Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Recommended Posts

Canada has always been a loyal ally to the U.S. But is there a limit to this loyalty as Chretien once demonstrated? Will too much loyalty to America kill and terrorize more Canadians for no justiafiable reasons? At first I was of the attitude "Kill all those damn terrorists" until I read this article and realize that if some foreign troops invaded and occupied Canada because our leader refused to turn over Canada's oil fields for pennies on the dollar, we'd also be pissed off. And if we came home from work one day and found our home smoldering in flames and our spouse and kids charred black like coal from some stray missile, we would also be outraged and called "patriots" to seek revenge on the barbaric bastards responsible for the war crime. So today my opinion is a little more objective. Read this and see if your truly disagree or if you are just trying to be politically correct or a false patriot http://www.globalresearch.ca/prime-minister-stephen-harper-and-canadian-war-crimes-in-afghanistan/24473

This is why IMO Harper has helped to increase terrorism in the world today. Real terrorism must be stopped, but drones impose terrorism from 30,000 feet and Harper implicitly condones this by unconditionally supporting American policies in Afghanistan and Iraq. http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/nov/24/-sp-us-drone-strikes-kill-1147

The UN and 57 countries have agreed that drones = terrorism and the war in Afghanistan is illegal. So should Canada really be fighting America's illegal war? Before you answer just think about how fairly America has treated Canada on past lumber and trade deals. Do they really deserve such unconditional loyalty or do we have the right to say "No Thank You" once in a while?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 85
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Canada has always been a loyal ally to the U.S. But is there a limit to this loyalty as Chretien once demonstrated? Will too much loyalty to America kill and terrorize more Canadians for no justiafiable reasons? ... Do they really deserve such unconditional loyalty or do we have the right to say "No Thank You" once in a while?

You just do not understand. Some bright lights here will swear that if they came home from work one day and found their home smoldering in flames and their spouse and kids charred black like coal from some stray missile, they would certainly NOT be outraged and called "patriots" to seek revenge on the barbaric bastards responsible for the war crime. They would understand that it was just poor aim and write it off as just a bad luck "OOPS!".

They (unlike those strange people in the Middle East) would understand. After all, we are different; that's why they put erasers on the end of pencils and nobody's perfect and even the best hitters average leas than .400 and ...

Link to post
Share on other sites

The UN and 57 countries have agreed that drones = terrorism and the war in Afghanistan is illegal. So should Canada really be fighting America's illegal war? Before you answer just think about how fairly America has treated Canada on past lumber and trade deals. Do they really deserve such unconditional loyalty or do we have the right to say "No Thank You" once in a while?

Before you answer, think which country is most likely to come to our defence if any kind of military crisis arises between us and Russia...

Link to post
Share on other sites

So we should just become puppets to the American neoconservatives so that they can save us from the Russians if need be. If we are already enslaved to the foreign policy of a country to protect us from another then we have already given up our sovereignty in the process.

Edited by G Huxley
Link to post
Share on other sites

So we should just become puppets to the American neoconservatives so that they can save us from the Russians if need be. If we are already enslaved to the foreign policy of a country to protect us from another then we have already given up our sovereignty in the process.

We should recognize our allies, be open when we disapprove, but not just dump them because they make what we view to be foreign policy blunders.

The United States has saved the free world on a number of occasions, and did things that, well, countries like Canada either couldn't or wouldn't do. Do I approve of everything they've ever done, well no, of course not. Not even many Americans approve of what the US government has done. But all in all, the US has been one of the most restrained Great Powers in history. When you look at what the Great Powers of the 19th century were up to, I'd take the US any day of the week.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a reminder, there's TWO sides to a story. When 9/11 happened, I read an article that a free-lance writer wrote that the reason 9/11 could happen is that no North American would believe that any government would attack its own country or its people. now because on the web and because people are getting wiser, people are now questioning their own governments and I do believe that Harper put in a clause about questioning the government or saying anything against it, did he not?? The power behind invading the ME is to invade, destroy and take over, and control the ME countries.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My point is that we simply cannot align ourselves with any country UNCONDITIONALLY like Harper has done. Only during election campaigns does he even try to assert a little rhetoric about Canada's indpendence. And do you really think we need to fear and invasion from Russia? Get real. Even if Russia got aggressive with Canada, no NATO country would not support us whether we have troops in Afghanistan or not. We should never let Canadian troops occupy another country unless it is part of UN peacekeeping mission IMO. In only 50 years America went from being the most admired and respected country to beomimg the most loathed, dreaded, and feared. And we are perceived around the globe with a wink and a nod as America's obedient "little brother".

Link to post
Share on other sites

.... In only 50 years America went from being the most admired and respected country to beomimg the most loathed, dreaded, and feared. And we are perceived around the globe with a wink and a nod as America's obedient "little brother".

America was doing the same thing 100 years before that. First war was with with Canada/Britian...that's how it came to be.

Canada has followed American foreign policy and economy for many decades, long before Harper or "terrorism" came along.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My point is that we simply cannot align ourselves with any country UNCONDITIONALLY like Harper has done.

You have utterly failed at demonstrating he has aligned himself "unconditionally" with the US. In fact, you have not even made the attempt.

Only during election campaigns does he even try to assert a little rhetoric about Canada's indpendence.

Why would he even need to. And btw, my understanding is the best description of the relationship between Harper and Obama would be "Icy".

In only 50 years America went from being the most admired and respected country to beomimg the most loathed, dreaded, and feared.

Drivel.

And we are perceived around the globe with a wink and a nod as America's obedient "little brother".

Also nonsense. You make unsupported statements which are nothing but your opinion, yet treat them as fact.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My point is that we simply cannot align ourselves with any country UNCONDITIONALLY like Harper has done..

. And we are perceived around the globe with a wink and a nod as America's obedient "little brother".

I remember a time when Canadians going abroad wore a Canadian flag on their lapel or backpack as a sign of pride. Later, after American incursions into foreign nations, even American travelers were wearing Canadian pins in an attempt to keep them safer from the building anti-American sentiments in Europe and the rest of the world.

Now, the Canadian flag pin provides no protection. We are now perceived as pseudo-Americans, supporting the questionable American foreign "excursions" and getting our hands just as dirty. This change has occurred during the Harper administration. Some Canadians are proud of that fact.

I am not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember a time when Canadians going abroad wore a Canadian flag on their lapel or backpack as a sign of pride.\

No, you remember a television commercial. The idea the world gave a shit about a Canadian flag on a lapel was boorish and ludicrous, then or now.

And didn't someone just post a study which showed Canada was the world's most admired nation? What evidence do you have otherwise but your extreme left wing biases?

Here, read it and cry.

Canada is the "most admired" country with the "best reputation" in the world, according to an annual survey ranking the reputations of developed nations across the globe.

The 2015 report from the Reputation Institute ranked Canada as the most reputable country in the world, based on a variety of environmental, political, and economic factors.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/canada-ranked-as-most-admired-country-in-the-world-report-1.2470040

Link to post
Share on other sites

We should recognize our allies, be open when we disapprove, but not just dump them because they make what we view to be foreign policy blunders.

The United States has saved the free world on a number of occasions, and did things that, well, countries like Canada either couldn't or wouldn't do. Do I approve of everything they've ever done, well no, of course not. Not even many Americans approve of what the US government has done. But all in all, the US has been one of the most restrained Great Powers in history. When you look at what the Great Powers of the 19th century were up to, I'd take the US any day of the week.

Advancing the neoconservative imperial agenda isn't defending America.

Do you remember what happened in World War 2 when Canada was at war with Germany? The US didn't even come to our aid then. It was only until Germany actually declared war on them that they entered the war against Germany.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes his foreign policies actions demonstrate it Re: Libya, Syria., Af-Pak etc.

You clearly have no idea what a neoconservative is and are simply using the term as a pejorative for everyone you don't like.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Neoconservatives advance the interests of the MIC, Israel, oil companies, Word Bank/IMF with military force, weapons sales, covert actions etc.

Again, you have no idea what the term means.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Similar Content

    • By DogOnPorch
      Bit of a gamer & designer/playtester all my life. Some military & historical background...
      What's your favorite wargame (et al)? Board or computer...no matter. 
      Some of the new ones are remarkable...
      For example...
      War of Rights...MMO US Civil War...FPS w/ musket and bayonet.
       
    • By Hussain
      Im currently a grade 12 student who started an Initiative to Inform Youth about Politics and World Issues. 
      I started this podcast in the summer of 2019 after seeing the lack of attention being given to the Canadain  election of 2019. My older friends were not voting, and if they were voting, they voted without the proper knowledge. That led me to create this podcast where I try to inform the youth about world issues and politics, and hopefully encourage them to vote. 
      CHECK IT OUT HERE & TELL ME WHAT YOU THINK
       
    • By mazerunner
      It is unfair to discriminate Indians and humiliate them by calling them national minorities, insisting that they are aliens in this country and that they should "go home", although America was and is their home even before the Europeans came to the country.
      At the moment, the situation with the Indians at the official level is peaceful, as the federal authorities are obliged to provide members of the Indian tribes with a number of special cultural and economic benefits, including full exemption from local and federal taxes, medical and educational grants. This can be called compensation for lost territories.
      However, sitting in one of the cafes, I was faced with a situation that just stunned me: three white guys actively discussed a married couple of Indian origin, called them "freaks" and even expressed their dissatisfaction with their presence in America - like "America is for Whites only". Can this actually be called a manifestation of nationalism, or maybe neo-Nazism?
      Of course, it was convenient for white Americans to use the Indians during the wars as "code talkers" and "wild animals that are not a pity if they die" but it is very possible thanks to them that those three guys in the cafe peacefully drank coffee being healthy and free.
      Many of today's Indians live on reservations, where we all can see big “No trespassing. Violators will be shot. Survivors will be shot again" posters. They feel like strangers in their own state and the problem of the indigenous inhabitants of America cannot be called resolved.
      Yes, the authorities legalized gambling in reservations, but for what purpose? I find this even offensive. By the word "help" I understand the construction of hospitals with the further provision of accessible to all medical care, educational institutions, libraries, stores, etc., and not casinos, which are actually alien to the Indian culture and corrupting Aboriginal people of America.
      Despite the formal presence of citizenship, indigenous people still have to literally conquer their rights through civic activism and protests. And Indians are remembered only when they are needed or loudly declare about themselves.
    • By mazerunner
      The life of any soldier who has fallen into a military conflict epicenter is definitely impossible to be called sweet, and especially if he falls out of his usual life conditions, into the humid climate of Asian countries and suffers from eternal thirst and humidity, attacks of tropical insects and "landscapes" of countless deaths. But is this an excuse for the endless atrocities of the US Army, for which soldiers get no punishment?
      Obviously, the ordinary recruit is not able to withstand such psychological pressure, and sooner or later he “breaks down” and is forced to relieve moral tension. Unfortunately, there couldn’t be any better means than the narcotic and alcoholic substances that the doctors had at their disposal on the battlefield.
      The power of the impact of easily accessible "entertainment" and psychological pressure from the command pushed the soldiers to immoral crimes: killing and raping civilians, unjustified shooting in villages and dropping bombs where there were not any enemies. Some US Army soldiers in Vietnam even compared the desire to kill with itching: Lieutenant Paul Medlow said that he “felt moral satisfaction” by killing civilians.
      As for the Koreans, more than a million civilians were exterminated in the most terrible ways during the American occupation of North Korea. The US Army burned thousands people alive every day, including women and children. Also, “human values defenders” loved medieval tortures and executions: quartering, impaling through the genitals, ripping up the pregnant women, etc. Even Hitler could not organize genocide in the occupied territories on such a scale.
      It is inconceivable, but similar atrocities occur to this day in Japan, where American soldiers serve at their military bases. Many of the bases (for example, on Okinawa island) are located near the cities whose residents are constantly subjected to violence and robbery, for which they constantly protest and demand the elimination of US military bases from the Japanese territory.
      However, in 90% of cases, the military do not get any punishment for what they have done, because they use the rights of extraterritoriality. That is, they are responsible for everything before the American court (which calmly closes the cases and acquits them). So, for decades, the US army treats Japanese citizens from the position of occupiers and continues to commit atrocities, knowing that for this they will have nothing but a reprimand. And a "vicious circle" comes: the incident - the anger and protests of the Japanese population - an apology from the American command and the promise to fix everything - and again the incidents.
      The US Army has never been a place where citizens of the “freest country” would strive for. Throughout almost the entire history of America, its army has been a cross between a punitive corps and a gang of thugs who cannot be left free in a country where anyone can walk around with a gun.
       
    • By mazerunner
      A major new report about the Syrian war raises the question of whether Washington ever cared about it in the first place.
      https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/10/03/the-united-states-is-done-caring-about-syria/
       
  • Tell a friend

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