Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Will the two become one?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 130
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

You must have money and live in a nice civilized neighbourhood. I am sure you would be against a merger between Jamacia and Canada with a totally open boarder policy. Go live at Jane and Finch in Toronto. Take a walk at night and think to yourself..If you could go back in time would you have imported the Jamacian crimminal culture to Canada...? Then think again about a merger with America which would cause a leak of Mexican migrants and murderous drug dealing thugs that kill for a living - then think ..do you want them here? There is a horrific price to pay with merger regarding America - a decayed atomosphere and human misery...Look at the EU - then think back - was it Europe better before this big mix up?

And what about tha Canadian who was arrested by the Thai police for sexual assault on minors last year? They could think just as easily that they'd never want to merge with Canada to keep all the Canadian pedophiles out of their country.

If you think that open borders woud increase crime rates, then you have a mighty low opinion of foreigners. Though this would make it easier for all, the virtuous and criminals, to cross borders, it would not increase crime. it's not a one-sided matter with those evil foreigners coming to ruin our pristine society. It goes both ways. We have good and bad people entering Canada. Some benefit our country, some don't. But we shouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Same with Thailand. Not all Canadians who go abroad are pedophiles in spite of the high profile arrest of a Canadian there last year.

I've lived abroad myself by the way. Just to give some idea of my experiences of different cities and countries and people:

I've lived in Ottawa, Victoria, Nanaimo, Canvouver, La Malbaie, Montreal, Kitchener and Toronto. My dad was in the military and I had to move provinces for family and work in the past. And these cities are just in Canada. I've also visited Quebec city, Trenton, Calgary, Edmonton, and many other cities in Canada.

In the US, I've visited Boston and Bellingham.

I've also lived in Jinan, Shanghai, Hefei, and Changchun, and have visited Beijing, Urumqi, Hong Kong, and a few other cities in China.

My ex-wife was Ethiopian.

I can speak speak, read, write, and understand four languages with complete fluency (English, French and Esperanto). I can speak and understand another with moderate fluency (Mandarin). And I know a smattering of Arabic and Persian.

I've read the Bible, the Qur'an and others of the world's religious texts.

So I do know at least a little about the world beyond Canada's borders, and can say from experience that Canadians can be just as corrupt abroad as foreigners can be decent in Canada.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What "high standards" would those be? How can this be reconciled with "multiculturalism".

High standards? like religious discrimination in Ontario's public school system? The UN has even officially condemned Canada for this... twice.

Our treatment of First Nations and Inuit?

A little arrogant, don't you think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, moving in the direction of world unity I can accept, but not closing ourselves into Fortress America.
I guess you'd prefer more peaceful neighbors such as Sudan or Somalia?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, moving in the direction of world unity I can accept, but not closing ourselves into Fortress America.

Agreed. Especially since the fear generated by 911 was a setup ... to make Americans scared of an external force, when the complicity was most likely within the duly elected administration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed. Especially since the fear generated by 911 was a setup ... to make Americans scared of an external force, when the complicity was most likely within the duly elected administration.

Why don't you give an intelligent response rather than your brilliant conclusion on this exchange:

I don't know about the NAU ... SPP ... needs a LOT of work ... and a LOT of public input.

And we all saw how much public input there was at the (SPP protests) G8 in Quebec.

NONE. Just government and other corporate input.

We weren't allowed. We've never been asked for input.

We have to 'protest' outside locked gates and windows that don't open to draw attention to our concerns.

They send 'agentes provocateurs' to raise the ante so the police can disperse us.

  1. Where's the capital of the NAU?
  2. What does it's flag look like?
  3. Who is it's PM or President?
  4. How many members are its Parliament and/or Congress?
  5. Where is the tin-foil hat factory?

To which you responded:

So ... it appears you are keeping yourself uninformed. You must like surprises, eh?

I believe in the Occam's Razor approach; the simplest answer is generally the most logical. It simply defies logic that the WTC attacks (1993 and 2001) were anything other than Islamist massacres. Even if Bush wanted to slaughter 3000 of his countryment to make a point, the risks of exposure are incredibly high. Just ask Richard Milhous Nixon about what happened with non-lethal hijinks.

Making bald, conclusory statements is no replacement for coherent argument.

Edited by jbg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1239931833...l?mod=yhoofront

We just saw this online, and lo and behold my wife's dead father was born in Canada and renounced his Canadian citizenship to become a US citizen so he could practice law. Now the wife wants to research the idea of getting dual Canada/US citizenship, and the three underage kids as well. How fun is that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We just saw this online, and lo and behold my wife's dead father was born in Canada and renounced his Canadian citizenship to become a US citizen so he could practice law. Now the wife wants to research the idea of getting dual Canada/US citizenship, and the three underage kids as well. How fun is that?

This was an issue manufactured by Canada...not sure what it means for anyone who wishes repatriation. As an ugly American, I do not understand why citizenship is so complicated for some people, as if it's a game to be played early and often.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This was an issue manufactured by Canada...not sure what it means for anyone who wishes repatriation. As an ugly American, I do not understand why citizenship is so complicated for some people, as if it's a game to be played early and often.

My father was born in Germany, came over when he was three. Maybe I can become a citizen of Germany/Europe. More fun.

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/localnews/con...nship_0608.html

http://www.richw.org/dualcit/

Just as long as dual citizenship does not mean dual taxation. Yes folks, we are moving to a one world government.

Anyone speak Chinese?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess you'd prefer more peaceful neighbors such as Sudan or Somalia?

Just for the sake of argument, let's suppose we did have a common world citizenship. this would mean that Sudanese and Somalians could more easily enter Canada. One major problem I could see with this would be the language barrier. Well, let's suppose we wave a magic wand for a moment and erase that issue. Beyond that, I don't see how ethnic conflicts in those countries would affect us in Canada. Canadians and Quebecers in China use Chinese, so their Canadian disputes become irrelevent there Likewise, the cultural context is different here, so foreign ethnic conflicts are not likley to just spill over a continent away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed. Especially since the fear generated by 911 was a setup ... to make Americans scared of an external force, when the complicity was most likely within the duly elected administration.

The jury's till out on the conspiracy theory so I'll leave it at that until more evidence comes out. Now as for fortress America, I ust want to clarify to avoid any misunderstandings that when I say world unity I am including the US too. I'm just saying that I woud want our world to be 'us', not 'us vs them.' A fortress America scenario would be 'us vs. them. Whereas inviting the US into a larger world union would allw a more balanced integration. I just wanted to clarify that I would want the US to be included in such a union should it want in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think the NAU will come to be but not for at least another ten years. Canada has alot of the natural resources the US needs but what does the US have that Canada needs???? Two things that we don't really need are the following.........http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090420.wibbitson21/BNStory/International/home

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think the NAU will come to be but not for at least another ten years. Canada has alot of the natural resources the US needs but what does the US have that Canada needs???? Two things that we don't really need are the following.........http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090420.wibbitson21/BNStory/International/home

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...ernational/home

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

The fact of the matter is that new powers are rising on the world stage. China and the EU, both of which have or will eclipse North America in economic might, political might and perhaps even military might, will give the beast its head as it is pulling abreast and ahead of us. Then there is Russia, growing in influence again and gathering friends in unions against the West. And do you think for a minute that the West will be able to hold sway to protect her interests in the U.N. and other places of influence?

In this context, it was imperative that a North American Union of some sort be formed just to keep a level playing field. It really looks unlikely that it will happen, and all of North America will enjoy the consequences of reduced trade and influence. Canada tends to look across the oceans for economic opportunities, but when the biggest economy the world had seen, right next door, becomes diminished, we will not emerge unscathed from it.

Edited by sharkman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact of the matter is that new powers are rising on the world stage. China and the EU, both of which have or will eclipse North America in economic might, political might and perhaps even military might, will give the beast its head as it is pulling abreast and ahead of us.
I normally agree with you but I am tired of hearing this. China is a huge country under the brutal thumb of a small minority, the Han Chinese. A country whose economy is essentially based on slave labor will never develop the dynamic middle class needed for world leadership. The EU is an ossified, fossilized group of countries that are good at paying benefits. I do not see either, as presently constitued, as being a legitimate challenger to the Anglosphere.
Then there is Russia, growing in influence again and gathering friends in unions against the West. And do you think for a minute that the West will be able to hold sway to protect her interests in the U.N. and other places of influence?
In case you haven't noticed their influence rises and falls with crude oil prices. Last summer they were riding high with $140 oil.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

China is a huge country under the brutal thumb of a small minority, the Han Chinese.

Have you been feeling under the weather these last few months, jbg? Because the Han Chinses... constitute 92% of China (at least according the the Wikipedia page on the Han Chinese).

If, perhaps, you are using a narrower definition of the ethnicity, you should elaborate on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I normally agree with you but I am tired of hearing this. China is a huge country under the brutal thumb of a small minority, the Han Chinese. A country whose economy is essentially based on slave labor will never develop the dynamic middle class needed for world leadership. The EU is an ossified, fossilized group of countries that are good at paying benefits. I do not see either, as presently constitued, as being a legitimate challenger to the Anglosphere.

In case you haven't noticed their influence rises and falls with crude oil prices. Last summer they were riding high with $140 oil.

Perhaps I should have been more specific. With Russia, I am talking about military power. The fact that they are partnering with Iran to get Nuclear Weapons to the Middle East is a bad thing. They are also selling weaponry to any takers over there and these are not good things. Regardless of the price of oil this kind of menace persists.

China has the potential to be the biggest economy in the world. The fact that they are buying up American debt is also not good. They are part of the axis of evil to me. Willing to lie, cheat and send spies to the US to steal military secrets. They are up to no good, and the fact that they want to increase their ownership of American debt makes me suspicious.

Maybe I'm missing something, but when more economies are competing for a finite amount of dollars, that does not help the U.S. When growing powers oppose Western interests with new militaries, I don't see that as a good thing. When, at the same time, the U.S. is losing influence and canceling military orders (warships, new fighters) and contracts, and has a new leader who is wiling to verbally bow to Europe and physically bow to a tin pot king, I cringe.

Edited by sharkman
Link to comment
Share on other sites




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...