Canada's Prime Minister Mark Carney said his country would honour its NATO obligations to defend Denmark and Greenland, putting Canada at odds with the US
Yeah, sure, in the event of a US military invasion and occupation, feel free to climb onto the moral high ground and explain to Canadians, who are oppressed and victimized daily by enemy forces, why they should fight back only by the agreed rules laid down by state actors.
I suspect OP meant the kinds of things that Canada was accused of in past wars - like perfidy and murdering POWs - and not, in fact, raping and smashing babies into trees, or whatever the fuck else you’ve decided to imagine they meant. You know, the things that were historically attributed to Canadian troops, which you might know, if you actually based any of your opinion on actual historical fact.
The trees thing was Cambodia of course. Rape and torture were all kinds of people, including The British Empire (AKA Canada).
I’ll let readers decide what what was obviously meant. I’m not sure killing in “creative” ways from further down can be twisted into something more generous, regardless of how much you try.
When people make this comment about Canada and the Geneva Conventions they are referring primarily to Canada’s conduct in WW1 and WW2, and in particular their treatment of POWs (i.e. killing POWs). There may also be reference to events like Canadian soldiers switching cans of food thrown to German soldiers with explosives.
Canada has had other incidents, particularly in Somalia with the airborne, who were disbanded.
These are facts that can be discovered with a little research. The other things you mentioned are things that you may wish to associate with Canada, but unfortunately for you Canada’s war crimes typically involve treatment of POWs and perfidy, not rape and ‘smashing babies against trees’.
And associating Canada to the British Empire is a pretty hamfisted way to try to implicate Canada in the colonial and imperial adventures of the British Empire that spans centuries and predates her.
Yeah, sure, in the event of a US military invasion and occupation, feel free to climb onto the moral high ground and explain to Canadians, who are oppressed and victimized daily by enemy forces, why they should fight back only by the agreed rules laid down by state actors.
I suspect OP meant the kinds of things that Canada was accused of in past wars - like perfidy and murdering POWs - and not, in fact, raping and smashing babies into trees, or whatever the fuck else you’ve decided to imagine they meant. You know, the things that were historically attributed to Canadian troops, which you might know, if you actually based any of your opinion on actual historical fact.
The trees thing was Cambodia of course. Rape and torture were all kinds of people, including The British Empire (AKA Canada).
I’ll let readers decide what what was obviously meant. I’m not sure killing in “creative” ways from further down can be twisted into something more generous, regardless of how much you try.
When people make this comment about Canada and the Geneva Conventions they are referring primarily to Canada’s conduct in WW1 and WW2, and in particular their treatment of POWs (i.e. killing POWs). There may also be reference to events like Canadian soldiers switching cans of food thrown to German soldiers with explosives.
Canada has had other incidents, particularly in Somalia with the airborne, who were disbanded.
These are facts that can be discovered with a little research. The other things you mentioned are things that you may wish to associate with Canada, but unfortunately for you Canada’s war crimes typically involve treatment of POWs and perfidy, not rape and ‘smashing babies against trees’.
And associating Canada to the British Empire is a pretty hamfisted way to try to implicate Canada in the colonial and imperial adventures of the British Empire that spans centuries and predates her.