POLITICS: Canada to reject missile defence, page 2
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times


reply posted on 24-2-2005 @ 02:23 PM by Seekerof
According to this article, perhaps this is one of the reasons why?

The federal budget presented to the House of Commons calls for $10.5 billion in the next five years to increase the country's beleaguered armed forces — including an additional 5,000 soldiers and 3,000 reservists — the largest commitment to defense in two decades. It also called for another $807,950 to improve Canada's anti-terrorism efforts and security along the unarmed, 4,000-mile border with the United States.


Typically, socialism and/or socialist governments divert most money that would have been aimed for the military into over-hyped and over-bloated social programs that will eventually bleed and require more money and then even more money to rectify and continue. I think the French, German, and Canadian healthcare systems (social program) are bleeding out what should be going to its national defense and military. If I am wrong, I am sure that I will be corrected.

Personally, why should the Canadian's opt into this deal anyhow? They know that if a missile (ICBM) is targeted anywhere remotely close to the US or at the US, they will be protected because the US will attempt to shoot such an incoming missile or ICBM down regardless. Martin is playing to the Canadian liberal base, as well. The same thing was done with Iraq.





seekerof

[edit on 24-2-2005 by Seekerof]


reply posted on 24-2-2005 @ 03:24 PM by sardion2000
Ah yes the Socialist Rhetoric yet again. If we don't do it the pure American Capitolistic way we gotta be Socialists, no matter that Canada has succefully had 8 balanaced budgets in a row, life expantancy is also longer in canada(79.3 years in Canada vs 76.6 in US stats from here), is now the biggest supplier of Oil to the USA now, our unemployment is 12.8 % okay maybe not steller, but it points to the fact that alot of people are actively looking for work. If the US had a higher unemployment rate I would be more hopefull for the US economy, however I am not as are alot of my peers in the Investment field. You see Seekerof, Canadians in general have different priorities then the americans, we prefer to have dependable institutions where if we get hurt or sick we don't have to declare bankruptcy after the bill for lifesaving treatment arrives in the mail. If the Capitolist way of delivering Health Care is better how come the Age Expantancy gap between our two countries? Why are we more respected around the world also?

[edit on 24-2-2005 by sardion2000]


reply posted on 24-2-2005 @ 03:47 PM by BattleofBatoche
Sardion2000 doesn't speak for all Canadians. The Western Provinces & territories who voted anti-liberal pro-conservative are strong supporters of the missle defence program. We also want a more capable military that doesn't have to rent transport planes from Russia to move our troops or send our troops to desert countries in green jungle fatigues or send them on missions without bullets in there guns. We are ashamed of our government and deeply embarrassed. Our healthcare system is a joke, our own leaders get medical treatment in the U.S. You get put on 5 year waiting lists for MRI scans even if you have brain cancer and get bumped if a famous athelete or MP needs a scan. My father in law is still waiting for his colon cancer / liver cancer surgery and its been a year and a half, now the cancer has spread to his kidneys. Mean while people go to the doctor for free to get anti-biotics for colds & fevers? They go to get slivers and hang nails removed. Senior citizens go to the doctor weekly 'just in case' or cause they are lonely. When ever something is free people abuse the hell out of it. My government takes over 50% of my paycheck and then taxes everything I buy or any service I get performed thus leaving me with less than 35% of what I originally made. I'd rather pay 5 000 a year in medical insurance than support a goverment with over taxation to support a dying system. WHEN ARE CENTRAL & EASTERN CANADIANS EVER GOING TO LEARN THAT SOCIALISM DOESN"T WORK. Just look at cuba or the Ex-Soviet Union.
If it was the year 300 A.D. and the king offered to build a wall around the city to protect from barbarians; do you think people would protest?
Not to mention Russia has had ABM technology in place since 1974. Why is it a crime if North America has the same technology. Russia & china still have nukes pointed at Canadian powerstations and major cities.
Socialisic Liberals are living in la la land!


reply posted on 24-2-2005 @ 05:54 PM by Trent
Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween
Yes I know those pesky capitalist New Found Landers are a worry. They antagonize and war against others thereby being forced to spend a goodly chunk of the citizens' tax dollars on bombs, death machines and killing of their citizens and others, then proclaim socialism bad for spending a goodly chunk of citizens' tax dollars on quality of life for the taxpayers. What a backa$$wards way of thinking, i.e. tax dollars is better used for killing not curing.


Also if the money is spent on health care/education that leaves me not having to worry about it so i can spend my money on other things (since i would have to spend money on these essentials anyway if they were not), me having money to spend helps local business much more than the military shooting stuff. I would prefer the government didn't tax me at all but if they are going to do it i would prefer they use the cash on things that i can see benefiting me directly rather than spending it on killing people in far off lands. As long as the government doesn't control the actual companies and just pays peoples bills for medical stuff when in certain limits or conditions (e.g. the government will re-emburse you for regular priced glasses from the optometrist but if you want extra expensive ones you have to pay the difference) i can't see it being bad at all. In fact the only problem with our economy at the moment is it's growing too fast and in some areas there aren't enough people to fill all the jobs available. I would like to see anyone make the case that social programs are killing the Australian or New Zealand economy since we have some of the highest grow rates and lowest unemployment of all the first world countries, NZ actually being in the #1 spot and they are beating us because they don't spend ridiculous amounts on military like we do.

[edit on 24-2-2005 by Trent]


reply posted on 24-2-2005 @ 08:04 PM by Seekerof
Thoughts?

"We don't get it," Paul Cellucci said in Toronto.

"If there's a missile incoming, and it's heading toward Canada, you are going to leave it up to the United States to determine what to do about that missile. We don't think that is in Canada's sovereign interest."

U.S. Perplexed By Canada On Missile Defence

Again, Canada is taking the US for granted, IMHO. They know that it is in the best interest of the US to protect Canada, as I mentioned initially in my first post to this topic, being that most of Canada's major cities lie within 200 miles of the US. Given the proximity of those cities to those within the US, they also know that the US coverage will cover them. Martin is not stupid. Its coverage and protection and not a dime spent.

Perhaps, he is hoping that this will help when he faces a leadership vote in a couple weeks? Never fear though, NORAD maintains a number of early warning radar installations in the northern parts of Canada, including in US Alaska....all the 'early warning' we will need. Sure hope those missiles fired to intercept or anti-ICBM lasers are successful. Then maybe many won't have to worry about those 'winds' blowing, huh?




seekerof

[edit on 24-2-2005 by Seekerof]



reply posted on 24-2-2005 @ 08:35 PM by Seekerof
Canada isn't going to "educate" the US on "sovereignty." Why?
Cause you just signed one aspect of it over to the US, DeuxEx: Canadian airspace.

Ottawa – Canada's announcement that it won't join the U.S. missile shield provoked an immediate warning that it has relinquished sovereignty over its airspace.


And then Mr. Martin has the nerve to say:

Martin said he would expect to be consulted on what to do about any missile passing over Canada.

Canada Has Given Up Control of its Airspace: U.S. Ambassador

This implies that when or if an incoming ICBM/missile is detected by NORAD, the US will control the decisions to fire at that incoming ICBM/missile over Canadian territory. Also per the article. Does Canada or Mr. Martin wish notification/consultation before it is intercepted over Canadian territory or after a US intercept is in progress?

Still taking the US for granted, eh?




seekerof

[edit on 24-2-2005 by Seekerof]
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>    ^^TOP^^



Russian scientists reach buried Antarctic Lake Vostok
  Posted 7 days ago with 83 member flags
Renowned Geophysicist Says Strange Sky Sounds Are Real
  Posted 2 days ago with 74 member flags
Monsanto quits as GM results announced (EUROPE)
  Posted 8 days ago with 72 member flags
Ayatollah: Kill all Jews, annihilate Israel
  Posted 7 days ago with 49 member flags
Is it morally wrong to take a life? Not really, say bioethicists
  Posted 14 days ago with 37 member flags