POLITICS: US Threatens Canada's Airspace: Ignores International Law

Originally posted by soficrow
The accepted process for dealing with such future possibilities is to negotiate an agreement ahead of time. Apparently the USA is unwilling to do so -

What have the canadians asked for that the US refused to give in exhange?

and prefers to ignore international law completely - instead, asserting its "right" as a 'common sense solution' as you and many others do.

The US has no 'right' to invade a sovereign nations airspace, any more than it has a right to send troops in to blow stuff up. Regardless, the US does have a right to defend itself whatever the costs.

You know, the kinds of tactics that have caused Bush to be labelled a bully in the international arena?

Indeed, bush is something of a 'bully'. But international politics is power politics, so what can be expected? Without co-operation with the US, of course there is going to be strong arming.



.

According to a Canadian general, Canada is not even capable of defending it's airspace without the help of the US.

OTTAWA—Canada couldn't afford to defend its airspace without its 46-year-old NORAD partnership with the United States, says the chief of defence staff.

So regardless of Ottawa's decision on the Americans' new continental ballistic missile defence plan, Ottawa has no choice but to remain in the North American Aerospace Defence Command, says Gen. Ray Henault.

Henault strongly rejected critics' claims that NORAD will wither and die if Canada does not participate in missile defence.

"NORAD will endure because the defence of our aerospace will always be a requirement," Henault said in an interview.

"The shared defence of our aerospace — Canada-U.S. — is, in my view, something that will not change.

"We could not afford to do aerospace surveillance and control of Canadian airspace without being involved in NORAD."

The general, who heads to a NATO post in Brussels next summer, said his American counterparts have given him every indication NORAD will survive, regardless of Canada's decision on ballistic missile defence.

www.thestar.com.../Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1103414410955&call_pageid=970599119419

Originally posted by Muaddib

Well, before you crash headlong into the manure you yourself just "ascertained", do note that I said that she is on a crusade against the government...nowhere did i say she was anti-USA..... Perhaps reading what people actually say will help you a bit before you make any claims.

ok, well... then anti government instead of anti USA...

doesn't change what i said though...

wrong is wrong... and if it happens to be our government doing the wrong, then i am glad people like soficrow point that out...

The only thing i will say in regards to this thread, (since i am not informed enough to say much) is that the US does tend to assume too much cooperation from its alllies these days, and you know what happens when you assume...
It is always nice to ask/bargain before you assume permission.

to sofi: no offense intended with any of my remarks... i find your extensive knowledge to have served you well.
We have always seen eye to eye...
and overzealous is a good thing... it is a needed charachteristic by anyone who wants to overcome stubborn mindsets...

Originally posted by LazarusTheLong
wrong is wrong... and if it happens to be our government doing the wrong, then i am glad people like soficrow point that out...

Well then, you must be happier than a puppy with two peters, because there is no shortage of people like soficrow pointing that out. However, I have noticed an acute shortage of people pointing out that just about every government is doing wrong, I understand that we are our own worst critics, and rightfully so, but I don't see people of other nationalities adhering to that principle. It's been an all out assault on our nation, and I guess the reason some get so worked up is because it's easy to view somebody who joins a chorus of people from other countries in bashing their own as a traitor. Of course that's probably not the case, but how many threads here on ATS do you see a bunch of Americans bashing France (just an example), and a bunch of French people joining in on the bashing or criticizing? Not too many.

Originally posted by 27jd

how many threads here on ATS do you see a bunch of Americans bashing France (just an example), and a bunch of French people joining in on the bashing or criticizing? Not too many.

...They do when France sticks their nose in other nation's business and stomps all over international laws and agreements.

And that's what this thread is about - disrespect for international law, and unwillness to play by the rules. Those rules came out of WW atrocities - they were hard won, and a LOT of people died to make them happen, Americans too. Now they're being tromped into the dirt. Of course people are upset.



.

Originally posted by soficrow
...They do when France sticks their nose in other nation's business and stomps all over international laws and agreements.

Really? I honestly would like to see what leads you to say they do. You say they do as if you have hard facts, please share. Otherwise you should say they probably would in your opinion. France has "joined noses" with the US on the Lebanon issue, please show me a thread where French folks are denouncing their governments involvement in that nation's business, or maybe some French folks denouncing their governments involvement in the Ivory Coast, also another nation if I'm not mistaken. I'll be waiting for that. And as for international laws and agreements, I doubt either you or I know the legal agreements made between the US and Canada in regards to continental airspace, NORAD or NORTHCOM, aside from the politics we all see, we have no idea what legally binding agreements have been, or are being made behind the scenes. Also, where, besides Americans here on ATS who probably don't have the decision making powers that Rumsfeld, Bush or I (according to you ) have, has it been said that the US would violate Canada's airspace (that they depend on us to protect)?





[edit on 28-2-2005 by 27jd]

The bush administration dumped international laws in the toilet when it went after a sovereign country without any act of war and then violated Geneva convention in the prison abuse scandal and in Guantanamo base.

This administration we are under now doesn't know what "international" laws mean unless somebody else comes and violate ours.

Originally posted by marg6043
The bush administration dumped international laws in the toilet when it went after a sovereign country without any act of war and then violated Geneva convention in the prison abuse scandal and in Guantanamo base.

This administration we are under now doesn't know what "international" laws mean unless somebody else comes and violate ours.

I think you know that I am against the war in Iraq, but what is being discussed here is legalities in regards to North American airspace and defense agreements between the US and Canada (before Bush).

But I commend your dedication to making your feelings about Iraq known, in every thread, probably even in threads about UFO's or Bigfoot.

[edit on 28-2-2005 by 27jd]

I remember a good reference about trying to cover the moon or the sun (I think it was one of them) with the palm of your hand, not matter what is till there.

So, yeah......deadly sins, you can not get rid of them no matter what.

I would not call Bush a tyrant. You want a tyrant, look at Edward the Longshanks (spelling?), Pol Pot, Mae Zedong, Kim Jong II, Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler, Mussolini, etc.....THOSE ARE TYRANTS.

Bush does not fall under that.

Now I agree that the Patriot Act is a crappy thing, but people seem to forget about Clinton and his wife; they together tried to hand over MULTIPLE forms of U.S. sovereignty to the United Nations. The Patriot Act is one thing as it turns over certain freedoms to the government of the United States, but to turn over freedoms to the U.N. is unforgivable in this nation.

And Bush did not simply go right into a "sovereign nation" and mess it all up. Saddam Hussein (there's a real dictator for ya!! but somehow because Bush knocked him out, he himself is a dictator) was given an ultimatum by the United Nations. They all told him to disarm or else. The United States, Britain, and Poland were the only ones who followed through.

OF COURSE FRANCE AND GERMANY WERE AGAINST INVADING IRAQ FOR REAL, BECAUSE IRAQ IS ONE OF THE BIG BUYERS OF FRENCH AND GERMAN MILITARY EQUIPMENT. Also, it was French and German oil companies that had interests in those oil fields there. When the U.S. came through and took out Saddam, those oil companies lost any power and influence they had on those fields, and they can't do crap about it, so they are furious right now.

People also seem to forget that the U.S. has a different mindset than Europe. European nations are quickly turning over their national sovereignty to the European Union. The United States does not believe in doing any such thing. We are a sovereign nation and will not get drawn into deals that force us to give up such freedoms just because it is what the "majority of the world wants."

The world wanted the U.S. in the Kyoto Treaty; would it have really helped slow global warming? No one knows. Would it have given Europe the power to dictate how we utilize oil and energy sources? Yes, and that is not something we turn over to Europeans and Asians.

The United States is going to remain a sovereign nation, even if that means pi**ing off the rest of the world, because that is what we believe in. It is one of our prime principles.

But people can call Bush a tyrant all he wants. They ought to be glad that the United States is not a dictatorship run by a REAL tyrant.

People say the U.S. violated the Geneva Convention......well no military is perfect, sheesh. You really think the French Foreign Legion over in Indochina does everything all politically correct? The only reason the French are even still in there is because the French people don't give a crap about the troops in the Foreign Legion.

But my point is, the U.S. military is very large. So no matter what, you're going to have @$$holes in it that are going to violate the rules and do something against international or national law. But just because a few soldiers do something like this does not mean the U.S. literally "violated the Geneva Convention." I mean, it did because of that, but it is not like the Bush Administration literally authorized the torture of said prisoners. There was that one U.S. jet pilot who bombed the Canadian soldiers too, and that they don't believe was an accident, so I mean you find @$$holes everywhere.

Look at what the Clinton Administration caused by not letting the Army handle Somlia properly. Because of that, they have the blood of 2000 Somalis on their hands and of U.S. soldiers.

Now I mean these things aren't torture per se, but I mean an administration does something like that and no one really says much, yet a couple troops at a prison torture some prisoners and boom, it's "The U.S. has violated the Geneva Convention, blah blah blah....." sheesh.

And sorry if I went a bit off-topic, but that was just my soapbox on people calling Bush a tyrant. LOOK AT REAL TYRANTS.

Originally posted by Nygdan

Originally posted by soficrow
The accepted process for dealing with such future possibilities is to negotiate an agreement ahead of time. Apparently the USA is unwilling to do so -

What have the canadians asked for that the US refused to give in exhange?

As outlined in the article above, a blanket missile defense contract was on the table - with no info or detail, and the US was asking Canada to sign an open-ended agreement.

Canada declined the contract, and the US then claimed publicly she had thereby given up her airspace soveriegnty. ...The media circus followed, marketing the issue as the US claiming her "right to defend herself." ...which is not the underlying issue at all.

and prefers to ignore international law completely - instead, asserting its "right" as a 'common sense solution' as you and many others do.

The US has no 'right' to invade a sovereign nations airspace, any more than it has a right to send troops in to blow stuff up. Regardless, the US does have a right to defend itself whatever the costs.

Glad you can see the distinctions.

Still, it's standard procedure to negotiate an agreement, and it's flouting of international law not to attempt to do so.

.

[edit on 28-2-2005 by soficrow]

Quite frankly, I believe that IF the US gets a defense shield that works and someday we wake up learn that missiles are launched and heading our way, the US is going to shoot them down I don't give a big rats A$$ who's air space they have to violate.

We'll make it up to them later

Love and light,

Wupy

Originally posted by mrwupy
Quite frankly, I believe that IF the US gets a defense shield that works and someday we wake up learn that missiles are launched and heading our way, the US is going to shoot them down I don't give a big rats A$$ who's air space they have to violate.

IMO - that's a legitimate response to an emergency situation. But we're not talking about an emergency.


.

Originally posted by soficrow
Canada declined the contract, and the US then claimed publicly she had thereby given up her airspace sovereignty.

Not to worry. Canadians are used to slogging around in the snow, so no big deal. Of course, y'all are going to have to learn to sling an Oklahoma twang. We already named a river after you guys, just to make you feel at home.

What the heck is that crazy Indian, Chakotay, yappin' about now?

Nothing much. Just remembering what happens to folks who give up their sovereignty to the US...

[edit on 28-2-2005 by Chakotay]

Originally posted by Chakotay

Not to worry. Canadians are used to slogging around in the snow, so no big deal. Of course, y'all are going to have to learn to sling an Oklahoma twang. We already named a river after you guys, just to make you feel at home.

What the heck is that crazy Indian, Chakotay, yappin' about now?

wild injuns down in new orleans, 'bout the prettiest thing, that you ever seen.... -the neville brothers

wait, .....there's no snow in new orleans! whaaaaaas 'uuup?

keep yappin', and we'll share your stolen land!

p.s. you're not jewish, are you? if you could be jewish, it would really pay off, landwise.

oh yeah. and MISSILE SHIELD! LOOK OUT! THERE ARE HUNDREDS OF NUCLEAR MISSILES BEARING DOWN! IF WE COULD ONLY SHOOT HALF OF THEM DOWN, IT WOULDN'T MAKE A CRAPLOAD OF DIFFERENCE!

Broadsword20068, are you serious? I can't believe you make excuses for these people, don't you think humans should try and live more peacefully? I wan't no part of any missle defence ofence, space wepons. there are so many other things that money should be spent on.

maybe we as north americans should work harder to make ourselves less of a target. or not a target at all. now that bush has stired up a hole bees nest of trouble.

Broadsword20068 you should look up how many united nations resulitions the united states has broken.

I seen today, cbc TV, norad, top dudes a Canadain, if there was a missle attack tonight, well some canadain dude is go'n to be calling bush for the ok to do whatever it is they do(scramble,deploy some #). I Think our Canadain government is just saying no to missle defence to save votes, were having an election soon. Canada is in like flin, weather we know it or not.

warmongering sucks plane and simple

G.D.H Cole
It is not enough that the forms of government should have the passive or "implied" consent of the governed, but that the Society will be in health only if it is in the full sense democratic and self-governing, which implies not only that all the citizen should have a `right' to influence its policy if they so desire, but that the greatest possible opportunity should be afforded for every citizen actually to exercise this right

if I lived in a true democracy, there would be a vote

please excuse spelling mistakkes , I'm stupid

who makes $$$$$ from war? look

www.wagingpeace.org...

Originally posted by fuggeisgod
who makes $$$$$ from war? look

My friend you just has discovered the Carlyle group.

Broadsword20068, are you serious? I can't believe you make excuses for these people, don't you think humans should try and live more peacefully? I wan't no part of any missle defence ofence, space wepons. there are so many other things that money should be spent on.

maybe we as north americans should work harder to make ourselves less of a target. or not a target at all. now that bush has stired up a hole bees nest of trouble.

Broadsword20068 you should look up how many united nations resulitions the united states has broken.

I seen today, cbc TV, norad, top dudes a Canadain, if there was a missle attack tonight, well some canadain dude is go'n to be calling bush for the ok to do whatever it is they do(scramble,deploy some #). I Think our Canadain government is just saying no to missle defence to save votes, were having an election soon. Canada is in like flin, weather we know it or not.

warmongering sucks plane and simple

G.D.H Cole
It is not enough that the forms of government should have the passive or "implied" consent of the governed, but that the Society will be in health only if it is in the full sense democratic and self-governing, which implies not only that all the citizen should have a `right' to influence its policy if they so desire, but that the greatest possible opportunity should be afforded for every citizen actually to exercise this right

if I lived in a true democracy, there would be a vote

please excuse spelling mistakkes , I'm stupid

who makes $$$$$ from war? look

www.wagingpeace.org...

Broadsword20068, are you serious? I can't believe you make excuses for these people, don't you think humans should try and live more peacefully? I wan't no part of any missle defence ofence, space wepons. there are so many other things that money should be spent on.

maybe we as north americans should work harder to make ourselves less of a target. or not a target at all. now that bush has stired up a hole bees nest of trouble.

Broadsword20068 you should look up how many united nations resulitions the united states has broken.

I seen today, cbc TV, norad, top dudes a Canadain, if there was a missle attack tonight, well some canadain dude is go'n to be calling bush for the ok to do whatever it is they do(scramble,deploy some #). I Think our Canadain government is just saying no to missle defence to save votes, were having an election soon. Canada is in like flin, weather we know it or not.

warmongering sucks plane and simple

G.D.H Cole
It is not enough that the forms of government should have the passive or "implied" consent of the governed, but that the Society will be in health only if it is in the full sense democratic and self-governing, which implies not only that all the citizen should have a `right' to influence its policy if they so desire, but that the greatest possible opportunity should be afforded for every citizen actually to exercise this right

if I lived in a true democracy, there would be a vote

please excuse spelling mistakkes , I'm stupid

who makes $$$$$ from war? look

www.wagingpeace.org...

Broadsword20068, are you serious? I can't believe you make excuses for these people, don't you think humans should try and live more peacefully? I wan't no part of any missle defence ofence, space wepons. there are so many other things that money should be spent on.

maybe we as north americans should work harder to make ourselves less of a target. or not a target at all. now that bush has stired up a hole bees nest of trouble.

Broadsword20068 you should look up how many united nations resulitions the united states has broken.

I seen today, cbc TV, norad, top dudes a Canadain, if there was a missle attack tonight, well some canadain dude is go'n to be calling bush for the ok to do whatever it is they do(scramble,deploy some #). I Think our Canadain government is just saying no to missle defence to save votes, were having an election soon. Canada is in like flin, weather we know it or not.

warmongering sucks plane and simple

G.D.H Cole
It is not enough that the forms of government should have the passive or "implied" consent of the governed, but that the Society will be in health only if it is in the full sense democratic and self-governing, which implies not only that all the citizen should have a `right' to influence its policy if they so desire, but that the greatest possible opportunity should be afforded for every citizen actually to exercise this right

if I lived in a true democracy, there would be a vote

please excuse spelling mistakkes , I'm stupid

who makes $$$$$ from war? look

www.wagingpeace.org...