man business is?

Do you support some 58 years of palestinian terrorism?

Any form of support for the socalled palestinian people is morally suspect - and out of the question.

As is always the case with Fox News, there's more to the story than it appears.

Canada has stopped giving money to Hamas, yes. The Canadian government asked for a softer stance on Israel and Hamas isn't moving.

BUT

Canada continues to guarantee loans made by the Palestinian Autority to keep basic functions like water, electricity, etc. running.

That way we can look tough on terrorist organizations, look kind to the poor palestinians and be all-around good guys. See how Canada is everyone's best friend? (Well, except baby seals, that is.)

As is always the case with Fox News, there's more to the story than it appears.

Canada has stopped giving money to Hamas, yes. The Canadian government asked for a softer stance on Israel and Hamas isn't moving.

BUT

Canada continues to guarantee loans made by the Palestinian Autority to keep basic functions like water, electricity, etc. running.

That way we can look tough on terrorist organizations, look kind to the poor palestinians and be all-around good guys. See how Canada is everyone's best friend? (Well, except baby seals, that is.)

Quite so. Canada is one of those countries that one hates at the risk of being considered somewhat of a misanthrope...

I did not think the Canadians had it in them to do this.
Why not?

Oh, yeah, I keep forgetting, we all of a sudden have a problem with funding terrorists.
Are you not glad that "we" are finally seeing that funding terrorists is something we should not do?

You support punishing the Palestinian people? See how easy this straw man business is?
I'm not making straw men. You genuinely seem to be suggesting the just because Western nations funded terrorists in the past, it means they should fund terrorists now.

All governments do. It's just a bit hypocritical to use terrorism and violence as an excuse, when that hasn't been known to be something we retract funds for. On the contrary, play nice evil puppet, and we'll just look the other way.
I agree, which is why the US support for Uzbek government massacres continues to leave a bad taste in my mouth.

Whether terrorism and violence is the real reason or a fake reason, I don't care, as long as Hamas is not being funded.

That way we can look tough on terrorist organizations, look kind to the poor palestinians and be all-around good guys. See how Canada is everyone's best friend? (Well, except baby seals, that is.)
*ears perk up* Where did I leave my club?

Why not?

Because Corneliu is convinced that Canadians are terrorist-appeasing surrender-monkeys. It isn't a personal thing. He believes this about everyone who did not vote for Bush in 2004. And no reason - be it age, or be it living in a place where Bush wasn't electable - such as Canada - strikes him as sufficient reason for not voting for Bush.

Are you not glad that "we" are finally seeing that funding terrorists is something we should not do?

When it suits us.

Ha ha! Hamas is broke. Fuckin' losers.

And that is the extent of my learned opinion on this subject.


Unfortunately no.

According to the Israeli High Court of Justice, the .gov.il is OBLIGATED to give them money to maintain schools and basic infrastructure.

I kid you not.

Do you support some 58 years of palestinian terrorism?

I do not support Isreal's illegal occupation.

Any form of support for the socalled palestinian people is morally suspect - and out of the question.

Ah, yes, the brown people racism.

Why not?

Because we Canadians are sissies. I mean, we let the Americans jerk us around on Softwood lumber for how many years? We constantly get lumped in with the Americans, but don't raise too much fuss about it aside from a long-forgotten protest or two. There's the water-territory debate (some view this particular water as international territory, whereas, the Canadians see it, reasonably as far as I know, to be part of our territory) that the US, among other nations, constantly goes through without too much done about it.

Maybe its just me, but I think that Canada hasn't got a backbone. We're too scared of making everyone else 'upset' with us.

Are you not glad that "we" are finally seeing that funding terrorists is something we should not do?

By retracting aid from an already destitute populace. How cosy.

I'm not making straw men. You genuinely seem to be suggesting the just because Western nations funded terrorists in the past, it means they should fund terrorists now.

We should not fund terrorists, period. But we're not consistent with it - we do fund terrorists when it suits us, and we continue to.

Whether terrorism and violence is the real reason or a fake reason, I don't care, as long as Hamas is not being funded.

If you think Hamas are going to lose an öre over this, you really are naïve.

Unfortunately no.

According to the Israeli High Court of Justice, the .gov.il is OBLIGATED to give them money to maintain schools and basic infrastructure.

I kid you not.

Occupiers having responsibility for the land they've occupied? Imagine that!

And I get to mock the West for praising democracy, but only when their puppet gets "elected."
Fine by me. Just as long as we agree that no nation is obligated to fund another.

Fine by me. Just as long as we agree that no nation is obligated to fund another.

Unless one is an occupier, the other nation is one's protectorate, or something like that.

Occupiers having responsibility for the land they've occupied? Imagine that!

Taken during a war that they didn't start, thus it should be considered part of Israel.

I personally think Israel should declare the Palestinians independent. Fold up the military, kick out the settlers, and leave.

Taken during a war that they didn't start, thus it should be considered part of Israel.

Except the problem is, no sane Israelis want it, or anything to do with it.

Except the problem is, no sane Israelis want it, or anything to do with it.

True, and with good reason. But if it was any other nation the story would be different.

Because we Canadians are sissies. I mean, we let the Americans jerk us around on Softwood lumber for how many years? We constantly get lumped in with the Americans, but don't raise too much fuss about it aside from a long-forgotten protest or two. There's the water-territory debate (some view this particular water as international territory, whereas, the Canadians see it, reasonably as far as I know, to be part of our territory) that the US, among other nations, constantly goes through without too much done about it.

Maybe its just me, but I think that Canada hasn't got a backbone. We're too scared of making everyone else 'upset' with us.
I'm sorry you see us that way.

Unfortunately no.

According to the Israeli High Court of Justice, the .gov.il is OBLIGATED to give them money to maintain schools and basic infrastructure.

I kid you not.
The Israeli High Court's ruling only applies to Israel though, right?

Taken during a war that they didn't start, thus it should be considered part of Israel.

2 wrongs != 1 right.

Unless one is an occupier, the other nation is one's protectorate, or something like that.
Neither Canada nor the US is occupying any Palestinian territory, therefore we owe them nothing.

Neither Canada nor the US is occupying any Palestinian territory, therefore we owe them nothing.

Quite. You owe them nothing, but that doesn't make you any less hypocrites.

I personally think Israel should declare the Palestinians independent. Fold up the military, kick out the settlers, and leave.
Well, the current name of the game seems to be "disengagement". sounds so clean and civilized. However, there is a point when this stradegy will run dry. Example: the current plan to dismantle settlements in the west bank is unlike the one that was carried out in Gaza last summer in that even though the civilian population will leave, there are no plans to remove the military, in effect, retaining the occupation but just with reduced risk to the Israeli civilians. Negotiations will have to resume eventually if Palestinians want their land, and if Israelis want their sons home.

2 wrongs != 1 right.

And how many wrongs have the Palestinians committed again? They seem to always be on the wrong side of any war against Israel. And yet, they have a special observer at the UN.

Does Tibet have that? No. And why? Because they don't blow people up and Jews aren't the ones occupying them.

Quite. You owe them nothing, but that doesn't make you any less hypocrites.
I'm no hypocrite. I've never had anything good to say about Hamas or Palestinian terrorists in general.

Quite. You owe them nothing, but that doesn't make you any less hypocrites.
Just curious, but when has Canada funded terrorists?

Anyway, if changing one's foreign policy (even for the better) makes you a hypocrite, well, I think that's a word all countries can embrace without shame.

When it suits us.
So should we fund Hamas or not?

I do not support Isreal's illegal occupation.

You didn't answer his question.

Ah, yes, the brown people racism.

You just invented a case of racism.

I honestly think that you are trolling. Your responses seem to be aimed at making people angry. It's certainly not intelligent debate.

By retracting aid from an already destitute populace. How cosy.
Not quite:
Canada continues to guarantee loans made by the Palestinian Autority to keep basic functions like water, electricity, etc. running.

We should not fund terrorists, period. But we're not consistent with it - we do fund terrorists when it suits us, and we continue to.
I agree. We should not fund any terrorists. So what are we arguing about, again?

("Period"?) Why are you speaking American English? Only Americans say "period" to end a sentence.

If you think Hamas are going to lose an öre over this, you really are naïve.
They're going to lose some Canadian "öre"; that's usually what cutting off funding means.

So should we fund Hamas or not?


I don't the reason to change our previous policy.

I merely don't like the moral ambiguity of saying "We'll fund A and B."
Even though most of the world says B are terrorists, as it suits to support them, they'll get money regardless.

Morals probably won't come into funding them- like always, it will come down to what situation benefits to benefactor in the end- having A or B in power- regardless of whether or not they are deemed 'terrorists'.

Do you support some 58 years of palestinian terrorism?

Any form of support for the socalled palestinian people is morally suspect - and out of the question.

58 years of justified armed resistance. And it might be out of the question for you, but don't lump the rest of us in with you.

A people that are unjustly and illegally occupied by a power thats intent on effectively cleansing them from certain areas and seizing the land should not be asked to "renounce violence". Its a pathetic bit of toadying to the US. The only demand that can be made of them with any remote legitmacy is that they recognise the state of Israel as defined by its 1967 borders.


Neither Canada nor the US is occupying any Palestinian territory, therefore we owe them nothing..

The US owes them for blocking the normal processes which would have moved the Israelies out by now.

I don't the reason to change our previous policy.

I merely don't like the moral ambiguity of saying "We'll fund A and B."
Even though most of the world says B are terrorists, as it suits to support them, they'll get money regardless.

Morals probably won't come into funding them- like always, it will come down to what situation benefits to benefactor in the end- having A or B in power- regardless of whether or not they are deemed 'terrorists'.
I don't think that any terrorists should be funded. It makes no logical sense to say, "hey you're hypocrites for funding terrorist group X and not terrorist group Y for being terrorists! [which is correct] Keep funding all the terrorists!"

At least be happy that one less terrorist group is getting money.

It looks like the critical volume of common sense in this thread had surpassed the level of sustainability. :rolleyes:

Because Corneliu is convinced that Canadians are terrorist-appeasing surrender-monkeys. It isn't a personal thing. He believes this about everyone who did not vote for Bush in 2004. And no reason - be it age, or be it living in a place where Bush wasn't electable - such as Canada - strikes him as sufficient reason for not voting for Bush.

Now this is a childish post. Not to mention slander, well in this case lible because it is in print and not by voice.