It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

POLITICS: Missile Shield: Canada PM Says No

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 16 2004 @ 11:00 PM
link   
Originally posted by DeusEx


Fifty years of not only horrible foreign policy, but the wholehearted support of the administrations commiting great atrocities. You have to be cracked out to ignore the lessons and events of the past.


Da comrade DeusEx your views have prevailed upon the defeat of the capitolist dogs of the USA - they now are in re-education camps where the truth of revolution will be absorbed or death will occur - it is simply their choice not ours comrade. Rejoice since victory is ours! [1]

1.[Notes from the American and Canadian gulag circa 1965]

What the hell are you talking about with fifty years of horrible foreign policy did we start WWII in your mind and should we have become isolationist as we were prior to it so the same mistakes could be repeated? where in the world are you coming from with this claim?

Being against the Bush administration and the Iraq invasion is one thing but to disclaim 50 years of policy says you are getting close to kook status can you elaborate on this.

I am supposing that the cuban missile crisis was no big deal since those missiles could not reach canaadiaan soil or that the fallout from a "MAD" exchange certainly would have affected only places to the south of a white covered country such as canaadadaaa.

Dude if your going to condemn fifty years of policy you need to back that up from the get go starting in 1954.

Ca-nukes pfttt.




posted on Dec, 16 2004 @ 11:08 PM
link   
Well, let's see... foreign policy... Aside from getting involved in wars that were none of your bussiness? Korea didn't exactly go as planned, did it? Vietnam comes readily to mind. Not only did American involvement fail its objectives, it destabilized the entire region. In the seventies, America supported the Butcher Pol Pot. Clearly, this was another brilliant move on behalf of your politicians. After that, it was the 80's, when Both the US and Russia tried to use Islamic fundamentalism to combat each other's proxies. That was clearly successful...look at both countries' problems with extreme Islam. Then, during the 90's, the kurdish revolution. Now look where we are!

Thanks America. I really enjoy an unstable world.

DE



posted on Dec, 16 2004 @ 11:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by DeusEx
Well, let's see... foreign policy... Aside from getting involved in wars that were none of your bussiness? Korea didn't exactly go as planned, did it? Vietnam comes readily to mind. Not only did American involvement fail its objectives, it destabilized the entire region. In the seventies, America supported the Butcher Pol Pot. Clearly, this was another brilliant move on behalf of your politicians. After that, it was the 80's, when Both the US and Russia tried to use Islamic fundamentalism to combat each other's proxies. That was clearly successful...look at both countries' problems with extreme Islam. Then, during the 90's, the kurdish revolution. Now look where we are!

Thanks America. I really enjoy an unstable world.

DE


Arm chair criticism is easy from where you sit but consider if none of these events never occured - an alternate history if you will................................

No its not world peace as you imagined

Korea invaded by the Japanese and subjugated for a long time would have been a totalitarian state in its entirety jeapordizing Japans transition to a democracy and leaving the Soviet Union and later China in control of the western pacific completing Japans original intention of hegomany over the region.

Vietnam was the same only it prevented countries like Thailand from becoming Soviet influenced states, Vietnam was a victory up until a liberal congress ripped the rug out from under the South Vietmanese government in 1975, As an example every review of the war concudes that "tet" was a large defeat for the NVA. It was on the home front in America where the war was lost with protests. Protests that are now known to have been clearly driven and organized by communist affilliated groups.

Like to see some kind of link for that Pol Pot claim, I can't recollect anything of that nature. Probably french derived if any help was given.

Yes both the US and the USSR used the Muhadajeen at some point until the russians invaded Afganistan then it was a legitimate US effort to help these people. It was not this help nor this war that turned Osama against us it was the later Gulf war I where we stationed forces in Saudi Arabia that he had issue with.

After the armistice in 1991 its my understanding that the Kurds in the north of Iraq were indeed protected with no fly zones and such however the failure was with the Sunni uprising in the south of Iraq. That failure can be squarely laid upon arabian governments of the 1991 coalition extracting a promise of no regime change from the US as part of their participation in the war.

If none of the above ever happened by the US's actions the world stage would be russo-chinese and whatever they dictated would be the case no matter if you liked it or not - no choice would be given.

Today you have a voice and a choice thanks in no small part to the US's actions in the past 50 years.

You could at least say thanks but I doubt it.

Now that a bit of foreign policy is clear how does a missile shield detract from Canadas security in any way?





[edit on 16-12-2004 by Phoenix]



posted on Dec, 17 2004 @ 12:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phoenix
Arm chair criticism is easy from where you sit but consider if none of these events never occured - an alternate history if you will................................

[b]No its not world peace as you imagined

I never imagined it would be...just less of a wreck.

Korea invaded by the Japanese and subjugated for a long time would have been a totlatarian state in its entirety jeapordizing Japans transition to a democracy and leaving the Soviet Union and later China in control of the western pacific completing Japans original intention of hegomany over the region.

Clearly, Japan was under US control in teh aftermath of WW2. I very much doubt they would have invaded Korea in spite of the civil war going on at the time. Japan was not communist, and the Japanese people have been at war with the Koreans and Chinese for millenia. I very much doubt that would change overnight. Even now, it's a matter of tense arms polishing between the two.

Vietnam was the same only it prevented countries like Thailand from becoming Soviet influenced states, Vietnam was a victory up until a ripped the rug out from under the South Vietmanese government in 1975, As an example every review of the war concudes that "tet" was a large defeat for the NVA. It was on the home front in America where the war was lost with protests. Protests that are now clearly driven and organized by communist affilliated groups.

The reds ended up with control of Cambodia, Vietnam and I believe Laos instead. Vietnam was a clear loss. While Tet was a defeat, so was the hearts and minds campaign. In fact, Cambodia was largely annexed by the NVA almost directly after US withdrawl. Clearly, the Americans were winning. by the end of the war, a large portion of the populace was anti-american due to incidents such as My Lai (quoted above, from wikipedia - en.wikipedia.org... )

Like to see some kind of link for that Pol Pot claim, I can't recollect anything of that nature. Probably french derived if any help was given.

Ah, typical American French-bashing. What can I expect- clearly, my heritage is fair game for a mod. Damn shame. As for the proof, it was quoted above AGAIN from wikipedia, and I'll even drag up the reference:

At times, the United States directly and indirectly supported Pol Pot and his hostility against the Soviet Union. - en.wikipedia.org...


Yes both the US and the USSR used the Muhadajeen at some point until the russians invaded Afganistan then it was a legitimate US effort to help these people. It was not this help nor this war that turned Osama against us it was the later Gulf war I where we stationed forces in Saudi Arabia that he had issue with.

Really? I thought it was being used by CIA handlers to combat the soviet influence. Or maybes it was the near-total lack of humanitarian and economic aid given after the war.

After the armistice in 1991 its my understanding that the Kurds in the north of Iraq were indeed protected with no fly zones and such however the failure was with the Sunni uprising in the south of Iraq. That failure can be squarely laid upon arabian governments of the 1991 coalition extracting a promise of no regime change from the US as part of their participation in the war.

Please read my links. BEFORE the way, the US promised support to the Kurds should they revolt. Unfortunately, at the last moment, America withdrew that support, and thousands of Kurds were gassed as a result.

Now that a bit of foreign policy is clear how does a missile shield detract from Canadas security in any way?

Two ways - Sovereignty, and of course further proximity to the States. American isntallations worldwide are targets, ergo you're putting even more of thsoe targets inside of Canada.

DE





posted on Dec, 17 2004 @ 12:06 AM
link   


Now that a bit of foreign policy is clear how does a missile shield detract from Canadas security in any way?


It doesn't compromise Canada's security that much(infact its mostly moral opposition on my part), what it does compromise is Canada's soverenty. At least thats my opinion on the matter. Who am I? Just a lowly Investor, who wants to have stability and from where I've been armchair QBin' from the US has definately destabalized the middle-east with its foolish invasion of Iraq. You can rationalize all you like, but the World has Amerikas intentions figured out and that is you want to create a Pax Americana. Hemogonize the world. And this weaponization of space is just a means to an end. Peace is never on Americas mind. Only money is. If peace was really on americas mind then they would't get into 2-3 wars a decade and 1 major war a generation. I'm just ashamed it's taken so long for my country to start saying "NO" to you guys whenever you want us to go fight and die for your causes.

Pfft, Neo-conmen.

BTW This isn't a Lib vs Conservative thing, as I believe that Democratic Foreign policy to be crap as well



posted on Dec, 17 2004 @ 12:53 AM
link   
lol, ahhh, in typical ATS fashion once again people have turned it into a country Vs. country forum.

Ok, First of all I disagree with whoever said that "Canada is well respected", I'm American and I view Canada as the guy hiding in the bushes during a gun fight.

I'm not a big supporter of Canada, but hey, I like Canada a little more the France.


I dont know why Canada wouldn't want to have this on there country, its like its raining and the US hands you an umbrella and you give it back. Again, this shield wont do much from nuclear attacks from Russia or China, its made to stop the "little guys", the unstable country that has aquired them, or if a terrorist network gets there hands on a ICBM.

I do not view Iraq as a mistake, the outcome is yet to be determined. The reason there are explosions nearly every day is because terrorist from other countries are going here to fight, the see it as a last stand. If America gets there way Iraq will be a Democracy and their people will be free, BUT the terrorist know that if that happenss then the US will most likely move on to the next country and do the same, systematicly wiping them out. Afghan is a better country today then it was years ago.

Also, some one said that if Canada was attacked they they would fight back. America was attacked on September 11th, the biggest attack to the US since Pearl Harbor, We took our revenge not the typical fashion of taking out the country that attacked us because it wasn't a country, So our war is against all terrorist, whether they reside in Afghan or Iraq or Iran.



posted on Dec, 17 2004 @ 01:29 AM
link   


Ok, First of all I disagree with whoever said that "Canada is well respected", I'm American and I view Canada as the guy hiding in the bushes during a gun fight.


Ah, Murc as closminded as always, but ya know what? Just because you don't respect us doesn't matter, I could really care less I can still look at myself in the mirror in the mourning the question is in 20 years will you be able to?
. BTW The last time I checked it wasn't raining ICBMs so don't worry about us.

You also need a history lesson. We could've said the same thing during WW1 and WW2. We were in before you Americans in both wars and we fought on the frontline in almost every battle. In fact its pretty well know amoung military historians that Canadians generally fight as a spearhead force due to the ferocity of our ground forces and the deadliness of our Snipers. Were we hiding in the bushes in Afganistan? No we weren't at least not when we should've when that US Cowboy pilot decided our troops were the enemy and killed 4 our our soldiers. Oh yeah we also helped out in Korea and to a lesser extent in Vietnam inspite of the opposition of our Citizens. So before you start critizing us do your research. And maybe just maybe come up and visit Canada. Try Montreal first, you'll be pleasantly surprised about how friendly the people are there. Montreal is not Paris. Quebec is not France.

And btw Bush fully expected us to commit Billions into this project, so no its not a "free" offer. American Arrogance is starting to sound like Roman Arrogance just before that Empire fell. Hope you guys don't hit your head on the way down
BTW I do not hate the American public, because I have lots of familiy in MI and AZ, so hating Americans would be hating my own family. I just hate the road America is lead the world down, its gonna get messy folks and I want Canada to stay out of it as much as possible.



posted on Dec, 17 2004 @ 02:12 AM
link   
- The "American Empire" isn't going away anytime soon, We are the most powerful nation in the world, No one can even compete on our level.

In the news and whatnot I rarly here anything relating to Canada's military, do you have any specs on it?

Also, the American Economy isn't crumbling and we will still be here in 50 years and still be on top. Not all nations get conquered, we have had the lead, still have it, and will always have it (technologicaly speaking).

So you dont view Canada at being "weak"?



posted on Dec, 17 2004 @ 09:32 PM
link   
Murc you make my head hurt. For the sake of everyone reading this thread pleeaassse stop posting.

-raven



posted on Dec, 18 2004 @ 12:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by raven2012
Murc you make my head hurt. For the sake of everyone reading this thread pleeaassse stop posting.

-raven

My post are exactly what they are suppost to be, "my opinion". I post what I think about the topic and add my 2 cents to it. thats more then I can say for you.



posted on Dec, 18 2004 @ 01:56 AM
link   
Let me get this straight...
Canada is denying us use of vital territory here on the ground because they thing it will PREVENT us from putting weapons in space?
The way I see it, we HAVE to weaponize space to put up a decent shield, especially if we dont have widespread cooperation on the surface.

Then again we're gonna do it anyway. We always do it anyway. In fact I'm gonna spill the beans on a really big secret right now. We're intentionally trying to make you all mad. One of these days we may have to economically exploit you or maybe even just bomb your countries to distract our population from a president's sexual affairs, so we dont want to be on good terms with you; it would just hurt more that way.



posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 05:31 AM
link   
I find it fascinating, well maybe not so much, that many Americans have a hard time figuring out why they are so disliked around the world. I've been to the states many times and some of the nicest, most generous people I've ever met are American. But if you read posts by Americans in various forums on here, it is generally the same mentality expressed by them. American's rule the world, always will, they never make mistakes.. the world still turns because of them, and that everybody who thinks otherwise is foolish. I hate to break it to you, but I as a Canadian KNOW that Canada doesn't rule the world, or even have much say in how it works. Nor do I want us to have that role. The US needs to fix it's own problems, such as racial segregation, prolific violence, and a morally degenerating society, before it should be even considering regime changes elsewhere.I want Canada to do what's good for Canadians, and help others to get what we enjoy here, if they express an interest in having it. In Iraq, I would have just as soon waited until the people stood up united as one voice and demanded change from their government. Much like the US rebelled against the UK for their independance. Then we help. Because how do you tell a child that his mother and father had to be 'liberated' from the earth by a stray cruise missile, even though they never asked for help? Unfortunately, they aren't even given that... they just have their lives torn apart by people that are saying that they are trying to help. It's not up to us, nor is it our right, to decide how other nations run their affairs. They are sovereign, and should be treated as such. Iraq did nothing to provoke war. There are no WMD's, and even if their were, so what... Nobody is going to nuke north america, because it's suicide for both sides.. in fact the ONLY country to ever use Nuclear weapons is the USA, and I'd take a good shot of Anthrax over being burned alive by Napalm anyday... if anybody does go nuclear, it's going to be a terrorist with a bomb in a truck, not from a nation on the tip of an ICBM... so forget the missile shield for now. Maybe when you have a proven efficient, cost effective platform, and an identifiable threat, then Canada should buy into it. But for now it's a money pit. Besides, how the heck can the USA afford to throw money away like that with a 500 billion dollar annual defecit? I know we can't.



posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Devans28

Nobody is going to nuke north america, because it's suicide for both sides.. in fact the ONLY country to ever use Nuclear weapons is the USA, and I'd take a good shot of Anthrax over being burned alive by Napalm anyday... if anybody does go nuclear, it's going to be a terrorist with a bomb in a truck, not from a nation on the tip of an ICBM...







Brava, Bravo, whichever is right. Just had to highlight that bit.






so forget the missile shield for now. Maybe when you have a proven efficient, cost effective platform, and an identifiable threat, then Canada should buy into it. But for now it's a money pit.

Besides, how the heck can the USA afford to throw money away like that with a 500 billion dollar annual defecit? I know we can't.




Oh that's simple. Bush cut taxes to the rich, let corporatations off the hook - and now he's bringing in a flat sales tax. Ordinary working Americans are gonna pick up the tab.

Who else?


.



posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 02:05 PM
link   
Murcielago:

The "American Empire" isn't going away anytime soon, We are the most powerful nation in the world, No one can even compete on our level.

In the news and whatnot I rarly here anything relating to Canada's military, do you have any specs on it?

Also, the American Economy isn't crumbling and we will still be here in 50 years and still be on top. Not all nations get conquered, we have had the lead, still have it, and will always have it (technologicaly speaking).

So you dont view Canada at being "weak"?


Listening to your views on Canada is like listening to a 3 year old's views on calculus. So misinformed as to be laughable.

Go to Europe one day and see how many monuments there are to Canadian troops during WWI and WWII. Look around at the depth of respect people there have for the military contributions of a fledgling country at the time.

CANADA did far more during the D-Day invasion than the USA ever did. Read a non-American published history book.


As for : Also, the American Economy isn't crumbling and we will still be here in 50 years and still be on top.

I have one word for you. CHINA. You, as a country, are already beholden to China for a huge amount of your imports. If China flexes her economic muscle, the United States will deflate like a giant red white and blue balloon.

Your arguments are not based in reality.


jako



posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 02:19 PM
link   
Does anybody know how many consecutive years the US could run a 500 billion or so dollar defecit before their economy starts taking some serious hits? I'm not entirely sure, but it can't be more than 4-5 years before it starts stirring up some major issues with their currency.

On another note, I would like to see Canada drastically increase our military budget. Our military has degraded steadily over the last 20 years or so, and is no longer an effective force to be integrated with NATO operations. The Canadian government just posted the fiscal results for this past year, and we enjoyed a 9 billion dollar surplus. What Canada should do, other than the missile shield, is to pre-order 100 or so Joint Strike Fighters (we still using f-18's), maybe a couple of LA class subs to replace the billion dollars worth of British subs we bought that don't even work, a bunch of M1A2 tanks to replace our 70's era Leopard 2's, and some of your nice Kidd class destroyers... maybe even an Aegis cruiser for our flagship. We also need some heavy lift capacity.That would probly bring the tab up to about 9-12 billion dollars. Americans have been happy to sell us gear before, I don't suppose now would be any different, and it would show them that we are indeed serious about our commitment to NATO, NORAD, and we would have a better ability to integrate into the high tech operations that NATO conducts. Not too mention, I want our boys to have the best, safest equipment that we can get if we gonna send them in harm's way in the name of political agendas. Canada doesn't need, nor can it support a large military.... but it should be first rate, and NATO should be proud to have Canada on board... as it stands now, not so much. We can afford it, so why not? Are our soldiers not worth it?



posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Devans28
Does anybody know how many consecutive years the US could run a 500 billion or so dollar defecit before their economy starts taking some serious hits? I'm not entirely sure, but it can't be more than 4-5 years before it starts stirring up some major issues with their currency.





The deficit is already $7.7 TRILLION (not billion) - interest is piling up at $2.2 Billion dollars every day.

China, Japan, Taiwan and South Korea hold 40 percent of the US government debt.


...Things are already quite interesting. ...The first sign is rapidly escalating housing costs - even rents are out of reach for many. More squeezes to come.


.



posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 06:28 PM
link   
Well, the US GNP is somewhere just under 11 trillion dollars i think. So what happens if they continue on the same road for another 4 years and actually owe more than they make? I think thats the definition of bankruptcy, but I'm not entirely sure as I've never gone bankrupt. Anyways, if the US were to go bankrupt or whatever equivalent that the world has for nations, what would that mean for the global economy? Can the US even go bankrupt? I dunno, they control so much of the world economy that I'm not sure there would be a day that other nations would cut off the money lending, cuz if the US goes down, the whole house of cards could collapse, or at least be given a thorough rattling. Interested in hearing what you guys have to say about that idea.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join