Stop jerking Canada around


Tecumsehsbones
+1
#1
By Charles Krauthammer, Published: January 23


Fixated as we Americans are on Canada’s three most attention-getting exports — polar vortexes, Alberta clippers and the antics of Toronto’s addled mayor — we’ve somewhat overlooked a major feature of Canada’s current relations with the United States: extreme annoyance.

Last week, speaking to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Canada’s foreign minister calmly but pointedly complained that the United States owes Canada a response on the Keystone XL pipeline. “We can’t continue in this state of limbo,” he sort of complained, in what for a placid, imperturbable Canadian passes for an explosion of volcanic rage.

Canadians may be preternaturally measured and polite, but they simply can’t believe how they’ve been treated by President Obama — left hanging humiliatingly on an issue whose merits were settled years ago.

Canada, the Saudi Arabia of oil sands, is committed to developing this priceless resource. Its natural export partner is the United States. But crossing the border requires State Department approval, which means the president decides yes or no.

After three years of review, the State Department found no significant environmental risk to Keystone. Nonetheless, the original route was changed to assuage concerns regarding the Ogallala Aquifer. Obama withheld approval through the 2012 election. To this day he has issued no decision.

The Canadians are beside themselves. After five years of manufactured delay, they need a decision one way or the other because if denied a pipeline south, they could build a pipeline west to the Pacific. China would buy their oil in a New York minute.

Yet Secretary of State John Kerry fumblingly says he is awaiting yet another environmental report. He offered no decision date.
If Obama wants to cave to his environmental left, fine. But why keep Canada in limbo? It’s a show of supreme and undeserved disrespect for yet another ally. It seems not enough to have given the back of the hand to Britain, Israel, Poland and the Czech Republic, and to have so enraged the Saudis that they actually rejected a U.N. Security Council seat — disgusted as they were with this administration’s remarkable combination of ****lessness and highhandedness. Must we crown this run of diplomatic malpractice with gratuitous injury to Canada, our most reliable, most congenial friend in the world? And for what? This is not a close call. The Keystone case is almost absurdly open and shut.

Even if you swallow everything the environmentalists tell you about oil sands, the idea that blocking Keystone would prevent their development by Canada is ridiculous. Canada sees its oil sands as a natural bounty and key strategic asset. Canada will not leave it in the ground.

Where’s the environmental gain in blocking Keystone? The oil will be produced and the oil will be burned. If it goes to China, the Pacific pipeline will carry the same environmental risks as a U.S. pipeline.

And Alberta oil can still go to the United States, if not by pipeline then by rail, which requires no State Department approval. That would result in far more greenhouse gas emissions — exactly the opposite of what the environmentalists are seeking.
Moreover, rail can be exceedingly dangerous. Last year a tanker train derailed and exploded en route through Quebec. The fireball destroyed half of downtown Lac-Megantic, killing 47, many incinerated beyond recognition.

This isn’t theoretical environmentalism. This is not a decrease in the snail darter population. This is 47 dead human beings. More recently, we’ve had two rail-oil accidents within the United States, one near Philadelphia and one in North Dakota.

Add to this the slam-dunk strategic case for Keystone: Canadian oil reduces our dependence on the volatile Middle East, shifting petroleum power from OPEC and the killing zones of the Middle East to North America. What more reliable source of oil could we possibly have than Canada?

Keystone has left Canada very upset, though characteristically relatively quiet. Canadians may have succeeded in sublimating every ounce of normal human hostility and unpleasantness by way of hockey fights, but that doesn’t mean we should take advantage of their good manners.

The only rationale for denying the pipeline is political — to appease Obama’s more extreme environmentalists. For a president who claims not to be ideological, the irony is striking: Here is an easily available piece of infrastructure — privately built, costing government not a penny, creating thousands of jobs and, yes, shovel-ready — and yet the president, who’s been incessantly pushing new “infrastructure” as a fundamental economic necessity, can’t say yes.

Well then, Mr. President, say something. You owe Canada at least that. Up or down. Five years is long enough.

Charles Krauthammer: Stop kicking Canada around - The Washington Post

The funny part is that Krauthammer is the kind of right-winger who usually demonises "our most reliable, most congenial friend in the world" as an example of the dope-smoking, gay-married, politically-correct, socialist nightmare that we must stop at all costs.
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
+2
#2
Interesting article, although despite there being no definitive answer on KXL, some of the fall out from that delay has resulted in 2 new lines being proposed (1 to the East and 1 to the West).

I believe that had KXL been moved through the chain of command (consideration) at a normal pace, those other 2 lines may have never been proposed or possibly even died on the vine
 
Locutus
#3
obama...he sure showed us, boy oh boy.
 
El Barto
#4
Yup , this is one of those topics you don't know where to stand on
 
mentalfloss
No Party Affiliation
+3
#5  Top Rated Post
This is what happens when your country's economy is fundamentally dependent on another's economy.
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
+1
#6
Northern Gateway and Energy East will have a strong impact on that situation
 
Locutus
+1
#7
...and obongo will be gone soon anyway.

We'll always have the Energy Sands.
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
+2
#8
Very true, however the benefits and/or consequences of the decisions he made will last for a long time to come
 
petros
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

Interesting article, although despite there being no definitive answer on KXL, some of the fall out from that delay has resulted in 2 new lines being proposed (1 to the East and 1 to the West).

I believe that had KXL been moved through the chain of command (consideration) at a normal pace, those other 2 lines may have never been proposed or possibly even died on the vine

They were all on the table at the same time.
 
EagleSmack
+2
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

Very true, however the benefits and/or consequences of the decisions he made will last for a long time to come

That is true.

Another chapter of this administration's disastrous legacy.
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
+1
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

They were all on the table at the same time.

Energy East and Northern Gateway are being pushed through via the PM... That was not in the cards when KXL was believed to have a chance. I'll wager that the TransCanada p/l will be operable before the EPA in the US is able to provide the go-ahead to KXL.

The game changer here is that Western crude will be on the Brent market.. No discounts anymore
 
taxslave
No Party Affiliation
#12
I'm betting on Energy east before Northern Gateway. Despite the massive distrust of Eastern politicians by anybody that isn't one it will be politically easier to pass in Canada.
Northern Gateway would have a far better chance of green light if it was to go to PR. Rupert instead of Kitimat. Much closer to outside waters.
 
petros
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

Energy East and Northern Gateway are being pushed through via the PM... That was not in the cards when KXL was believed to have a chance. I'll wager that the TransCanada p/l will be operable before the EPA in the US is able to provide the go-ahead to KXL.

The game changer here is that Western crude will be on the Brent market.. No discounts anymore

Northern Gateway Was planned along with AP Gateway.
 
damngrumpy
No Party Affiliation
+1
#14
Personally I hope Obama continues to say nothing. That will mean an east/west
pipeline and the demand for refineries. We will sell finished product for real value
instead of sending it south to a US Refinery and out of America for export where
they make the money. I am not against pipelines at all they are safer than rail.
I am against us shipping raw resources anywhere when we need the manufactured
and refinery jobs right here in Canada. We can sell finished product and make
a better life for Canadians
 
Zipperfish
No Party Affiliation
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by TecumsehsbonesView Post

By Charles Krauthammer, Published: January 23


Fixated as we Americans are on Canada’s three most attention-getting exports — polar vortexes, Alberta clippers and the antics of Toronto’s addled mayor — we’ve somewhat overlooked a major feature of Canada’s current relations with the United States: extreme annoyance.

Fail. Didn't mention Justin Bieber.



Quote:

The only rationale for denying the pipeline is political

Yes. And all politics is local. What Canada thinks about it has bugger all to do with it in Obama's deliberaitons.



Quote:

The funny part is that Krauthammer is the kind of right-winger who usually demonises "our most reliable, most congenial friend in the world" as an example of the dope-smoking, gay-married, politically-correct, socialist nightmare that we must stop at all costs.

Yes, unless it suits his needs to see Canada otherwise.
 
karrie
No Party Affiliation
+1
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalflossView Post

This is what happens when your country's economy is fundamentally dependent on another's economy.



Our economy isn't dependent on them, our security is. We could easily sell to other countries, but if we alienate our neighbour, we risk them not having our back.
 
JLM
No Party Affiliation
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by damngrumpyView Post

Personally I hope Obama continues to say nothing. That will mean an east/west
pipeline and the demand for refineries. We will sell finished product for real value
instead of sending it south to a US Refinery and out of America for export where
they make the money. I am not against pipelines at all they are safer than rail.
I am against us shipping raw resources anywhere when we need the manufactured
and refinery jobs right here in Canada. We can sell finished product and make
a better life for Canadians


Damn right- glad to hear some common sense in a day and age when there isn't much! -
 
L Gilbert
No Party Affiliation
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by TecumsehsbonesView Post

By Charles Krauthammer, Published: January 23
Fixated as we Americans are on Canada’s three most attention-getting exports — polar vortexes, Alberta clippers and the antics of Toronto’s addled mayor — we’ve somewhat overlooked a major feature of Canada’s current relations with the United States: extreme annoyance.
Last week, speaking to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Canada’s foreign minister calmly but pointedly complained that the United States owes Canada a response on the Keystone XL pipeline. “We can’t continue in this state of limbo,” he sort of complained, in what for a placid, imperturbable Canadian passes for an explosion of volcanic rage.
Canadians may be preternaturally measured and polite, but they simply can’t believe how they’ve been treated by President Obama — left hanging humiliatingly...

Quote has been trimmed, See full post: View Post
lol Funny stuff.
 
taxslave
No Party Affiliation
+1
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by damngrumpyView Post

Personally I hope Obama continues to say nothing. That will mean an east/west
pipeline and the demand for refineries. We will sell finished product for real value
instead of sending it south to a US Refinery and out of America for export where
they make the money. I am not against pipelines at all they are safer than rail.
I am against us shipping raw resources anywhere when we need the manufactured
and refinery jobs right here in Canada. We can sell finished product and make
a better life for Canadians

Are you willing to have a refinery built near you?
 
darkbeaver
Republican
+2
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

Our economy isn't dependent on them, our security is. We could easily sell to other countries, but if we alienate our neighbour, we risk them not having our back.

Jesiss F Krust , not having our back! That's what I bean talking about for years and years with respect to them. A back is something they always stab in the end. Who would be hard pressed to fill a scribbler with the names of betrayed and stabbed (multiple times) best friends and neighbours of uncle sham, who? IMO
Our security is our economy.
 
BaalsTears
-1
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by damngrumpyView Post

Personally I hope Obama continues to say nothing. That will mean an east/west
pipeline and the demand for refineries. We will sell finished product for real value
instead of sending it south to a US Refinery and out of America for export where
they make the money. I am not against pipelines at all they are safer than rail.
I am against us shipping raw resources anywhere when we need the manufactured
and refinery jobs right here in Canada. We can sell finished product and make
a better life for Canadians

That would be the smart move...from a Canadian standpoint.
 

Similar Threads

27
stop racism in canada
by stopracismcanada | Jul 16th, 2009
13
Microsoft Canada helps to stop Child Porn
by kden604 | Apr 11th, 2005
no new posts