PLXTO
Toronto Escorts

Go Home Mr. Bush

cyberbard

New member
Nov 21, 2001
681
0
0
Mississauga
FOR ONCE...and this is historical, so someone make a note in the
log...I agree with something a Federal Liberal did. Kudos to Mr.
Martin for saying no to Bush's missiles over Montreal idea.

That being said...he's still a Liberal, so I'm holding my breath a bit
for the flip flop when pressure is applied. If that flip flop
comes, I'm going to take advantage of my grandmother's Irish heritage
and leave the continent faster than you can say Yankee Doodle.

Bard
 

y2kmark

Class of 69...
May 19, 2002
18,433
5,116
113
Lewiston, NY
Bush

Awww, do we gotta get him back so soon?
 

Quest4Less

Well-known member
May 25, 2002
1,063
27
48
I hope the Liberals come to their senses and agree to take part in this program. If some nut job launches a nuke I'd like to think that there is at least SOME chance of knocking it down.
 
Why are Canadians, so reluctant to protect our country? While our part of the world has been relativly stable for 50 years , do people really think there will never be a "fourth Riech" type dictator/king/president who will begin trampling the world if the thought pleases him?
I know we have pressing domestic problems , but the investments made by governments in "high tech military" in the 50's 60's and 70's, led to many of the great electronic wonders we enjoy today.
Hopefully the days of war are coming to an end, but I doubt it.
 

danmand

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2003
46,353
4,776
113
Many canadians are against weaponization of space, which is a key element in the US' plans for hegemony.
 
So danmand..what do we do? The US is pure evil, and all other despots are therefore better?
We are a large, yet pitfully unprepared nation in the event of a serious global conflict.
I don't see how sticking our collective head in the sand and pretending nothing bad is ever going to happen to us helps.
We require some type of defence, No?
What should CANADA do?
 

Cobra1

New member
May 7, 2004
162
0
0
Canada should participate

.. if only to shape the mechanics of a defense system. Using the PAtriot or Arrow systems , the risk is that you take out the propulsion system, leaving the paylod to hit short of the target. AS the pole is still the shortest route for a China/Korea, rogue CIS, then Canada is the recipient. The US will protect itself, MExico and Canada need to ensure they dont become the "shoulder area" where intercepted missles land and cause destruction.
 

happywanderer

the chivalrous lech
Jun 12, 2002
1,542
3
0
central toronto
Although Mr. Putin seems bound to recreate (in some way) the old Soviet-like sphere of influence/intimidation and all the lovely perks that came with it... MAD, I thought that these days we are fighting a different type of war. The days of keeping the peace with Minutemen isn't exactly over, but we have to a) focus on what the threats are right now, and b) as Canadians, understand where we should put our efforts in detering those threats.
While we have to certainly keep a watchful eye on the likes of people like Kim Jung Il, I believe we are in small war scenario. Our doctrine and spending on defense should be in rhythm with who and what we are... not a multi-million (right now... insert billion later on) space defense system (SDI boondoggle). We should have a small, but extremely professional standing army, navy and airforce with a capable civilan reserve system.
The days when we were one of the larger military forces in the world (end of WW2) are long gone. Let's be rational and logical in what we do in the future. Let's buy the right weapons, not ones that we "feel" are the most politically expedient (remember the Avro Arrow).


TTFN
 

guelph

Active member
May 25, 2002
1,500
0
36
77
Don't forget the great track record with missle defence systems I can think of SCUD and Bomarc as two major flops are we heading for three.

Canada got totally ripped with the bomarc purchase. I hope its once bitten twice shy
 

Ranger68

New member
Mar 17, 2003
3,665
0
0
SDI is nonsensical. The weaponization of space is something that should be fought against.

If the US was really concerned about security, and not about their military-industrial complex, they'd find better ways to do things.

That having been said, the US may at some point be presenting Canada with a fait accompli. At some point, it may be in our best interests to go along with it, if for no other reason than to improve relations, since there wouldn't be any good reason to continue opposition.
 
Jan 24, 2004
1,279
0
0
The Vegetative State
Ranger68 said:
SDI is nonsensical. The weaponization of space is something that should be fought against.

If the US was really concerned about security, and not about their military-industrial complex, they'd find better ways to do things.

That having been said, the US may at some point be presenting Canada with a fait accompli. At some point, it may be in our best interests to go along with it, if for no other reason than to improve relations, since there wouldn't be any good reason to continue opposition.
I agree. If the US wants to waste money on putting Death Stars in orbit - that's fine with me. I frankly could care less about the "weaponization of space," beyond the fact that's there's precious little evidence that it can be made to work. I think we should go along with the States on this one just as we would with the plans of the kid on the block who keeps wanting us to help him build a tank with pipe cleaners and a refrigerator box.
 

danmand

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2003
46,353
4,776
113
Diode said:
So danmand..what do we do? The US is pure evil, and all other despots are therefore better?
We are a large, yet pitfully unprepared nation in the event of a serious global conflict.
I don't see how sticking our collective head in the sand and pretending nothing bad is ever going to happen to us helps.
We require some type of defence, No?
What should CANADA do?
North America has had no danger of being invaded for 200 years.A foregn missile never landed on North America. The dangers in the world today are different, as we all now understand. A missile shield will not help against muslim fundamentalists, HIV, SARS or what not.
Putting nuclear weapons in space only serves to enrich the military industrial complex and cement the hegemony of the US, so it can threaten everybody else.

The best defence for Canada is to help the have-nots of the world become haves.
 

Ranger68

New member
Mar 17, 2003
3,665
0
0
A better question would be, why isn't the US spending some of its MASSIVE military budget on this, instead of on SDI, since it would *clearly* increase national security much more than some ballistic missile shield?

Another question would be, is anyone else bothered by yet another broken treaty, yet another illegal action by the United States? There was an ABM treaty, if I recall correctly - don't ask the Repubs, I'm sure they haven't heard of it either. :rolleyes: Are we down to just doing whatever strikes our fancy of the day, international law be damned? Fuck you, pal, we're gonna do whatever we want?

How is this attitude defensible?
 

langeweile

Banned
Sep 21, 2004
5,086
0
0
In a van down by the river
Ranger68 said:
A better question would be, why isn't the US spending some of its MASSIVE military budget on this, instead of on SDI, since it would *clearly* increase national security much more than some ballistic missile shield?
How is this attitude defensible?
Military expenditure creates jobs.
Foreign aid has been one of the flops of foreign policies.

1) the money never makes it to the people.
2) Since the money ends up in the hands of the goverments, those goverments become independent from their population, and loose all motivation for reforms.
 

Ranger68

New member
Mar 17, 2003
3,665
0
0
Military expenditure, at the cost of foreign aid, has put the US into a debt hole it might never climb out of.

Your two assertions are typical, but pretty much faulty, of arguments against foreign aid.
 

langeweile

Banned
Sep 21, 2004
5,086
0
0
In a van down by the river
Ranger,
Again my comments don't come from a Dyer book. My stepsister happens to live in Kenia and is married to a Kenian. She has lived there for the past 15 years or so.
She has seen first hands what happens to foreign aid money. She has witnessed several attempts by well meaning nations to establish some type of agriculture there. Everything was fine until the foreign aid workers left. The fields were neglected and the natives lost interest.

If a goverment is not depended on the goodwill and tax money of it's citizen, because money to maintain themselves comes from another source. What motivation does the goverment have to follow the wishes of it's people?
People are greedy and become even more so when put in to an unchecked position of power.
 

Ranger68

New member
Mar 17, 2003
3,665
0
0
My comments don't come from a Dyer book, either.
LOL
It doesn't pay to reference authority with any of these jobbers.

Not to belittle your sister's situation, but has she kept an accounting of all the foreign aid that's come? I've seen people make fake IDs, too, but that doesn't mean that nobody has real ones. Right?

Don't pass judgement on all foreign aid, just because it doesn't always make miracles happen. You're making bad assumptions and generalizations about the goals of foreign aid.
 

danmand

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2003
46,353
4,776
113
langeweile said:
Are you willing to lower your standard of living to make this happen?
The answer is yes, not only am I willing to, I have done it.

Any place where there is a gulf between the haves and the have-nots, (and I have lived a few places like that, including the US and South Africa), violence and high rates of criminal behavior follows. I assume from your question that you don't include that in your definition of standard of living.

I chose to lower my standard of living (by your definition) by living in Canada, instead of in the US or South Africa.
 

Quest4Less

Well-known member
May 25, 2002
1,063
27
48
It's a forgone conclusion that there WILL be weapons in space eventually. Given that, would you not want to be on the side that put them there? If there are to be "death stars" in space, I'd sure want a piece of them, maybe the ability to influence the "owners".....
 
Toronto Escorts