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.


A question for citizens of the United States, Mexico, and Canada.

page: 1
<<   2  3 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 4 2007 @ 07:02 PM
The plans for a NAU (North American Union) is underway and is expected to be put in power by 2010. If you don't know what the NAU is, then I suggest do some research on it. It is not fiction, but a fact.

My question is this:

State your nationality (USA, Mexico, Canada)

Are you for or against? Why?

As for me? I am a United States citizen, I am still on the fence. I see that it has some benefits, but the cons outweigh the pros. My opinion could swing depending on how this plays out.

posted on Apr, 4 2007 @ 07:15 PM
As a proud Canadian I would be very unhappy if we merged with North America to form a union and especially if it meant losing some of my rights and privliges's. Heath care and stuff like that America doesn't have plus we have all the resources so it would never be in our best interest to merge.

I also think the reason for all this Quebec separation talk is caused by people with ties to the NAU agenda and all this NAFTA stuff ties in as well. I guess they want an EU,NAU and other major alliances before they implement the full blown 1 world government?

posted on Apr, 4 2007 @ 07:15 PM
I am in the United States and while I can see why there may be some support for it, I can't say that I'd support such a plan. I guess there are pros and cons to it.

posted on Apr, 4 2007 @ 07:17 PM

plus we have all the resources so it would never be in our best interest to merge.

More resources than the U.S.. I'd have to see an unbiased source before I believed that one.

posted on Apr, 4 2007 @ 07:25 PM
Why wouldn't you put this in the form of a survey where you could actually get some statistics out of it? There are plenty of online statistics services (although most message boards have them built in).

posted on Apr, 4 2007 @ 07:47 PM
US - This was started back when the EU was taking shape. NAFTA/CAFTA have basically shot anything like this from happening, and while there may be supporters trying to push for it, there is no economic or political reason to do it, at least for the US. The only exception would be to open up migration and if that happened, much of Mexico would come north and even more of America would head south to the beach areas where real estate is quite a bargain....

Would be an interesting swap - we take Mexico for the coastal resort areas and ship all the Mexicans up here to work the farms and factories....

posted on Apr, 4 2007 @ 08:24 PM
i'm a citizen of the united states of america

i believe this is a step in the right direction towards removing the anachronistic force of nationalism and tearing down borders

as a person that considers myself a political universalist (opposite of nationalism) i see this as good

posted on Apr, 4 2007 @ 08:33 PM
I am a citizen of the US:
After great thought and consideration I am against such a merger of the countries. For starters, the individual laws that govern each nation is different, as well as out alliances and what each would bring to the table. I do not feel it would be good for the US in the long run, as ultimately we would end up with the short end of the stick, and that Mexico, would end up benifiting at the expense of the US and Canada. The current problems in all three of the countries outway any bennifits that may come of such. I do know that as a person who lives near the Mexican border, and I am not sure how it is in Canada, but I can tell you that it is illegale for any non citizen of Mexico to own property. There have been alot of horror stories of people who had moved down to Mexico, with the intention of owning a house to retire to, only to be told by the local authority that they had no title to such and would have to leave the country. Combined with some very hard feelings and relationships between the US and the Mexican people on both sides of the borders, this can only be very bad.

That is my thoughts.

posted on Apr, 4 2007 @ 08:36 PM
USA: If we merge with Canada and Mexico, what will be the law of the land? Will Canada and Mexico go by the constitution of the United States? I seriously doubt it. Our constitution will be thrown out for something more uniform. For this reason alone I am opposed to the NAU. We would no longer be able to say, "This violates my constitutional rights"

Why disrupt the governments of 3 (or at least 2) perfectly contented countries to form such a union? Who gains from this? The American people? NOT! The NAU is nothing less than a complete coup of 3 countries.

I've heard a lot of talk about how everyone will benefit from such a merger but I've not heard what sort of government it will be. What are our rights, responsibilities, etc.? Will it be a monarchy? Dictatorship? Corporate charter? Socialist or Communist idealogical based? One thing is certain....we will no longer be a constitutional republic. At least not the constitutional republic we know now.

posted on Apr, 4 2007 @ 09:01 PM

Originally posted by annestacey
Why wouldn't you put this in the form of a survey where you could actually get some statistics out of it? There are plenty of online statistics services (although most message boards have them built in).

That is a good idea, but I wanted to see ideas and feelings, not numbers. I appreciate all the post.

posted on Apr, 4 2007 @ 11:40 PM
More resources than the U.S.. I'd have to see an unbiased source before I believed that one.

Well America may have a bigger economy but Canada does have a LOT more natural resources than America. I don't want to go digging around but I know for a fact we have more water,beef,oil,wheat,timber,land,fish,diamonds, minerals and lots of things we have an abundance of to trade. Not trying to start a contest just wanna tell it how it is.

posted on Apr, 5 2007 @ 12:06 AM
There's also the fact that Canada is a little bigger than America and a whole lot less 'tapped' for resources.

Capital City
Area [sq. km]
2002 Population Estimate



United States
Washington DC


IMO... the biggest loser out of this union would be Canada, since that country has the greatest potential.

[edit on 5/4/07 by masqua]


posted on Apr, 5 2007 @ 12:16 AM
I am Mexican.

I cant see how a North american Union could be worked out, the diferences are enormous, the style of government, the controls, the laws, heck the way teach of us think and acts.

Let me give you some examples:

Mexico has very tough inmigration laws (go figure! and quite ironic given the current illegal inmigration to the north!).
All that lies under your feet in Mexico belongs to the government!
Laws are seeing as something optional to the average Jose here, and most social behaviour is based on what is allowed and you can get away with opposed as order and law compliance (heck just watch Bable and see for yourself)
And in my viw those who would be hit hard by such thing are the Canadians, whats in the union that can be seen as a advantage?.... If I were Canadian Id oppose it vigorously...

posted on Apr, 5 2007 @ 12:20 AM
I think you should provide proof that the plans are "under way." Last I checked, the commission had made its report and recommendations and there's no legislation in any of those countries to enact it at all.

If you go back and look at the history of the European Union, you will see that it moved VERY slowly. The impetus came in 1945, and the whole thing was 50 years in the making. The initial states were unified in 1946, and most of Europe didn't join until the last 20 years. The idea of a sudden "Western Union" (to coin a term) being put in place (given the complex and contradictory laws) by 2010 or even 2020 seems unrealistic.

Maybe you've forgotten the years of legislation and votes and so forth that heralded the final EU... the Wikipedia article will refresh you on some of the issues.

But a sudden "Bush says we're going to join with Canada and Mexico" is an impossible scenario, particularly given the bad relationship Bush has with the leader of Mexico at this time.

posted on Apr, 5 2007 @ 12:25 AM
As a Canadian, I would definately want to see this North American Union...if it wasnt controlled by a bunch of criminals.

This is right in line with the centralization of all global power. The plan was to form "unions" all over the world, like the European Union, the North American Union, the African Union, etc etc, and eventually merge all the "unions" into a mega world government.

Now that in itself is not bad. I personally think that the idea of nationalism is bad, because that divides and rules, and the Elite can play us off against each other in wars, thats what countries are for. There is no need at all for nationalism, we are all one human species living on one planet, god forbid we live together in peace and harmony.

But, the Elite make sure that doesnt happen. Worse, they will try to use globalization, not a bad thing in itself, for negative intent, to control and dictate.

If we had leaders that really cared, and were good, and not selfish war mongerers and moneymakers trying to increase their wealth and power to satisfy their ego desires, if we had leaders that were really leaders, Im all for a world government. Lets have it. We will need it if we want to evolve into a galactic society. But as long as its gonna be controlled by the Illuminati Elite, who for centuries have worked towards this plan so they could in effect control the world and suppress the human race, we need to stop it at all costs.

posted on Apr, 5 2007 @ 12:32 AM
I am an American.

I approve of an NAU as long as it is free and democratic.
And before we merge our economies we bring Mexico up to or
near our standards.

posted on Apr, 5 2007 @ 12:35 AM
I have duel citizenship and I am proud to call myself both Canadian and American, born in the US but have living in Canada for past few years. I am for it, why not. I think the fact that we are separated into a whole bunch of different nations is just plain silly, and completely inefficient.

posted on Apr, 5 2007 @ 12:37 AM
...and is primarily as a result of 9/11

Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP):
The SPP is a White House-led initiative among the United States and the two nations it borders – Canada and Mexico – to increase security and to enhance prosperity among the three countries through greater cooperation. The SPP is based on the principle that our prosperity is dependent on our security and recognizes that our three great nations share a belief in freedom, economic opportunity, and strong democratic institutions. The SPP outlines a comprehensive agenda for cooperation among our three countries while respecting the sovereignty and unique cultural heritage of each nation. The SPP provides a vehicle by which the United States, Canada, and Mexico can identify and resolve unnecessary obstacles to trade and it provides a means to improve our response to emergencies and increase security, thus benefiting and protecting Americans.

The SPP is meant to:
Coordinate our security efforts to better protect U.S. citizens from terrorist threats and transnational crime and promote the safe and efficient movement of legitimate people and goods;
Expand economic opportunity for all our people by making our businesses more competitive in the global marketplace, cutting red tape, and providing consumers with safe, less expensive, and innovative products; and
Enhance our common efforts to combat infectious diseases, develop responses to man-made or natural disasters to enhance our citizens’ quality of life, protect our people and our environment, and improve consumer safety.


First, the coordination of police and armed forces, then the free flow of goods across the borders (new highways), then the levelling of the playing field regarding government policies (drug laws, health care, drug costs) and onward to an eventual union.

If the Harper government wins a majority government this spring (as I expect they will) this will be 'fast tracked'.

Edit to add unabashed flaunting of related thread

[edit on 5/4/07 by masqua]

posted on Apr, 5 2007 @ 01:58 AM
I think that NAFTA/CAFTA are a big mistake. Do you know that we have lowered our food safety standard because Mexico said that they could be used to restrict trade, and all the jobs that have left the United States is staggering. And now they want to allow Mexican truckers to drive on our Highways, and we don't have enough inspectors to check all those trucks.
I don't know if you ever been deep into Mexico, but I have seen trucks that have like spice racks, or small shelves clear across the windshield, with a small opening so where the driver can look straight out only.
I don't know about where you live, but here in California, it is common practice for Mexican nationals to bail out, and abandon there unregistered car and run, and I suspect that if you were hit by one of these trucks from Mexico, the driver would split, and you would have no protection for your medical and financial losses.
Citizens and Congress has had nothing to say about all this.

posted on Apr, 5 2007 @ 02:49 AM
Invader, I agree with you. I do know OOIDA - Owner Operator Independant Association is fighting against Mexican truckers on US roads. I see alot of wreaks happening if they let the truck drivers in. There is no way for a US DOT officer to be able to check for hours of service compliance. I know US truckers fudge their books when they have to, some more and some less. I really hate to see what a Mexican would come up with.

The other thing I don't like about this is that I seriously do not see Mexico coming up to US or Canada's standards. I see US and Canada's standards being lowered to Mexican standards. They will swarm in US and eventually Canada, and be willing to take over the available jobs for less and less money. They are not above working under the table. You could possibly have a job that paid over minimum wage all of the sudden being filled by someone willing to take it at minimum wage.

I wonder if the government isn't wanting to raise federal minimum wage, because they know that more loss of higher paying jobs is a real possibility.

From what I have heard so far about the Mexicans coming across the borders, they don't want to learn English or even attempt to intergrate. They want to bring in their culture and language, and only associate with other Mexicans. Possibly some that learned Spanish. I'm not saying all of them are like that, but I heard enough to know alot of them are are like that. I may not mind so much if I haven't heard so many coming across that have bad in your face type of attitude.

Also, I read Senator's Hayworths book on Illegal immigration. He brings up some very good points about how many of the people that are in our jails are illegal immigrants that have committed a crime besides sneaking into the US. He also talks about how once they get into the US, they tend to swamp the welfare system, school systems, and health care systems. Mostly in the areas where they sort of settle down in, but it also affects the systems as a whole.

I wonder if they are allowed to freely cross the borders if the school systems will cry out for more money to be able to teach the Mexicans in the spanish languages. If there will be a cry from the Mexicans that US children need to learn Spanish?

There are so many unanswered questions about the laws. Will they make it that what is law in one country will become law in the other two countries as well? Will this somehow be blanketed, or only certain laws choosen? Will US and Canada citizens be able to freely move into Mexico also?

Also, if the Canadian and Mexican borders are taken away, what about security? Will the US military be allowed into Mexico and "help" patrol their borders if needed? I'm not so worried about terrorists coming in through Canada as I am about them sneaking in through Mexico. Also, I would like to see how the militaries are going to interact? Are they still going to be three seperate militaries, or somehow melded into one military where if one military say in the former US needed more troops, would they be able to call upon troops in former Mexico or former Canada?

I just don't like the idea, period. Let alone it takes us one step closer to the NWO.

Edited to add that in another completely different forum, I already heard EU citizens complain about how the people from the neediest countries are going up into the other countries and obtaining jobs for less pay. How there are less and less jobs available from the service sector to the tech sector, especially better paying ones.

[edit on 5-4-2007 by Mystery_Lady]

new topics

top topics

<<   2  3 >>

log in