posted on September 10, 2002 10:25:28 AM new
The assumption seems to be that Canada is getting some free protection in the world from the US spending so much on defense.
The question I have to ask is protection from whom? What country is any threat to Canada? It seems to me that if anything Canada would be at risk for their being an ally of the US than from any action or stance of their own.
The current foreign problems with the US all revolve around economic questions rather than any ideology. It is dependance on foreign oil and minerals that drive the need for any intervention in foreign affairs.
If the money spent on the military was spend developing technologies and domestic sources of these needed resources then we could tell the other countries to solve their own problems and leave us alone instead of trying to be the worlds policeman.
Trouble in the Balkans? Iraq grabing Kuait?
We could just say "Not my problem."
posted on September 10, 2002 10:35:48 AM new
Well....my thoughts were around our NORAD agreement with Canada. Not sure where President Bush's thoughts were. So I didn't see it as 'free protection', but rather a long held agreement between the two countries. Please set me straight.
The current foreign problems with the US all revolve around economic questions rather than any ideology. Ugh...I believe some revolve around our WTC and the threat that other nations will use all means they have to destroy us.
it is dependence on foreign oil...I agree in large part with that. But I also believe it has long been the position of the US to help other countries prevent attacks/takeovers from their enemies. Am I wrong?
posted on September 10, 2002 10:36:29 AM new
The oil, for one. Troops in Afghanistan, for two. I also am going to see if I can find the water problem I was reading about, I believe it was last year.
I'll be in and out today, because I'm getting a room ready for a guest. You have the right to an informed opinion -Harlan Ellison
posted on September 10, 2002 10:40:27 AM new
Also wanted to ask you gravid [or any one] if our government feels we have an additional threat to deal with like the terrorists that have entered our country through Canada, do you find it unreasonable for us to ask that they 'shore up' these places that make us even for vulnerable? Or should we just lock our own boarders [with Canada] up and deal with it ourselves? Thus...maybe...reducing the trade that goes on between the two countries.
posted on September 10, 2002 11:14:19 AM new
Linda, gravid, I think you're closest to the truth. I feel that the U.S. wants Canada to do a better job at the borders but it's almost impossible around the Great Lakes because of morning & supper time rush hours. Lots of people commute back & forth. I'm about 40 minutes away from the Michigan border and an hour from New York. I go over for lunch, shopping, etc., but I haven't once been asked to show my birth certificate either going across or coming back.
posted on September 10, 2002 11:35:58 AM newHere is some about the water. There was trouble in Western Canada just last year if I remember correctly. I'll look for that. You have the right to an informed opinion -Harlan Ellison
posted on September 10, 2002 11:46:06 AM new
Kraftdinner - The thing I'd heard was that there are many ports on your eastern coast line where terrorists could easily make their way in as they aren't patroled at all. If that's true and we do keep our CA US boarders open then we are at further risk, IMO.
I hope you're not taking this that I'm being critical of Canada, just concerned that some of the statements being made are true. I believe it is in our best interests to have more secure boarders with both Canada and Mexico. And we all know how secure our Mexican boarder is...LOL
posted on September 10, 2002 11:50:07 AM new
snowyegret - I'm going to read your water link in a few minutes. Thanks for posting it.
But I'm still not clear on how/what you're saying about the oil issue. We're buying the oil from you right?
And on the the 800 soldiers your birth country contributed...I'm not clear what your feelings/opinions are about that either. Sorry. Do you not support Canada's alley support we've been given or just in general you don't agree with anyone's troops being sent to Afghanistan?
posted on September 10, 2002 12:13:33 PM new
LindaK, I'm American. I just happened to be one of those oops while my parents were visiting in Canada.
As to the troops in Afghanistan, Canada has always sent troops when the US requested. I don't know if they should have gotten involved. Canada has much the same weaknesses to terrorism as the US.
As to the Mexican border, lol. I used to live in Brownsville. The Border Patrol might do better to shut down the internal checkpoint in between Brownsville and CC and concetrate at the border area. (Or at least put some people there who realize that whether they like the state or not, New Jersey is a part of the USA and its residents are US citizens You have the right to an informed opinion -Harlan Ellison
posted on September 10, 2002 12:47:38 PM new
LOL snowyegret - I know you're an American, and just learned you were born in Canada in this thread. I mis-spoke [typed].
So then if I'm understanding you correctly, on the water issue, you're not liking the NAFTA agreement our three countries agreed and signed then, right? Or at least parts of them. Okay...I can understand that. I don't like many of the agreements either. What I wasn't understanding is why you appear to be blaming our government for Canada agreeing to sign the agreement. That's what I meant when I asked what you were referring to when you said, "unequitable friendship". They agreed, they weren't forced. Canada, the US and Mexico all voted in their own countries to agree to these terms. I say blame the leaders of Canada for agreeing to those terms. I blame our leaders for some of the NAFTA rules I don't agree with.
And my aunt and uncle used to live part time in Brownsville, and when visiting I could sit there and watch the illegals crossing the boarders so easily. And the RIO GRANDE....what a surprise that was....close to the Brownsville area, in the spring, the water was ankle high. What a disappointment that was. lol GRANDE...right.
But...before I go off to get some work done, what problem do you see that Canada has with this water issue? [Kidding here] I'm thinking Canada has lots of ice, it melts, therefore they should have plenty of water to share. LOL
So I didn't see it as 'free protection', but rather a long held agreement between the two countries. Please set me straight. 