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.

 

Canada & U.S. agree to use each other’s troops in civil emergencies

page: 2
17
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 11:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by boondock-saint
Oh just great, we fight a couple world wars
only to be invaded successfully
by Canadians.

Obama just spit on every single grave at Arlington.


Play nice

This is a couple of years old, at the G20 that was held in Toronto, about half of the cops there, were from the USA.

Plus, look at our country's population. 34 million. Our military would hardly be noticeable. Unless they're from Quebec or Newfoundland, where the accents are so strong, most Cdns cannot even understand their speech. :shk:

If they were going to use our troops against the US population, like some other posters on this site have alluded to, you wouldn't even notice us. They would have to bring in troops from other countries too, or else rely on the US troops to also control the American population. There just isn't enough of us.

Now American military in Canada, the numbers there are truly frightening

Time to move further north......again......




posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 11:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Fox Molder
Why am I the only one that does not see a problem with this agreement ? It is obvious that any troops serving on foreign soil and under the command of the residing military force would be bound by that nation's laws. The only place a U.S. soldier or citizen for that mater is on he's own soil while in another country is at the Embassy.

Plus..The only time such utilization be done would be under martial law meaning a hell of a lot of civil unrest!

It is no different than the understanding in place now that allows a Canadian police officer to continue a chase on to American soil....Once crossed over the boarder the Canadian officer is to take an accompanying role in the chase, same goes for the contrary when a U.S. trooper crosses in to Canada!


I'm sure there are a great many others that hold the same belief that you do. Not everyone is going to see this in the same way. Interesting however to read the comments at the end of the article, seems Canadians are up in arms over this...as they (and we) should be, IMHO.

With due respect to your differing opinion I do not see it as the same as police of either country giving chace of a criminal over repective borders. I see great potential for this to fall quickly into an abuse of powers on either side and not be used just in case of martial law being called.

Let's just think of it this way... the US or Canadian citizens finally have had enough. We start protesting in great numbers against our governments. US (or Canada) calls the other's troops in for 'containment' of the rabble rousers, like Bahrain calling in or allowing Saudi troops on their soil for crowd control. I am not saying that this would happen for sure, I'm just saying that it could be used in that instance and as for me... that scares the daylights outta me.



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 11:52 AM
link   
reply to post by MyMindIsMyOwn
 



There is potential for abuse of power in the scenario that you describe but you have to understand that those troops being "used" are subject to the laws of the nation that they are being called upon to help thus exposing the abusers to reprimands.



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 12:08 PM
link   
It' all about sovereignty. I believe that Canada and the US should worry about thier own populace.Troops should only be protecting trier own embassies otherwise,yes, the potential for abuse of power is gonna be there. A "he said she said" scenario.



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 12:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by 420man
It' all about sovereignty. I believe that Canada and the US should worry about thier own populace.Troops should only be protecting trier own embassies otherwise,yes, the potential for abuse of power is gonna be there. A "he said she said" scenario.


So we shouldn't ask each other for help then? It is possible that we can help each other without any abuse, we are not that bad...Well aside from us crazy Quebecois and our tempers and hot blood...LOL... but still.....I don't see this as being a huge infringement on sovereignty on one's nation. Of course if there were to be abuse of power then I would gladly change my views but as Westerners we are fairly calm and civil.

Please don't look at Montreal and hockey games as an example....lol



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 12:25 PM
link   
Hey Fox, born in MTL now in BC.Hot tempered or not, we go down there, they come up here. What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas. That's always been the millitary's official stance when abroad. Check out wikileaks.



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 12:31 PM
link   
reply to post by 420man
 



I served my country....

If we are realistic about this we both know that during civil unrest of massive proportions, martial law will be called upon, remember Trudeau and the October crisis involving the FLQ ? Remember the OKA crisis involving the Mohawk aboriginal people ?

If Canadians are to cross the boarder it would be in an assistance posture and I would hope that it would be the same for the U.S. helping here in Canada. As for abuse, I agree that it might happen, always a sour grape in the sweet ones.



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 12:34 PM
link   
I personally don't like this at all.

In times of natural catastrophe...OK. In times of an attack from a foreign country or organized border stampede type of thing...OK. But this leaves an awful lot of wiggle room to me.

If there were a civil uprising in this country, I would bet money that our own military would not fire upon US citizens. Perhaps a few rogue soldiers, but collectively, as a force -- no way in my opinion.

But would a Canadian military have the same hesitation? Is this a response to the realization that the military, as evidenced in Egypt, is truly on the side of the people? Is this to prevent the people from being able to harness the power of the military to their benefit?

I just think that US soldiers would be more likely to fire upon Canadian citizens and vice-versa than their own. More likely still being a relatively small percentage though.



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by lpowell0627
 



Well I tend to differ for that. Canadian soldiers would tend to fire on Americans and American soldiers wouldn't fire upon Canadian citizens either. Like you said though, you might get that rogue soldier that thinks he's Rambo but in general.....All would be fine I think.



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Oh just great, we fight a couple world wars only to be invaded successfully by Canadians.


I think it's the Canadians who should be worried.

The North American Union just got a step closer to being a reality.

BTW I wasn't aware that either of our countries had such a troop shortage that we had to borrow troops from another country to quell "civil emergencies". The Pentagon is out of control.



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 01:15 PM
link   
reply to post by MyMindIsMyOwn
 


I've called my member of parliament and am awaiting some, as they put it, "talking points".

What bothers me is that all these deals are done outside the publics awareness. If it's not shady you shouldn't be hiding it.



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 01:22 PM
link   
Canada or US, politics is politics and all the major deals are done behind closed doors so the public doesn't know what's going on until it's too late to do anything about it.



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 01:22 PM
link   
Umm... we have the most grotesquely large military in the world. We don't need help. However... I would be totally thrilled about exchanging our military services for their medical services. It would almost be a "swords to plowshares" scenario!



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 01:30 PM
link   
reply to post by MyMindIsMyOwn
 


I read the article a couple of days ago and was wondering how on earth our army of 10 is going to deal with a population of 330 million and your army of millions against our population of 33 million. This leads me to think, could it be possible that this agreement has opened things up such that the US Military could put on Canadian uniforms and go against their own and the Canadians do the same?

I'm just thinking out loud here.



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 01:53 PM
link   
Anything is possible with our mutually corrupt governments. Smoke and mirrors to deceive the masses. Brute force to promote democracy? Could be a one-size-fits-all uniform.



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 02:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by boondock-saint
Oh just great, we fight a couple world wars
only to be invaded successfully
by Canadians.

Wonder what Gen. Patton would think about that???
Or Eisenhower ???

Obama just spit on every single grave at Arlington.


"Only to be invaded" um... we've already invaded successfully in the past. You can thank us for your current White House... and we'll say that you're very welcome.
edit on 24-2-2011 by Dendro because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 03:24 PM
link   
reply to post by MyMindIsMyOwn
 


North American Union
The Amero
High speed transit

edit on 24-2-2011 by beholdblight because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 03:56 PM
link   
reply to post by VernonBC
 


Hmm, well thats a position I had not thought of while considering all of this nonsense. I don't see where that would be of benefit though. If going through all that hullabaloo, why not just declare the NAU as a done deal and let everyone wear the NAU uniform. But, like I said....had not come at this from your angle.



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 04:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Dendro
 


OOoohhhhh.... that pesky little song by 3 Dead Trolls in a Baggie.... "The War of 1812"


But in the spirit of goodwill... I will thank you for our new White House... lol



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 04:18 PM
link   







The irony in that one is quite thick^^




top topics



 
17
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join