Canada Land of the Pussies

[oldjones]

I never cease to be amazed at the readiness of some to visit a Canadian sexwork review board to insult their host country. It's been entertaining to read the opinions both reasonable and rabid. However, I'm surprised that after three pages on this tired topic I am the first to point out that crimson2002 seems completely oblivious to the only definition of "pussy" that should matter to posters on the Toronto Escort Review Board. Certainly by choosing to come here, of all places, to use "pussy" as an insult, his motives and thought processes are forever suspect.

 

[solitaria]

My opinion is that Canada has more influence and power because of British and US support than it's population or gross domestic product would suggest when compared to other, more populated, countries.
I would also argue Australia also benefits from those ties. It's a historical
result from being a colony of the former British Empire. We both were that.
The operative word being 'former' as in past tense.

How is that a slam?

It is my opinion that the standard of living of the middle class Canadian
worker benefits from your ties to the US. Yes, there is trade with
the US that benefits the US. But, it also benefits the working class
Canadian. There is also a free-flow exchange of ideas and technology
that aids the Canadians.

Am I wrong in my opinion?

Raising issues and asking questions. Don.

Your opinion isn't wrong and I agree with the observations for the most part. However when you attach it to remarks like "don't bite the hand that feeds you" you are implying that we owe the US in some way for how we have benefited from that relationship such that you think it is whiny or classless that Canadians would criticize the US too much even if it is deserving. The USA hardly does anything that isn't self-serving just like Canada and the rest of the world. The reason that the US does business with us is because of the economic gains to be had. I think Canada belongs as part of the G8 countries being a first-world nation and of course Canada wouldn't be a first-world nation if it didn't share the history and geography it does with USA and Britain* and if the USA and Britain opened the door for Canada to be a part of G8 it was only because they saw Canada as a way to weight their agenda and interests at an international table more heavily in their favor. However to suggest that we owe you something for this or that our collective morals and opinions should somehow be shaped by eternal gratitude towards the US who really are only acting in their best interest is silly and stupid (not to mention whiny and classless since you were the first to throw around those terms).


*This is just destiny though and you could say that many external factors outside the scope and control of any given country are a factor to their rise and fall on the world stage.

 

[someone]

But, I don't understand why my original statement that Canada wouldn't be
in the G8 or an original member of Nato without the support of the US or
England was off the mark.

You have a point regarding the G8. My understanding is that when Europe wanted Italy added, the U.S. wanted Canada also added to have an additional North American voice to counterbalance the additional European voice. However, it was not so much done as a favour to Canada as an attempted to make sure there was a North American “ally” to counter the additional European one.

I don’t think you can make any argument that joining NATO was a favour. At the end of WW2 Canada had (I could have the figures reversed but I don’t’ think so) the 3rd largest navy and the 4th largest army in the world. Of course, this was a wartime military that everyone knew would be reduced. Nonetheless, it was still a respectable military. Not including it to counter the Soviet threat would have been strange. Also, the U.S. and Canada were going to have to corporate in North American defence anyway.

If your real point is that Canada has benefited from the UK and U.S. as allies, I agree with you but the benefits have not been all one way.

 

[Mcluhan]

I'm an equal opportunity basher.
Fact is, I'm more likely to bash the US with our folley and
perceived military superiority. Tough to take out a terrorist cell
with a B-2 Bomber or a nuclear sub.

My comments on this thread have been even handed toward the Canadians.
But, I don't understand why my original statement that Canada wouldn't be
in the G8 or an original member of Nato without the support of the US or
England was off the mark..

It was off the mark for a couple of reasons. One, we earned the equal right to have a voice at NATO because, as much as we could muster, and could be expected the entire resources of our country went in support of Britain’s life and death survival in WWII. Imagine if you will the preposterous notion of Canadian’s having to buy butter and meat in Canada during war-time with food stamps. Especially when 80% of the population was agrarian not urban. You made it sound like the NATO membership was gratuitous – it was not. This slight makes you sound like an uninformed American with an arrogant point of view, which you surely are not. Now, from OTB we would expect such

 

[someone]

My reading of the history at the time was that Canada
wouldn't have a role in NATO. The Canadians contributed
mightely to WWII. No doubt about it. But, they weren't
considered a necessary member of NATO at it's inception.

I'm not sure what you mean by a "necessary member" as I don't think iceland has ever been a necessary member but they are also a member of NATO. My reading of the time seems to be different than yours but I will move on to the next issue you raise.

One of the more recent criticisms of Canada is that it hasn't
sufficiently funded it's military to be a contributor to NATO.
Your defense appropriations are the lowest of the original
NATO members. There have been more than a few postings
on TERB decrying your low military budget and poor
resources. You have virtually no airlift or sea capacity to
deliver supplies and material to the various operations
conducted by NATO.

I don't want to get this posting into another flameout. But,
Do you think Canada is commiting resources sufficient
to meet its commitment to NATO?

I think that you are clearly right about this issue. As I have stated in other threads (I would rather not repeat myself here) Canada does underfund its military. That should change. However, I don't think that was anticipated when it came to establishing NATO.

 

[assoholic]

..well on behalf of Canada allow me to please say. go fuck yourself, since you are no doubt some loudmouth, know it all , dickless wonder, who couldnt punch his way out of a paper bag.

 

[cyrus]

Canada is not an aggressive nation thus it does not need an aggressive military force, having said that I agree that Canada still need to increase its military spending by another point or two but only to refurbish and strengthen its existing forces including its Coast Guard . . . etc.

 

[cyrus]

That being said, I return to my original question that you didn't address.

Is Canada living up to its treaty commitment to NATO?

I'd appreciate a direct answer to my question.

Don

If you read the NATO charter invasion is not part of it.
Technically speaking both Afghanistan and Iraq were invaded, having cleared that out, I think Canada’s participation level in Afghanistan was reasonable and conciliatory!

 

[Mcluhan]

I read the Charter differently. The US was attacked.
Under the NATO Charter the signatory countries are
treaty bound to support the US in retaliating against
the attack.

That was exactly why the French, Germans, Brits,
Italians and Canada sent troops to Afghanastan.
The US retaliated for the 9/11 attacks. Their
invasion was in retaliation.

I beg to differ with you. You are wrong.

Again you are not answering my question

Is Canada living up to it's responsibilities as a NATO member?

Sooner or later someone will address that question.

Don

Here are the charts:

http://www.defenselink.mil/pubs/allied_contrib95/alliedov.html

We rank behind UK in total grant aid cumlative, but in total grant aid as a percentage of GDP we rank ahead of USA

 

[someone]

Is Canada living up to it's responsibilities as a NATO member?

Sooner or later someone will address that question.

Don

I thought "someone" did when in my last post I said we spend to little on defence . Last time I checked, the only NATO countries to spend less, as a percentage of GDP were Luxemburg and Iceland spent less as a percentage of GDP. That being said, we do contribute more (as a percentage of both GDP and the labour force) to UN opperations than the U.S. does (I posted a U.S. defense department link on this in response to one of OTB's posts some time ago). Still, Canada's clearly spends too little on defence.

 

[Mcluhan]

Than's for the reply.



This war is a war of ideas and the US and our allies are loosing that war.

It is my opinion that .....and Canada must give more support to NATO.
Don

These two ideas have little in common.

NATO was created as a counter measure to the Warsaw pact.

OBL attacked the US because of US 'interventionism' or call it by any name you like, imperialism, geo-politics, 'spreading the good word' ..pick one.

The US has weaponised it's ecomomy over time. Your country Don, like France, like the UK, like Italy has a whole sector of your economy that pumps out war machinery and sells it to other economies. Even when you spend 200 billion of taxpayers money (your money) on weapons and invasions 90% cycles back into the US domestic economy. When you invade other countries and send Japan the bill for 80 billion...where does this money go? Canada?

please...spare me these lectures....now you're starting to 'piss me off'.

Frigging hawk in a dove's mask!

 

[Mcluhan]

Don't Expand NATO! by Rep. Ron Paul

This is a good point of view on why NATO belongs to the cold war period


an outdated alliance

 

[yesterdays_man]

Americans pussies rather than Canadians?.....

I was going to post a topic asking whether Americans are pussies but saw this so that I'd add my two penn'orth. They have banned their service personnel entering London following the bombings last week....either business or pleasure. What sort of signal does that send to terrorists? If we Brits did that after 9/11 can you imagine what the US press would have to say? Pussies!!

 

[hungryfrog]

After what happened in the UK this week and after all that has occurred during the last few years and reading what I have read on this board I have to conclude that "Your country has the largest concentration of pussies on the planet".

How do you sleep at night you righteous assholes. Is it the cold weather, the political environment, or the comforting feeling that one feels when aligned with the big dog that creates so many pussies.

You are a pussy if you are:

-a person or group who gives in to a bully
-a person or group that complains about a problem and then doesn't fix the problem
-a person or group that compains about a problem and points fingers at others
-yada yada yada. The list goes on.

To those Canadians who don't fall into this category- I apologize for my rant.

-a person or group who gives in to a bully
I don't get your point?!! I believe we've stood up to the americans all 4 times they've tried to invade us in the past. But on a more recentnote, Chretien had the balls and foresight to avoid another Vietnam in Iraq knowing full well that a bunch of piss-ass, corn-dog eating, fast-food worshipping yankees would start to piss on us....
If that's us giving in to a bully, then you must be right...

-a person or group that complains about a problem and then doesn't fix the problem.
And I assume that that is a problem inherent (oops... I forgot that most yankees can't use big words...!), a problem that exists in Canada only??? I see your point though -- there certainly isn't any of that back in your good ol' US of A! "In God we Trust!"... Shit! I bet every bully and every war waging nation out there thinks God's on their side! If you want my opinion (which I'm sure you do or you wouldn't be ranting about pussy Canadians on their own forums), God must be on our side as we haven't had the need to go to war in recent times, unless it was to help out a friend on THEIR soil...

-a person or group that compains about a problem and points fingers at othersWhat can I say, we learned from our southern cousins!!!! Explain something to me - why is it that everybody gets sued in the States? A person helps out another by giving him CPR, but gets sued for braking his ribs... Now if that's not pointing fingers at others, I don't know what is...

-yada yada yada. The list goes on.
Please, entertain me some more. Do go on.

To those Canadians who don't fall into this category- I apologize for my rant.
Apology is accepted, as that what we Canadians do: we let bygones be bygones. And I apologize as well to the Americans that still have a shred of decency and the ability to conjure their own thoughts.

 

[hungryfrog]

I have to respond to this one, because I want to understand this better:

Illegal? Immoral ?

I never agreed with the original farse to go into Iraq due to WMD. This may seem barbaric, but I honestly believed that we should do it because I felt that Iraq's brutal regime should not be allowed to continue. I also feel that brutality anywhere and everywhere should be dealt with in an appropriate fashion. I think it is bad for the haves to sit back, enjoy their utopia and not strive to help others to achieve the same.

BTW: In order to preempt any liberal attacks on spirutality- I am not a religious person, as such my motivations are not religious in nature, just basic human kindness.

Alleluia!!! I have seen the light! Now, if a country like the States can walk into another, overthrow its government (however corrupted it may be), throw it back about 50 years into a newly created third world country where multiple faction go back to an unending war, than can the whole of Europe and Asia walk into the States and overthrow its corrupt and power hungry government for the good of its mindless followers???

Please enlighten me as I can't see how one differs form the other!!!

Righteousness is in the eye of the beholder. I think Bush is dangerous to the whole planet, can I just walk in and start bombing the shit out of you poor bastards? But it's for your own good, really....

 

[langeweile]

You Canadians just stay in your dream world, that just because you are nice, the terrorist will leave you alone.
Keep on dreaming.

 

[happygrump]

You Canadians just stay in your dream world, that just because you are nice, the terrorist will leave you alone.
Keep on dreaming.

Obviously you're a bit out of date.

TORONTO -- Canada is as vulnerable to terrorist attacks as London, Madrid and New York, Public Security Minister Anne McLellan said yesterday as she warned Canadians against a misguided sense of complacency...

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/serv...DISAST12/TPNational/?query=mclellan+terrorism

Could we do more? Yes, probably. Do we need to live in fear? Absolutely not. Should we go the way of the US and restrict fundamental freedoms (a la Patriot Act)? No friggin way.

 

[hungryfrog]

You Canadians just stay in your dream world, that just because you are nice, the terrorist will leave you alone.
Keep on dreaming.

Sadly, we're not that naive.

It has become quite clear, especially over the last few days, that most western countries have now been grouped as one as far as extremists are concerned. In their eyes, there is no difference between the guys who dropped the bombs on their heads, and the guys who have done nothing to prevent it. I don't agree with either sides, but as sides must be taken, we "pussy Canadians" are not given much choice.

Now is not the time to point fingers at anyone... that would be too easy.

Rather, it should be a time to try to fix this whole freakin mess that we have all be dragged into by a handfull of dominating countries who obviously don't know the meaning of multi-latteralism. It would have been easier to have avoided the whole damn thing in the first place, but what else can be done now that the US trained Bin Laden is still on the loose, or that the US backed government of Saddam Hussein during the Iran/Iraq war has opened up a brand new can of whop-ass...

Let's drop this whole freakin cowboy attitude, and let's come up with some REAL ways of fixing this whole damn thing... dropping bombs is just too damn easy, especially when the ones making those decisions are not the ones paying the price for it.

Don't get me wrong - I do feel for ALL of the soldiers around the world fighting for other people's screw-ups. I just don't agree with the "an eye for eye" approach....

 

[langeweile]

Obviously you're a bit out of date.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/serv...DISAST12/TPNational/?query=mclellan+terrorism

Could we do more? Yes, probably. Do we need to live in fear? Absolutely not. Should we go the way of the US and restrict fundamental freedoms (a la Patriot Act)? No friggin way.

a few days ago an official of the Toronto transit system, made some comments, that in my mind summed up what I was afraid of.
Unfortunately I forgot his name.

 

[langeweile]

Sadly, we're not that naive.

It has become quite clear, especially over the last few days, that most western countries have now been grouped as one as far as extremists are concerned. In their eyes, there is no difference between the guys who dropped the bombs on their heads, and the guys who have done nothing to prevent it. I don't agree with either sides, but as sides must be taken, we "pussy Canadians" are not given much choice.

Now is not the time to point fingers at anyone... that would be too easy.

Rather, it should be a time to try to fix this whole freakin mess that we have all be dragged into by a handfull of dominating countries who obviously don't know the meaning of multi-latteralism. It would have been easier to have avoided the whole damn thing in the first place, but what else can be done now that the US trained Bin Laden is still on the loose, or that the US backed government of Saddam Hussein during the Iran/Iraq war has opened up a brand new can of whop-ass...

Let's drop this whole freakin cowboy attitude, and let's come up with some REAL ways of fixing this whole damn thing... dropping bombs is just too damn easy, especially when the ones making those decisions are not the ones paying the price for it.

Don't get me wrong - I do feel for ALL of the soldiers around the world fighting for other people's screw-ups. I just don't agree with the "an eye for eye" approach....

can you enlighten me on what could have been different?

Please don't repeat the same old tired phrases, please be specific.

Leave the Taliban in power?
Ignore Saddam?