Americans against Canadians???

FormerCanuck

New Member
Mar 7, 2005
20
0
1
Dear Brazilian Guest:

First off, thank you for taking the time to look into other cultures. I think this is something many people simply don't bother to do. This brings me to my reply...There has always been a close relationship between Canada and the United States. They have always shared a friendly bond, sometimes impaired by the frequent appearance of liberal governments in Canada. I have the priviledge of being able to live in both countries and plan to remain in the U.S. I grew up in Canada but moved to the U.S to go to University and have been here ever since. Culturally, the two countries are NOT that far apart. Canadians will deny this but they are only fooling themselves. Almost all forms of media in Canada come from the U.S, almost all sporting rituals are the same (Hockey, Baseball, Football...American style, etc.) We drive the same cars, build our houses the same way, eat the same food, have a proportionately identical mix of religions and so on. To address the comments made about maintaining ethnic identity in Canada versus the United States, apparently Andem has not been to the world's largest Chinatown in San Francisco. He/She has obviously also not visited the various sections of large American cities like New York and Boston where groups of people from various national backgrounds exist closely together (Little Italy, Little Odessa, etc.) I will just take a moment to moot any retort that will attempt to identify this as segregation. Wake up, this is the 21st century!

To further reply to "Andem's" remarks, his facts are somewhat skewed...to the left (the Canadian way). I fear that he has been brainwashed by the government run (socialist) media outlets in Canada. Here are the facts: Health care is NOT free in Canada...in fact, it costs more than in the U.S. Canadians just don't see it because it comes out of their taxes (which generally amounts to 40% of their income). Income tax in the U.S is MUCH lower but premiums for health insurance are slightly higher. It all works out in the wash though and all the while, Americans get MUCH better quality health care. There are virtually no waiting times for minor surgeries and emergency room visits, etc. In Canada, you would have to wait over a year for knee surgery and over seven weeks to get an MRI (non life threatening issues).

Canadians often claim to be culturally independent from the U.S and claim not to care what Americans think about them. At the same time, however, they get upset when Americans don't know where Saskatchewan is and get excited when they hear someone on television talking about Canada. It is almost amusing to see what lengths Canadians will go to to deny these facts. Just watch for replies to my posting and you'll see how defensive they get....this only furthers my point.

Speaking of geography lessons, this has always been a soar spot for Canucks. If an American tourist doesn't know that Vancouver is in British Columbia and that Newfoundland is an island, they get so distraught and often reply that Americans don't know anything about Canada and that they must be uncultured or less intelligent. This child-like bickering has gone on from one end of Canada to the other. In reality, this is nothing more than hypocracy. Next time a Canadian makes a comment to this effect, ask them to name all of the States from below Manitoba down to the Gulf of Mexico (9 out of 10 will not be able to do it). While you're at it, ask a Canuck what the capital of Wyoming is....they won't know. Ask a Canadian to name the States that surround Missouri...they won't know. My point is, its up to the individual to learn these things, not the system to teach it to you. Canadians need to see both sides of the issue and realize that this is what they can do to ease their ill feelings (we're essentially all the same).

In any case, my reply might give you some insight into the real dividing issues between Canada and the U.S. (petty bickering). Canada chose not to particiapte in the Iraqi Freedom war because, despite a proud military tradition, the liberal government in Canada hasn't spent very much money on defense (defence for you Canadians) since the Korean Conflict. I have many relatives who served in WWII (for Canada) and they must be ashamed to see their country so weak, after all they sacrificed and fought for in what was a battle against tyranny (sound familiar...try Iraq). Canadians find it scandalous that the U.S. has banned Canadian beef (they are only trying to protect their own citizens as well as their own beef exports...its actually called protectionism) and Canada woudl do the same thing if reversed. This makes headlines in Canada all the while, a good chunk of Canadians go to work everyday, putting food on their tables because they work for American companies that obviously contribute to the Canadian economy. Ask a line assemblyman at a GM plant in Ontario how he feels about the American free market and he'll be short on criticism, I assure you (or at least, he should be).

I have no doubt that this will prompt some angry replies from other Canadians out there but they need to open their eyes and see what the Chretien government has done to their country. Paul Martin doesn't seem to be much better. First, they will have to admit that they DO care what Americans and other allies think of them and only then will they see the slow decline of what WAS one of the greatest countries in the world. Admit you live in the shadow of the U.S, admit that you admire the many positive aspects of American life, and certainly admit to yourselves that given the chance, you would live here in a heartbeat. The U.S. is an entrepreneur's paradise, promoting individuality, personal responsibility, and strong work ethic instead of government handouts and thus complacency. All of the right ingredients are there for Canada, they simply need to get over their petty squable with the U.S and rebuild what was once a beautiful friendship.
 

Mooseskin Johnny

Electoral Member
Dec 23, 2004
134
0
16
BC
Dear Brazilian Guest: FormerCanuck has been a bit disingenuous. The United States attacked Canada several times. That was a long time ago, but we have not always been friends. The relationship tends to wax and wane as time goes on. George Bush and his fascist friends have done a great deal to sabotage the relationship of the US with Canada, and the rest of the world.
 

peapod

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2004
10,745
0
36
pumpkin pie bungalow
Oh man 8O I am losing it around here...former canuck sounds just like canadian observer, and they both sound like girandi 8O 8O ...its like a herring ball 8O

They all the sound the same, say the same stuff, in the same way...its like being gaslighted....
 

mrmom2

Senate Member
Mar 8, 2005
5,380
6
38
Kamloops BC
Hey former canuck I can tell you sure don't know what is going on in your own backyard.I hope you love the police state bush is setting up for you and your fellow citizens.As for the iraq war being a fredom war.I thought it was about weapons of mass destruction oh thats right the U.S. is using those not the Iraqis.D.U. So just stay down there you ignorant american sounds like you fit right in
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
There has always been a close relationship between Canada and the United States.

They invaded us, so we went on a road trip and torched the White House. Sounds friendly, eh? Kennedy hated Diefenbaker, Johnson grabbed Pearson by the lapels and said, "Don't piss on my rug," Nixon referred to Trudeau as an asshole, Reagan hated Trudeau too. The reason for all of that was Canadians not playing along with the USA's violent foreign policy.

Chretien and Clinton got along well. The relationship only soured when Bush came to power and started unilaterally cancelling treaties and actively working to undermine the United Nations.

In any case, my reply might give you some insight into the real dividing issues between Canada and the U.S. (petty bickering).

It isn't petty bickering, it's a deepening divide based on political policies. The United States has been moving away from the rest of the world. I'm sure that Brazilian guest, having seen South America, including Brazil, move towords internationalism while shifting to the left, is aware of the radical and backwards actions of the Bush regime in the US though.



Canada chose not to particiapte in the Iraqi Freedom war because, despite a proud military tradition, the liberal government in Canada hasn't spent very much money on defense (defence for you Canadians) since the Korean Conflict.

Canada chose not to participate in the illegal invasion of Iraq because the US had no proof of the charges they were making. That was obviously the right decision because Bush and his thuggish little oil-patch buddies have yet to find any weapons of mass destruction. Bush was clearly lying about the intelligence he claimed to have.

Canadians find it scandalous that the U.S. has banned Canadian beef (they are only trying to protect their own citizens as well as their own beef exports...its actually called protectionism) and Canada woudl do the same thing if reversed.

The United States has ignored science and trade agreements. It isn't just beef, it's wheat and lumber and industrial hemp and a plethora of other things. The US has no respect for international agreements and laws.

Former Canuck seems to have little grasp of the actual facts. Either that or he is knowingly lying.
 

FormerCanuck

New Member
Mar 7, 2005
20
0
1
I guess I did not fully anticipate the hostility in response to voicing my opinion, although I expected some. I would say that if those who replied with such verbal "voilence" are not able to accept the opinions of others, they don't fully understand what a forum is all about.

In any case, I think I need to make a couple disclaimer statements before we proceed. First, I am very proud of who I am and where I come from. In fact, this is the reason that I care so passionately about this topic. Canada is not the same country I grew up in and it saddens me to see it fall out of favo(u)r with its only neighbo(u)r. For that matter, I am also proud of being able to live in a country (U.S) that has welcomed me for who I am and allows me to pursue all of my aspirations, if I am willing to work for them. Its not that Canada doesn't have opportunity, its just that too much government sets limits on how far people can go without running into bureacratic red tape. Secondly, contrary to assumptions made by some forum participants, I am not a Bush supporter. I do align myself with conservatives but I can think of several Republicans who would have been better suited to the Oval Office back in 2000 (Sen. John McCain, AZ). Third, just because I made statements about the Iraqi war, it does not mean that I am happy that we are there. I never supported the idea that evidence of Weapons of Mass Destruction was the only reason for embarking on this campaign. It would have been irresponsible to do so.

Ok, let's move on. I covered several topics as to why I believe tension has existed between Canada and the U.S, to varying degrees, over the years. I'd like to make an observation with respect to the responses my posting received; all of the categories I discussed (knowledge of geography, cultural diversity and integration, national defens(c)e, religion, and healthcare), the only one that was consistently hit on in those replies was politics. I think this may zero in on what Brazilian Guest was looking for in her main question. It may therefore be said that all those other things can be considerd pettty bickering, especially when we consider what the real issue really is, politics. Lets' not lose sight of that.

One person replied by outlining how certain Prime Ministers and certain Presidents did not historically get along. Well, ironically enough, this almost always occured when there were vastly different governments in power in each respective country. For example, Reagan and Trudeau not seeing eye to eye. Of course, we know that Reagan and Mulroney became best buddies and that Bush Sr. and Mulroney fish and hunt together regularly in Labrador. My point is that this is not always just a Canada-U.S thing. This is a phenonmenon that has always been present thoughout the history of nationalism, around the world. I spent a fair bit of time in Argentina and found that the Chileans and Argentines had no love lost for each other because of a very long history. However different governments came and went and relations would ease once in a while too. So what I am getting at is this; governments in both countries will come and go and we each have to accept those differences as being purely political. The one thing that will last is the legacy of how we conduct ourselves with respect to our neighbo(u)rs. I want all of you to remember this; average Americans just like average Canadians are good people. They both have families and care for their children. Most people on either side of the border would stop at nothing to help another person out, when need be. Americans will welcome you into their homes, treat you as equals, and make you feel like you are a friend. Politics should not play into this. There will always be bad apples but this is true regardless of national origin. Please remember this next time you see a car with American plates driving through Canadian cities and you start to associate them with whoever may be sitting in the Whitehouse.

I guess I'd also like to take this opportunity to respond to some of the comments posted in lieu of my last commentary. First, Mooseskin Johnny and Reverend Blair, for whatever reason, mentioned the War of 1812 in which after an attack, the "Canadians" burnt down the original Whitehouse. The facts are somewhat skewed here. Most importantly, it was not the Canadians being attacked, nor was it Canada who burnt down the Whitehouse. It was the British who retaliated against the American military. It is important to note that Canada did not gain independence from the U.K until 1867. So why did the U.S attack what is now sovereign Canadian territory? Well, because it was British and the French (who helped the U.S gain their own independence) were also involved in this campaign. Did the Americans want more territory? Probably, it was 1812 after all. Were the British positioning themselves to do the same? Perhaps...none of us were actually there. The details are too lengthy and complicated to get into here but just know, Brazilian Guest, that this was not a war between Canada and the United States as we know it today.

Also, mrmom2 wrote that he hopes I enjoy the expensive health care we have in the United States. He apparently didn't read far enough into my posting to see that I addressed that by saying that health care actually costs more in Canada but is buried in their income taxes. Don't forget, I've lived on both sides of the border. These taxes are often 20% higher that what a middle class citizen in the U.S. pays. I'll give you an example. A friend of mine in Alberta (generally the cheapest province to live in with respect to taxes) pays about $75/month for his family in health care premiums. This is in addition to the hidden amount he pays out of his income taxes. He will also be forced to endure long waiting lines at doctor's offices and especially emergency rooms, for non life threatening ailments. I pay about $90 per month in health care premiums (all tax deductible) for my whole family and pay absolutely nothing out of my income taxes. Doing some quick math, I would say that many Canadians pay more than I do, just to have health insurance. Furthermore, health care in the U.S is privatized which means, it is run like a business. Socialists think this is a bad thing but in fact, what it really means to the public is that hospitals will compete to serve you. The difference is customer service. They will not impose long waiting times for procedures and they will always treat you like you want/need to be treated. Prescription drugs are an issue in the U.S and this is something that needs to be fixed. At the same time however it is difficult to deny that the entire Canadian health care system is collapsing. Alberta recognizes this and has moved to privatize certain segments of its care structure. I suppose the moral of this argument is that nothing is perfect.

Finally to address the division in political policies, just remember a new administration is only four years away. The key is not to associate the negatives of this Whitehouse with the American people themselves. Remember that Bush did not win the popular vote in 2000 and barely won with it in 2004. Let's consider why for a moment. In 2000, Bush ran against Gore and with the public fresh off the Clinton scandal(s), etc. Al Gore did not seem a viable option. The economy was starting to decline and Americans were looking for conservative solutions (tax cuts, etc.). By the way, don't fool yourselves into thinking that Bill Clinton was responsible for U.S prosperity in the 90s. That was the after-effect of Reagan and Bush Sr. tax programs from the 80s. These things don't happen overnight. Anyway, moving forward to 2004, Bush was believed to be the lesser of two evils. Most Republicans will tell you that they consider themselves moderates and that Bush was too far to the right. I believe this too but John Kerry was the most leftist senator in Congress and his voting record showed that. Also, his campaign was never consistent and he was guilty of flipping his opinions just to get a vote. Americans were frightened by Kerry and thus we now have Bush sitting in for a second term.

It strikes me as odd that the Canadian, European, and even American media (who are also very liberal) continue to target Bush for the innacurate intelligence on WMDs and thus the decision to go to Iraq. No one bothers to consider other justifications...just that one because it was fouled up and thus a reason to point fingers. Furthermore, no one targets Tony Blair for the same thing (at least not as much)...just Bush (Bush also accepted resposibility for this). British intelligence is just as guilty for this blunder as the CIA. If I were either Blair or Bush, I would clean house in both intelligence groups and move on. The fact is, we are there now and the situation is at hand. Saddam Hussein can't hurt anyone anymore and we need to find a way to help the Iraqi people get their lives back together, in a free and democratic way. Let's face it, freedom is the most basic human element. No one will tell you that they wish to be dictated and policed into servitude. This does not mean we should impress our beliefs on them, we need to make it secure so that they may decide how to run their own country. Freedom is not free. In the meantime, allied soldiers are dying there everyday along with innocent civilians and we need to pay those families their due respect.

Please don't allow emotion to rule your thoughts and arguments. That's how wars get started. Let's use our heads here and do what we can to get along. We are all basically the same and have to respect differences in opinion...that's what truly makes us free and what will make us good neighbo(u)rs.
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
In fact, this is the reason that I care so passionately about this topic. Canada is not the same country I grew up in and it saddens me to see it fall out of favo(u)r with its only neighbo(u)r. For that matter, I am also proud of being able to live in a country (U.S) that has welcomed me for who I am and allows me to pursue all of my aspirations, if I am willing to work for them. Its not that Canada doesn't have opportunity, its just that too much government sets limits on how far people can go without running into bureacratic red tape.

There have actually been a couple of studies showing that a person has a better chance of moving up between socio-economic classes in Canada than they do in the US.

Secondly, contrary to assumptions made by some forum participants, I am not a Bush supporter. I do align myself with conservatives but I can think of several Republicans who would have been better suited to the Oval Office back in 2000 (Sen. John McCain, AZ).

If you are not actively working to defeat Bush, then you are supporting him. That's just an extrapolation of his rules, "with or against" outlook.

Third, just because I made statements about the Iraqi war, it does not mean that I am happy that we are there. I never supported the idea that evidence of Weapons of Mass Destruction was the only reason for embarking on this campaign. It would have been irresponsible to do so.

Weapons of mass destruction were the reason given, the only reason that could have posed the clear and immediate danger that Bush claimed Iraq presented, and were the only reason Bush went to war. No backing away now...George Bush and his thugs lied to the world then launched an illegal invasion. That makes them war criminals.

One person replied by outlining how certain Prime Ministers and certain Presidents did not historically get along. Well, ironically enough, this almost always occured when there were vastly different governments in power in each respective country.

Because historically the US government has been out of step with the rest of the world.

Of course, we know that Reagan and Mulroney became best buddies and that Bush Sr. and Mulroney fish and hunt together regularly in Labrador.

Mulroney pretty much handed over the keys to our country to those bastards, of course they were nice to him.

I guess I'd also like to take this opportunity to respond to some of the comments posted in lieu of my last commentary.

They weren't instead of, they were made in response to.

First, Mooseskin Johnny and Reverend Blair, for whatever reason, mentioned the War of 1812 in which after an attack, the "Canadians" burnt down the original Whitehouse.

You claimed that the US and Canada had always been friendly. You were wrong.

Most importantly, it was not the Canadians being attacked, nor was it Canada who burnt down the Whitehouse. It was the British who retaliated against the American military. It is important to note that Canada did not gain independence from the U.K until 1867.

It is also important to note that Canada was recognized as a separate territory from the United States since before the American War of Independence. The hair you are trying to split here is akin to me saying that George Washington was British until the day he died. That doesn't work.

So why did the U.S attack what is now sovereign Canadian territory? Well, because it was British and the French (who helped the U.S gain their own independence) were also involved in this campaign. Did the Americans want more territory? Probably, it was 1812 after all. Were the British positioning themselves to do the same? Perhaps...none of us were actually there.

There was a very definite movement in American politics to expand north into Canada. The British (and Canadians) were not positioning themselves to do the same, as witnessed by the fact they pulled back out of the US after they beat the US army like a cheap hound and torched the White House.

He apparently didn't read far enough into my posting to see that I addressed that by saying that health care actually costs more in Canada but is buried in their income taxes. Don't forget, I've lived on both sides of the border.

Again, studies show that medical care in the US not only costs more per capita now, but that it will still cost more per capita if we implement every single recommendation in the Romanow Report. That's without even mentioning that 40,000,000 million Americans do not have medical coverage.

Alberta recognizes this and has moved to privatize certain segments of its care structure.

Alberta is run by a red-necked moron who paid off the debt at an accelerated rate while old people ate dog food because he was too cheap to look after them.

It strikes me as odd that the Canadian, European, and even American media (who are also very liberal) continue to target Bush for the innacurate intelligence on WMDs and thus the decision to go to Iraq. No one bothers to consider other justifications...just that one because it was fouled up and thus a reason to point fingers.

It's pretty clear from all that has come out that the intelligence wasn't innaccurate, but that the warmongers in the Bush camp used only the information that would sell a plan devised by PNAC before they even came to power. George Bush and his cabinet lied to start an illegal war. Don't forget that little fact, FC...it's important.

Furthermore, no one targets Tony Blair for the same thing (at least not as much)...just Bush (Bush also accepted resposibility for this). British intelligence is just as guilty for this blunder as the CIA.

First of all, I do target Maggie Thatcher's Bastard Son. Second of all, Blair was at least man enough to admit that a mistake had been made. Third of all, he has subsequently distanced himself from Geiorge Bush.

Please don't allow emotion to rule your thoughts and arguments. That's how wars get started.

You mean like the illegal war that Bush started in Iraq, or the one he's threatening to start in Lebanon. Funny thing about Lebanon...a half million people out on the street protesting today. Many of them want Syria to leave, they just don't want Bush coming in.
 

jamie

Electoral Member
Oct 22, 2004
185
0
16
the wang
FormerCanuck said:
First, Mooseskin Johnny and Reverend Blair, for whatever reason, mentioned the War of 1812 in which after an attack, the "Canadians" burnt down the original Whitehouse. The facts are somewhat skewed here. Most importantly, it was not the Canadians being attacked, nor was it Canada who burnt down the Whitehouse. It was the British who retaliated against the American military. It is important to note that Canada did not gain independence from the U.K until 1867.

Well, you beat me to saying it, Former Canuck. :eek:ccasion5:
 

missile

House Member
Dec 1, 2004
4,846
17
38
Saint John N.B.
In 1823,President James Monroe declared the US to be the sole military protector of theWestern hemisphere.. I don't see any reason why they need our help now,after all that time doing such a fine job.
 

mrmom2

Senate Member
Mar 8, 2005
5,380
6
38
Kamloops BC
former canuck it was not me that said health care was cheaper get your facts straight before you blast somebody .got your national id card yet?Have your children been phsycologicly tested twice a year yet?Have you shown your papers yet at one of the hardend highway check points yet? you better have a look at the bills that are passing in the house down there because all the afore metioned are law have a great time in your police state.
 

jamie

Electoral Member
Oct 22, 2004
185
0
16
the wang
No, instead it uses its military as goons to promote the corporate interests of the business and political elites

Come on, Mr. B., let's be realistic for a moment. Every country/political entity on Earth, uses whatever means they want/can/have 'to promote the corporate interests of the business and political elites' that fall into line w/their agenda.
 

FormerCanuck

New Member
Mar 7, 2005
20
0
1
mrmom2: I think you've been reading George Orwell books a little too much. I'll ask you to not bring my kids into this conversation, please. I don't think that legislation aimed at adding security to the nation equates to a police state. I can assure you that the American people will not allow the terrorists to win in that respect. I will be glad however to subject myself to tighter security measures if it means my family can live peacefully. I don't think this infringes on my civil liberties either. I would however say that a boondoggle attempt to register firearms (of which I own none) in Canada is about as close as you can get to one in a free society. I still don't understand why more Canadians (like me, remember) didn't voice their outrage at the Chretien multi-million dollar gun resgistry mess. I am not arguing the issue itself, but rather how the government handled it.
Once again, it boggles my mind how some people simply can't respond without allowing emotion to enter the debate. This can be an intelligent exchange without mud-slinging.
 

peapod

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2004
10,745
0
36
pumpkin pie bungalow
George Orwell eh?????

1984 : Ministry of Peace
Now : Department of Defense

1984 : Useless statistics, incorrect economic predictions, and slanted opinions polls are presented on the telescreen as "legitimate news", to give people the impression that "things are getting better", and that all people agree with the popular way of thinking.
Now : Useless statistics, incorrect economic predictions, and slanted opinions polls are presented on the Evening news as "legitimate news", to give people the impression that "things are getting better", and that all people agree with the popular way of thinking.
 

FormerCanuck

New Member
Mar 7, 2005
20
0
1
Thank you Peapod. Its refreshing to hear someone else's interpretation of the media. I believe they are an epicenter of liberal propaganda too. I'll save everyone else the trouble....CNN is just as bad as CBC which is just as bad as BBC.

Kill your televisions!
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
RE: Americans against Can

BBC and CBC are both recognized internationally for their balanced news coverage. Fox isn't, Global isn't. CNN is criticized internationally for it's pro-American bias.

Just because they don't reflect your political position doesn't mean a whole lot, Former Canuck.