03-14-2004, 02:02 AM
Errr, sorry. The city in the example is Toronto; not sure how or why I flipped it to London halfway through. And one potential threat would be that the U.S. would declare war. My question was, if you were that PM, would you cooperate with the US/Canadian investigation, or would you start gearing your troops up to go to war against the U.S.? But I think you completely missing the point of this.
The Bush quote was a message to the leadership of countries where terrorists are trained, funded, etc. that their countries can be held accountable for the actions of the individuals. If you are a head of state, then it is a strongly worded threat. Either cooperate in the elimination of the terrorist elements of your country, or face the consequences. Kandrathe is right in that it really was aimed at specific countries (because, as I'm sure Occhi would point out, there is always more than one issue involved in any international relationship). For you to apply this quote to yourself and say you are not for Bush, so you must be for the terrorists... I don't have the slightest idea what you are saying by that. The only thing that would make sense would be that either you take part in harboring terrorists, or it is within your power to stop some terrorists, but you refuse to do it. Since this doesn't seem to be what you are getting at, I think we are just arguing about the context of the quote.
The Bush quote was a message to the leadership of countries where terrorists are trained, funded, etc. that their countries can be held accountable for the actions of the individuals. If you are a head of state, then it is a strongly worded threat. Either cooperate in the elimination of the terrorist elements of your country, or face the consequences. Kandrathe is right in that it really was aimed at specific countries (because, as I'm sure Occhi would point out, there is always more than one issue involved in any international relationship). For you to apply this quote to yourself and say you are not for Bush, so you must be for the terrorists... I don't have the slightest idea what you are saying by that. The only thing that would make sense would be that either you take part in harboring terrorists, or it is within your power to stop some terrorists, but you refuse to do it. Since this doesn't seem to be what you are getting at, I think we are just arguing about the context of the quote.