It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


American Government are a bunch of Whiners

page: 1
<<   2  3 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 04:02 AM
So Canada doesn't go along with your damn missile defence shield? Who cares? It is a colossal waste of money seeing that most people realize that using atomic bombs is deterrence enough and the ones that would try to explode a atomic weapon on us soil don't have long range weaponry.

So what does the US government retaliate with, cutting trade, pork, lumber banning our beef, what happened to NAFTA? It is called free trade not, do everything we think is right or else. And then the ambassador has the gall to say we are giving up our sovereignty over our airspace, IS he trying to cause a conflict? Give me a break!!!!

posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 04:06 AM
Yeah because there is no way that syria, Iran, or N. korea could possibly devolp something as complex as long range missiles.
I mean why should you guys pay? God forbd if anyone ever launches something at N America we are gong to shoot it down no matter what. So why should you help out? WHy not let us pay for your protection so that you can keep spending money on free hockey sticks for everyone?

Ingrate, I really hope that when the day comes, we let you defend yourselves, maybe after half your citizens are engulfed in nuclear flames you will stop being leeches.

posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 04:08 AM
who is going to fire at Canadian cities dumbass. Wh should we pay billions to protect you? That is the point and another point is that US policy doesn't determine Canadian, because the majority of Canadians think it is a waste of money that won't be complete for decades and at a cost that is ridiculous.

Ingrate, ha that is pathetic.

posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 04:13 AM
To protect us? Thats the funniest thing I have ever heard. Hell canada protectng anyone is funny in and of itself. Hell you people cant even get trhough a shakedown cruise without sinking your own ships.

Like I said, when you see that "fire arrow" fallng to earth and yor PM calls up washington to ask for help, I just hope we say, "sorry but your account is in arrears and we can not help you untll you pay"

Protect us?

posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 04:20 AM
Protect you, yeah that is the point, why should we spend billions to protect you or help you out of the messes that your governments policies create?
We don't believe in having a huge miltary nad I am quite sure the FIREBALL you speak of won't be heading for Canadian soil.

The missile defense shield is a ridiculous idea that will be outdated before it ever is realized, that is why we as a people said no and thankfully our responsible leader has also chosen the path of discretion. I think this plan is a case where just because you can spend trillions etc, you don't have to on a bogus idea.
Try educating people in your country properly with all that money, it may make a difference. Obviously you sink to personal attack instead of using your mind to finish an argument, but I am not taking the bait. It is sad that the Canadian military is outated and at the moment quite weak, but we have chosen that course, inorder to provide iniversal healthcare and cheap education for our population. There aren't too many nutbars taking out buildings in our cities.

posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 04:29 AM
Jawapunk you are an idiot.
Canada couldnt protect a three year old grl from a four year old boy.
And why should you have to? If the # ever hits the fan you can count on US to bail your sorry asses out.

posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 04:40 AM
That is a funny joke seriously. The point I am making DUMBASS is that if the # hits the fan, they won't be attacking us, were you dropped on your head or something? What didn't you understand about the way we handle 'diplomacy'. As an American do you even understand the meaning of that word?
We won't need BAILING OUT, likely it will be the American eastern seaboard glowing in the dark before a Canadian city gets hit. The only thing we would have to worry about is fallout, luckily the jet stream blows east and not north hey?
I should say I am sorry I broke down to personal attacks, it really is a stupid thing to do, and it doesn't solve anything. The point I was making is the missile defense shield is a DUMB idea, a waste of money and that Americans are coming back on the Canadian government with trade restricitons as a means of pressure. Pretty lame and sooky if you ask me. We did sign a NAFTA agreement afterall, adding tariffs along our borders hurts both parties, especailly over somehting so petty.
Another point I'd like to make is that we only have 30 odd million people in our country and don't generate the trillions required for this pet project of the republican party. It doesn't make sense fiscally, we don't want to deficit spend and screw our economy.

posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 04:45 AM
Jawapunk you do realise I hope that if as you stated the eastern seaboard was glowing in the dark it would kll your citzens too? Look up fallout why dont you.
See what you fail to realise is that as far as National security the US and canada are n it together. There is no weapon that could hit the north of the US without affecting canada too.
We are willing to do our part to defend N America, its a shame you aren't.
Then again what couldd I expect from a bunch of lazy socialist hippies.

posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 04:54 AM
Why are you getting so bent out of shape over a buunch of lazy socialist hippies then? Also I said thankfully the jet stream would carry alot of the fallout east not north, good thing. I wasn't trying to say that a nuclear attack would be a good thing, just that it wouldn't be directed at us. And let the truth be told, we are only in it together as long as it suitsd US needs and on US terms, and if that is the way things are going to be handled, then we would rather not do it.

The reaction to our decision is what is pathetic though.

We are more than willing to CONTINUE doing our part, many of the NORAD facilities are located in Canada and manned by Canadians. It was never a question of that, but we weren't willing to spend trillions on a system that is shaky at best, no tests have worked so far, has been in the works since the 1970s with no working prototype to date and will be probably be outdated either before it is ever implemented or soon after. Not to mention the real threats to Canadian-US security would come from a dirty bomb, or a short range attack of some sort.
The Canadian government have been more than willing to spend the money and man power in programs that tighten our mutual borders and coastlines.

What is with the serious attitude, I am talking politics and you are attacking every Canadian citizen, if this is the attitude that is general within the US, why the hell would we care to help you?

[edit on 8-3-2005 by jawapunk]

posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 04:56 AM
jawa if you researched more on this you'd know canada was paying nothing and wasnt expected to pay for anything, we are and were paying 100% of the cost with some israeli help, we only wanted moral support and access to your airspace, and dont say youre protecting us, our military could crush canada in a war, you dont seriously think you are needed to protect us do you? you would be cut off by sea and air very quickly, no supplies would destroy your ability to fight even if you could resist

posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 05:01 AM
When did I ever suggest a war between the US and Canada, and Canadians have been spending millions of dollars in the upkeep of NORAD facilities, nad if you had done your research the Americans want Canada to spend ALOT of money, that is one of the reasons we said no. I think this would be pretty lame if this thread degenerated into a discussion of how the AMericans could kick the Canadians asses in a war, Way to F$%^(&* go heroes. Anyways, hopefully I will get some back up on this, Because the personal attacks are starting to get lame.

[edit on 8-3-2005 by jawapunk]

posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 05:03 AM
Wouldn't be much point arguning about it jawapunk, kinda like arguing about whether mike tyson could beat a 9 year old girl in the boxing ring.
Face it, even the french have more of a military than you do.

posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 05:10 AM
what is your point?

Do you think our countries are heading to war or something? Why haven't you addressed any of the issues I have brought up about the flaws in the missile defence system? Is it because you agree it is full of them? Do you also then agree that it is a toal waste of money, and that it is pretty lame that your country has been trying to implement some sort of missile defense system for 20 years or more?

Do you disagree that NORAD helps protect our mutual airspace?

Way to go, your military can kill mine, WOW. Amazing stuff, you should be a journalist or something, you really can dig up the dirt.

posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 05:15 AM
No the missile defense system is not a waste of money, if anything it is even more necessary than it was 10-20 years ago. During the cold war the peace was kept through MAD, today however when dealing with psychotics like Kim il, and the Mad Mullahs of Terhan, MAD doesnt work. They quite frankly dont care how many people die.
And no I dont find it "lame" that we have been dvolping this for 20 years, its further proof as to why we, and not you are superpower, we have the abiility to keep trying untill we succeed.
All NORAD can do is tell us we are being bombed, great so we get enough warning to kill the other guy, how does that save our lives?
Bottom line, you canadians haven't had to have a real military because we have always been here to have one for you.
And I am sick of it. If you people haven't got the balls to defend yourselves, we shouldnt have to either.

posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 05:30 AM
lock this thread someone, this is a pointless pissing contest between two nationalists.

posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 05:31 AM
Then don't, there is no agreement other than a partnership in NATO in which our military is involved in, that says we have to mutually protect one another. If you feel this way, write your congressman etc. Of course I also have to say you are underestimating the Canadian military's history. Yes I said history, I know we are weak in that sector these days but that was not always the case, since World War 2 we have beenin decline because of our increasing socialist style of government, but you can't just blatantly white wash our entire history saying we have never been any sort of threat or force. We more than did our part in both World War's, nad before. And may I remind you that the only armed conflict that has occured between the Americans and Canadians resulted in a victory for us, nad the burning of your original White house. Not that that would happen today, but for you to say we have never had a real military just shows how ignorant you really are.

Back to the point though, I can't see a missile defense shield being viable, the imminent threat is from a dirty bomb or short range missile which the defense shield would not help either. As for long range attacks, counterattack is deterrent enough, if you can bomb Pyongyanf thirty ties over what they can bomb you, and they KNOW this, do you think they will try their luck?

You think they are insane, because you are told they are. Kim IL is not insane, he is quite shrewd actually, he thinks that having these weapons gives him more bargaining power, and the Chinese seem to agree with him as they have said no to the US to intervene, and pressure North Korea. I personally think he is more using the weapon as a bargaining chip than as a real weapon to use. But that is only my opion kind of like yours saying he doesn't care how many people will die. If he didn't he would have already attacked SOuth Korea, he outnumbers the army 4-1 in equipment and man power, even with the 30,000 US troops stationed there.

Finally as to your suggestion that we don't have balls, we merely soend our money differently, and we see diplomacy as the means to an end, not bombs and weaponry. Like I said before, just because you can spend trillions on a stupid idea, doesn't mean you should. Also this defense shield has not proved it will save anyone. If there is any kind of conspiracy nut out there they shoudl look into where all this money is GOING? Can you honestly tell me it is this hard to create a system that can track and destroy incoming missiles? 20+ years and how many trillions? Just seems a little shady to me.

posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 05:35 AM

I thought I was trying to have a discussion on politics, I feel like I am the one being PISSED on as you say it. What are your views on this defense shield?

posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 05:36 AM
Diplomacy is a hostage trying to talk a terrorist out of beheading him.
Diplomcy does not work unless you have a military force capable of defending you when negotiations break down. Without a strong military why would another country negotiate wehn all they have to do is attack?
Tell me how well did diplomacy work for the french when they tried to stop the US from liberating Iraq?
How well did diplomacy work at stopping world war 1 or 2?
People never learn.
In order to have peace one must be willng to wage war.

posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 05:44 AM
I can agree with that, but you must also concede that war shoudl ALWAYS be a last resort and that in todays global interconnectiveness, there should be a REAL coalition, and that diplomacy should be used to its fullest end. The only reason it didn't work in the last Iraq invasion is that the US were unwilling to wait, unwilling to concede that they might be wrong and inf fact were worng about the weapons of mass destruction. You shouldn't be so pissed off at the French because they saw through the BS they should be commended. They along with a LARGE amount of countries including, France, Germany, Canada and Russians did not buy the argument that the US was putting forth, they opted for more time and patience as well as faith in the UN inspectors to do their job. You can't call us a ll cowards because you weren't able to sell us on the weapons Iraq supposedly had.

You haven't given the many times that war has been averted through Diplomacy, albeit concessions have been made but those are usually the ways in which a diplomatic end is reached. IT can't always be your way, you can't hog ALL the toys.

[edit on 8-3-2005 by jawapunk]

posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 05:55 AM
Yeh more time was the key, afterall 12 years isn't nearly enough.

top topics

<<   2  3 >>

log in