Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Canada, U.S. agree to use each other's troops in civil emergencies
Canwest News Service ^ | 22 Feb 2008 | David Pugliese

Posted on 02/23/2008 9:18:08 AM PST by BGHater

Canada and the U.S. have signed an agreement that paves the way for the militaries from either nation to send troops across each other's borders during an emergency, but some are questioning why the Harper government has kept silent on the deal.

Neither the Canadian government nor the Canadian Forces announced the new agreement, which was signed Feb. 14 in Texas.

The U.S. military's Northern Command, however, publicized the agreement with a statement outlining how its top officer, Gen. Gene Renuart, and Canadian Lt.-Gen. Marc Dumais, head of Canada Command, signed the plan, which allows the military from one nation to support the armed forces of the other nation during a civil emergency.

The new agreement has been greeted with suspicion by the left wing in Canada and the right wing in the U.S.

The left-leaning Council of Canadians, which is campaigning against what it calls the increasing integration of the U.S. and Canadian militaries, is raising concerns about the deal.

"It's kind of a trend when it comes to issues of Canada-U.S. relations and contentious issues like military integration. We see that this government is reluctant to disclose information to Canadians that is readily available on American and Mexican websites," said Stuart Trew, a researcher with the Council of Canadians.

Trew said there is potential for the agreement to militarize civilian responses to emergency incidents. He noted that work is also underway for the two nations to put in place a joint plan to protect common infrastructure such as roadways and oil pipelines.

"Are we going to see (U.S.) troops on our soil for minor potential threats to a pipeline or a road?" he asked.

Trew also noted the U.S. military does not allow its soldiers to operate under foreign command so there are questions about who controls American forces if they are requested for service in Canada. "We don't know the answers because the government doesn't want to even announce the plan," he said.

But Canada Command spokesman Commander David Scanlon said it will be up to civilian authorities in both countries on whether military assistance is requested or even used.

He said the agreement is "benign" and simply sets the stage for military-to-military co-operation if the governments approve.

"But there's no agreement to allow troops to come in," he said. "It facilitates planning and co-ordination between the two militaries. The 'allow' piece is entirely up to the two governments."

If U.S. forces were to come into Canada they would be under tactical control of the Canadian Forces but still under the command of the U.S. military, Scanlon added.

News of the deal, and the allegation it was kept secret in Canada, is already making the rounds on left-wing blogs and Internet sites as an example of the dangers of the growing integration between the two militaries.

On right-wing blogs in the U.S. it is being used as evidence of a plan for a "North American union" where foreign troops, not bound by U.S. laws, could be used by the American federal government to override local authorities.

"Co-operative militaries on Home Soil!" notes one website. "The next time your town has a 'national emergency,' don't be surprised if Canadian soldiers respond. And remember - Canadian military aren't bound by posse comitatus."

Posse comitatus is a U.S. law that prohibits the use of federal troops from conducting law enforcement duties on domestic soil unless approved by Congress.

Scanlon said there was no intent to keep the agreement secret on the Canadian side of the border. He noted it will be reported on in the Canadian Forces newspaper next week and that publication will be put on the Internet.

Scanlon said the actual agreement hasn't been released to the public as that requires approval from both nations. That decision has not yet been taken, he added.


TOPICS: Canada; Foreign Affairs; Government; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 110th; bordersecurity; canada; canadiantroops; emergencies; military; nationalsecurity; nau; nwo; spp
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-159 next last
To: the gillman@blacklagoon.com
A troop-swapping deal with Canada is just a palatable trial balloon.

If it goes down without a protest, expect a similar deal with Mexican troops to follow.

101 posted on 02/23/2008 6:20:58 PM PST by Travis McGee (---www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
This is the first step in the combined three nation defense structure that will see Mexico added in short order.

Bingo. Then, we shall hear that we must "regularize" our gun laws......downward.....to match Canada and Mexico.

102 posted on 02/23/2008 6:22:43 PM PST by Travis McGee (---www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: kiriath_jearim; archy; B4Ranch

Great link at reply 84 to “Northern Command” AKA the Fifth Army AKA the “Fatherland Internal Army.”

That one is a MUST SEE folks!!!


103 posted on 02/23/2008 6:25:41 PM PST by Travis McGee (---www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt

bumping!


104 posted on 02/23/2008 6:27:02 PM PST by nicmarlo (A vote for McRino is a false mandate for McShamnesty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: ItsForTheChildren; GlennBeck08
It won’t be called anything silly like Mexamericanada.

It’ll just be called North America.

We’ll be told we’re ALL Americans, Canada, the USA and Mexico.

With room to expand under the same name all the way to Panama.

105 posted on 02/23/2008 6:27:53 PM PST by Travis McGee (---www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo

Fixin’ to play Halo co-op with my son so I won’t be here long. The Canadian military cannot be that dense as to try and take Americans guns from them. I’ll say no more before I get in trouble.


106 posted on 02/23/2008 6:48:42 PM PST by processing please hold ( "It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: processing please hold

To that I say.............it likely wouldn’t be the regular military who will try.


107 posted on 02/23/2008 6:52:39 PM PST by nicmarlo (A vote for McRino is a false mandate for McShamnesty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo
I know. I love living in the country. That last sentence may not make sense to you but it does to me. :)

There are plans within plans within plans.

108 posted on 02/23/2008 6:56:11 PM PST by processing please hold ( "It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: BGHater

This is NOT the North American Union.
This is facing the reality of dealing with large muslim populations.


109 posted on 02/23/2008 6:59:58 PM PST by Cyclops08
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: processing please hold

haaaaaaaaaaaa

Makes sense to me!


110 posted on 02/23/2008 7:00:28 PM PST by nicmarlo (A vote for McRino is a false mandate for McShamnesty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: Cyclops08
Are you serious?

Muslim populations? How about the reality that illegal immigrants are causing more problems than mooslims.

This has nothing to do with mooslims, but our loss of sovereignty.

111 posted on 02/23/2008 7:06:25 PM PST by BGHater ($2300 is the limit of your Free Speech.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: BGHater

ssssssssssshhhhhhhhhhhh

They want the sheeeeep to remain asleeeeep.


112 posted on 02/23/2008 7:08:00 PM PST by nicmarlo (A vote for McRino is a false mandate for McShamnesty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: BGHater

This is about gun confiscation. Polling of US police officers indicates that they would not respect such a plan here.


113 posted on 02/23/2008 7:14:22 PM PST by editor-surveyor (Turning the general election into a second Democrat primary is not a winning strategy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

Woo hooo!!


114 posted on 02/23/2008 7:16:31 PM PST by GlennBeck08
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: quendi
"Canadian troops will show no compassion for American gun owners when they are ordered to come and confiscate all our weapons."

Exactly!

115 posted on 02/23/2008 7:18:34 PM PST by editor-surveyor (Turning the general election into a second Democrat primary is not a winning strategy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo
My game is on. I'm gonna snipe my son all over Blood Gulch.

Reaper out!

116 posted on 02/23/2008 7:24:05 PM PST by processing please hold ( "It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: processing please hold

Blood Gulch? What is that?


117 posted on 02/23/2008 7:24:43 PM PST by nicmarlo (A vote for McRino is a false mandate for McShamnesty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: RC2

Someone from another country is going to come over here and tell us what to do? I don’t think so.”

Or maybe Troops from another country are going to shoot your a$$ when you refuse to give up your firearms.


118 posted on 02/23/2008 7:36:37 PM PST by philetus (Keep doing what you always do and you'll keep getting what you always get.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
This is about gun confiscation. Polling of US police officers indicates that they would not respect such a plan here.

That's my first suspicion as well, but Canada's own attempt at national gun registration has been an expensive flop. If they couldn't get their own, much more compliant citizens to comply with that law, there's no way that Canadians will ever be used to ram some confiscation scheme through in the U.S. They'd literally be cannon fodder, and they know it.

119 posted on 02/23/2008 8:18:40 PM PST by Charles Martel (The Tree of Liberty thirsts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: BGHater

Bush and his global buddies in action again - compromising the American sovreignty. One day Canadian “troops” will be used to sieze OUR guns.


120 posted on 02/23/2008 8:20:44 PM PST by ZULU (Non nobis, non nobis Domine, sed nomini tuo da gloriam. God, guts and guns made America great.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-159 next 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson