Let's soothe Rich's ruffled feathers. Many Quebeckers volunteered to fight in World War II. Many Quebeckers opposed conscription. Gnu's statement implies that no Quebeckers would fight "unless conscripted", but this was true of only some Quebeckers. Gnu I assume was exaggerating for dramatic effect, but is technically inaccurate. (I'm not sure that the people who opposed conscription were wrong, as we were able to win the war without it.)

While I'm here: the assumption of Quebec separatists is that a region cannot retain its cultural identity unless it has political sovereignty as well. This is demonstrably false, even in the case of Quebec. The survival of the Quebec culture is not threatened by the fact that it's a province of Canada rather than a sovereign nation. The same is true of Newfoundland (and, I would guess, of Labrador as well).

I would assume that some Quebec separatists sincerely (if mistakenly) believe this thesis, and that others cynically use it to promote independence for their own personal ends (remember, Quebec is known for political corruption, and I'm sure lots of provincial politicians would love to get their hands into that federal till).

This attitude is pernicious. So many of the brushfire wars going on in the world right now arise from some ethnic group believing that they are oppressed by other groups and that the only way they can put an end to it is by becoming a sovereign nation. (Of course, this may include oppressing the other groups in their turn.) In some cases this may be true, but I don't believe it's a sine qua non. Certinly it's not true in the case of Quebec, or of Newfoundland.