Is the Annexation of Canada part of Bush's Military Agenda?, page 1

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times

Topic started on 24-11-2004 @ 01:12 PM by Wask

globalresearch.ca...

Territorial control over Canada is part of Washington's geopolitical and military agenda as formulated in April 2002 by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. "Binational integration" of military command structures is also contemplated alongside a major revamping in the areas of immigration, law enforcement and intelligence.

At this critical juncture in our history and in anticipation of the visit of George W. Bush to Canada on November 30th, an understanding of these issues is central to the articulation of a coherent anti-war and civil rights movement.

The purpose of this detailed report is to encourage discussion and debate in Canada and Quebec, as well as in the US. Kindly circulate this article widely. The Summary can be forwarded by email with a hyperlink to the complete text.

I'm all for cooperation between both the US and Canada to defend North Americas borders, for example the missle defence shield. However if any American soliders enter Canada I think **** will hit the fan with alot of Canadain citizens.

[edit on 24-11-2004 by Wask]

[edit on 24-11-2004 by Wask]

reply posted on 24-11-2004 @ 01:16 PM by Englishman_in_Spain

Quebec's got the bomb, I know because I saw Bill Clinton being told by a Secret Service chap in The Simpsons.

I hope someone has told Dubya.

reply posted on 24-11-2004 @ 01:18 PM by rowsdower

i dont think so, no offense to canadians but the only things in canada are beavers and bad drivers.

reply posted on 24-11-2004 @ 01:20 PM by sardion2000

Originally posted by rowsdower
i dont think so, no offense to canadians but the only things in canada are beavers and bad drivers.

And Oil, and Lumber, and don't forget the worlds largest supply of fresh water....

reply posted on 24-11-2004 @ 01:21 PM by Seekerof

One important question/observation before I counter this over-hyping globalresearch.ca article:

Why has the Canadian Armed forces been continually downsizing and would this be reason for such an agreement to the NORTHCOM mandate?

seekerof

reply posted on 24-11-2004 @ 01:22 PM by Amelia

Originally posted by Englishman_in_Spain
Quebec's got the bomb,

What do you mean...I'm french and I don't really understand the thread! Are we in danger in Quebec! We are so peaceful people, we don't want anything to do with war....

Ameliaxxxxxxxxxxxxx

reply posted on 24-11-2004 @ 01:27 PM by rowsdower

when us americans (God bless the USA) want something like natural resources (like fresh water) we would invade the poorest less changleing country we can find (like anartica, which isnt a country). if we wanted lumber we would invade Finland, which is the poorest least changling country with lumber. if we wanted oil we would invade the poorest arab country, like iraq (oh wait we already did

) so you canadians have nothing to worry about (unless we run out of weak countries to invade)

reply posted on 24-11-2004 @ 01:30 PM by sardion2000

Originally posted by Seekerof
One important question/observation before I counter this over-hyping globalresearch.ca article:

Why has the Canadian Armed forces been continually downsizing and would this be reason for such an agreement to the NORTHCOM mandate?

seekerof

Well recently the reason for the downsize was because we had too many Lt's. Way too many to go around, unfortunetly according to my buddy who a sniper now stations in the middle of nowhere right now, that there is a need for more Lt's becuase the cuts were a bit over-done. Oh yeah he bitches a moans about the military not getting the funding it deserve all the time and hes one of the most liberal guys i know...

EDIT: We are also short on qualified pilots as well, seems no one wants to risk their but in a 20 yr old fighter or a 40 year old chopper anymore.

[edit on 24-11-2004 by sardion2000]

reply posted on 24-11-2004 @ 01:32 PM by soficrow

Originally posted by Seekerof
Why has the Canadian Armed forces been continually downsizing and would this be reason for such an agreement to the NORTHCOM mandate?

seekerof

Canada did not agree to NORTHCOM - from the article:

The creation of NORTHCOM announced in April 2002, constitutes a blatant violation of both Canadian and Mexican territorial sovereignty. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld announced unilaterally that US Northern Command would have jurisdiction over the entire North American region. Canada and Mexico were presented with a fait accompli.

...Canada has oil, lumber, vast untapped natural resources and the world's largest supply of fresh water... (Thnx Sardion2000)

Also see:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

.

reply posted on 24-11-2004 @ 01:39 PM by colsislander

Lets not forget,we in Canada have a lot of empty land a small population around 35 million I think .We also have a lot of fresh water

reply posted on 24-11-2004 @ 01:41 PM by edsinger

Canada is already the 52nd state behind Puerto Rico

Seriously, there would be no need. The connections behind the scenes are VERY close. Canada and the US are extremely close allies, maybe not all the time in public, but behind closed doors....

reply posted on 24-11-2004 @ 01:41 PM by billybob

canadians might seem weak to you, but you don't understand the power of education. perhaps canada will annex america and teach you a thing or two.
when canadians don't have borders, only the USA will have canadians

reply posted on 24-11-2004 @ 01:44 PM by Amelia

Originally posted by colsislander
Lets not forget,we in Canada have a lot of empty land a small population around 35 million I think .We also have a lot of fresh water

I don't want to get invade by the USA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I wanna stay in my province where people are peaceful, have great values...What will happen to us! We have nothing to fight them! No, they WON'T do that to us

Don't put this in my mind guys!

Ameliaxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

reply posted on 24-11-2004 @ 01:53 PM by rowsdower

"We are also short on qualified pilots as well, seems no one wants to risk their but in a 20 yr old fighter or a 40 year old chopper anymore"

us americans fly in 45 YEAR OLD BOMBERS (the B52s) made in 1962 and you canadians are crying over your F-18s. we have to go to 50 year old military junkyards to get spare parts for the B-52.

and we are not crying over them. in fact we dont plan on retireing them until 2044. by then each aircratf will be 82 years old and 65 years over its original planned lifespan.

[edit on 24-11-2004 by rowsdower]

reply posted on 24-11-2004 @ 01:59 PM by Jimi Hendrix

Manifest destiny. Sorry Canada, all your land and resources are belong to us.

reply posted on 24-11-2004 @ 02:00 PM by BlackJackal

Originally posted by soficrow

Canada did not agree to NORTHCOM - from the article:

Yes they did........

No one suggests that Canada will acquire go/no go authority over NMD if NORAD runs the show. But Canada will have the right to consultation, the right to participation, the right to a place at the table when decisions are made. As the United States is all but certain to proceed, Canada must choose between high morality and great practicality, and in such circumstances, when morality will only anger the Bush Administration and hurt Canadian interests, there is no choice: the time for maximum benefit may already have slipped by but, nonetheless, the earlier Canada agrees to support the NMD decision, the
better.

Similar to the NMD/NORAD conundrum is the question of the Northern Command, the new United States military super-command, announced April 17, 2002. NORTHCOM is to be activated on October 1, 2002, and to be led by the US Air Force four-star general who commands NORAD. NORTHCOM will also be housed alongside NORAD at Cheyenne Mountain, Colorado. Such an organization, largely for purposes of coordination among the fractious American services, had long been suggested in the United States, such proposals pre-dating the World Trade Center attack.

www.ccs21.org...

reply posted on 24-11-2004 @ 02:24 PM by soficrow