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.

 

Should Canada Get Out Of Being Part Of The Commonwealth?

page: 3
4
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 03:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 


Got sources?
And remember what I said...retaliatory attacks on Canadian soil inspired by our invasion of other countries. I'm in no way suggesting that Canada has never been the victim of terrorism.




posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 03:37 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


I like how both you and Aeons cut off my final statement. If a country makes no enemies, it has no need of defending itself against anyone. And, if we have no need of stockpiling defenses, then we can focus on other things...like the health and financial welfare of our citizens.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 03:41 PM
link   
I don't like my surname, but I keep it. Why?

I am grateful for my ancestors' sacrifices, which have afforded me the quality of life I currently enjoy.

I honour my heritage by keeping my surname and by making sacrifices as well, so that my children will enjoy a better quality of life.

Albert Einstein said, "Many times a day I realize how much my own life is built upon the labors of my fellowmen, and how earnestly I must exert myself in order to give in return as much as I have received.”

I think Canada should remain in the Commonwealth because it represents our nation's heritage.

The people who came to this country before us made a choice. They chose to remain loyal to the land from which they came. Loyalty seems to be valued less in today's world but I value it.

They built this country for us and given the terrain, it was no mean feat. The least we can do is honour our heritage.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by CLPrime
I like how both you and Aeons cut off my final statement. If a country makes no enemies, it has no need of defending itself against anyone.

So the Jews somehow invited the holocaust?

The Natives somehow invited the europeans to invade what is now the U.S. and Canada, and moved to reservations out of good will?

History very much disagrees with you
I could list so many more examples but i'm sure you get the point



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 03:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Reaching
Albert Einstein said, "Many times a day I realize how much my own life is built upon the labors of my fellowmen, and how earnestly I must exert myself in order to give in return as much as I have received.”

What did you receive from Britain?
Who says you couldn't receive more with more independence?
Labours of you fellow man?
Really?
There was no canadian army during 1812, just Canadian militias and British military
They fought against the U.S. for imperial reasons not out of the goodness of their own hearts.

The U.S. didn't invade Canada as much as they invaded a british colony while britain was busy with France.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 03:52 PM
link   
If we were to get out of the commonwealth it wold cause a logistical nightmare due to the fact that we would have to adjust our entire parliamentary system. We could follow India's example and become a Parliamentary Republic, instead of a Constitutional Monarchy based on the Westminster Parliamentary system, but it would take a huge amount of effort to transition. It would probably mean political suicide for a Canadian political party as well, thus non of them have truly touched the issue besides the Bloc Quebecois.

Yes we have to pay for royal visits, but no we no longer send money over to Britain as we once did. This stopped with the Statute of Westminster in the 1930s.

When it comes down to it, Canada is still apart of the Commonwealth because a majority of Canadians want to be apart of the Commonwealth and still support the Queen.

I personally agree with some of the other members posts in that we would most likely be on our way to a North American Union situation if Canada were to leave the Commonwealth, and do we really want that?



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 04:00 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


History doesn't live in 2011.

The Jews were not a sovereign nation of almost 34 million people.
The native Americans were not a sovereign nation of almost 34 million people.

This was the purpose of the US 2nd Amendment: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." As the people of a sovereign nation, we have the right - in fact, the responsibility - to defend ourselves, and, as a nation, if we fail to do that, then the blame is ours. This does not necessitate the existence of an unrivaled military capable of obliterating the planet - this necessitates the existence of a capable populace aware of their rights and responsibilities and able to stand by them, to the death if need be.

This is a basic tenet of democracy. All a military built around the offense gets you is enemies and the constant threat of tyranny.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 



Yeah, i want out of the Commonwealth. I think it's pretty ridiculous.

Funny you post this thread today as Mackay announces we will be changing our military names to honor royal roots.

Changing name of military


Canada's air force and navy will undergo a name change that honours the military's royal roots, Defence Minister Peter MacKay announced Tuesday. Speaking in Halifax, MacKay said the Canadian air force, now officially named Air Command, will be renamed the Royal Canadian Air Force. The navy, now called Maritime Command, will once again be known as the Royal Canadian Navy. And the army, known as Land Force Command, will now be called the Canadian Army.


LOL I know we are Canada and no one takes us seriously, but I'm tired of this Monarchy BS.

Get the Queen off of our money!


Honestly, I'm glad we're going back to our old naming system. The modernized "LAND FORCE COMMAND" was just silly sounding, especially when inside that you had "Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry". It just didn't make sense.

RCAF, good.
RCN, good.
CA, good.

Now if we can just remove the absolutely stupid distaste our general public has towards our own troops, as well as upping funding for our military by quite a bit (We DON'T need history repeating itself in the case of our first actions in World War 2. Ill-equipped soldiers with lackluster training sent over on a moment's notice, where not only did they suffer horrible losses and not win a single battle, but the Germans actually laughed at us.

I'm not saying we need US-levels of government funding for our troops, but we DO need to support them more than we do now.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 04:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by CLPrime
History doesn't live in 2011.

Yes it does
South Korea is a richer territory than North Korea
But still North Korea wants to take control of SK

Look at what is happening in the middle east too
Wars all over the place



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


I'm sorry, I honestly thought we were talking about Canada.
You should try responding to more than just a single sentence taken out of context.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 04:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by CLPrime
I'm sorry, I honestly thought we were talking about Canada.
You should try responding to more than just a single sentence taken out of context.

Really?

Originally posted by CLPrime
If a country makes no enemies, it has no need of defending itself against anyone


YOU mentioned countries and how countries do not need to have a strong military power if they don't make enemies
I am simply responding to such Utopian delusions



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 04:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by CLPrime
reply to post by Aeons
 


Got sources?
And remember what I said...retaliatory attacks on Canadian soil inspired by our invasion of other countries. I'm in no way suggesting that Canada has never been the victim of terrorism.


The terrorists believe that they are responding in a retaliiatory way. So the distinction, isn't.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


The countries you mentioned have already made enemies. Trying to nullify my argument by applying my reasoning to such countries is a perfect example of reductio ad absurdum. Of course my "utopian" ideal won't work with South Korea, or Israel, or other nations who already have enemies. If you have enemies, then you can't suddenly start acting like you don't.
But, we're talking about Canada, a country without a defined list of enemies. And we don't go out of our way to make them. So, our focus can be more internal - as I said, the health and welfare of our citizens. That focus seems to be something America is lacking.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 04:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 


Certainly, if reality bows to the terrorists.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 04:36 PM
link   
If the purpose of this thread was to slag on the monarchy, it has most certainly back fired. Modern Academia, if I remember correctly you were born here in Canada?



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 04:38 PM
link   
Canada does not need a huge army, not when she has 2.1 billion people watching her back.




posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 04:43 PM
link   
I hope Canada stays in The Commonwealth.

They have always been loyal and steadfast friends and allies and are much respected and valued here in the UK.

As for The Queen, she's just a quaint anachronism and has no real power at all here in the UK, even less so in Canada.

And you wouldn't be able to enter The Commonwealth Games where you always get loads of medals.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by EvanB
Canada does not need a huge army, not when she has 2.1 billion people watching her back.



Kind of like how people don't need to learn how to defend themselves, because the police will always be around?

Never rely on others for your safety and well-being, be it on a personal or a country-wide level.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 04:47 PM
link   
I am proud to be a member of an organization, while started with the demise of empire, has lasted this long. There's history here, not always a good one but there none the less. There is also something to be said about tradition. We don't kneel to the monarchy but we respect them and our past. With the exception of Prince Charles and Phillip.
Damn, we're second only to the UN. Over 50 nations. A third of the worlds population. Mind you half of that in India. Does it cost us some money? Sure. Most things do.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 04:58 PM
link   
The only way this world is going to get by is if we become tribal and mind your own #@%@#^%^ BUSINESS!

Tribes have allies and they relate to the other tribes through trade and visitation.

We need to destroy paper money, destroy our nationalism, love our families, build the tribes and use what we have.

If you dont have any oil left, guess what genius? You need to find something else.

The common wealth is a network of tribes that are too fat for their britches, and its time to pull it apart.

I want my mayor to have his power back, I want my sherrif to keep me safe.

Hey Nazi Punks, screw off, the new world order is a joke, and I dont want any part of it.

Tribe. Tribe! TRIBE!


-GM



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join