Posted on 02/24/2005 6:21:02 PM PST by quidnunc
Sorry but I can't help but wonder if you are a child. No one has said that there is now a fully functioning missile defense system. But here is what you said in your post #71:
Except that nothing has been shot down not even during tests. Every test has not worked. There is no functioning BMD system. I wish there was. – post #71
Um, hello, for the fourth time, there was a successful test today. There have been previous successful tests. What about the words in my posts have you not been able to understand? I would expect an American to admit being wrong before now. But then you are not an American are you?
Americans posting here, I assume feel as I do, and are confident that the system will succeed and will be in place shortly after that. And they are expresing scenarios that they hope will play out.
As I say, you are woefully uninformed and seem determined to make us aware of it.
1) There are all manner of references on this thread to shooting missiles down over Canada (which you do not have the capability for).
2)The successful tests you cling to predate the Bush Admin "rollout". As provided, the test results since that rollout have failed.
3) The test today has nothing to do with missiles that would be flying over Canada.
4) Rather than wonder my intent, or worse guess, why not ask politely?
5) You really cannot have a rational discussion without insults can you?
Except that nothing has been shot down not even during tests. Every test has not worked. There is no functioning BMD system. I wish there was. – post #71
What you say is patently untrue. There have been successful tests.
There is no such thing as a "rational" discussion with someone who does not tell the truth. And so I wonder: are you a child? that would at least explain the immaturity.
Preserve Banff.
CA....
To be a bit cold on the matter, Canada does not have any great strategic importance to the US. Candanian natural resources and territory yes, the polity and population of Canada, no. We could choose not to protect Canada from any external threats or military blackmail and still get all the value from the territory and airspace.
Canadian trade accounts for around 4% of US GDP, we could get by without them if necessary. Not so the reverse.
I could not imagine a ballistic missile nuclear attack on Canada that was not also aimed at the United States, but given the limited number of missile interceptors which the United States will have deployed over the next few years, none should be used in the defense of Canadian civilians in Canadian cities as they have rejected being part of the "missile shield" while at the same time rejecting its very possibilty of any success.
Fine. Never use it to defend their civilian population. After all, it is exactly what they say they desire...
dvwjr
They even beet the French when it comes to surrender!
Yea, the French are still "fighting" the feeling! hehehe
The USA's #1 souce of foreign energy is Canada. At same time Canada is your #1 customer period.
If you really think you have a reason to not want that, it has to be a really good one.
and...
"they have rejected being part of the "missile shield" while at the same time rejecting its very possibilty of any success."
Through NORAD Canada will be a part of it anyway, and as for it working... when and if you get it working, there might well be several nations highly interested in it. Right now you have had setbacks. I still beieve you might pull it off.
Second, it is abundantly clear that you erred in declaring that there have been no successful tests... Except that nothing has been shot down not even during tests. Every test has not worked.
My first post to you quoted the above and very politely explained to you that there had indeed been successful tests - there had even been one today and so it is obvious that you are ill-informed. It is clear what I was referring to as I quoted from your post #71 exactly what I was talking about.
Instead of explaing yourself in your next post which a polite guest would have done - you continued to claim that there had been no successful tests. When you finally did say in a further post that you were bothered that Americans on an American site were talking about letting missiles hit Canada - who had just stuck their finger in our eye - one. more. time. I replied:
[[[My post # 101 - Americans posting here, I assume feel as I do, and are confident that the system will succeed and will be in place shortly after that. And they are expresing scenarios that they hope will play out.]]]
That is all that needs to be said about that. There is no reason that I can see for you to ever bring that up again.
And still you have not taken responsibility for initially claiming that there have been no successful tests. And I repeat: there is no such thing as a rational discussion with someone who does not tell the truth or will not come clean about their own misstatements (if that's really what it was). You are responsible for what you actually say. And what you said was not true. Period.
I have no interest in having a discussion with you, anyway. It seems to me that you are not very mature. Why else would you refuse to deal with your initial patently false statement?
And don't forget this froom Spktyr in post #94:
Um, actually, the SM3 (the successful test today) is capable against anything in the reentry phase, which includes ICBMs. What it can't do is kill something that's in the cruise phase.
So, yes, it could knock down something heading for Seattle. Or Vancouver. But only if the launcher was near the intended target.
My opinion is that it is you who has been "rude" on this thread. What is it to you if Americans vent on an American site about one more betrayal from Canada? It's not like we are going onto some Canadian site somewhere and lecturing you.
Lol,pretty good, but it would be funnier if Canada was made a part of Idaho.
Alot of Canadians believe that the US can't live without them, they cite "they need our water", out west quite frequently.
America has given up control of it's borders. Canada pledges to send troops. Film at 11.
Bingo! They are much too interested in spending money for social projects than on defense. And really, why should they when they have the perfect patsys to do it for them.
No Sunsong. You "think" I came here to lecture, you have no idea. I'm a member here, no one told me I would only be a guest. You have other similar posts to other people, so I know what your real problem is.
And don't forget this froom Spktyr in post #94:
Sprktr provided intersting information in an intelligent way. I much appreciated it.
[[[My post # 101 - Americans posting here, I assume feel as I do, and are confident that the system will succeed and will be in place shortly after that. And they are expresing scenarios that they hope will play out.]]]
You missed the several times that I said I too posted my hope for such an outcome, where I expressed vehement opposition to the Canadian gov't's decision.
Your problem is I'm Canadian, you don't care that I'm a card carrying, active Conservative. You'd rather that there be no one here but Americans and you think you have liense to insult us.
Cellucci is well regarded, even when disgareed with. He's been very effective in stating his (your) case throughout his tenures (which ends soon).
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.