researchok said:
On grounds of America not even respecting NAFTA... *cough* soft wood lumber *cough*
Would you die for your country?
- Thread starter Haggis McBagpipe
- Start date
On grounds of America not even respecting NAFTA... *cough* soft wood lumber *cough*
War over softwood lumber? I thought we were into sanctions now.
Sanctions could be enforced by the UN. They could also be tageted at the American military-industrial complex, at least to start, then move up to environmental concerns etc..
Even George Bush can be brought to heel...look how quickly he dropped the steel tarrif when Britain promised to target vulnerable states.
I keep hearing that democracies don't go to war with each other. Why not?
Sanctions could be enforced by the UN. They could also be tageted at the American military-industrial complex, at least to start, then move up to environmental concerns etc..
Even George Bush can be brought to heel...look how quickly he dropped the steel tarrif when Britain promised to target vulnerable states.
I keep hearing that democracies don't go to war with each other. Why not?
Hey!
I think we lost our chance at winning any war when we began
to sell our softwood as furniture and 2x4's.
We should of just manufactured bow and arrows with our
softwood.
I bet the American's would take notice then.
Calm
Because democracies TALK before they gotyo war or lettings getout of hand.
Not necessarily a bad thing.
Not necessarily a bad thing.
And yet the US has aided in the overthrow of democratically elected leaders in South America. Are secret wars not wars?
Good Morning, Rev!
They are, and youre right. The rationale was that they were overthrowing repressive regimes (no, I dont always agree!) many were of course, democratically elected.
The 'looking in hindsight' mirror, I think you'll also find a very different face on US foreign policy. The 'old guard' for the most part is gone. They were the relics of the WW2 era-- that is, they saw Hitler democratically elected and then abrogate the German constitution, etc etc. I think that in no small measure influenced them, as well as the 'sky is falling' anti communists who's religion was anti communism.
But I do agree, those episodes were not shing moments for US foreign policy.
They are, and youre right. The rationale was that they were overthrowing repressive regimes (no, I dont always agree!) many were of course, democratically elected.
The 'looking in hindsight' mirror, I think you'll also find a very different face on US foreign policy. The 'old guard' for the most part is gone. They were the relics of the WW2 era-- that is, they saw Hitler democratically elected and then abrogate the German constitution, etc etc. I think that in no small measure influenced them, as well as the 'sky is falling' anti communists who's religion was anti communism.
But I do agree, those episodes were not shing moments for US foreign policy.
The Bush era isnt either. But that's a different story. I honestly, had alot of respect for the US under the Clinton administration. But only after 1 year, of bush being in power, that respect almost vanished. Iraq, pretty much killed any respect left. Try to understand research, that its the same case for most of us here. We will, most likely continue, to dislike America, as long Bush like presidents are elected.
There's alot of things I dislike about the US, but when does things are being forced upon others, in unjustified wars, its at that moment that my respect starts diminishing(sp?).
There's alot of things I dislike about the US, but when does things are being forced upon others, in unjustified wars, its at that moment that my respect starts diminishing(sp?).
Well, Im no great fan of Bush-- that may surprise you.
Nonetheless at this point, I have to say the jury is still out on the matter as it relates to his overall foreign policy.
I do admit as well, to being uncomfortable with some aspects of the Patriot Act.
I too, liked Clinton, save the Paula Jones matter-- that he tried to use the office to preclude her from going to court was troubling . Lewinsky was a waste of time and Ken Starr allowed himself to be manipulated by hardcore Republicans. The impeachment proceedings were ridiculous. Ah, politics!
In any case, disliking American policy is one thing-- to take it out on Americans (Canadians, such as myself who work down here, as some have done) is quite another.
Im not sure Kerry/Edwards will be the panacea many think they will. I think there will be cosmetic changes, but not really substantive ones.
Im curious-- what will ittake for the dems to get elected, in your opinion?
Nonetheless at this point, I have to say the jury is still out on the matter as it relates to his overall foreign policy.
I do admit as well, to being uncomfortable with some aspects of the Patriot Act.
I too, liked Clinton, save the Paula Jones matter-- that he tried to use the office to preclude her from going to court was troubling . Lewinsky was a waste of time and Ken Starr allowed himself to be manipulated by hardcore Republicans. The impeachment proceedings were ridiculous. Ah, politics!
In any case, disliking American policy is one thing-- to take it out on Americans (Canadians, such as myself who work down here, as some have done) is quite another.
Im not sure Kerry/Edwards will be the panacea many think they will. I think there will be cosmetic changes, but not really substantive ones.
Im curious-- what will ittake for the dems to get elected, in your opinion?
No idea... I don't follow American Internal politics much. So I can't tell you what they would have to do to get the American public to vote for them. All that intrests me, is foreign policy. Anything but Bush, is pretty much acceptable to me.
Underdtood.
But don't look for any really big chages, foreign policy wise.
At least, thats the word down here.
But don't look for any really big chages, foreign policy wise.
At least, thats the word down here.
I don't think that a lot of people who follow American politics are expecting much change if/when Kerry gets elected. He looks a lot like another Clinton to me...pretty damned far to the right.
On the other hand I think Edwards is a lot more honest than anybody who has hit the White House since Carter, and I think he could be very influential in determining domestic policy, especially as it pertains to the poor. That will undoubtedly have a spill-over effect into foreign policy because of trade and the overwhelming number of poor Americans who join the military in an attempt to get an education and better their lot in life.
Most important of all, I think the election of Kerry/Edwards would signal a move by the American people to becoming more globally influenced militarily and in matters of aid while becoming slightly more protectionist in matters of trade. That will hurt Canada in the short run, but will be an advatage to us as the legacy of American debt and over-all economic mismanagement begin to take their toll.
What would it take for Kerry to win the next election? Not much. Bush is increasingly in trouble. Every body bag that comes back from Iraq, every lie revealed, every new scandal, is a boon to Kerry. Cheney still might get indicted in France. Kenny lay is going to end up on the stand before November. Moore's latest movie isn't going away any time soon and I heard a rumour that his next book will hit the shelves in late September or early October.
The next US election will be a close one, but I'm really unconvinced that Bush will win it.
As that thought progresses, scary thoughts creep into my mind. There was the interview in Cigar Afficionado magazine where Tommy Franks seemed to be sending up a trial ballon of the next election being cancelled if there was another terrorist attack and the article posted here about a nuclear strike on North Korea or Iran.
Are these men of PNAC desperate enough to try such a thing? I'm not sure that they aren't.
What would it take
On the other hand I think Edwards is a lot more honest than anybody who has hit the White House since Carter, and I think he could be very influential in determining domestic policy, especially as it pertains to the poor. That will undoubtedly have a spill-over effect into foreign policy because of trade and the overwhelming number of poor Americans who join the military in an attempt to get an education and better their lot in life.
Most important of all, I think the election of Kerry/Edwards would signal a move by the American people to becoming more globally influenced militarily and in matters of aid while becoming slightly more protectionist in matters of trade. That will hurt Canada in the short run, but will be an advatage to us as the legacy of American debt and over-all economic mismanagement begin to take their toll.
What would it take for Kerry to win the next election? Not much. Bush is increasingly in trouble. Every body bag that comes back from Iraq, every lie revealed, every new scandal, is a boon to Kerry. Cheney still might get indicted in France. Kenny lay is going to end up on the stand before November. Moore's latest movie isn't going away any time soon and I heard a rumour that his next book will hit the shelves in late September or early October.
The next US election will be a close one, but I'm really unconvinced that Bush will win it.
As that thought progresses, scary thoughts creep into my mind. There was the interview in Cigar Afficionado magazine where Tommy Franks seemed to be sending up a trial ballon of the next election being cancelled if there was another terrorist attack and the article posted here about a nuclear strike on North Korea or Iran.
Are these men of PNAC desperate enough to try such a thing? I'm not sure that they aren't.
What would it take
For the most part, we're on the same page, with the exception of Edwards.
I'm familiar with him, being in NC myself. He isn't universally loved (in his defense, most native sons suffer that in politics), to say the least. Polls here show he won't carry the state. I submit it's his trial lawyer background-- in particular the Cerebral Palsy case (turns out he knew that a C section could not have been responsible, but went ahead with the suit and made himself and his clients a fortune). I do worry about his foreign policy experience-- conventional wisdom says the pros at Foggy bottom and elsewhere will eat him alive.
I can't say I give the thought of going after NK much credence-- I'd look more towards Iran, going after the nuclear facilities, using Israel as the US proxy (not unreasonable-- many think the strike on Iraqs Osirak was that very scenario. Iraq was a lot further away from nukes then than Iran is now). To me, thats a greater concern.
In any case, youre absolutely right-- Kerry is a centrist and not much will change, especially in foreign policy and tax posture.
Right now, I think its too close to call, though Kerry does have the 'bounce' for the moment.
I'm most curious to see how relations with Canada will turn out-- for example, will he go back to the tradition of 'calling on Canada first' or will he be unwilling to upset the Mexicans and that relationship?
Interestingly, have you seen the numbers on Hispanic voters? Seems the RNC has been making serious inroads.
I'm familiar with him, being in NC myself. He isn't universally loved (in his defense, most native sons suffer that in politics), to say the least. Polls here show he won't carry the state. I submit it's his trial lawyer background-- in particular the Cerebral Palsy case (turns out he knew that a C section could not have been responsible, but went ahead with the suit and made himself and his clients a fortune). I do worry about his foreign policy experience-- conventional wisdom says the pros at Foggy bottom and elsewhere will eat him alive.
I can't say I give the thought of going after NK much credence-- I'd look more towards Iran, going after the nuclear facilities, using Israel as the US proxy (not unreasonable-- many think the strike on Iraqs Osirak was that very scenario. Iraq was a lot further away from nukes then than Iran is now). To me, thats a greater concern.
In any case, youre absolutely right-- Kerry is a centrist and not much will change, especially in foreign policy and tax posture.
Right now, I think its too close to call, though Kerry does have the 'bounce' for the moment.
I'm most curious to see how relations with Canada will turn out-- for example, will he go back to the tradition of 'calling on Canada first' or will he be unwilling to upset the Mexicans and that relationship?
Interestingly, have you seen the numbers on Hispanic voters? Seems the RNC has been making serious inroads.
Just jumping in here with both feet, without a thorough briefing, Kerry/Edwards may run a great campaign, and get their hearts broken. The Bushies will have something like a four-to-one money advantage.
I was approached back in '99 by the chairman of the county Democratic party, to run for something-or-other. The draw is I am the great-grandson of a founding member of the Republican party in Ohio. Go figure that one. The more bodies under this moron's ass, the higher he sits, right? Now he's the state Democratic party chairman. They got some yutz from Toledo, a light-skinned African American, who got his law degree from the Jesuit Catholic college in Dayton, who worked as an evictor for a slumlord kike here in Columbus. The then future-mayor's stepson was once arrested for spray-painting swastikas--a white-supremacist logo--on the utility building of the Jewish community center principally endowed by his step-father's employer! It gets better.
Anyway, I will cut to the chase. Our mayor is the vehicle for the ousted West Virginia Democratic Party machine to establish themselves as crimelords here in Ohio. Over my dead body. Last year, I pledged my support to our current state attorney general, a Republican from Cleveland, as the next governor. I will not compromise that pledge by, in any forum, stating support for the "forelorn hope" ticket of Kerry/Edwards. May they fail with honor!!
I was approached back in '99 by the chairman of the county Democratic party, to run for something-or-other. The draw is I am the great-grandson of a founding member of the Republican party in Ohio. Go figure that one. The more bodies under this moron's ass, the higher he sits, right? Now he's the state Democratic party chairman. They got some yutz from Toledo, a light-skinned African American, who got his law degree from the Jesuit Catholic college in Dayton, who worked as an evictor for a slumlord kike here in Columbus. The then future-mayor's stepson was once arrested for spray-painting swastikas--a white-supremacist logo--on the utility building of the Jewish community center principally endowed by his step-father's employer! It gets better.
Anyway, I will cut to the chase. Our mayor is the vehicle for the ousted West Virginia Democratic Party machine to establish themselves as crimelords here in Ohio. Over my dead body. Last year, I pledged my support to our current state attorney general, a Republican from Cleveland, as the next governor. I will not compromise that pledge by, in any forum, stating support for the "forelorn hope" ticket of Kerry/Edwards. May they fail with honor!!
I don't see Edwards being a direct influence foreign policy at all...I think wants Kerry control of that for himself. I think he will influence a lot of dometic policies that will have repercussions on foreign policies.
I'm also not convinced that Edwards' trial lawyer experience will hurt him too badly. It's proof that he worked hard and brought himself up a few stations in life, he helped a lot of people along the way, and he won a lot of cases.
I think Kerry will come to Canada first if he gets elected. It is the tradition and the US needs to do some serious work patching up their relationship with Europe. Canada has traditionally had a role in that relationship because of European heritage and membership in the Commonwealth.
I'm also not convinced that Edwards' trial lawyer experience will hurt him too badly. It's proof that he worked hard and brought himself up a few stations in life, he helped a lot of people along the way, and he won a lot of cases.
I think Kerry will come to Canada first if he gets elected. It is the tradition and the US needs to do some serious work patching up their relationship with Europe. Canada has traditionally had a role in that relationship because of European heritage and membership in the Commonwealth.
I would die for my country, yes.
To be more political, I will never die for something like Iraq which is illegal for starters. If Canada as a country and nation was threatened, I would sacrafice my life for the cause.
To be more political, I will never die for something like Iraq which is illegal for starters. If Canada as a country and nation was threatened, I would sacrafice my life for the cause.