2017 Canadian Politics Megathread - Sesquicentennial Edition

[Napkiraly]

The idea that the Liberals need to go through with the arms deal for some bullshit "credibility" is a cop-out. It doesnt matter who authored it before, it matters who is going through with it now. People are dying. Being killed by an oppressive regime that seeks to dominate the region. Why the fuck should we help them?

There still an US ally and therefore our ally.

It is not a cop out.

If a solder was ordered to kill civilian, you don't blame the solder, you blame whomever ordered it.

They are not our ally. They may be trade partners and we work together from time to time on counter-terrorism, but they are not our ally. The only time I'd be willing to have Canadians go and fight for Saudi Arabia is if someone worse is trying to take over and they'd have to be significantly worse than the Saudis.

[Camicon]

The idea that the Liberals need to go through with the arms deal for some bullshit "credibility" is a cop-out. It doesnt matter who authored it before, it matters who is going through with it now. People are dying. Being killed by an oppressive regime that seeks to dominate the region. Why the fuck should we help them?

No, it's facing facts. Burning down everything the previous government had ongoing does not make Canada a reliable partner. If people think Canada is unreliable then our clout and standing in the international community diminishes a great deal, particularly when it comes to any sort of deal or agreement with another actor. That's not something our country can afford.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

There still an US ally and therefore our ally.

It is not a cop out.

If a solder was ordered to kill civilian, you don't blame the solder, you blame whomever ordered it.

They are not our ally. They may be trade partners and we work together from time to time on counter-terrorism, but they are not our ally. The only time I'd be willing to have Canadians go and fight for Saudi Arabia is if someone worse is trying to take over and they'd have to be significantly worse than the Saudis.

There the US's friends and any friends of the US are friends of Canada.

[Cymrea]

They are not our ally. They may be trade partners and we work together from time to time on counter-terrorism, but they are not our ally. The only time I'd be willing to have Canadians go and fight for Saudi Arabia is if someone worse is trying to take over and they'd have to be significantly worse than the Saudis.

There the US's friends and any friends of the US are friends of Canada.

Not necessarily, and in the other direction Canada's continued trading with Cuba even after the U.S. tried to compel Canada not to.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

There the US's friends and any friends of the US are friends of Canada.

Not necessarily, and in the other direction Canada's continued trading with Cuba even after the U.S. tried to compel Canada not to.

Well, thats kinda of a mute point beacuse of america finally reopened Us- Cuba relations.

But thats a different case in any event.

[Cymrea]

Not necessarily, and in the other direction Canada's continued trading with Cuba even after the U.S. tried to compel Canada not to.

Well, thats kinda of a mute point beacuse of america finally reopened Us- Cuba relations.

But thats a different case in any event.

It may be moot now, but it really bugged the U.S. for a long time.

And while Canada does trade with pretty much all the same folks as the U.S., and for generally the same reasons, it's not in any way mandatory. Though during Conservative governments, it's not so easy to tell.

[Bogdanov Vishniac]

The idea that the Liberals need to go through with the arms deal for some bullshit "credibility" is a cop-out. It doesnt matter who authored it before, it matters who is going through with it now. People are dying. Being killed by an oppressive regime that seeks to dominate the region. Why the fuck should we help them?

There still an US ally and therefore our ally.

It is not a cop out.

If a solder was ordered to kill civilian, you don't blame the solder, you blame whomever ordered it.

I'm pretty sure the Nuremberg defense stopped being a good excuse circa 1945 or so.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

Well, thats kinda of a mute point beacuse of america finally reopened Us- Cuba relations.

But thats a different case in any event.

It may be moot now, but it really bugged the U.S. for a long time.

And while Canada does trade with pretty much all the same folks as the U.S., and for generally the same reasons, it's not in any way mandatory. Though during Conservative governments, it's not so easy to tell.

Bugging the US for a long time is what Justin Bieber did, and that didn't have any border tension flare ups.

Anyway, I don't think the deal was great ether but It was still Harper's fault. And they have oil. And they are US's friends so we are friends with them by proxy.

There still an US ally and therefore our ally.

It is not a cop out.

If a solder was ordered to kill civilian, you don't blame the solder, you blame whomever ordered it.

I'm pretty sure the Nuremberg defense stopped being a good excuse circa 1945 or so.

It's not an excuse. Its a fact.

[Camicon]

There still an US ally and therefore our ally.

It is not a cop out.

If a solder was ordered to kill civilian, you don't blame the solder, you blame whomever ordered it.

I'm pretty sure the Nuremberg defense stopped being a good excuse circa 1945 or so.

There is a difference between moral culpability and blame.

[Bogdanov Vishniac]

I'm pretty sure the Nuremberg defense stopped being a good excuse circa 1945 or so.

It's not an excuse. Its a fact.

Principle IV of the Nuremberg Principles, published by the International Law Commission of the United Nations and included in General Assembly Resolution 177;

"The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him."

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

It's not an excuse. Its a fact.

Principle IV of the Nuremberg Principles, published by the International Law Commission of the United Nations;

"The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him."

If a solder was ordered to kill civilian, you don't blame the solder, you blame whomever ordered it.

"Ordered:
give an authoritative direction or instruction to do something."

No choice possible. Unless you want high oil prices.

[Bogdanov Vishniac]

Principle IV of the Nuremberg Principles, published by the International Law Commission of the United Nations;

"The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him."

If a solder was ordered to kill civilian, you don't blame the solder, you blame whomever ordered it.

"Ordered:
give an authoritative direction or instruction to do something."

No choice possible. Unless you want high oil prices.

Yes, and if your superior officer is literally pointing a gun at your head and threatening to shoot you with it if you don't carry out said orders, then you have a good excuse. But Nuremberg laid out that the subordinate does have a responsibility to stand against immoral orders. Likewise with the Liberal government.

Of course this isn't quite the argument that Camicon is making - more of that world realpolitik and Canada's position robs us of the ability to make an effective stand against that immorality by refusing to deal with the Saudis.

I'm pretty sure the Nuremberg defense stopped being a good excuse circa 1945 or so.

There is a difference between moral culpability and blame.

They overlap quite a bit though.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

"Ordered:
give an authoritative direction or instruction to do something."

No choice possible. Unless you want high oil prices.

Yes, and if your superior officer is literally pointing a gun at your head and threatening to shoot you with it if you don't carry out said orders, then you have a good excuse. But Nuremberg laid out that the subordinate does have a responsibility to stand against immoral orders. Likewise with the Liberal government.

Of course this isn't quite the argument that Camicon is making - more of that world realpolitik and Canada's position robs us of the ability to make an effective stand against that immorality by refusing to deal with the Saudis.

There is a difference between moral culpability and blame.

They overlap quite a bit though.

Great, then you get insubordination charges. If you are ordered to do something, you do it.

But what exactly immoral about the deal it self?

We have a thing that does stuff, they have money, we already agreed to sell the thing that does stuff for there money.
When the new government took office, nothing changed with that deal.

Also, If you want to pay a crap tone of money for gas or plastic products, that's your business.

Overlap does not equal exactly the same.

[Bogdanov Vishniac]

Great, then you get insubordination charges. If you are ordered to do something, you do it.

Military codes of justice explicitly specify that insubordination consists of refusing to obey lawful orders. You can and will be prosecuted for following unlawful orders.

But what exactly immoral about the deal it self?

We have a thing that does stuff, they have money, we already agreed to sell the thing that does stuff for there money.
When the new government took office, nothing changed with that deal.

The problem comes in that we're a country that's decided that it stands for human right and dignity throughout the world, both in policy and speech. Selling weapons systems or vehicles to a country that is currently using those systems to bomb civilians or execute dissidents or 'undesirables' or what have you represents an act of hypocrisy on our part.

Also, If you want to pay a crap tone of money for gas or plastic products, that's your business.

Maybe that's a conversation we need to have as a country. Is it worth selling out our principles for the expedience of cheap gas?

Overlap does not equal exactly the same.

Nor did I say as such.

[Geilinor]

Great, then you get insubordination charges. If you are ordered to do something, you do it.

Military codes of justice explicitly specify that insubordination consists of refusing to obey lawful orders. You can and will be prosecuted for following unlawful orders.

But what exactly immoral about the deal it self?

We have a thing that does stuff, they have money, we already agreed to sell the thing that does stuff for there money.
When the new government took office, nothing changed with that deal.

The problem comes in that we're a country that's decided that it stands for human right and dignity throughout the world, both in policy and speech. Selling weapons systems or vehicles to a country that is currently using those systems to bomb civilians or execute dissidents or 'undesirables' or what have you represents an act of hypocrisy on our part.

The deal had already been made by the Harper government. Trudeau could have cancelled it but that would have been very bad for Canada's defense industry and could make it hard to get deals with other countries in the future. If Saudi Arabia commits war crimes, they will be the ones who are culpable.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

Great, then you get insubordination charges. If you are ordered to do something, you do it.

Military codes of justice explicitly specify that insubordination consists of refusing to obey lawful orders. You can and will be prosecuted for following unlawful orders.

But what exactly immoral about the deal it self?

We have a thing that does stuff, they have money, we already agreed to sell the thing that does stuff for there money.
When the new government took office, nothing changed with that deal.

The problem comes in that we're a country that's decided that it stands for human right and dignity throughout the world, both in policy and speech. Selling weapons systems or vehicles to a country that is currently using those systems to bomb civilians or execute dissidents or 'undesirables' or what have you represents an act of hypocrisy on our part.

Also, If you want to pay a crap tone of money for gas or plastic products, that's your business.

Maybe that's a conversation we need to have as a country. Is it worth selling out our principles for the expedience of cheap gas?

Overlap does not equal exactly the same.

Nor did I say as such.

And that's how real life works? That's how it is on paper but stuff happens man.

But they have oil and we need oil cheep in order to keep life stable. We can only support the number of humans on this earth (7.4 billion) with cheep oil.
Again Harper did everything, Trudeau just need to finish the last 00.01% of the deal.

It wouldn't be worth the controversy to can the deal to a US ally. (you know the guys who also protect us)

You implied it.

[Bogdanov Vishniac]

And that's how real life works? That's how it is on paper but stuff happens man.

...Yes? I mean, there are cases of soldiers being punished for following their superiors' unlawful orders going back to like the Romans. If not further.

But they have oil and we need oil cheep in order to keep life stable. We can only support the number of humans on this earth (7.4 billion) with cheep oil.

Saudi Arabia represents one chunk of the world's oil reserves. You've yet to prove that breaking deals with them specifically would affect oil prices enough to threatened the existence of civilization.

Again Harper did everything, Trudeau just need to finish the last 00.01% of the deal.

Does that absolve him of responsibility though?

It wouldn't be worth the controversy to can the deal to a US ally. (you know the guys who also protect us)

Against who? Unarmed Yemeni civilians? Besides, given their support for Wahhabism worldwide I wouldn't exactly say they're doing much to protect our security.

You implied it.

I said their definitions overlap, and they do. I did not say they are the same.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

And that's how real life works? That's how it is on paper but stuff happens man.

...Yes? I mean, there are cases of soldiers being punished for following their superiors' unlawful orders going back to like the Romans. If not further.

But they have oil and we need oil cheep in order to keep life stable. We can only support the number of humans on this earth (7.4 billion) with cheep oil.

Saudi Arabia represents one chunk of the world's oil reserves. You've yet to prove that breaking deals with them specifically would affect oil prices enough to threatened the existence of civilization.

Again Harper did everything, Trudeau just need to finish the last 00.01% of the deal.

Does that absolve him of responsibility though?

It wouldn't be worth the controversy to can the deal to a US ally. (you know the guys who also protect us)

Against who? Unarmed Yemeni civilians? Besides, given their support for Wahhabism worldwide I wouldn't exactly say they're doing much to protect our security.

You implied it.

I said their definitions overlap, and they do. I did not say they are the same.

How many solders officers got punished harder the solder when they gave the order?
How many solders got absolved of any guilt because they where ordered to do the action and had no other choice?

Saudi Arabia has lots of oil. If we went back on the deal, they wouldn't give us the oil so cheaply.

Yes, he barely did anything for the deal. Blame Harper not Trudeau.

They have nukes, solders, boats. If anyone does boo to us, Big Bro USA comes in screaming.

So... your saying that its synonym.
A word or phrase that means exactly or nearly the same as another word or phrase in the same language.

[Bogdanov Vishniac]

How many solders officers got punished harder the solder when they gave the order?
How many solders got absolved of any guilt because they where ordered to do the action and had no other choice?

Why do the numbers matter?

Saudi Arabia has lots of oil. If we went back on the deal, they wouldn't give us the oil so cheaply.

Would they really? Where's the proof of that?

Yes, he barely did anything for the deal. Blame Harper not Trudeau.

Trudeau has the power to negate the deal though. Hence that moral responsibility we're talking about - it may be the previous government's decision, but he still bears responsibility for allowing it to go unchallenged.

They have nukes, solders, boats. If anyone does boo to us, Big Bro USA comes in screaming.

The Saudis don't have nuclear weapons. They also spend a great deal of money promoting movements that can and do attack us. Why should we be allies with a state that covertly funds movements designed to undermine us?

So... your saying that its synonym.
A word or phrase that means exactly or nearly the same as another word or phrase in the same language.

No I said that what we mean by 'blame' often carries the same connotations as 'moral responsibility'.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

How many solders officers got punished harder the solder when they gave the order?
How many solders got absolved of any guilt because they where ordered to do the action and had no other choice?

Why do the numbers matter?

Saudi Arabia has lots of oil. If we went back on the deal, they wouldn't give us the oil so cheaply.

Would they really? Where's the proof of that?

Yes, he barely did anything for the deal. Blame Harper not Trudeau.

Trudeau has the power to negate the deal though. Hence that moral responsibility we're talking about - it may be the previous government's decision, but he still bears responsibility for allowing it to go unchallenged.

They have nukes, solders, boats. If anyone does boo to us, Big Bro USA comes in screaming.

The Saudis don't have nuclear weapons. They also spend a great deal of money promoting movements that can and do attack us. Why should we be allies with a state that covertly funds movements designed to undermine us?

So... your saying that its synonym.
A word or phrase that means exactly or nearly the same as another word or phrase in the same language.

No I said that what we mean by 'blame' often carries the same connotations as 'moral responsibility'.

Numbers always matter.

Proof #1 Proof number two: Human behavior.
"Oh your not selling us this stuff anymore? Well, price of oil just jumped."

Why bother changing it. Our arms industry needs the cash.

1.We are not allies with Saudi Arabia, we are allies by proxy.
2. Proof of them funding stuff that undermines us?

Again, the act of selling stuff is not immoral.

Gun dealers sell guns and that's not immoral.

[Napkiraly]

They are not our ally. They may be trade partners and we work together from time to time on counter-terrorism, but they are not our ally. The only time I'd be willing to have Canadians go and fight for Saudi Arabia is if someone worse is trying to take over and they'd have to be significantly worse than the Saudis.

There the US's friends and any friends of the US are friends of Canada.

No, they are not. I view the USA as a sibling nation, but that doesn't mean all of their "friends" (if you even want to call the Saudis that) are our friends.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

There the US's friends and any friends of the US are friends of Canada.

No, they are not. I view the USA as a sibling nation, but that doesn't mean all of their "friends" (if you even want to call the Saudis that) are our friends.

Maybe, maybe not. But it in a round about way helps the US, and that helps us.

[Admunkziahviastan]

It's not an excuse. Its a fact.

Principle IV of the Nuremberg Principles, published by the International Law Commission of the United Nations and included in General Assembly Resolution 177;

"The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him."

So murder in war is still considered murder?

[Bogdanov Vishniac]

Numbers always matter.

Tautology. Why does the number matter?

url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves_in_Saudi_Arabia]Proof #1[/url] Proof number two: Human behavior.
"Oh your not selling us this stuff anymore? Well, price of oil just jumped."

That's not proof that reneging on this specific arms deal will cause them to jack up oil prices, or that they have the capability to do so.

Why bother changing it. Our arms industry needs the cash.

I'm sure they can find other customers.

1.We are not allies with Saudi Arabia, we are allies by proxy.

Even more of a reason to cut them off.

2. Proof of them funding stuff that undermines us?

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/21/opini ... de-it.html

Again, the act of selling stuff is not immoral.

Gun dealers sell guns and that's not immoral.

Selling weapons to someone you know is going to do something immoral or illegal is, however. Gun dealers who sold weapons they know were likely going to be used in crimes have been prosecuted as accessories. Same process for arms deals.

[Napkiraly]

No, they are not. I view the USA as a sibling nation, but that doesn't mean all of their "friends" (if you even want to call the Saudis that) are our friends.

Maybe, maybe not. But it in a round about way helps the US, and that helps us.

Not always. And especially not with the likes of Saudi Arabia. We weren't pals with the Khmer Rouge for example and there are reasons for that. We have been pals with Cuba and until recently, there were reasons why America wasn't. America doesn't even support our claim to the Northwest Passage, which is something Russia will most likely try and assert its claims over in the coming years.