War on Terror how would Canucks handle it?

The US has been criticized(sometimes rightly so)from the get go for the decisions it has made regarding the War on Terrorism. From Guantanamo to Iraq and now in regards towards its actions towards Iran. We were even criticized by many for our actions in Afghanistan. So lets ask the most gentle peope of all(you know who I'm talking about). So what would the Canadians have done differently?

Wow Canada finally get her own political forum on PTS and it is mostly getting actions from Americans.

So what would the Canadians have done differently?

I think this would be better phrased as “So what have the Canadians done differently?”
Canada is involved in the WoT.
We agreed to go to Afghanistan. We disagreed on going to Iraq. We have said no to weponising space. We allow cigarette lighters on commercial aircrafts,
What have we done the same? We have imprisoned people with out charge. We have lost the lives of those who wish to make the world a better place.

Thanks for putting me in my place Umbrax. I'm sure at least several people on this board would say it needed to be done. You made some good points. I guess you could chalk my ignorance on Canada's contribution too the war effort in Afghanistan to having forgotten about Afghanistan completely(most americans have).

Can't fault you for staying out of Iraq(I guess your leaders didn't sleep through history class). But why did you decide not to join the Anti Ballistic Missile program?

It is believed that doing this will cause a new arms race. Enemies would build more missiles hoping that if they had to they could send enough the defense net would be overwhelmed.
Back when the Conservative Party was the opposition they were for ABM’s in space. Now that they are the leading party who knows if Canada’s stance on ABM will change.

Umbrax, this is the new and exciting Canadian forum on PTS. Why not give him all the dirt on our refusal of the BMD program?

When it was first brought up, the Liberal party was in power, but with a minority government. The PM at the time, Paul Martin, supported the plan but it was incredibly unpopular with the public, for the reason Umbrax mentioned. The Liberals were mired in scandal and baggage from the previous PM, Chretien, from whom Martin wrested power in a fierce internal struggle.

Then Bush came to town. Before he arrived, he was briefed on the fact that Liberal support for the program would topple the government and Bush agreed that at no time would the program be mentioned. Then he went on TV and mentioned it, blindsiding Martin on a live nationally televised event. By the next day, it went from something most Canadians didn't even think about to front page news.

Martin had to swallow his previous words and announce that Canada would not be joining the program. It was either that or lose the job that he had schemed and fought for years to get.

In my opinion, it boils down to bad timing and poor advice from whoever advises your President on things like this. In my opinion, if the US had waited for a majority government, Liberal or Conservative, Canada would have signed on.

[edit on 8-7-2006 by Duzey]

Joining the program just means we're more involved in the process, it doesn't make any difference to how the program will be incepted. That's probably why Harper recently did an about face and said Canada wouldn't join. It makes no difference in the end to what the program will look like. Just political posturing, or Harper doesn't mind placing his 'in Bush we trust.'

The rights to privacy have also been railroaded in Canada.