« First « Previous Comments 266 - 276 of 276 Search these comments
If “liberal†appeals to the masses, and the masses vote for the president, by the transitive property, shouldn’t we have a liberal president as well?
We do have a president that is very liberal in spending.
How on earth looking at these numbers, can anyone in the US believe that they can’t afford universal healthcare, when you are spending over 500 billion per year on defense, homeland security and Iraq an Afghanistan?
I've always said fuck the world. We should pull all, I mean all, of our troops stationed abroad and bring them home. Take the 14 aircraft carrier battlegroups and station 9 on the west coast and 5 on the east coast. Let the rest of the world fight amongst theirselves. Fuckem.
Oh, by the way, when it comes to MAD, Canada is a country with the technology and raw materials to build its own nuclear weapons from early on, if that was necessary . don't worry, if we had to, we could have done that in, oh, about 1946. Don't believe me? Check this out -
More facts on Canada's "minor" contribution in WW I -
WWII - again, canada proved worthy, check this out:
"Canada did not accept American Lend-Lease aid. Actually Canada ran its own lend-lease program for its allies called "Mutual Aid", supplying its allies with four billion dollars worth of war materiel. A further credit of a billion dollars was given to Britain."
http://www.around.ntl.sympatico.ca/~toby/ww2.html
Ever hear of the man called "Intrepid"? Check this out -
And, in case you didn't notice, US/allied actions in Afghanistan have been far more successful than those in Iraq. Check out Canada's ongoing involvement - and no, we didn't ask for you to pay our way, there or any of the many other places around the world where Canadians have been on peacekeeping missions in recent years.
Happy reading.
Ooooops.
that last link on Afghanistan should have been:
also check this out -
Happy reading!
Stanman,
all I can say is, if you think my worldview is coloured by patriotism, go look in the mirror.... Amercians set the world standard in that regard.
BTW, if Canada had needed to run our own MAD progrm in the absence of the US, we have had the technology and capabilities to do so since 1946. go back and read my previous link,
Here is the current defense picture. As we do not pretend to be a great power, and do not fund aircraft carrier battle groups for instance, it amounts to the equivalent of a US defense budget of $130 billion - hardly small potatos. No way is the US defending Canada just because Canada is only spending $13 billion per year. On a total basis, that still puts Canada in the top 15 - BTW, we are not in the top 15 based on population
http://tinyurl.com/bs9zc military - total spending
http://tinyurl.com/9rz4x gross domestic product
Here are more stats on US military waste, look at the numbers:
Stanman -
How can you say a country with 30 million people spending 13 billion on defense is measly? That still puts Canada in the top 15 countries in the world in size of our military budget, if not our population. The entire federal budget is around 110 billion this year - and that includes of course spending on health and education and foreign aid that are superior on a per capita basis to US expenditures.
I didn't say Canada could have developed a bomb on their own - I said they aided you in getting your bomb.
Most of the uranuium used to make your bombs came from Canada. The heavy water used to purify the uranium came from Trail BC. Check it out.
In other words, you may have developed the bomb, but are you seriously implying Canada is less technologically advanced than the US, or maybe North Korea or Pakistan?
If Canada wanted nuclear weapons, they could have been built in a very short period of time, so your arguments about how we somehow owe the US for protecting us are screwed up. In reality, we don't have those weapons or defences for big power political reasons - namely, the most likely military enemy of Canada is not the USSR, Japan or any other country, it is the US.
By the way, Bosnia? Canadians were there, same as you, including flying air support and on the ground.
Haiti, same thing.
Afghanistan. Same thing.
Oh yeah, we even had a couple boats down there helping you out after Hurrican Katrina because all your equipment and men were overseas.
Why you keep harping that Canada was going to be attacked by Japan or the USSR is bizarre. You are truly ignorant if you think Canada was unable to defend itself in the 1940s and 1950s.
But hey, that's your right, as an American, just say it and its got to be so....
You still haven't explained how an increase to cold war military spending levels makes sense when the adversaries (terrorists) are not armed with ICBMS, nuclear submarines or long range bombers.
Besides which, the weapons of mass destruction crap is the biggest propaganda bungle in recent US history - I mean, Saddam posed 0 that's zero, threat to the US. How about North Korea? Well, that is certainly different.
And what about Iran?
You are now fighting in Iraq when in the long run, Iran is poised to develop nuclear weapons. Maybe you invaded the wrong country, if you are concerned about WMD?
Tell you what, it would have been a lot smarter to hang onto the world's oil monetarily by paying top dollar, instead of trying to seize control of it.
IMHO.
Stanman,
you say you don't want to continue,
but you finish with questions.
My viewpoints are in no way extreme.
As far as the war in Iraq goes, I'm sure a great many Americans share them.
Don't accuse me of intellectual dishonesty, fact is, you are the one who has given up responding to facts you don't agree with.
And finally, it was you Stanman, who started the whole Canada vs the US tenor of these arguments when you made the following comments earlier in this blog. Read on:
"No offense, but are they still teaching mathematics in Canada? .....
By the way, the second link you provided has TOTALLY false numbers on the chart! Is this Canadian propaganda? And you believe that? ....
You may think that Americans are simply ignorant as your link stated. However, I find that disturbing coming from a country that is subsidized by the United States. Not only do American drug manufacturers subsidize medicine in Canada, but the US also has subsidized the defense of Canada for many decades. Canada would probably have been taken over by Japan if not for the security the US provided. Canada or certainly Western Europe would have been taken over after WWII by the USSR if not for the constant threat of the mutually assured destruction offered by the US. Similarly, the US has subsidized the protection of Japan since after WWII and South Korea since after the Korean war. So you can try to provide your BS saying the US spends too much. But if the US was not defending the above countries, those countries would have to pay for it themselves. I wouldn’t be opposed to that idea! Make Canada finally support itself. ...."
as you can see, several of the themes that have been developed and argued in this blog were introduced by you.
Stanman, you started the whole attack on Canada thing with your posts, when you didn't like some numbers I posted on your idiotic world power chest thumping military spending.
I love how you don't even try to make a comment on the Downing St Memo. You know why? Because if it's real, it shows you've got a first class liar for a President and his whole administration was in on duping the American public, and because of that, Americans with nothing at stake are now dying in Iraq.
BTW, lots of Iraquis are dying too.
Debate those facts, Stanman.
I would like to see Stanman and Tsusiat duke it out in a pool of Maple Syrup while pelting each other with cheeseburgers and debating the finer points of North American politics. I think the first point of debate, before the first burger is tossed, should be agreement that each country has the beauty of free speach that allows for their comments to be posted.
Let the burgers fly gentlemen.
Tsusiat, love reading your posts, very insightful, please keep on posting!
Do I win for longest post ever?
Perhaps. But my "Huh?" should be the shortest post ever!
« First « Previous Comments 266 - 276 of 276 Search these comments
By Randy H
Oil Shock! It now appears that the US will suffer another severe blow to its oil refining infrastructure. With this being the second major shock to the supply-side of energy in less than a month, and with oil, gas and petrol being major inputs into the US economy, how could this affect the overall US economic situation. Could inflationary energy pressures, rising interest rates, and worsening deficits finally pop the real-estate bubbles in the “frothy†RE markets?