PDA

View Full Version : Should Canada join the US?



DualCPU
12 Sep 03,, 10:00
I heard about this board from the board at http://www.unitednorthamerica.org/phpBB2/index.php on http://www.unitednorthamerica.org/. What that website is proposing is that Canada join the US. What does everyone here think of this. There are some pros and cons at http://www.unitednorthamerica.org/procon.htm. What I think most people would find here would find the most interesting is the uniform continental defense perimiter which would allow for both American and Canadian border guards stationed on the common border to be stationed elsewhere (Mexican border, airports, and ports).

Personally, I am for it. My only concern is that it could lead to Democrat control of the federal government, but I suspect that may not be a problem. It seems like the Republicans would be able to integrate Canadian conservatives more easily than the democrats could integrate Canadian liberals.

Ray
12 Sep 03,, 10:41
What has the Colonel to say on this? My relatives and friends in Canada would say 'no go'.

Ironduke
12 Sep 03,, 15:50
There was a study done by Pew Internet Research, and the number of Canadians who want to join the US is 19.9%.

2DREZQ
12 Sep 03,, 20:01
Do we get their firearms laws, or do they get ours?

If we get theirs, my answery is N.F.W.!

Leader
13 Sep 03,, 00:35
Reduction in taxes by up to 50%.
:LOL

So let see if I have this right Americans will be paying for Canada’s stupid social programs.


Increase land mass by 104%.


Great millions of square miles of useless barren tundra.

This has got to be one of the top ten stupidest things I have ever heard of.

DualCPU
13 Sep 03,, 07:30
Originally posted by ironman420
There was a study done by Pew Internet Research, and the number of Canadians who want to join the US is 19.9%.

I'm curious where that 19.9% is. For instance, I suspect there is a high concentration in Alberta. When Alberta leaves, the situation is different making the rest of the provinces think differently. It would be a domino effect. All you need is for one or two provinces to leave and Canada will soon be dead.

DualCPU
13 Sep 03,, 07:32
Originally posted by 2DREZQ
Do we get their firearms laws, or do they get ours?

If we get theirs, my answery is N.F.W.!

Don't worry, we wouldn't get their firearms laws. The most likely path for Canada joining the US involves each province joining seperately leading the the government in Ottawa being dissolved and all of its nonsense laws about firearms (and many other things) dead.

DualCPU
13 Sep 03,, 07:37
Originally posted by Leader
:LOL

So let see if I have this right Americans will be paying for Canada’s stupid social programs.

Actually, they would die. Most likely each province joins seperately leading to the death of the government in Ottawa which would kill their nonsense socialist programs. In theory the new states could keep them, but they would be overwhelmed so that will never happen.



Great millions of square miles of useless barren tundra.

This has got to be one of the top ten stupidest things I have ever heard of. [/B]

They said the same thing about Alaska when it was purchased.

ZFBoxcar
13 Sep 03,, 08:11
Im a canadian, im totally in favor of it. Thats favor without a 'u'!!!

I dont want the feds telling my province of Ontario that we need full public health care. Im tired of our weak military and our stupid foreign policy, im tired of high taxes and social programs that dont work all that well (although they arent as bad as unitednorthamerica makes them out to be), and im tired of the anti-american sentiment in this country. I love my city and my province, but fuck the confederation of Canada. Alberta is ok too lol.

Officer of Engineers
13 Sep 03,, 19:02
The military would certainly vote no. Too much history to give up. We're proud to be Canadians.

bigross86
13 Sep 03,, 20:07
What's the last thing the Canadians went to as Canadians, not as a UN force? Latest mention I know is they were one of five brigades on D-Day. They were the only paratroopers to destroy their allocated targets

Officer of Engineers
13 Sep 03,, 20:24
I/SFOR, KFOR, OEF Afghanistan, ODS, OAF, ISAF, and it was a Canadian Corps in WWII. Juno Beach was taken by two Canadian divisions, not bdes.

bigross86
13 Sep 03,, 21:27
Weren't I/SFOR and KFOR UN forces? Or were they NATO? What are OAF and ISAF?

I said brigades cuz I wasn't sure, but it sounded right.

The Canadians got Juno, US got Omaha and Utah, and the Brits got Gold and Sword, right?

Leader
13 Sep 03,, 23:23
Originally posted by DualCPU
They said the same thing about Alaska when it was purchased.

Good point, but Alaska was empty. Canada is filled with millions of liberals.

Officer of Engineers
13 Sep 03,, 23:29
Originally posted by bigross86
Weren't I/SFOR and KFOR UN forces? Or were they NATO? What are OAF and ISAF?

I said brigades cuz I wasn't sure, but it sounded right.

The Canadians got Juno, US got Omaha and Utah, and the Brits got Gold and Sword, right?

I/SFOR and KFOR are NATO ops.

OAF - Operation Allied Force
ISAF - Intenational Stablization Assistance Force - currently a NATO op.

Correct on D-Day.

bigross86
14 Sep 03,, 12:57
But which one was OAF?

Officer of Engineers
14 Sep 03,, 23:17
I told you. Operation Allied Force.

bigross86
14 Sep 03,, 23:31
No, where were they, when, what did they do, etc...

Officer of Engineers
15 Sep 03,, 00:43
Ok, since you asked for the details. You barely escape the lazy clause.

OAF - aka the Kosovo War.

8 CF-18s (5% of the air effort doing 10% of the sorties)
2 Battle Groups attached to the British 4th Armoured Brigade
- Lord Strathcona Horse (Royal Canadians)
- 3rd Battalion, Royal Canadian Regiment

In all the ops I've mentioned, the Canadians are the 3rd or 4th largest force contributor ahead of much larger Italian and German forces.

I've forgotten about Somalia with the Canadian Airborne Regiment which btw is the only sector that accomplish all their OPOBJs.

Yet, we're conviently forgotten, aren't we?

Praxus
15 Sep 03,, 01:00
I've forgotten about Somalia with the Canadian Airborne Regiment which btw is the only sector that accomplish all their OPOBJs.

What exactly was their "objective"?

Officer of Engineers
15 Sep 03,, 02:58
In general terms (OPOBJs are inherantly classified items),

area recee
area accessment
base establishement
area security
convoy duties
disarming hostile forces
provide aid to NGOs
establish NGO stations
force protection
area protection

TopHatter
15 Sep 03,, 15:57
Speaking of Canada in WWII, let's not forget the Canadian force at Dieppe. It was that disastrous British-Canadian raid that gained a wealth of knowledge for the D-Day landings at Normandy. In my humble opinion, it can be argued that the men who died in the Dieppe raid made a successful D-Day landing possible.
I am also rather tired of the Canadians being forgotten. Anybody know who jointly runs NORAD? Yeah, the USA and....Canada! Who is traditionally 2nd in command at NORAD? A Canadian! What was the first foreign country I ever visited? Canada!
Seriously though, I don't think people realize how much Canada did and does for the continental defense and overseas military operations.
Sure, Canada might have some policies or problems that Americans might not like. Well guess what? Canada ain't America!
OK, I'll step off the soapbox now...

bigross86
15 Sep 03,, 16:24
All of what you say is true, but alot of people have the attitude of "Canada is a loft apartment over a great party"

Officer of Engineers
15 Sep 03,, 20:00
Tophatter,

Hell, even Canadians don't know our warrior heritage. Canada was the 3rd most powerful country on earth at the end of WWII with the 3rd largest land army, 2nd or 3rd largest navy (depending if you count tonnage or ships), and the 4th largest AF, add to a vibrant industry that was undamaged by war and of course, cash up the ying-yang (everybody outside of North America owes Canada money for war supplies).

However, I wished I could say that the people in the know don't forget. Canada has a reputation of punching far above its weight, deploying forces in numbers that larger militaries (aka the Turks, Italians, Germans) would not deploy.

Every ship in Maritime Command (aka the Canadian Navy) has been deployed at least once, if not twice, in the past two years.

Just a side note, on 11 Sept, Canadian and American fighters patrol the entire North American airspace under NORAD auspicies with no respect to borders. It was unpractical for planes to turn back at the border when they still had effective rnage. NATO planes training in Labrador also took to the skies to man their positions with all weapons hot. In theory, non-American planes could have shot down American airliners though that would be through the orders of the POTUS.

The Americans asked for and got a Canadian battle group (3 PPCLI) in Afghanistan.

Canada is not allowed to say no to any deployment request. At best, we're offerred a choice but we're going.

When the Macedonian shit hit the fan, Canada offerred 4 observers. NATO demanded and got an entire coy. Rumsfeld offerred a choice to Canada. Take command of the ISAF or committ a bde to OIF. The coward Chretien chosed the former.

I said that Chretien is a coward not so much as saying no to OIF. He was respecting the majority wishes of the Canadian public. He was a coward for committing an entire bde without knowing just how dangerous and how ill prepared we are for that mission. He should have just say no and leave it at that.

I don't know about Dieppe's effects on D-Day though. If you look at the prep work of the various beaches, the Canadians by far got the most paperwork and had more rehersals than anybody else. The Americans got the least amount of prepwork relatively speaking (still a hell of alot in overall amount). The Americans also got alot of experience from the USMC actions in the Pacific though how much actually is transferred is debatable but suffice to say, the Americans knew how to land.

The only thing that was confirmed by D-Day is that a prepared opposed landing is not going to work.

TopHatter
15 Sep 03,, 22:54
Colonel
Good post and some especially good history.
I think most Canadians don't know of your warrior heritage and history simply because Canada has never been known as a "warlike" country like Great Britain,France,Germany, and the USA. Nothing at all wrong with that, in fact that's probably why Canadians can travel to just about anywhere and not have people heaving insults at them. "Yankee Go Home" ring a bell here guys?
One of the things that warmed my heart after September 11 was the glowing reports of Canadians throwing open their homes (and their arms) wide open to stranded Americans. Many Canadians that I chatted with online said, referring to the attacks, that WE have been attacked. There was no "The Americans were attacked". We were all in it together and at a time when the country (hell, the whole world) was reeling from the shock, it was comforting to know that our neighbor to the north was right there in with us. I was especially glad to read your details on the NORAD patrols. It jibed with everything else I've read and heard.
As far as Dieppe, I'll have to do some reading on that. It's been quite some years since I read about it, but I seem to recall it mentioning how much of an eye-opener it was and how some good lessons were learned. I'll see what I can find and post it on the History forum.

Bill
16 Sep 03,, 09:04
I was frankly pretty pissed off the way the sniper's from the Princess brigade were demonized by the Canadian gov't.

I like the people, but man, what a FUCKED UP government you guys got!

Officer of Engineers
16 Sep 03,, 11:48
M21,

It's a trait of the government no matter which party is in power. The four guys we lost in Afghanistan is the first time I remembered when any elected official (Municipal, Provincial, or Federal) ever showed up at a military funeral or wake. The person who impressed me most there, however, was US CAS Gen Shinseki who said nothing but was just there to show his respects. Damn classy act.

Minor correction, the snipers were from 3rd Battalion, Princess Patricia Canadian Light Infantry of the 1st Canadian Mechanized Brigade Group. The PPCLI is officially a regiment with three battalions but Regt HQ is only ceremonial.

There was some confusion about the Bronze Star being awarded to the snipers. There was no official requests from the US DoD to award the guys - a must under the Queen's Rules. I don't know the status of what happenned right now but there was the impression that Foreign Affairs told State not to make the request. Apparently, we're uncomfortable having war heros.

DND did honour the guys with our own medals but it would be nice to have the bronze stars recorded in the regt history.

2DREZQ
16 Sep 03,, 18:09
Realistically, it doesn't seem possible that any part of Canada would join the U.S. It probably isn't a good idea anyway. It would take decades to work out the details. We already have about the closest relationship two nations could possibly have. What advantages would be offered over those we already enjoy? (Massive trade, freedom of movement, what am I missing?

BTW, here in North Dakota we love our northern neighbors!

TopHatter
16 Sep 03,, 18:18
I agree, this is more of an academic discussion more than anything. Canada remains a different country in so many ways, however much America has in common with her. I think Americans take for granted how fortunate we are to have a country such as Canada sharing such a huge common border. Perhaps the only other country in the world that could be compared to Canada in that fashion would be Great Britain.

Ray
16 Sep 03,, 19:28
Asa third party all I can say is Canada is an excellent and a very tolerant country.

Praxus
16 Sep 03,, 20:01
Canada is a country with a Statist Government and you can't own firearms without going through 10 miles of red tape. There is nothing great about it. The people are nice though.

bigross86
16 Sep 03,, 21:10
Only serious problem I have with Canadians is they way my best friend keeps saying "Eh!" all the time, and the way they looked at me when I blasted "Blame Canada" from my dad's car when I went up there this summer.

Officer of Engineers
16 Sep 03,, 21:40
Speaking as a gun owner (.30-06 Remington Model 70, Ruger-14, .22RF Springfield, 12guage over-under Remington), it's no more hassels than buying, registering, and insuring a car.

Canada is what Canadians make it to be and I make no apologies for that.

The land itself is worth alot more than you think. Extremely large oil reserves, fresh water that in this century will be a gold priced commotity, and hydro-electric generation that is an envy to the world.

TopHatter
16 Sep 03,, 22:48
Originally posted by Praxus
Canada is a country with a Statist Government

Um, what is a Statist Government?

Ray
17 Sep 03,, 05:54
Could someone explain whats the big deal about owing firearms and being a great country. In Rwanda and Iraq, you also can have firearms and maybe even an artillery piece. If that is what is the bottom line, then I reckon the Americans and others who love having a weapon will not want to return home!:LOL

Officer of Engineers
17 Sep 03,, 06:05
Speaking personnally, I love the feel of the wood as I sit in my tree stand waiting for that yearling buck to come by to fill my dinner table with a hind of garlic roasted venison.

Sure beats the $5 per pound butt roast at the butchers - (at least I keep telling myself).

Bill
17 Sep 03,, 16:14
Ray, if you want to talk about gun control, start a thread on it. Discussing it here will only totally hijack the thread.

2DREZQ
17 Sep 03,, 21:04
This friday my 14-year old son will be sitting in a treestand, waiting for his first buck to wander by...

Ironduke
17 Sep 03,, 22:15
Originally posted by TopHatter
Um, what is a Statist Government?
A statist government is a government that controls economic planning and policy.

DualCPU
18 Sep 03,, 06:51
Originally posted by TopHatter
I agree, this is more of an academic discussion more than anything.

It is an academic discussion to a point. However, all you need is one province to leave, and it goes beyond academic. Years ago it was thought that Quebec would secede (which would lead to this), but that has died down.

Now, the most likely candidate is Alberta. Alberta is quite possibly the most American province (as well as being the most free province) in Canada. The largest concentration of people who would wish to leave Canada is in Alberta now. Many of them would wish to join the US. Alberta would be quickly welcomed into the US. Republicans would gain extra votes that would solidify their majority. Alberta's oil reserves are very valuable.

Ray
18 Sep 03,, 09:28
Originally posted by M21Sniper
Ray, if you want to talk about gun control, start a thread on it. Discussing it here will only totally hijack the thread.

I don't wish to hijack.

I also am not concerned with gun control.

All I wanted to know why in the US and Canada [since this is a phenomenon that we here cannot quite fathom but would sure want to know why] is there is always an equation between over the counter purchase of weapon and 'freedom'.

Bernard Shaw while walking down London Bridge objected to a man swinging his umbrella which hit him on the nose. The guy who hit him said, 'Sir, this is a free country and I can do what I want'.

GB Shaw retorted, 'Sir, your freedom ends where my nose begins!'.

Thus, what is sauce for the goose is not sauce for the gander and yet there is such a song and a dance about weapons being freely available being freedom or the freedom to go on a shikar and deplete wild life or even kill a man out of pique as what has been done in US schools at times.

Benajmin Spock is indeed wrong!

This is my last post on weapons since I sincerely don't want the thread to go wonky.

My apologies, Sniperman.

bigross86
18 Sep 03,, 09:38
LOL! Sniperman! Firm believer in Porsches, Guns, and American Babes!!!

TopHatter
18 Sep 03,, 16:12
Originally posted by DualCPU
Alberta is quite possibly the most American province (as well as being the most free province) in Canada.

Pardon my confusion, but what do you mean by "the most free province"? Free as in less government-controlled?

Bill
18 Sep 03,, 16:45
Ray, i'll answer you like this, and we'll ALL let it drop. ;)

This is one of my favorite quotes from the founding fathers, and it cuts right through all the BS to the heart of the matter.

"Without the 2d amendment, the Bill of Rights would be but a bill of privelidges".

Thomas Jefferson.

Officer of Engineers
18 Sep 03,, 17:24
Originally posted by DualCPU
It is an academic discussion to a point. However, all you need is one province to leave, and it goes beyond academic. Years ago it was thought that Quebec would secede (which would lead to this), but that has died down.

Now, the most likely candidate is Alberta. Alberta is quite possibly the most American province (as well as being the most free province) in Canada. The largest concentration of people who would wish to leave Canada is in Alberta now. Many of them would wish to join the US. Alberta would be quickly welcomed into the US. Republicans would gain extra votes that would solidify their majority. Alberta's oil reserves are very valuable.

I challenge that assertion that Alberta wants to secede to the US. If anything, it is one of the strongest Canadian voices in Canada. It is the home of the 1st Canadian Mechanized Brigade Group and the strongest militia regiment representations in Canada. That history and tradition is too strong to even assert that pro-US sentiments would get a large foothold.

Ironduke
18 Sep 03,, 22:49
OOE,

Is it true that alot of Canada's revenues are generated from Alberta and then diverted to other provinces?

Officer of Engineers
18 Sep 03,, 23:16
It's called the Balance of Transfer Payments.


For Federally funded programs such as health care, welfare, unemployment insurance, national pension, the idea here is that every Canadian no matter where he is would get the same service whether he's on the Pacific end or the Atlantic end.

Ontario and Alberta generates alot more tax revenue than they use which is then given to Provinces with smaller tax base to afford their programs.

Alberta got nothing to complain about here. Historically, they've got alot more out of the program than they put in. It's only when OPEC jacked up their oil prices is when Alberta started making the money.

And before the IT bubble burst, British Columbia also contributed positively to the program.

Ontario is the only province that has never benefitted from the program.

I would like to point out that the majority of the decent in the West is anti-Ontario and/or anti-Ottawa but rarely, if ever, anti-Canada.

tw-acs
20 Feb 04,, 23:35
Wouldnt French Canada (Quebec) be the most probable to want to to join the USA.

They are seperationists. And Quebec as an independent nation is just not probable. Most likely they would then become part of the USA.

Though, Canada's population has been steadily declining, thus I don't think it will be necessary to join the USA now.

And not to mention the history between the colonies and Canada and the USA and Canada has not been the most friendly. In more recent years with events such as wars Canada and the USA work together.

And the trade between the countries.

Why would any of the other provinces want to join the USA. My impression is that Quebec is the most likely to secede from the Canadian Confederacy. Being that it is the most independent province legally. That dates back to when England gained control of upper Canada and the King made an agreement with Quebec that they shall be generally left alone and the King will not try to enforce laws that are un-wanted, as King learned not to do earlier in the New World. I think that was with the Acadians.

French Canada, has had a history of wanting to be independent of the rest of the Canadian confederacy for quite sometime now.

Praxus
21 Feb 04,, 00:11
It's easy to take over Quebec, you just send one unarmed soldier to accept their surrendur:LOL

ZFBoxcar
21 Feb 04,, 00:21
Though, Canada's population has been steadily declining, thus I don't think it will be necessary to join the USA now.

Canada's population is actually steadily RISING, although slowly.

Ironduke
21 Feb 04,, 00:24
Though, Canada's population has been steadily declining, thus I don't think it will be necessary to join the USA now.
Actually, their growth rate is higher than ours. 0.94% vs. 0.92% in the US. They let in 500,000 immigrants per year, the United States lets in 1,000,000 with a population 10 times the size.

In a vote back in the mid-90's on whether to become independent or remain in Canada, most voted to remain in Canada.

ZFBoxcar
21 Feb 04,, 03:31
they arent stupid, Quebec knows without transfer payments from Ottawa they are doomed. They have incredibly high taxes and huge social programs, as well as high unemployment. They need Ontario and Alberta to survive, however much they hate us.

Anvilanthony
21 Feb 04,, 04:07
I believe in uniting nations together under one government as I said before.

However canadiens are just too damn liberal, mexicans are conservative so yes on mexico but no on canada.

Only if we were allowed to deport 25 million canadians back to france or the UK would I say annex canada.

Officer of Engineers
21 Feb 04,, 04:13
Gee, after we kicked your butt out of Canada three times.

Praxus
21 Feb 04,, 04:34
The fact is the failure of US invasion into Canada had to do with stupid leadership and an unprepared military which consisted of something around 10,500 regulars. The rest were not very well trained militiamen who had no legal obligation to fight outside the United States.

The first invasion attempt wasn't even a fight. If I remeber correctly Hull almost got executed for his incompotence. The second one was a fairly even match(something like 1500 Soldiers from US and 1300, half of which were British and Native American). The third one Canadians and British were outnumbered something like 20:1 and we had our ass handed to us, lol.

The British Empire and Canada gained nothing from the war however, America took British Influence out of the US and they stoped "impressing" our ships. The Battle of New Orleans although it did not officially occur during the war allowed us to expand towards the west. Oh and need I remind you, the war was started by the British Empire.

Officer of Engineers
21 Feb 04,, 04:55
Originally posted by Praxus
The fact is the failure of US invasion into Canada had to do with stupid leadership and an unprepared military which consisted of something around 10,500 regulars. The rest were not very well trained militiamen who had no legal obligation to fight outside the United States.

The British Empire and Canada gained nothing from the war, America took British Influence out of the US and they stoped "impressing" our ships. The Battle of New Orleans although it did not officially occur during the war allowed us to expand towards the west.

Actually I only counted the war of 1812 as one event. The Battle of Queenston Heights is as professional as they came. The American salute to the fall of General Issac Brock is a tale of romanticism at its finest. Do you know of any other time an American Army gave salute to an Honoured Fallen Enemy?

The Battle of New Orleans was well matched.

The three attempts I counted were

1) The American Revolutionary War - Benedict Arnold's Invasion of Quebec

2) The War of 1812

3) The Fenian Invasions.

As far as the War of 1812 is concerned, the real winner was Canada, not the British Empire nor the US. Canada, as a people, was borned in that war. French Canadian Regiments were responsible for repelling the 1st two invasion attempts. In other words, French Canadians defended Canada.

Praxus
21 Feb 04,, 05:11
1) The American Revolutionary War - Benedict Arnold's Invasion of Quebec

He was repelled by the British not Canada.


As far as the War of 1812 is concerned, the real winner was Canada, not the British Empire nor the US. Canada, as a people, was borned in that war. French Canadian Regiments were responsible for repelling the 1st two invasion attempts. In other words, French Canadians defended Canada.

Giving a country a sense of patriotism doesn't make them a winner.

A good portion of the defending forces in Canada weren't even Canadian.

The United States invaded Canada because we were pissed at the British for impressing sailors and attacking our ships. After the war all of this ceased.

However I do agree Canada was a victor in the sense that it had more pride in their country.


The Fenian Invasions

Can you count this one when the US Government was against them and infact seized their supplies?

Officer of Engineers
21 Feb 04,, 05:21
Originally posted by Praxus
Wasn't he repelled by the British?

The Gates of Quebec City would not openned.


Giving a country a sense of patriotism doesn't make them a winner.

Half the defending forces in the second attempt weren't even Canadian, you think if the Native Americans and the British weren't there Canada would have been able to win?

You're misunderstanding my point. My point is that people rose up to defend their HOMES to those they perceived as a foreign invader. In other words, a sense of national identity was borned out of that war.


The United States invaded Canada because we were pissed at the British for impressing sailors and attacking our ships. After the war all of this ceased.

Well, it ceased during the War. Napolean was beaten and hence no more need to restrict trade. However, the cause of that war is not as simple as that as you yourself has alluded to. The Northern States wanted to end the war to resume trade.


Can you count this one when the US Government was against the Fenian and in fact seized their supplies?

They were a bunch of crazy Irishmen, not the United States.

I have to count that one to be consistent in including Teddy Rosevelt's participation in the Spanish-American War - ie Private Regiments (as opposed to individual mercenaries) carrying war to foreign soil.

The Fenians did in fact flew their Civil War Regimental Colours when they clobbered the Queen's Own Rifles of Canada. Under the Rules of War at that time, that was an American invasion force.

Praxus
21 Feb 04,, 05:26
it ceased during the War. Napolean was beaten and hence no more need to restrict trade. However, the cause of that war is not as simple as that as you yourself has alluded to. The Northern States wanted to end the war to resume trade.

I am well aware of the fact that the South wanted to expand territory and bring more states into the Union with Southern Settelers to get more votes in congress.

You got me on the trade but throwing the British out of New Orleans allowed us to expand out west and become as powerful as we are today.


You're misunderstanding my point. My point is that people rose up to defend their HOMES to those they perceived as a foreign invader. In other words, a sense of national identity was borned out of that war.

Yes and I understand this.


The Fenians did in fact flew their Civil War Regimental Colours when they clobbered the Queen's Own Rifles of Canada. Under the Rules of War at that time, that was an American invasion force.

They left because the US Government took their supplies not because Canada repelled them so how exactly this comes under the classification of "kicking our butts out of Canada".

Officer of Engineers
21 Feb 04,, 05:34
Originally posted by Praxus
You got me on the trade but throwing the British out of New Orleans allowed us to expand out west and become as powerful as we are today.

I would pegged American power expansion as the result of the American Civil War. The technological and industrial might puts anything pre-Civil War to shame.


Originally posted by Praxus
They left because the US Government took their supplies not because Canada repelled them so how exactly this comes under the classification of "kicking our butts out of Canada".

That's one half of it. The other half was that a superior force was being assembled and the Fenian position was no longer attainable. The Fenian Regiments were chased out.

Officer of Engineers
21 Feb 04,, 05:44
Praxus,

I think you have a misunderstanding on how Canada view herself pre-WWII. Canada was not a country but a Dominion of the British Empire, a Bastion of the British Empire. Canada saw Herself as an equal voice within the Empire but very much part of the Empire.

Very much like your States pre-Civil War days. Thus, it is not quite fitting to seperate Canada and the British Empire as if they were two different entities. They were not.

Also, could you tell me what holdings the British had in New Orleans/Louisanna? I was not aware of any pre-1812 and the Paris Treaty stated a return to all pre-war borders.

tw-acs
21 Feb 04,, 07:19
Interesting about the population rising. I guess I misinterpreted what was said in my US and Canada Geography class. The eastern provinces, or at least regions of eastern Canada are losing there populations, to cities I suppose.

Praxus
21 Feb 04,, 17:07
Also, could you tell me what holdings the British had in New Orleans/Louisanna? I was not aware of any pre-1812 and the Paris Treaty stated a return to all pre-war borders.

Yah your right, but my point was that if they won the Battle of New Orleans they would have controled the Mouth of the Mississippi. and could have gained conessions from the United States.

However if they did win they still might have pulled out once they knew Treaty of Ghent was signed

I was incorrect in saying that it allowed us to expand westward.

Anvilanthony
22 Feb 04,, 01:53
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers
Gee, after we kicked your butt out of Canada three times.

I thought you won your independence by default because the british had no use for the land of which they thought was to much of a burden hanging on to.

I thought that was hillarious with Conan and how he treated those ehh french canadians.

Officer of Engineers
22 Feb 04,, 02:34
In this age of the internet, do you really have to prove your ignorance?

Confed999
22 Feb 04,, 05:52
How about a compromise, Canada can come to visit any time she wants, just knock first, and we'll do the same. ;)

Officer of Engineers
22 Feb 04,, 06:30
Originally posted by Confed999
How about a compromise, Canada can come to visit any time she wants, just knock first, and we'll do the same. ;)

On that, the decision has been made. It's either Fortress America or Fortress North America. Guess which one Canada wants?

The simple fact is, much to AnvilAnthony's ignorance, that neither Canada nor the US can survive without each other. The trade between the two nations (they're each other's largest trading partner - Mexico doesn't even come close) and dominant players in the G7 (Mexico doesn't even rank), there's got to be free movement through the borders.

Confed999
22 Feb 04,, 07:55
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers
On that, the decision has been made. It's either Fortress America or Fortress North America. Guess which one Canada wants?

The simple fact is, much to AnvilAnthony's ignorance, that neither Canada nor the US can survive without each other. The trade between the two nations (they're each other's largest trading partner - Mexico doesn't even come close) and dominant players in the G7 (Mexico doesn't even rank), there's got to be free movement through the borders.
I've had to knock both times I've been to Canada, so my "compromise" was really to leave things as they are.

We want "fortress America", Canada has to decide what it wants on it's own. The US government will then set it's policy accordingly. It's a bitch but our countries don't allways agree, and sometimes we'll both suffer for it. I doubt our border would ever be closed for any real length of time anyway.

Trooth
22 Feb 04,, 20:54
Of course the US could always join Canada. I am sure Canda could handle another 50 provinces :).

tw-acs
22 Feb 04,, 21:43
In light of my claims of population decline, and the rebuttles to my statement, I think it would be pertinent to post this link.

US Census Bureau's International Data Base Site

http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/idbnew.html

If you click on Population Pyramidsand then you, may find watching the dynamic feature for Canada to be quite interesting.

The number of babies being born in Canada is getting lower and lower each year.

Praxus
22 Feb 04,, 21:46
that neither Canada nor the US can survive without each other.

Rediculus statement alert!

Exports with Canada only account for about 1.5% of our GDP.

The US unlike most of the world does not depend on exports for our economy to grow as exports with to the rest of the world only count for 6% of GDP.

This being said we don't need to close the border and all barriers to free trade against all countries should be torn down exluding brutal dictatorships.

Officer of Engineers
22 Feb 04,, 22:48
Originally posted by Praxus
Rediculus statement alert!

Exports with Canada only account for about 1.5% of our GDP.

The US unlike most of the world does not depend on exports for our economy to grow as exports with to the rest of the world only count for 6% of GDP.

Whoa, not exports. Imports.

ZFBoxcar
22 Feb 04,, 22:57
the US CAN survive without Canada, but it would require a restructuring of the economy and a spike in import prices as the US searches for new import locations. Loss of exports would hurt too, although as Praxus said, not fatally so.

I for one am in favour of Fortress North America and further integration of immigration and border policies. Also, if possible, we should work out whatever foreign policy disputes we have.

Personally, Im in favour of taking it further than that and having Canadian provinces become states, but this would be intollerable to most Canadians, so what Im proposing is what most Canadians actually do want.

Praxus
22 Feb 04,, 23:07
I don't want Canada to join the United States. The last thing we need is millions more bleeding heart liberals that want to take our money.

Open borders under the condition Canada makes sure it puts in measures to stop terrorists and open trade I am fine with.

Officer of Engineers
22 Feb 04,, 23:15
A result of the 11 Sept was a study in how to restructure the trade bwt the two countries. Can't recall it at the moment but done by Queen's University and Boston University.

Essentially, what the US buys from Canada is raw materials and energy (ie oil - 5 out of 6 Canadian produced oil barrels goes to the US). Replacing those in alot of cases would be cost prohibitive.

I'll use oil and the Auto Pact as the example. There is simply no way for the US to rely on oil tankers to replace Canadian oil. In the meantime, American auto industry would be extremely hard pressed to meet parts demand (based upon their Just In Time supply chain) based upon an ever diminishing buyer market (higher oil prices).

I'll leave the ripples to your logical conclusions.

The Free Trade Agreement between the two countries has gone too far for it to be dismissed as inconsequential and non-fatal for both countries.

Anvilanthony
23 Feb 04,, 08:18
Originally posted by Praxus
I don't want Canada to join the United States. The last thing we need is millions more bleeding heart liberals that want to take our money.

Open borders under the condition Canada makes sure it puts in measures to stop terrorists and open trade I am fine with.

Exactly, canada pays people(anyone) to come and live in their country. Which is why terrorist have made canada one of their most organized bases in the world.

Which is again why I have no problem with a million mexicans comming over the border, they're not passive to terrorist and have the same ideals that the US was founded under because they are religious people. The last thing we need is liberal athiests tearing this country apart like they've done so well in california.

smilingassassin
23 Feb 04,, 10:03
"Exactly, canada pays people(anyone) to come and live in their country. Which is why terrorist have made canada one of their most organized bases in the world."

We pay terrorists to live in Canada?..........
News to this canadian.

Trooth
23 Feb 04,, 10:13
Everyone's an expert on Terrorism nowadays.

Officer of Engineers
23 Feb 04,, 13:12
Originally posted by Anvilanthony
Exactly, canada pays people(anyone) to come and live in their country. Which is why terrorist have made canada one of their most organized bases in the world.

Which is again why I have no problem with a million mexicans comming over the border, they're not passive to terrorist and have the same ideals that the US was founded under because they are religious people. The last thing we need is liberal athiests tearing this country apart like they've done so well in california.

Right! Let the Drug Cartels in from the south who has killed a hundred times more people than 11 Sept - GROW THE FUCK UP!

AND SHOW ME HOW AND WHERE CANADA PAY TERRORISTS TO LIVE IN THIS COUNTRY!

Trooth
23 Feb 04,, 13:28
I would never accuse Canada of paying Terrorists. It is self-evident that Canada does not do that.

However I work for one of the worlds largest banks, and it was only in the last 6 months that we removed Canada from our "Sanctions list", derived from the Bank Of England sanctioned countries list. This was a list of countries whose nationals couldn't open or operate their accounts without further checks. The sanctions list is, of course, based on several factors - one of which being money laundering.

Officer of Engineers
23 Feb 04,, 20:27
I take no insult in that. The Canadian passport (until recently) being one of the easiest to forge.

Anvilanthony
23 Feb 04,, 20:46
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers
Right! Let the Drug Cartels in from the south who has killed a hundred times more people than 11 Sept - GROW THE FUCK UP!

AND SHOW ME HOW AND WHERE CANADA PAY TERRORISTS TO LIVE IN THIS COUNTRY!

You took me out of content like all elite canadian liberals do.

I didn't say pay terrorist I say and I quote "..pays people(anyone) to live in their country..".

This hasn't changed even after 9/11, even when your government would make changes in your immigration policy.

Which is why our president sees more of a threat from athiest canadians who have no moral obligation to life rather than mexicans who live for life by wanting to risk their lives to have a better life for themselves and their families for future generations.

ZFBoxcar
23 Feb 04,, 21:13
we dont pay people to live in our country.

What, do you think because of the weather people have to be payed to live here? LOL

Or are you exagerating the welfare state? I dont deny it exists, but you dont get money just for living here. And also, it changes province to priovince, or even city to city, as the Ontario government (Ontario gets the most immigrants) downloaded the responsiblity for welfare onto municipalities.


This hasn't changed even after 9/11, even when your government would make changes in your immigration policy.

Our immigration policy does not involve paying people to live here.


Which is why our president sees more of a threat from athiest canadians who have no moral obligation to life rather than mexicans who live for life by wanting to risk their lives to have a better life for themselves and their families for future generations.

Huh? Youre saying Mexicans are better people because they risk their lives to get into the US while Canadians don't? Maybe I got that wrong because it doesnt seem to make any sense. If I got that right, then let me tell you its because Canada is a nice place to live...whearas Mexico is...not so nice.

smilingassassin
23 Feb 04,, 21:21
Are you implying that ALL Canadians are liberals anthony?

Ironduke
23 Feb 04,, 21:53
Originally posted by smilingassassin
Are you implying that ALL Canadians are liberals anthony?
Apparently he thinks Canada is just Toronto or something.

ZFBoxcar
23 Feb 04,, 22:24
yes, if he was talking about toronto he would be close to right. 50% of the people in this city were not born in Canada, it is one of the most liberal cities on earth. Although for all that, there is surprisingly low amount of crime and violence (for a city of 2.5 million and a metro area of 5 million).

Praxus
23 Feb 04,, 23:26
Or are you exagerating the welfare state? I dont deny it exists, but you dont get money just for living here. And also, it changes province to priovince, or even city to city, as the Ontario government (Ontario gets the most immigrants) downloaded the responsiblity for welfare onto municipalities.


Welfare exspecially the means of antaining the money to provide welfare at least in my opinion is a perversion of what Governments are instituted for.

You know how Canada has price limits on drugs along with most of Europe, you ever wonder why the US makes the vast majority of new drugs?

Canadas welfare state is definatly larger then in the US relitivly speaking.



Huh? Youre saying Mexicans are better people because they risk their lives to get into the US while Canadians don't? Maybe I got that wrong because it doesnt seem to make any sense. If I got that right, then let me tell you its because Canada is a nice place to live...whearas Mexico is...not so nice.

Did you know there are less Mexican immigrants on welfare per capita then whites.

Not that it makes them better then Canadians.

Trooth
24 Feb 04,, 00:01
Originally posted by Praxus
You know how Canada has price limits on drugs along with most of Europe, you ever wonder why the US makes the vast majority of new drugs?



Does that actually follow? Drug comapnies seel their wares all over the world. I doubt the US is more unhealthy than their Canadian or European counterparts, therefore the drugs they make go for export.

Also, how much is vast?

Anvilanthony
24 Feb 04,, 00:23
Originally posted by ZFBoxcar
we dont pay people to live in our country.

What, do you think because of the weather people have to be payed to live here? LOL

Or are you exagerating the welfare state? I dont deny it exists, but you dont get money just for living here. And also, it changes province to priovince, or even city to city, as the Ontario government (Ontario gets the most immigrants) downloaded the responsiblity for welfare onto municipalities.



Our immigration policy does not involve paying people to live here.



Huh? Youre saying Mexicans are better people because they risk their lives to get into the US while Canadians don't? Maybe I got that wrong because it doesnt seem to make any sense. If I got that right, then let me tell you its because Canada is a nice place to live...whearas Mexico is...not so nice.

You know the only time I ever went to canada was to watch the yankees beat the living tar out of the bluegays. Even then in the whatever you call it dome with the retractable roof there were more new yorkers in there than canadians and I always had the impression of canadians being ungrateful or maybe that was just because of your former leader Jean Cretin who said if his country captured OBL he wouldn't hand him over to the US. Or maybe it was the booing of the US national anthem in a hockey game, I don't really know, somewhere along there.

Bottomline is I would rather have a taliban division in front of me than a canadian division behind me. I believe my government would agree with me on that.

Officer of Engineers
24 Feb 04,, 00:38
Originally posted by Anvilanthony
You took me out of content like all elite canadian liberals do.

I didn't say pay terrorist I say and I quote "..pays people(anyone) to live in their country..".

This hasn't changed even after 9/11, even when your government would make changes in your immigration policy.

Which is why our president sees more of a threat from athiest canadians who have no moral obligation to life rather than mexicans who live for life by wanting to risk their lives to have a better life for themselves and their families for future generations.

WHAT A LOAD OF CROCK!

Son, be advised that you're speaking to a former Lieutenant-Colonel of the Canadian Forces with over 17 years of experience, including combat. DON'T YOU DARE TELL ME WHAT I AM OR WHAT I AM NOT!

My people have DIED fighting alongside the USArmy in Afghanistan. We're still in Afghanistan. We've sent over 5000 Canadian military personel to fight the War on Terror. How many soldiers have Mexico sent? ZERO!!!!!!

There were over 150 Canadian Forces personel who fought in the Iraq War. How many Mexican Nationals? ZERO!!!!!

You show me. You show me with links and sources that the POTUS thinks that we're athiests; thatwe're more of a threat than Mexico. PUT UP OR SHUT UP!

Confed999
24 Feb 04,, 00:51
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers
WHAT A LOAD OF CROCK!
To say the least.


Last I heard Canada did subsidize immigration. Isn't removing those subsidies a part of your Libertarian party's platform? The thing is, the US subsidizes immigration too. There's nothing wrong with that either, as long as the money is going to people who need it and not scumbags and terrorists. I'm certain Canada isn't knowingly paying terrorists any more than the US is.

Trooth
24 Feb 04,, 00:54
Originally posted by Anvilanthony
You know the only time I ever went to canada was to watch the yankees beat the living tar out of the bluegays. Even then in the whatever you call it dome with the retractable roof there were more new yorkers in there than canadians

My word. Canadians must be scum. I can't imagine anything worse than not turning up to see a visiting baseball team. Oh the humanity! Won't someone think of the children?




and I always had the impression of canadians being ungrateful

For anyting in particular or just in general? Whenever i have been to Canada (Toronto, Montreal, Niagara and Ottawa) i have found them be pleasant and they have even said thank you to me. So i must have found a couple of grateful ones.



or maybe that was just because of your former leader Jean Cretin who said if his country captured OBL he wouldn't hand him over to the US.

Whilst it is highly unlikely that he wouldn't have handed him over, i seem to remember from somewhere that Canada was a sovereign nation that had laws, and things. Whilst i have disagreed with OofE over the exact manner in which OBL should be dealt with, i am absolutely convinced that Canada (and for that matter OofE) could deal with OBL should the need arise.



Or maybe it was the booing of the US national anthem in a hockey game, I don't really know, somewhere along there.

If i remember rightly this occured because the Canadians recognised the US anthem, which was more than a US flag bearer managed to do who held the Canadian flag upside down at a previous game.



Bottomline is I would rather have a taliban division in front of me than a canadian division behind me.


..... i can't even begin ....



I believe my government would agree with me on that.

Shall i send these comments to president@whitehouse.gov for Dubya's endorsement or will you?

Praxus
24 Feb 04,, 01:26
Does that actually follow? Drug comapnies seel their wares all over the world. I doubt the US is more unhealthy than their Canadian or European counterparts, therefore the drugs they make go for export.

What???

I'm talking about new kinds of drugs, companies need more then a couple percent profit to develope new drugs and one of the few places in the world you can make a decent profit is in the US.


How many Mexican Nationals? ZERO!!!!!


Probley one hell of a lot more then that, but they were fighting in the US Army;)

Officer of Engineers
24 Feb 04,, 01:39
Originally posted by Anvilanthony
Bottomline is I would rather have a taliban division in front of me than a canadian division behind me. I believe my government would agree with me on that.

YOUR GOVERNMENT DOES NOT AGREE WITH YOU!

Fact: 3rd Battalion, Princess Patricia Canadian Light Infantry Battle Group was attached to the 187th "Rakashan" Brigade Combat Team, 101st Division Air Assualt. 3PPCLI BG was SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR BY THE US CENTRAL COMMAND!

Fact: THIRTY US BRONZE STARS were awarded to 3 PPCLI BG for fighting the Taliban INCLUDING to two Canadian snipers who took out a Taliban bunker pinning down an American platoon (32 men).

Fact: Canadian Naval Task Group Operation Athena was the right flank to Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Fact: Canadian fighter planes were the ONLY ones outside of US planes patrolling AMERICAN airspace immediately after 11 Sept.

Fact: 3 PPCLI is now an honourary Battalion in the 187 BCT, 101st Division (Air Assualt).

Fact: You are one ignornant SOB!

Officer of Engineers
24 Feb 04,, 01:42
Originally posted by Praxus
Probley one hell of a lot more then that, but they were fighting in the US Army;)

I'm not sure what to make of that. That would make them American soldiers first and foremost and thus would that make them Mexican Nationals or American immigrants?

By the same token, there are also alot of Canadians, especially First Nations, in American uniforms although under the First Nations Treaties with both Washington DC and Ottawa, they retain their own national citizenship and tribal rights - don't ask me, I get confused trying to follow my 1st Nations people logic.

ZFBoxcar
24 Feb 04,, 01:48
Last I heard Canada did subsidize immigration. Isn't removing those subsidies a part of your Libertarian party's platform? The thing is, the US subsidizes immigration too. There's nothing wrong with that either, as long as the money is going to people who need it and not scumbags and terrorists. I'm certain Canada isn't knowingly paying terrorists any more than the US is.

I could be wrong, but I was pretty sure we didn't subsidize immigration.


You know the only time I ever went to canada was to watch the yankees beat the living tar out of the bluegays. Even then in the whatever you call it dome with the retractable roof there were more new yorkers in there than canadians and I always had the impression of canadians being ungrateful or maybe that was just because of your former leader Jean Cretin who said if his country captured OBL he wouldn't hand him over to the US. Or maybe it was the booing of the US national anthem in a hockey game, I don't really know, somewhere along there.

So thats your argument? Canada sucks because lots of New Yorkers were at the Jays-Yankees game. Nothing Chretien says can be construed as popular opinion. Most Canadians hate him. Not that everyone is so enamored with America, and if you consider that ungrateful, fine ( I do like the US, but many Canadians don't, but its not like they act on it).

And now you have a beef with the Canadian Forces too?

Praxus
24 Feb 04,, 01:51
I'm not sure what to make of that. That would make them American soldiers first and foremost and thus would that make them Mexican Nationals or American immigrants?

My point was they are not naturalized citizens, I was just facetiously making a point that there are a lot of illegal aliens in the country, which I have no problem with unless they are terrorist.

Confed999
24 Feb 04,, 02:03
Originally posted by ZFBoxcar
I could be wrong, but I was pretty sure we didn't subsidize immigration.
There are programs to provide everything from medical to housing subsidies for immigrants in the US. That's subsidizing immigration. Removing those subsidies are a big part of our Libertarian party platform too. ;)

Gio
24 Feb 04,, 03:56
Ugh, just shut up Anvilanthony! Your comments are so uninformed and ignorant i feel embarassed for you.

smilingassassin
24 Feb 04,, 04:26
Anthony I suggest you read up on current events and history before you spout off about a close allie of your country. Most of all I hope you learn some damn respect. I seriously hope all of new york isn't as ignorant as you.
While new yorkers died in the WTC, Canadian airports were swamped with Americans unable to return home and barely getting any news on what was happening other than the U.S. was attacked. We didn't kick the americans out, we fed them, comforted them and sheltered them in our own homes. If you could only visualize how many empty airliners were parked at Vancouver and Abbotsford you could acctually visualize just how swamped canada was. No one complained...not one bit. You mistake one man's (cretien) sentament as the sentament of the whole nation which shows your complete lack of brains and gonads.
Stop assuming every nation should be a clone of your nation, thats not how it works in this world. The sooner you can get that little fantacy out of your head you may acctually start to learn something.

Trooth
24 Feb 04,, 22:42
He doesn't strike me was someone who wants to learn anything. He strikes me as happy to live with his pre-conceptions and will choose small isolated examples to satisfy them.

smilingassassin
25 Feb 04,, 02:39
Truely sad to see a New Yorker as truly ignorant about the world around him like Anthony.

Confed999
25 Feb 04,, 22:11
We all tend to see only the side we want to see. It's just human nature. All any of us can do is express our views in as calm and kind a way as possible.