Skip to comments.
Canada: We can be involved -- or irrelevant
National Post ^
| May 08 2003
| J.L. Granatstein
Posted on 05/08/2003 9:31:40 AM PDT by knighthawk
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-28 last
To: gcruse
Yeah, he'd be a tough client. Almost makes me feel sorry for Bob Bennett.
21
posted on
05/08/2003 10:57:38 AM PDT
by
katana
To: katana
Heh. What a nasty remark! I think I like you.
22
posted on
05/08/2003 11:00:27 AM PDT
by
gcruse
(Vice is nice, but virtue can hurt you. --Bill Bennett)
To: knighthawk
23
posted on
05/08/2003 11:11:12 AM PDT
by
dixiechick2000
(Never have so many been so wrong about so much.)
To: mitchbert
what does Canada bring to the table that benefits the US? Potentially a couple of things, actually.
First as was posted above, lots of barren empty space for testing,
The US has plenty of open-spaces sites to test.
as well as access to the North for forward detection
The US has many satellites that will give us plenty of early detection.
Second, backup facilities like the fall-back command facility for NORAD underneath North Bay, Ontario (there's a Canuck on the command team in Cheyenne).
The US can easily build it own fallback command facilities thousands of miles away and still on US soil.
We're also no slouch when it comes to satellite and space technology and that may come in useful.
Good, Canada can build its own defense, if perchance, they feel their new allies in France arent up to the job.
I know there are millions of great folks in Canada, and I am sure you are too. But in the last year there has been far too much anti-America sentiment, words and actions coming from Canada for it to be considered much of an American ally.
24
posted on
05/08/2003 11:41:08 AM PDT
by
RJL
To: gcruse
Just to be the devil's advocate for a moment, a moron armed with a machine gun in a crowded room can get his enemies to dance all day long. It doesn't make him any less of a moron. I have to say this is an unfair and poor analogy.
Thank you for your well-spelled opinion.
Youre welcome. I gave it everything it deserved.
25
posted on
05/08/2003 11:53:02 AM PDT
by
RJL
To: RJL
We do not need Canada to help with this. Canada should be excluded from the benefits of NMD, and included in the costs (in the form of tarifs on their gov't subsidized exports to us) as reparations for not supporting us in Iraq. Canada should also be held responsible for any debris that lands in it.
26
posted on
05/08/2003 12:28:12 PM PDT
by
eBelasco
To: RJL
What does Canada have worth defending, apart from some collectivist tractor factories and feminazi communes? Really, if Canuckistan wants to go their own way, let them. Just don't come crying to us when North Korea decides they want those Alberta oil fields.
To: Provost-Marshal
If it was in our national interest to defend the people of Alberta from totalitarian aggression, we would be justified in doing so. Otherwise, they are responsible for themselves. Ideally, Alberta would separate from the USSK and become a territory of the USA.
28
posted on
05/09/2003 9:21:55 AM PDT
by
eBelasco
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-28 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson