Attack On Canada's Capital

If only it were that simple...

Well, since the only way they can tell what Americans are like is through mainstream media and Hollywood, it's perfectly understandable why they think that.

That depends on their definition of battlefield. It seems to me that basically anywhere in the western world is the battlefield for the ISIS.

Well, since ISIS did declare war on the Western World, that statement is true....

Can't we just nuke their headquarters while they are all there and forget that they ever existed?

Canada didn't declare war all on it's own, it went to war as a part of good faith towards the monarch and british parliament, as we were technically still heavily linked.

Basically, up until Stephen Harper took office, the Canadian governments, primarily Canadian Liberals (basically American Conservatives) would choose to go to war or support wars waged by America. (Other than the War of 1812) and the European Union.

Also, in regards to the war on "Terrorism" in Iraq, the US was collectively pissed that Canada was basically the only country that chose not to participate as a member of the coalition of the willing.

In the first three months of that war, Canadian soldiers who were not in combat ready status, volunteered individually to join the American troops. Some were even said to renounce their citizenship to do this, and ultimately became AWOL soldiers or mercenaries that ended up committing war crimes.

It wasn't until this time that Canada had ever said "NO!" to sending troops into war-torn countries at the behest of it's allies.

This little part. We are actually far from a being a pacifist country. We're actually ranked 13th for guns per capita at 30.8 guns per 100 people. Our military is actually one of the best trained in the world as well. The only difference between us and the USA is that we have a much smaller population. That and our gun control is a bit better.

We just need to reduce ISIS' main HQ in Syria to radioactive glass.

A) Bahahahahahahahaha. Seriously, thanks for the laugh about the gun control bit.

B) You can't use guns as an indicator of pacifism or not. I own a gun, but I don't go around shooting people or declare wars against my neighbor or whatnot. I don't create conflict with anyone (outside online activities). I am, in a general definition, a pacifist, due to the fact that I don't create or cause conflict. But I own a gun. So, your reasoning is very flawed.

Ensuring ISIS goes franchise a la Al Qaeda or takes up home in some other unstable part of the globe. Ready to reduce the entire world to glass?

Ya'll really need to stop thinking of terrorist orgs like standing militaries of days gone by. There isn't this base you hit to win, it's an ideology gone global encouraging people to engage in mass murder for God.

What I'm really concerned about is how much money they're making from oil fields and selling cheap barrels of oil on the black market. An income stream means ability to buy arms, engage in more concerted recruitment and become as virulent and stubborn a threat as some large scale drug operations. How well has the West done with that? Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

This ***could well be the next 50 years of warfare in the region.

Not to mention that the glass wouldn't be radioactive...

So, having nuclear waste in a glass bottle sent to your house was a good idea?

I actually didn't mean to say Canada was in fact a pacifist country by literal definition. (Tho its easy to see how it could be interpreted that way)

I was referring more towards the ideas behind
the idea that they are not currently able to deal with such actions. - Atks like this/ppl like this exist in the world. All nations should be ready and trained to deal with it. And since the world has let ppl with these type of violent intentions flourish, it is (sad to say) something we can come to expect more often.

Canada, I hope you learn from the US and don't go full tilt WE HUNTIN SUM TURRIRISTS.

Don't overreact or you'll have played into ISIS' hands.

That evening our Prime Minister literally said we won't overreact, we'll just step up security.

im kinda baffled by that logic. While im not saying jump straight to war or anything, the idea of only stepping up security is basically saying 'we wont stop the problem at its source. We will only wait for the problem to be on our door step before we try to intervene'. That approach will not only put you in more danger, but it will keep you on the defensive for ever since the problem will never go away.

You already didn't get involved rly in the fighting, and they atked you anyway. Not intervening again is only going to produce the same results.
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein

(all of this under the assumption that it was an isis atk)

Well, the media is backpedaling (due to assumptions right after the attack happened) and stating that this was a terrorist attack outside of ISIS.

Obama's to blame!.... or so said fox news this morning.

I would say that this is an obviously generalized statement....

...but you are probably right.

So you're interested with dealing with the problem at its source are you? That would require the prosecution of Cheney and Bush for war crimes. Still interested?

wow.. back to blaming bush are we? lol
Yes. Bush hired the terrorist to go atk Canada. (hmm what else can we add...) Oh! Bush wanted Canada's oil so he hired a terrorist to atk Canada! Its a secret conspiracy! Hes hoping Canada will retaliate in grand proportions so he has an excuse to invade Canada!

Obviously it's all Bush's fault.

ISIS
Syria
The asteroid out to kill us all
Benghazi
Solyndra
Obama

All of the world's ills are always Bush's fault!

I don't know what is more ridiculous; how ignorant your post is or the fact that you think you are being clever.

You confuse the issue, but it was more of a side rant, so carry on.

idk where you think that glass can't be radioactively contaminated, if radiation or radioactive waste touches it, it's contaminated.

Ooh, sounds delish! Let me just toss some jeans on...wait a minute !

your the one saying bush is the source for an atk on canada'

Wait a minute! This could not have happened in Canada! They don't have the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. Plus due to his criminal record, Zehaf-Bibeau was already prohibited from owning a gun; in fact, Canadian courts had already issued the man a standard lifetime gun ban due to a violent conviction. Even without that ban, however, this guy couldn’t have obtained the gun in any legal way.

So this is either a lie or liberal gun control nuts are *** Insane.

Meanwhile: Since Canada has no worry of a "2nd amendment" The following will more than likely come into existence.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ottawa-shooting-harper-government-wants-to-make-terror-arrests-easier-1.2811571

Best Saying I ever heard in the Army:

Not every Muslim is a terrorist, but every terrorist is a Muslim.

Except for domestic terrorists

Pretty sure not all of them have been Muslim lol

Anders Breivik from Norway is a terrorist and he's not Muslim, he's anti-Muslim in fact.