Talk:Lescatie/@comment-59.189.164.79-20150106231016/@comment-12776-20150202164037

"Well, I know Kuruni hates the analogy with a suspicious degree of vitriol, PV, but I'll bring it back to bear on you and say that it the US unilaterally mobilized this afternoon and shelled Toronto into the floor, by your logic, that's Canada's leader's fault."

No. I actually fine with nice analogy, but only if it done well and really fit. Your scenario is too simple to be believable and totally not similar at all.

In reallity, there will be lot of tension go on between two nations before the war start. War doesn't just happen without reason, why USA suddenly attack Canada? Serious, you keep saying that  time makes no difference, yet you alway stick to sudden attack without reason in these analog. Because it's only way that will make Canada look like victim, right? Change it to, US and Canada is enga ein war for ten years, then one day US force unilaterally mobilized and shelled Toronto into the floor. is too complex to you?

"All I can tell you is that if Stephen Harper turned up at my pearly gates, his ghostly spirit still riddled with holes from the depleted uranium shells of the US Second Army, I wouldn't send him down to the fiery abyss because "You should've been better prepared you irresponsible noble".

Of course. Because your don't have any pearly gate. Be real.