More Kevin Annett conspiricy theories that have nothing to do with George Bush!
2007-08-24 03:02:04
·
answer #1
·
answered by conranger1 7
·
3⤊
1⤋
Libs have some mixed up priorities. This is a classic example. Canada's treatment of native people 100 year ago, is not A topic for a 3 nation meeting,
2007-08-24 03:17:44
·
answer #2
·
answered by lana_sands 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I'm not a fan of Bush by any stretch of the imagination, but I can see some really 'good' political reasons to stay out of this.
First, it's a domestic affair. There isn't anything 'in it' for Bush.
Second, the atrocities weren't commited during the Bush administration.
Third, he really can't afford to point fingers at any country that is part of his 'coalition of the willing'. I don't know what back-room bargaining chips he used to get Canada's support to invade Iraq, but I'm sure he would be burning some bridges if he condemed his allies for ANYTHING. They have....more than enough ammo to burn him a hundred times worse. All they have to do is mention 'WMD' at the U.N.
2007-08-24 03:06:16
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Because then the USA has to face up to the biggest genocide in all of history, 16 million natives killed by gun and disease on purpose. The US Robber Barons of the 17 -18th century, exchanged disease carrying blankets for animal hides with the Indians, wiping out entire nations, later it was a sport, to eliminate entire populations of buffalo, the main food source for natives, in drive by shootings by train
2007-08-24 03:06:53
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
This is all the ravings of one lunatic. This person should be locked up in one of Canada's great health facilities and heavily medicated.
2007-08-24 03:04:46
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Can anyone really see us going to war with Canada? That’s where all of our deserters go. We've had one of them wars once. Brother vs. brother wars just don't work out.
2007-08-24 03:25:36
·
answer #6
·
answered by Dan S 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because Americans did the same thing back in the day.
2007-08-24 03:02:30
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
1⤋
It would be like the pot calling the kettle black. You do realize, the US got it's land the same way.
2007-08-24 03:04:01
·
answer #8
·
answered by handyrandy 5
·
3⤊
0⤋
This seems to me to be Canada's problem. Not the U.S.
2007-08-24 03:02:04
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋
Can you do anything but look for ways to make "UNECCESSARY" trouble where it doesn't even exist?
2007-08-24 03:20:55
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋