Site Administrator Of:

Supporter Of:


An open letter reply to the Conservative trolls from last topic.

Dear Small Dead Animal fan(s) from Saskatchewan: My questioning of the Afghanistan panel as to whether it’s slanted only towards one point of view does not mean that a) I want to see Afghanistan women in burqhas again, or b) I want to see the mission fail or c) make me an ass***e. What it does make me is someone who is pointing out if you’re going to paint a panel you’ve created to take the heat off of your government over the issue as being “non-partisan”, you’d better make sure you appoint panellists of all sides of the debate so it actually IS non-partisan. It also means if the panel is going to call “experts”, you should not just call experts from your own government to testify, but call independent ones as well. That also shows you’re serious about it being non-partisan and objective.

Fairly simple straightforward and reasonable statements, but it appears conservatives from Saskatchewan-way aren’t very logical (and yes, I removed your comments from the site and banned you as well – both for a fake email address and for abuse. I just thought I’d make sure you got a public reply to let you know I saw the attempted public reply on that thread,  and how idiotic I think people are who leave stuff like that).

I have said this before, but I’ll say it again It doesn’t say much for the mentality of conservatives based out of Saskatchewan. There must be a pretty deep feverish swamp out there.

Sincere Regards,


13 comments to An open letter reply to the Conservative trolls from last topic.

  • Festus

    So, uh, what will happen to the women and children of Afganistan if we pull out? It’s no suprise the Euros won’t help, the US looked after their defence for a couple of generations and now they have no concept of standing up for anything. That and they have screwed themselves by letting all the muslims immigrate, now it they do stand up the rioters will burn down their cities.
    If they won’t help in Afganistan, then I guess Canada and the other grown up countries will have to keep shouldering the responsibility to protect the weaker members of the planet.
    Or we can let the Taliban start killing everyone who is gay, who is not not muslim, who would like to go to school, or who doesn’t subscribe to their misogynist view of the world.
    There’s the way the world should be, and then there’s the way the world is.
    I wouldn’t be to quick to forget how gutless and useless the Euros are now that they have decided on selfishness instead of adulthood.

  • As long as a national blogosphere is dominated by conservatives, this is probably inevitable. It’s not so much an issue in America because the progressive blogging community has absolutely exploded, but it certainly was at one point. Either the progressive side will grow to the point that conservatives get drowned out (see: DailyKos), or people will get used to ignoring them.

    Until then, though, may I suggest disemvoweling?

  • I always thought supporting someone meant keeping them out of harms way. But I guess black is white…

  • Jin

    has anyone ever seen Aaron Unruh and Dick Cheney in the same room at the same time?

    It is a dense but thankfully seldom few who don’t understand the difference between supporting the troops and supporting the war.

  • It always bothers me when people suggest that supporting our troops and supporting the war are inseparable.

    Do I support our troops? Of course! I think they’re doing a great job within the parameters thay have been given. I think the parameters don’t make much sense and don’t support them, but the troops, of course!

    Anyway, this is my answer to comments about Canada’s role in the war in Afghanistan.

  • Aaron,

    Allow me to answer, if Scott won’t:

    According to soldiers on the ground, no we aren’t really helping the Afghan’s very much. At least according to CP and they guys at the Galloping Beaver. You remember them right, the former soldiers, including Dave, the former Royal Marine?

    Our guys are dying to support a corrupt, warlord-infested government that is only marginally better than the Taliban, in a country where a sizeable number of the people want to negotiate peace with the Taliban. They are fighting in a country with a long history of tribal warfare and instability, that could not be tamed historically by the Brits or more recently by the Russians – 500 000 of them. The one whose nieghbour, Pakistan, is making peace with the tribes so they can then join the Taliban in the fight (and if you have read "Ghost Wars" by Steve Coll, you would know that the Taliban is likely a creation of the ISI, Pakistan’s military intelligence…so much for our ‘Allies in the War on Terra’).

    No, our soldiers or caught in a quagmire and a meat grinder, with no clear plan or objective, supporting an unpopular and corrupt regime supported warlords – some former Taliban.  How is this even a remotely winnable situation? It isn’t.

    Our soldiers ought to come home and only be used when there is a clear plan, a clear strategy and a chance of success. None of this exists in Afghanistan.

    Yes, somehow by wanting our troops to live, to have success and not be wasted in a quagmire means I "don’t support the troops". But you, who wishes to leave them to die for nothing, with no plan or strategy and no hope of success, does "support the troops".

    What nonsense. You are a fool.

  • That’s a stupid answer…more stupid than normal coming from you. Does the idea of another NATO country picking up the slack after you’ve abandoned Afghan citizens allow you to sleep better at night? I hear that life under the Taliban was a real picnic, after all.

  • That’s a stupid question, Aaron… more stupid then normal coming from you.   It has nothing to do with my questioning whether or not the panel has been rigged to come to a conclusion that the Prime Minister and his Conservative Party wants – something conservative blog supporters don’t seem too keen on answering.

    As for the "Liberals hate soldiers" bullcrap, that’s all it is… it’s nothing more then the "Democrats hate/don’t support  our troops!" spiel that comes from the Republicans/conservatives in the US towards those who want to end the Iraq mess.

    I’ve already stated many times I supported sending the soldiers there originally, but I believe it’s time for others in NATO to shoulder the burden. We’ve done our fair time there. There are many nations in NATO who either don’t have troops there (and don’t want to send troops there), or else restrict them in other parts of the country, where fighting is less. We’ve done our duty – its time for others to show how much they believe in this mission.

  • My my, doesn’t someone have an expansive definition of "troll." 

    "Boo hoo, he doesn’t agree with me, he’s a troll!"

    And Scott apparently doesn’t know whether Canadian troops are making a positive difference in Afghanistan. Another ringing endorsement of our troops! And then you wonder why Canadians think that the Liberal Party hates our soldiers?

  • Nuke the Unruh Troll

    Aaron, do you have life outside of writing your stupid blog and trolling?

    Oh, right…you don’t answer hard questions.

  • Scott, do you think that Canadian soldiers are making a positive difference for Afghan civilians?

    Oh, right, you don’t answer hard questions.

  • Scott, I find that discourse with people who like to derail conversations with irrelevant remarks can be resolved in two ways. One, is to patiently beat them over the head with logic over and over until they’re screaming masses of incoherence, or to just remove them from your discourse. The second option doesn’t require saintly patience and saves time too. 🙂

  • Scott, we are in the middle of an election here in Saskatchewan right now. Both New Democrat and Lib bloggers have been dealing with a flurry of demented right wing (SDA related) bloggers – probably the very one you refer to. With the New Democrats having been in power for 16 years, the right wing is emboldened in anticipation of electoral victory provincially. The Saskatchewan Party is full of the most incredibly uneducated, blustering former Reformers who have found a new home with Brad Wall and the SP.
    They may win the election on November 7th. At dissolution, the Saskatchewan Party held 28 seats in the Legislature to the New Democrats 30 (with NO Libs)
    If they do, Stephen Harper will acquire the slavish loyalty and co-operation of this province.
    It will be ugly.

unique visitors since the change to this site domain on Nov 12, 2008.