Given that the free exchange of rationale and well thought out arguments in this post probably ended some 10 or so posts ago, this will be my last contribution to this thread. I will give both Hortlund and Habu the benefit of the doubt that they are simply misinformed about this issue, and try and set the record straight. Frankly, the only reason I felt it was necessary is to do my small part to try and limit the disinformation that circulates on this BBS and others, so you can take or leave all of this if you like.
For the record:
1. At no time did I say that conscription was not a major issue in Canada in both WWI and WWII. My point was that you cannot understand the reasons why it was such an issue without an understanding of the political context at the time and the history of Canada.
2. My objections to various comments made were objections to those comments that suggested that Quebec's rejection of conscription was somehow a function of a lack of bravery on the part of French Canadians.
3. I am an Anglophone from Montreal. If either of you seem to think that means that I am a French Canadian and that somehow explains my point of view, you need an education on what it means to be an Anglophone in Quebec.
4. At no time did I make any attempt to defend "french" honour. At all times I made every attempt to defend Canadian honour. Again, the fact that you don't seem to understand the difference goes a long way to explaining some of your posts.
5. The Van Doos are a proud and distinguished regiment, and in fact have always been the "Pride of Quebec" so to speak, even amongst those people who disagree with the entire conscription issue. I would ask that you show even just a little bit of respect. If that is beyond you, so be it, but your lack of respect does not belittle them it belittles you.
6. Habu, I would love to see statistics that back any of your assertions that, as a percentage of the total population of Canada at the time, French Canadians were underepresented. I suspect you have none, so your only ammunition is the 98% number you referred to above together with your ridiculous "2 out of 100,000" example which you somehow think supports an attack on me.
I will concede that both of you are entirely correct in your point of view that French Canadians are cowards when you can refer me to any book, article, etc. written by a respected military historian (Canadian or otherwise) which takes the position that the conscription crisis was a result of French Canadian cowardice. I suspect that you will not find one, but I am willing to give you the benefit of doubt since you both seem convinced that you are entirely right on this whole issue. Given your commitment to you ideas, I can only assume that you formed those ideas on the basis of reading something, anything, that supports that position, and frankly I would be interested in being similarly enlightened.
