Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2005 10:14 am Post subject: Missle Defence Shield
The is a story today in the Halifax Herald saying that President Bush of the United States tried to force Canada to joining him in the Missle Defence Shield. I am curious how you feel about this project. Russia has already stated that they are working on missles that would be unffected by such a system. Other people have said that this will just give the terrorists a reason to try to attack.
One of the things that worry me is the fact that it would never be public knowledge when the system is operational. Everyone knows that there have been major problems in the past, and how will the public ever feel safe if they don't know if the last line of defence is working?
Finally, I have never heard of a direct threat towards Canada. This doesn't mean that it had never happened, so if anyone can reference a case please let me know.
<<But Bush "waved his hands and remarked: 'I don't understand this. Are you saying that if you got up and said this is necessary for the defence of Canada, it wouldn't be accepted?' ">>
Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2005 3:43 pm Post subject: missle defense
while there has been talk for some time now on the potential threat that nuclear attach might pose to the us, to north america as a whole really, i think the greater threat is for canada to just jump aboard any cockamammy plan of defense that the united states puts forward. if it was in our best interest would it not have come to us directly through the channels of canadian government? do we not risk becoming a target-by-association if we act as the lapdog? for us to take a stand on this issue is to establish once again our sovereignty from the Man. a decision like this should not be made hastily or without intense consultation with the canadian public. blah blah, tis is my two cents to see if the post is working. word up jeff.
Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2005 6:44 pm Post subject: Put up your dukes.
Quote:
"if it was in our best interest would it not have come to us directly through the channels of canadian government?"
Uhmm. Sense when has this government done anything in our best interest?
Quote:
"...for us to take a stand on this issue is to establish once again our sovereignty from the Man."
Okay, so we should just say no to this proposal simply because it comes from 'the Man?'
As the resident conservative here (ie, free-thinker,) I would like to clarify my position on missile defence. I would say that I am currently opposed to it, from what I have read and heard. This is not currently needed, nor is it guaranteed to work. However, I still require a ton more information before I make a solid decision.
However, opposing it simply because the Man is for it, is not a good enough reason to go against it.
I do agree with the former poster's belief that a decision should not be made hastily. If a decision is made to go ahead with it, we had best not be simply a 'lapdog,' but a true partner in all sense of the word.
BUT, with this current government we have, I'd say we're screwed.
<<But Bush "waved his hands and remarked: 'I don't understand this. Are you saying that if you got up and said this is necessary for the defence of Canada, it wouldn't be accepted?' ">>
Ha, yeah maybe if we were SHEEP.
*waving my hands like a flying sheep*
I think it is more because we have become so cynical of Liberal politicans. I mean we have the Premier of Ontario lying his way into office. We have Paul Martin nearly losing the Federal election, throwing put promises to NFLD and Nova Scotia that he has no intentions of keeping, and his only way of winning is by trying to suggest that the main opposition is a bunch of racist bigots that will take away rights.
At least with their President, Americans knew going into the election where Mr. Bush stood on almost every major issue. In Canada, we have to guess and even then, odds are what we are being told is nothing more than lie. How could Mr. Bush expect us to believe our PM?
Back to the issue at hand. The US is merely looking for our support. they are not looking for money, they are looking for support. We get to keep our biggest trading partner happy with little or no cost to us. Furthermore, it gives us a seat at the table, which is a lot better than not having one.
For those that may worry about the "weaponisation of space", all I can say is, we better shoot down those communication satellites. They are directing bombs around the world and truly that should be seen as the "weaponisation of space".
____________ --
"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries."
Winston Churchill
Well according to the PM, Bush was not as forceful as some people may think. Personally I must take our PM's word on this basically because if Bush was as forceful as people said, it would be better not to say anything. Let the subject die, and not bring it up again.
I think "force" is the wrong term. Mr. Bush likely strongly suggested that his government would like us to join in the program.
He has a valid point, someday, a president may ask why they are paying so much for our defence.
____________ --
"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries."
Winston Churchill
I think "force" is the wrong term. Mr. Bush likely strongly suggested that his government would like us to join in the program.
He has a valid point, someday, a president may ask why they are paying so much for our defence.
Very true, and after doing some reading about the whole proposal, I am starting to think that Canada should join the US on this issue. It is not going to cost us very much, the exposure is going to be minimal. The idea that this may put us closer to a viable target does have some merit, but I think that if an organiztion had a choice they would attack US. Besides my feelingright now is, if they attacked us there would be a more "complete" global outrage than if "they" attacked the US again.
If 9/11 proved anything, an attack on a Canadian city would cause havoc at the border. If the US becomees too hard to attack, people will target us because they can get here easier than they can get there.
We need to think of the defence of North America not in terms of two nations, but as a geographical target.
____________ --
"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries."
Winston Churchill
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
