Let us remember, us Canadians, that before this, Canada routinely shared about 95% of our intelligence with the United States. It is just common practice that the Canadian and American intelligence and military services work closely together, because we have a set of common problems that require co-ordination. So, this event has likely not changed anything, except that Canada is probably using what little “peacemaker” cachet it has around the world pressuring moderates and fence-sitters to lend their voices to the call for the hand-over of bin Laden.
As far as the Canadian Military helping out, I don’t quite see how… remember Serbia when the 12 planes we sent completely maxed out our capabilities and they figured that we could only stage them there for a few more weeks. If Canada participates in any military solution, it will be purely in order that the Maple Leaf is flying alongside the Stars and Stripes as a means of helping to legitimize the attacks (not that the US needs anything beyond pictures of the WTC to legitimize their actions at this point).
As well, it is interesting that on the day after, Bush stated that the only two leaders he talked to were Chretien and Blair, so they must obviously have some influence if they were allowed through.
You all are right, I was speaking from a point of ignorance on the IRA subject. I do keep to my point that enforcement would be almost impossible without extreme infringement of constitutional rights.
Erek
This is entirely off the point. Schroeder was one of those who said it is an attack on civilization. We are not forcing anything on them. They reached that conclusion on their own.
I wouldn’t even agree with it. But my point is that all of our allies have been, from day one, insisting that this is an attack on civilization, on western civilization, on NATO, “We are all New Yorkers,” blah blah blah. But within hours, they’re also saying they won’t put forth even a token effort to help pursue justice, and saying it loudly.
[QUOTE]
I’m aware that’s a pretty contentious paragraph (or two), and I hope the way I explained myself is not too offensive.
{/QUOTE]
Not at all.
You’re new. 
We ask for cites here when you make those sorts claims.
Not to the point, though.
Democracy, freedom, and you’re right, add capitalism. And the criticisms you make are entirely correct. But if you do any reading at all on their motivations, it’s not just about the US; the US is just first on the list. It’s capitalism, its foriegners in Saudi, its Jews in Palestine, it’s women walking around “naked,” and yes, it is “heathens” like you and me. (unless you’re muslim…)
No time for cites now, but you can look in Google or I’ll get them later when I have some time.
Of course not. The Danes aren’t terrorists. This supports your point how?
Maybe. Maybe not.
Couldn’t find anything on Iceland but thisand thiscover Denmark
One can only hope.
Where the hell are you getting this? GWB went to a mosque yesterday, for Allah’s sake. They have gone to great lenghts to say this is not about all Arabs or Muslims. If you’re going to hold governments and nations responsible for the actions of their most ignorant and savage members, then I suppose you endorse the nuclear annihilation of Afghanistan.
I’m not going to go into the UK/IRA thing. It’s off-topic. My point was the US has beem loyal to its ally, the UK. Whether that’s a good thing was/is not the issue.
damn damn damn
links:
http://www.dr.dk/dr-nyheder/international/engelsk.shtml#3
http://www.dr.dk/dr-nyheder/international/engelsk/onsdag.shtml#4
Wow, just noticed. That second link shows some Danish support for missle defense. Who’da thunkit?
Have the perpetrators been identified?
If not, how do you know their motivation?
The United States will do whatever it feels like. What I’m scared about here (Canada) is my government seems passionate in its support for the US’s projected war in Afghanistan.
I mean, we and the rest of NATO are about to start helping them drop bombs on a country of millions of people because their unelected leaders are harbouring a man who may or may not have, well, slaughtered innocent people because he hated the policies of a foreign government.
I don’t believe this has anything to do with justice, because the Afghan people aren’t responsible and because nothing’s been proven. And it’s not about self-defence, because even without bin Laden, his organisation will continue and probably become even more vicious in its attacks in revenge for this.
This is about revenge. And we still don’t know who we’re getting revenge against. I can’t in good conscience support this action, and the American “you’re-with-us-or-against-us” rhetoric terrifies me. I’d rather declarer neutrality, at least until we know more and can find a way to do this that doesn’t millions of innocent lives. But if there are only two ridiculously extreme choices, I guess I’m against them
I think we should wash our hands of this. If necessary, we should even go so far as to pull out of NATO.
Speaking as a Canadian, I don’t think we should ever give another country carte blanche to do whatever they please. We are sovereign, after all.
That said, Canada is the U.S.'s strongest ally. We’ve been through a lot together, and have gone to each other’s aid repeatedly. That means when the chips are down, we stand up and fight right along with you. In calmer, less dangerous times we reserve the right to disagree with you, as we did with the Vietnam war. But if that war had ever gotten out of control and the U.S. itself had been threatened by the Russians and/or the Chinese, we would have fought and died right beside you.
I particularly like the family analogy. My brother and I may quarrel, we may not even agree on a lot of things. But punch my brother in the face, and you’re going to have to answer to me. All differences end at that point, unquestionably.
That’s the position we’re in today. You need us, just ask. We’ll be there. Later, when the threat has abated, we can have lots of spirited debates about where we go from there. But for now, we’re watching your back and taking your lead. Tell us when, partner.
Says who? A lot of people inside and outside of the states keeps saying this. I keep hearing from individuals that America plans to “Carpet bomb” or “Nuke” the whole frigging area between Isreal and India. We are not. I have not heard this from the government or the news media. I’ve mostly heard things about super secret special forces being deployed not “carpet bombing”. Just because we are Americans doesn’t mean we plan to go around blowing things up for no good reason. The opinions of a few rednecks does not represent the opinions of the majority of Americans or our government, just as the opinions of bin Laden et al. does not represent the opinions of most muslims and afgans.
I don’t know. Precedent?
The US bombarded most of Yugoslavia to try to get Milosevic and bombarded most of Iraq to try to get Hussein. What reason have we to imagine that a similar tactic won’t be used in Afghanistan?
I’ve never thought of the US as family. More like that annoying neighbour you put up with because you’re too nice to tell them to turn the music down. 
As for following their lead, I find that downright scary.
I’m all for providing medical aid and disaster cleanup when they – or anyone else – needs it. And of course I believe any suspects should be extradited, so long as we could be reasonably sure of a fair and impartial trial.
But the US taking the lead? “Tell us when pardner?” Look, I don’t want to be playing Tonto to their Lone Ranger or Robin to their Batman, here. From my perspective, we’re more like Sancho to their Don Quixote.
As I see it, if the United States bombs Afghanistan, it’ll be committing the same atrocity against millions that someone committed against thousands – attacking innocent citizens because you don’t like the policies of their government. A lot of people are already starting to talk about potential Afghani casualties as “collateral damage.” They’re as much people, and as innocent, as the people who were trapped in the WTC.
I don’t want my country to blindly follow the US’s lead, cowboy and family metaphors aside. We should have the right to reserve judgement, and the opportunity to make each decision with our conscience.
http://www.cbc.ca/cgi-bin/templates/view.cgi?/news/2001/09/19/afghanistan010919
Above is the link to a CBC story which details the initial preparations for an aerial strike. The US has requested Canadian aid. Our government – without even token consultation with the public – have pledged their support.
This offensive already has a catchy, made-for-CNN label – “Operation Infinite Justice.” I would like to move that we re-christen it “Operation Infinite Casualties” – not quite as catchy as the original, but I have a feeling it will be proven the more accurate.
This thread is no longer theoretical, I’d like to add. At least not for us. It looks like a war is about to begin, and my government has given the US a <i>carte blanche</i>, at least in terms of military support. Thank the gods even the Chrétien Liberals stopped short of <i>rewriting our immigration act</i>, as was suggested, to make the US feel safer.
http://www.cbc.ca/cgi-bin/templates/view.cgi?/news/2001/09/19/afghanistan010919
Above is the link to a CBC story which details the initial preparations for an aerial strike. The US has requested Canadian aid. Our government – without even token consultation with the public – have pledged their support.
This offensive already has a catchy, made-for-CNN label – “Operation Infinite Justice.” I would like to move that we re-christen it “Operation Infinite Casualties” – not quite as catchy as the original, but I have a feeling it will be proven the more accurate.
Ooops Somehow I posted twice… Sorry.
Suffice to say, Hamish’s attitude does not reflect either the majority Canadian opinion, nor the policy of the Canadian government. Canada is firmly behind the U.S., up to and including providing troops and aircraft for any military missions required, in Afghanistan or elsewhere. That’s a fact. Our PM is in Washington now, affirming the total support of Canada.
Hell, even France has offered full support, and they don’t have anywhere near the record of support for the U.S. that Canada does.
Most of the free world realizes that this isn’t a U.S.-only problem, you know. The next attack could be in downtown Toronto, or London, or Paris, or Tel Aviv, or Sydney. Canada lost about 100 of her own in the WTC, so we were hurt as well.
Since the German parliament allowed today the German government to involve german troops in a possible US action, your sources seem quite unreliable.
Not a full support. According to the French president, a military involvment is only a “hypothesis”.
Hamish,
I love your “annoying neighbour” analogy. Being a U.S. citizen, I’m even close to the “noise” than yourself. I believe that any government is irresponsible if it fails to consider the best interests of its people before the interests of its allies. I would be both annoyed and disappointed if Canadians were to act as Toto or Sancho.
I wanted to put in my own two pennies worth, even though I am a U.S. citizen. I abhor the labelling of the response to this disaster as “war”. The U.S. has shown repeatedly that they regard “war” as a license to suspend all concerns regarding human rights, national sovereignty, and international law. We have a tremendous opportunity to build cooperative alliances with former “opponents”, but I fear that we are headed in the opposite direction. I would like to let foreigners know that not all U.S. citizens are brimming over with lust for war and vengeance. Many of us are just as helpless as foreigners in terms of influencing our government and our general populace to adopt healthy, moderate world views.
I agree with TitoBenito. All the talk of carpet bombing and mass air strikes I’ve heard has come, first and foremost, from Internet ranters and watercooler strategists, followed by the media. By contrast, the government and military talking heads I’ve seen have tended to discount the idea. See Rumsfield’s comments at:
http://www.globeandmail.com/special/attack/pages/analysis_0919_a4_2.html
I think a lot of people assume mass air attacks are going to happen simply because it’s what happened in the Gulf war. However, history seldom repeats itself in exactly the same way twice.
The government is firmly behind the US. Most of the Canadians I’ve spoken with are more ambivalent. Some would be willing to offer some military role, others aren’t. I’ve talked to no one yet as hawkish as the Chrétien Liberals seem to be.
If our Prime Minister is affirming the total support of Canada, he is once again falling in step behind the American lead. Chrétien seems to have forgotten he was elected as the lesser of two evils, an alternative to an even more American-style party, the Alliance.
As for what the majority of Canadians think about this, I doubt anything short of an election or referendum could tell us. I’ve never believed that calling 4000 people at dinner time can tell you what a country of 30 million thinks. Statistics and polls are a way of inventing facts. They depend on the question asked, and who’s doing the asking. They’re a poor substitute for democracy.
I’m beginning to wish our Prime Minister had the vision President de Gaulle in the Sixties, when he pulled out of NATO.
I think a lot of countries feel pressured to join in this. The US’s “you’re-with-us-or-against-us” rhetoric is revealing, and terrifying. France’s leap on the bandwagon is disturbing, but not surprising with mob mentality sweeping everyone and everything away with it.
In this hysterical environment following the attacks, measured words, careful consideration, and balanced judgement have been the first casualties. This ocean of rhetoric and propaganda have almost washed away the possibility of asking honest questions.
Yet some of us choose to ask them anyway.
My point has never been to have no compassion for the Americans, but to apply that same compassion for the Afghani people, who seem to register as less important on our moral radar.
And even if no Canadians had died there, this wouldn’t be just an American problem. Not in the small world we live in. A couple of days ago, I learned that a friend of mine is among the missing, presumed dead.
The idea that we’re going to inflict that loss a million-fold somewhere else is inexcusable for me. The fact that we seem enthusiastic about it really disgusts me.
As for terrorists attacking Toronto, my first thought was why? I’m more worried about Esquimalt, my hometown on the west coast, because it has a naval base where the Americans often park nuclear submarines. So it’s a conceivable target.
Nothing about what we’re planning to do is a solution. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, this is not about justice and it’s not about self-defence. Justicecannot include taking thousands of innocent lives to get at one man. Self-defence is a comical argument, because killing bin Laden won’t remove his organization, just make them thirsty for revenge. I would say we’re more likely to endanger both Canada and the US by racing in there.
For both moral and practical reasons, I cannot support this. If the US wants to rush in there, then we can’t stop them. But military action in Afghanistan won’t protect us. And it won’t bring anyone back from the dead.