Very well said. Reasonable, balanced, insightful.
What’s a guy like you doing in a forum like this?
Stop that. Just ignore him. You’re just going to encourage more of that kind of behaviour.
<sheepish> I agree **smiling bandit ** but I resent the fact that you’re able to express it in less posts than I. </sheepish>
Pre scriptum: I cleaned up spelling in Word, but I may have accidentaly changed some of Quick’s text by correction spelling errors… I’m not quite sure if I did though ,and I just wanted to alert you that I may have accidentaly and superfically changed some text.
After a good deal of time, and death, and only after it was painfully obvious that it wasn’t working. Yes, things get worked out eventually. But there is no indication that the missile defense system is anywhere near that point.
Well, let’s see.
A) Missile defense is not a priority, it’s not even anywhere near the top of the list.
B) It’s not currently working, and doesn’t look like it will any time soon.
C) We’re asking you to sign onto a project that’s both unnecessary and impotent.
We are trying to control your national sovereignty. Or do you claim that wanting carte blanche to use your airspace for a project which may never get off the ground is not a violation of your sovereign right to use your airspace and allow access as you see fit?
And, I’m curious. Upon what grounds should you have objected?
Pray tell, which aggressors, exactly, are we defending against?
You wouldn’t have a problem with US jets and missiles being in your airspace, and perhaps damaging civilian populations, as long as another country struck first? Let’s say North Korea lobbed a nuke at us and for some reason it passed over Canada (I think the geography for this is all wrong, but anyway…) America chooses to shoot it down near a major Canadian population center. The warhead detonates.
General prognosis: many megadeaths. No blame.
(My ass no blame!)
Doesn’t Canada have the right to dictate US terms of engagement within it’s sovereign airspace?
Yes, I think we would hesitate, because your airspace is sovereign and we have to ask permission before flying into it. If we can enter your airspace whenever we want, and do whatever we want, it becomes our airspace.
Did the US, or Canadian government shut down Canadian airspace? Did we ask your government to cooperate, or did we simply, via fiat, declare that no Canadian jets would fly?
If you tie your country’s safety to US foreign policy, you may very well be in for a rude awakening. There’s a reason why Al Queda targeted New York and not Quebec.
Besides, your country is your own. I don’t expect you to act in strictest concert with our wishes, or our strategies, or our alliances.
So you’re giving your nation a choice between cancer and AIDS, and you think that’s a good thing?
Personally, I’d rather that no countries were bullied, by the “good guys” or the “bad guys”. I’d also rather that my nation, in my name, did not sully our national honor by being a global bully.
Right… so we bully you, how are you supposed respond? Honestly, you’re taking issue with it, but what should you do instead? Why is Canada expected to bow and scrape when we forgo diplomacy and tell you “Our way or the high way!”
To me these seem like totally different concepts. American cultural imperialism =/= a violation of sovereignty. Asking for carte blanche to your airspace is a violation of sovereignty.
I’ll also add to Finn’s fine post that our bullying is starting to lose it’s luster. Take of course this thread with Canada telling us to shove the MD up our ass, and also recently, Putin signing up with Iran. I suspect that more of this will happen as the world, finally sick of us will find more ways to wrok around us instead of with us.
I’m having a bad grammar week, sorry.
Finn, this is fun but our posts are getting ridiculously long with the back and forth quotes.
I don’t know if anybody is going to be lobbing missiles at the US any time soon, if ever. If nobody does then the entire issue is moot. How the US chooses to spend their military budget is not Canada’s issue to decide or dictate. We just hope they’ll save our asses if ever that time comes.
Look, all I’m suggesting is that Canada doesn’t rise to the very bating of which you critisize the Bush administration. We can make a case against participation but we’ve got to show some leadership and class by saying we have doubts about the efficacy of the proposed defense system and NOT call the US an imperialist pig and it’s leadership a bunch of hooved cattle. This entire airspace issue is just a red herring, btw.
What ever happened to the sense of proportion in politics and life in general.
I know that long drawn out quote fests can get bothersome… but I see no other way to respond to specific bits of text. If you’d like, every few posts we can provide a ‘summary’ post?
The issue isn’t moot, becuase if it should ever happen, we’ve demanded the right to use your airspace however we see fit, without asking you first. The demand is still there whether or not it actually happens.
True, as an American I feel that it’s a ridiculous outlay of money on a ridiculously unnecessary and ineffective project.
But the issue isn’t whether or not Canada wants us to develop MD, but whether or not Canada has the right to control its own airspace.
Just curious, but what enemies on the global stage does Canada have? I’m honestly curious… I’ve always thought of y’all kinda like Switzerland, but with more snow. Please clear up my ignorance.
Why is it a red herring? To me, your airspace’s integrity is a soverign right of your nation whether we have MD or laser defense or giant flying birds with microchips in their brains who can disarm missiles in flight. Even if MD worked flawlessly, it’s still your nation’s right to allow or disallow other nations to use their airspace.
Our ports aren’t secured, the borders aren’t secured, homeland security is inefficent and under funded, the war in Iraq was based on cherry picked intel, the U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T. act is limiting civil liberties, the Iraq campaign has consistenty been mismanged, Halliburton has (if we’re being very kind) “accidentally” overcharged our government, we’ve had Haliburton and others make money on foreign goods when Iraqis themselves can produce what they need and paying them would help their economy and society, we’ve violated the Geneva Convention and torture innocent civilians as a matter of policy, nine billion dollars just went ‘missing’ somewhere between the American tax payers and Iraq… but gays want to marry!!!
Ahem, I mean, I have no idea.
Someone once said it’s the most expensive solution to the lease likely scenario.
speaking of this, re we still importing oil into Iraq?
Most of the cites I’ve been finding are from 2003, I’m looking for something more current re: oil imports.
This is a big ol’ hijack, but I think we’re also importing concrete into Iraq while their own factories can produce it.
Maybe we should open another thread to discuss it?
Holy shit! :eek:
I hear what you’re saying about the airspace issue. I’d be more inclined to agree with you if we were talking about a similar agreement between say… Russia and Ukrain. Two nations that have a fundamental distrust of one another but still have deep economic ties and long history. But we’re talking of Canada and the USA. Two nations with a deeply similar history and culture, to say nothing of our trade agreements. And then there is the issue of NORAD. We have a precedent of mutual military co-operation deeply related to objects entering national airspace.
I don’t think Canada needs to fear any unwarranted airspace incursions by the US. More importantly, the US asked for co-operation for testing within Canadian airspace. I don’t recall anyone demanding it.
Again, not sure what US military budget (mis)spending and Halliburton related issues have to do with any of this.
Wait a fucking minute. I thought your rant was about this guy at U of T with his “stamp their little hoofies” comment. When did Paul Martin ever deliver an “overly dramatic rant on how evil the US is”? When the hell did Paul Martin ever “talk smack”?
The principle involved is not one of maluse, but misuse. We don’t have a right to your airspace, even if we use it to drop fluffy teddy bears on your major cities.
Agreed, but you’re still allowed, as a soverign nation, to opt out at any time.
Of course we’re demanding it, and Condi won’t even visit your country unless you do what we tell you to.
Well, you asked about proportion so I answered, and then I realized it was a hijack so I stopped.
Well they asked and the answer was no, so Condi goes storms off and pouts about it.
I didn’t mean to insinuate that Martin did any such thing.
Martin didn’t. Neither did Chretien directly (I don’t think). But various gov’t members have maid some dumbass comments and have been called on the carpet for it. Sometimes not sternly enough.
But I get the distict feeling that a general lack of civility towards America among the Canadian gov’t echelons of late has stirred an aplified knee jerk reaction mentality among some Canadians, not unlike this UofT prof.
I don’t understand why it’s a knee jerk reaction… I mean you agree that the US shouldn’t be able to set your policies for you without your consent. And the US has become increasingly unilateral and absolutist in it’s decrees.
I know you view the airspace issue as a red herring, but isn’t the the central focus? The US presumes to tell you what to do with your soverign possesions, and if you disagree, we essentialy cut off high-level diplomatic contact.
This can be said for every govt on the face of the earth.
Asshat bigotry in govt picked up by the populace, say it ain’t so! Wasn’t there something with “Freedom” fries a few years back or was that my imagination?
This is the crux of it right here.
Imagine if someone pulled this shit on the US. We wouldn’t have harsh words, we’d probably say they had connections with AQ and invade their asses.
I’m surprised there isn’t more outrage in Canada.
I guess my reluctancy to try and convict the US as a brutal imperialist is due to the fact that a good half of the country voted against this administration. The pendulum will swing back and things will go back to a more “reflective” stance in the next election (or two).
In the meantime, Canadians need to tone down the anti-American rhetoric because it’s just making us look like we’re jumping on that bandwagon with the rest of the half baked lunatics around the world.