Canada isn't morally superior

ironsides

Executive Branch Member
Feb 13, 2009
8,583
60
48
United States
I like to stand up to the Americans. It's popular. -- -- Jean Chretien,



By The Ottawa Citizen


like to stand up to the Americans. It's popular. -- Jean Chretien,
former prime minister
- - -
In July 1997, then-prime minister Jean Chretien attended a summit meeting of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in Spain. While speaking with prime minister Jean-Luc Dehaene of Belgium, before the meeting began, Mr. Chretien made some candid comments about American foreign policy. "All the [American] politicians would be in prison ... [in] your country and my country," he stated, because, "they sell their votes." He argued that the expansion of NATO's membership had nothing to do with "world security" and instead was driven by the desire of the Clinton administration to buy votes domestically.
What Chretien did not realize was that he was speaking into an open mike and that his comments were being picked up by the media. While some might be tempted to dismiss the remarks as the type of chatter that might result from political frustration over this or that issue, they nevertheless expose an anti-American tendency long evident in Canadian international policy. Indeed, Chretien bluntly indicated that he regarded anti-Americanism as politically useful. "I like to stand up to the Americans. It's popular," he told his Belgian counterpart. He bragged that on the issue of Cuba, for instance, "I was the first one to stand up. And people like that." He did acknowledge, however, that, "you have to be very careful because they're our friends."
This mentality is hardly unique to the former prime minister. Prime minister Paul Martin played to the same sentiment in his decision to reject a Canadian role in ballistic-missile defence. Anti-Americanism was also a prominent theme in the Liberal Party's 2005-06 election campaign. While this may be counterproductive in terms of advancing Canadian interests, Jack Granatstein has noted that Canadian "political and cultural elites continue to use anti-Americanism for their own purposes."
Canada isn't morally superior

hmmmmmm
 

Icarus27k

Council Member
Apr 4, 2010
1,508
7
38
Right. Well, the US is more powerful than most other countries, and with power comes responsibility. Getting criticized for shirking that responsibility is okay.

With that said, anti-Americanism can be irrational, especially when it's directed at ordinary Americans who have nothing to do with the US government except living under it.
 

Praxius

Mass'Debater
Dec 18, 2007
10,609
99
48
Halifax, NS & Melbourne, VIC
So? The US uses Anti-Canadiasm and Anti-Mexicasm (or whatever) for their own political gains as well, like constantly blaming Mexico for taking their jobs or illegally immigrating, or using Canada as some sort of hub for terrorism..... Nothing new.

The only difference I see is that when our politicians use anti-Americanism by not agreeing to various programs or plans that benefit the US, it's done for good and justified reasons which much of the rest of the population agrees with.

Nobody wanted to go to Iraq and not many people wanted to join Bush in his Star Wars plans. Jean said he held such a position because "It's Popular" and you think that's a bad thing? Funny... I thought our politicians were supposed to do what the majority of the population wants them to do.... if it's popular to do something based on the majority of our population, then doesn't that make sense as a politician?

Besides.... Morally Superior compared to what?
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,336
113
Vancouver Island
Right. Well, the US is more powerful than most other countries, and with power comes responsibility. Getting criticized for shirking that responsibility is okay.

With that said, anti-Americanism can be irrational, especially when it's directed at ordinary Americans who have nothing to do with the US government except living under it.

There are times when dealing with American tourists makes you want to build a wall at the border to keep them out. The problem is that it only takes a couple of obnoxious ones to label the whole bunch.
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
847
113
69
Saint John, N.B.
Interesting article, and absolutely dead on.

I noticed it was from March of 2006.

I think Harper has done an excellent job so far in foreign affairs, especially when compared to the former Liberal government.....he has somewhat repaired relations with the USA, without being slavish about it, he has been consistent in his support for Israel, he has ceased the embarassing and never-ending kissing of fascist arse in China, and in the UN......we have been diplomatically hostile to the lunatics in Iran..........and Harper has stepped up to the plate rapidly and effectively in disasters like Haiti........

Full points.....
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
847
113
69
Saint John, N.B.
There are times when dealing with American tourists makes you want to build a wall at the border to keep them out. The problem is that it only takes a couple of obnoxious ones to label the whole bunch.

I have never had a problem with Americans........here or there.

On the very rare occasion that I have been down in the States, I have been very impressed with the friendliness and hospitality of the average American.
 

YukonJack

Time Out
Dec 26, 2008
7,026
73
48
Winnipeg
"There are times when dealing with American tourists makes you want to build a wall at the border to keep them out. The problem is that it only takes a couple of obnoxious ones to label the whole bunch."

How true!

Mind you, it goes the same way how Americans got their opinions about Canada by obnoxious Canadian tourists.

As a frequent visitor to Florida and Arizona, I always make a special effort to make the favourite riddle among Americans false:

What if the difference between a Canadian and a canoe? A canoe tips.
 

earth_as_one

Time Out
Jan 5, 2006
7,933
53
48
Right. Well, the US is more powerful than most other countries, and with power comes responsibility. Getting criticized for shirking that responsibility is okay.

With that said, anti-Americanism can be irrational, especially when it's directed at ordinary Americans who have nothing to do with the US government except living under it.

The Bush administration commited a war crime when they misled the American people into an unproked war with Iraq which has resulted in about a million mostly innocent deaths during their first term in office. Tens of thousands of Iraqi soldiers (mostly involuntary conscripts) were killed in the first few weeks. The first and second seige of Fallujah laid waste to an entire city and most of the inhabitants, even though most of the residents were hostile toward the Hussein regime. In response to these war crimes, the American people marginally re-elected the criminals responsible for all this death and destruction.

I recognize that millions of Americans did not support these criminals, but a slim majority did. Now that the government has changed, I see no sign the new government will hold the people responsible for their actions. I am unaware of any significant grassroot movement in the US demanding justice.

The American government provides billions in economic and military aid each year tosupport a brutal dictatorship in Egypt. This government oppresses and tortures its people and was frequently used by the Bush regime to outsource torture and I'm not talking about just waterboarding.

The US record regarding Israel is appalling. This country tortures and oppresses millions of people who had the misfortune of living here before the US, Canada and other Western nations awarded their land to Jewish refugees fleeing the horror of Nazi Europe. Canada is not innocent regarding Israeli crimes against humanity either but at least we aren't providing billions in economic and military aid each year. The US routinely blocks sanctions against which might pressure Israel to alleviate the suffering of millions of people.

Whether the US punishes countries for committing war crimes, crimes against humanity has little to do with humanitarian reasons. At the same time as the US government was priming the American people for an unprovoked war against Iraq, a genocidal civil war which killed about five million people was taking place in the Democratic Republic of Congo. In the previous years before the 2003 US led invasion of Iraq, human rights groups and even the US state department blamed the Iraqi government for several hundred deaths, nearly all people convicted of crimes.

Don't get me wrong. I never supported the Hussein regime in Iraq. But I was against them back in the 1980's when they committed most of their war crimes and crimes against humanity and were American allies, not twenty years later, unlike the majority of American people who supported Hussein in the 80's.

Overall, I'd say Canada and Canadians are relatively more moral than the US, but we are hardly guilt free.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Praxius

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Just can't resist turning every thread into a "Hate the Joos and the Great Satan" shyte fest eh eao?

Speaking of morally superior. Anyone that consistently ignores reality in defense of terrorist organizations, neo Nazism and the subjugation of women, really isn't qualified to comment on anyone else's moral position. So that leaves you opinion on it in the trash bin.
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
847
113
69
Saint John, N.B.
.............................The American government provides billions in economic and military aid each year tosupport a brutal dictatorship in Egypt. This government oppresses and tortures its people and was frequently used by the Bush regime to outsource torture and I'm not talking about just waterboarding.....................

Absolutely!

I agree completely.....

Unfortunately, everything else in your post was unmitigated horse pucky, so I relegated it to the garbage, where it belongs.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
108,901
11,182
113
Low Earth Orbit
Egypt is the prime example of how a regime can do what it pleases to it's own people as long as it bows the the west politically by claiming religious tolerance and allowing MFO and 721st Air Mobility Operations Group, Cairo on their soil.
 

earth_as_one

Time Out
Jan 5, 2006
7,933
53
48
The US and many Americans have done many great things which benefit the rest of the world. But the question so many Americans asked after 9/11 can't be honestly answered without mentioning Israel.

For example:
"Why do they hate us?" asked President Bush in his speech to Congress last Thursday night. It is a question that has ached in America's heart for the past two weeks....

'Why do they hate us?' / The Christian Science Monitor - CSMonitor.com
But it could also include the US record regarding this list of despots, that the US supported at one time or another:

Abacha, General Sani - Nigeria
Amin, Idi - Uganda
Banzer, Colonel Hugo - Bolivia
Batista, Fulgencio - Cuba
Bolkiah, Sir Hassanal - Brunei
Botha, P.W. - South Africa
Branco, General Humberto - Brazil
Cedras, Raoul - Haiti
Cerezo, Vinicio - Guatemala
Chiang Kai-Shek - Taiwan
Cordova, Roberto Suazo - Honduras
Christiani, Alfredo - El Salvador
Diem, Ngo Dihn - Vietnam
Doe, General Samuel - Liberia
Duvalier, Francois - Haiti
Duvalier, Jean Claude - Haiti
Fahd bin'Abdul-'Aziz, King - Saudi Arabia
Franco, General Francisco - Spain
Hassan II - Morocco
Marcos, Ferdinand - Philippines
Martinez, General Maximiliano - El Salvador
Mobutu Sese Seko - Zaire
Noriega, General Manuel - Panama
Ozal, Turgut - Turkey
Pahlevi, Shah Mohammed Reza - Iran
Papadopoulos, George - Greece
Park Chung Hee - South Korea
Pinochet, General Augusto - Chile
Pol Pot - Cambodia
Rabuka, General Sitiveni - Fiji
Montt, General Efrain Rios - Guatemala
Salassie, Halie - Ethiopia
Salazar, Antonio de Oliveira - Portugal
Somoza, Anastasio Jr. - Nicaragua
Somoza, Anastasio, Sr. - Nicaragua
Smith, Ian - Rhodesia
Stroessner, Alfredo - Paraguay
Suharto, General - Indonesia
Trujillo, Rafael Leonidas - Dominican Republic
Videla, General Jorge Rafael - Argentina
Zia Ul-Haq, Mohammed - Pakistan
 

Liberalman

Senate Member
Mar 18, 2007
5,623
35
48
Toronto
I like to stand up to the Americans. It's popular. -- -- Jean Chretien,



By The Ottawa Citizen


like to stand up to the Americans. It's popular. -- Jean Chretien,
former prime minister
- - -
In July 1997, then-prime minister Jean Chretien attended a summit meeting of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in Spain. While speaking with prime minister Jean-Luc Dehaene of Belgium, before the meeting began, Mr. Chretien made some candid comments about American foreign policy. "All the [American] politicians would be in prison ... [in] your country and my country," he stated, because, "they sell their votes." He argued that the expansion of NATO's membership had nothing to do with "world security" and instead was driven by the desire of the Clinton administration to buy votes domestically.
What Chretien did not realize was that he was speaking into an open mike and that his comments were being picked up by the media. While some might be tempted to dismiss the remarks as the type of chatter that might result from political frustration over this or that issue, they nevertheless expose an anti-American tendency long evident in Canadian international policy. Indeed, Chretien bluntly indicated that he regarded anti-Americanism as politically useful. "I like to stand up to the Americans. It's popular," he told his Belgian counterpart. He bragged that on the issue of Cuba, for instance, "I was the first one to stand up. And people like that." He did acknowledge, however, that, "you have to be very careful because they're our friends."
This mentality is hardly unique to the former prime minister. Prime minister Paul Martin played to the same sentiment in his decision to reject a Canadian role in ballistic-missile defence. Anti-Americanism was also a prominent theme in the Liberal Party's 2005-06 election campaign. While this may be counterproductive in terms of advancing Canadian interests, Jack Granatstein has noted that Canadian "political and cultural elites continue to use anti-Americanism for their own purposes."
Canada isn't morally superior

hmmmmmm

Chretian wasn't anti-American he is pro-Canadian.

Any Canadian Prime Minister has to represent Canadian interest first.

At the same time America was breaking their free trade commitments on a regular bases so Chretian is supposed to kiss their boots I don't think so and if he did kiss American boots he would be viewed as a Conservative.
 

Icarus27k

Council Member
Apr 4, 2010
1,508
7
38
earth_as_one,

I find myself torn between whether the US is "supporting" regimes and whether the US is just "having diplomatic relations" with regimes.

Take Saddam Hussein's Iraq for example. If instead of invading Iraq in 2003, the US persued diplomacy with Iraq, even fighting to end UN sanctions, would that be a case of the US supporting the Hussein regime?
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Chretian wasn't anti-American he is pro-Canadian.

Any Canadian Prime Minister has to represent Canadian interest first.

At the same time America was breaking their free trade commitments on a regular bases so Chretian is supposed to kiss their boots I don't think so and if he did kiss American boots he would be viewed as a Conservative.
I guess the facts just don't mesh your ideology eh Libby?

 

Liberalman

Senate Member
Mar 18, 2007
5,623
35
48
Toronto
earth_as_one,

I should've find myself torn between whether the US is "supporting" regimes and whether the US is just "having diplomatic relations" with regimes.

Take Saddam Hussein's Iraq for example. If instead of invading Iraq in 2003, the US persued diplomacy with Iraq, even fighting to end UN sanctions, would that be a case of the US supporting the Hussein regime?

Bush Jr. miscalculated with Iraq big time.
 

Icarus27k

Council Member
Apr 4, 2010
1,508
7
38
Bush Jr. miscalculated with Iraq big time.

Right. But I'm thinking in more abstract terms about what's supporting a brutal regime and what's not. Is the US having an ambassador in Egypt an example of the US supporting Egypt's human rights violations? What would be the right thing for the US to do with a country that is somehow considered bad? Would it be something in between (1) giving them weapons and (2) overthrowing this bad country's government, either through invasion or special ops?

Some Americans consider the overthrowing of a government thing to be an act of charity. That is, actually confronting an oppressive regime. (Not me, but others see it that way.)