A vision of the past?
Add the spectre of security walls rising along “the world’s longest undefended border” to a federal election campaign already being driven by debate about Canada’s relations with the United States.
The U.S. House of Representatives voted late Thursday to consider erecting “physical barriers” along the American border with Canada, the firmest step yet toward building the kinds of fences now in place on the Mexican frontier to stop the northward flow of illegal aliens and smuggled goods.
Be careful of opportunistic Liberals fanning anti- american flames.
Check out this story and others like it from US sources. Do you see the word Canada anywhere?
Answer: NO
It’s all about Mexico.
House OKs Bill to Tighten Immigration Laws
Also don’t forget, in a state that has real, not phony separation of powers, this bill needs to pass vote by a (gasp) elected senate, and executive approval before anything can happen.
Just some words of caution.
I think Canada should build a fence first to stop all those Hollywood types who threaten to move to Canada every time a Republican is elected.
What happened to you post today on the CBC election roundtable thingee?
We should start building a fence around Ottawa.
The real question for our American friends is: “Are we paranoid enough?”
Robert – We’re having trouble getting the graphic to load cleanly. Working on it now.
The Globe and Mail story on Al Qaeda and Hizbollah making calls from Canada to accomplices all over the world- and that reality known to the phone company, but not Canadian security services is troubling.
Much as I hate to say it (and it really is distatseful), there has to be a new border paradigm.
9/11 (the tragedies and failures) are still all to real to have passed into ‘interpretable’ memories.
For me, over time, it has become harder and harder to watch video clips of the planes crashing into the buildings, or looking at images of people who jumped.
The magnitude of the number of dead- and the repurcussions and consequences of so many bereaved parent, spouses and children left orphans hasn’t been forgotten.
If it takes a renewed protocol at the border, so be it. We just never thought we’d have to be at odds with Canada, of all nations. We used to see you as ‘family’, occasionally at odds- but blood was always thicker than water.
I guess we are no longer family. We really have become neighbors (one poll reported 40% of Canadian teens thought Americans- and not just the American government were ‘evil’)- and you know what they say about neighbor and fences.
I miss the old days.
So- why does our federal government continue to ignore serious security issues with our American neighbours? Could it be because our lawyers earn lucrative incomes from taxpayers by defending the rights of anybody who sneaks into this country, to remain here? What other possible reason could there be?
Dave, it’s about control. Canada’s passive aggression gives them some clout, or so they think. By taunting the US with lax security, we keep them edgy and paranoid, something the left thoroughly enjoys. It’s the only way they’ll get noticed. Being a sovereign country with plenty of third world superpower friends we’ve sold nuclear reactors too, well, it’s unlikely the US will invade us anytime soon. Martin lobs insults and sneers at their fears. Woe Canada.
Come on guys were being a little uptight here. These people voted to consider putting up a wall not a confirmed yes “put up a wall” If I was in the house of reps i would vote yes to “consider” it as well. It is just a cover your butt vote in case something did happen that came out of Canada. The person who voted yes to consider is now free of all finger pointing because they supported the necessary steps to prevent this. Imagine if you voted no and the next terrorist attack came from Canada that person would lose their next election.
Well the wall, wherever it’s built, is dumb idea that won’t work unless you have border towers every 1/2 kilometer.
I say we need our own nukes to protect us.
9/11 was 4 years ago…over 3000 people who didn’t have to die…they were left unprotected despite the warnings. Terrorism was killing many innocent people everywhere long before Al Quaeda and 9/11 and will still be the #1 problem once the US coalition has secured the oil in Iraq.
Our long border is not the problem. The non-functioning combined intelligence group (80000 people on the watch list?) in the States and our lousy CSIS are the problem.
This is a very bad thing in many ways.
We in Canada flop along, insulting the U.S., ignoring our own military, security for our half of the continent, and generally thinking it can’t happen here.
I don’t think most Canadians “get it” when it comes to what Americans are thinking.
I occasionally work with the US Navy and Coast Guard, when we do the odd “port security” exercise. These people aren’t fucking around – they mean it. They see themselves as at WAR. And in that harsh reality, we’re either a friend or an enemy, and our opinion is irrelevent. Pissing off our best friend and protector for political points is stupid and dangerous.
Damn the Liebrals to hell. This is serious shit.
If a terrorist attack took place here, the Liberals wouldn’t take the blame.
The Liberals, their surrogates in the MSM, and their apologists among the general public, would charge their critics – most notably the CPC – with trying to exploit a tragedy for political gain.
There is one standard by which conservatives held, another for liberals.
It’s no different with 9/11.
People on the left always use the “root causes” argument, whether it be for crime, poverty, etc.
But when it comes to 9/11, suddenly they don’t want to revert to root causes.
Had Clinton/Gore done something about al Queda during their 8 years in power, and after all the attacks by bin Laden on American interests (as well as bin Laden’s threat in 1997 to target American civilians), 9/11 probably could have been avoided.
Trust me, had Bush sr. won the ’92 election, and had Bob Dole continued the string of Republican presidental victories in ’96, and had a democrat won the presidency in 2000, just 10 months before 9/11, then we would’ve heard the “root causes” argument from the left, as they would have blamed a decade of inaction by their Republican predecors for the 9/11 attacks.
While Mr. MacKinnon writes a story that contains some truth, he misleads us by enhancing the shock value when it is not really justified. That unfortunately, is not fair and balanced writing and so is untrue in that it misleads. My inserted comments will moderate the weight of this story back towards a more balanced truth. [TG]
Thought you might like this article from today’s Washington Times Newspaper
By Douglas MacKinnon
December 16, 2005
For a growing number of people in our country, “O, Canada” is now less about a national anthem and more about frustration, confusion, disappointment and anger. As in, “Oh, Canada! Why are you once again stabbing the United States in the back?” A recent public spat between liberal Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin, and David Wilkins, U.S. ambassador to Canada, is shining a much-needed light on a problem that runs much deeper than mere name calling. It is a problem that if not properly addressed and fixed, could have severe national-security consequences for the United States.
There is no risk to any national security when one politian says something less than flattering about the USA because he’s on the ropes and wants to be re-elected. This is one politian remember. Not the whole of Canadian people.
In what some in Canada are saying is a desperate bid to win reelection, Mr. Martin has decided that slandering the United States will win him the most votes among the millions in his country who have a strong dislike of our nation, George W. Bush, the war in Iraq, sensible immigration policies and the rule of law.
Having grown weary of the prime minister’s insults, as well as the vile and juvenile insults thrown at our country by other liberal Canadian politicians, Mr. Wilkins decided enough was enough.
Mr. MacKinnon is correct in opposing PM Martin’s comments, but there is no reason to add any needless weight to words of a single failing Canadian Political figure. At 27 on a scale of 30, Martin calls the kettle black.
After the prime minister said the United States lacked a “global conscience” for not ratifying the seriously flawed Kyoto accord, Mr. Wilkins decided it was time to speak up. If that had been the first insult, he more than likely would have let it go. Sadly, it was far from the first or the worst.
A top aide to Mr. Martin’s predecessor, Jean Chretien, once called President Bush a “moron.” Another high-ranking Canadian official publicly called Mr. Bush a profane name. And yet another liberal member of parliament stomped on a George W. Bush doll on national television. This was the same liberal who called Americans a profane name.
Mr. McKinnon’ s writing could have been more balanced here if he had mentioned that Canadian politicians of the Chretien and Mulroony school always use crude and colorful language. Chretien may well classify several leaders who do not agree with him as moron on any given day. Mr. Bush may well speak in similar language , but with the wisdom to do so privately.
Mr. MacKinnon misleads again when he fails to provide insight into the nature of the liberal MP who stomped on a small Bush doll. Did MacKinnon mention the stomping was done during a TV comedy skit? Does he mention why Canadians regard the liberal in question with no gravity at all? Does Jay Leno often do similar comedy?
Insulting and verbally attacking the United States has become such a national sport among liberal Canadian politicians that one conservative member of parliament said they displayed “a consistent attitude of anti-Americanism.” As Mr. Wilkins stressed, “It may be smart election-year politics to thump your chest and constantly criticize your friend and your number one trading partner. But it is a slippery slope, and all of us should hope that it doesn’t have a long-term impact on the relationship.”
There is no consistant sport among liberal politicians of verbally attacking the USA. Simply because a conservative member of parliament said that was so is no reason for Mr. MacKinnon to embrace the idea as fact and so mislead his readers.
The ambassador’s point raises a larger question: Can Canada really be considered our “friend” anymore? As someone whose family comes from Canada, a country I grew up loving as a child, it pains me to ask the question. That said, what other question can be asked when the Canadian government not only willingly allows Islamic terrorists into their country, but does nothing to stop them from entering our nation.
Two cases in point out of many. The first being in December 1999, when al Qaeda operative Ahmed Ressam entered the United States from Canada. By luck, he was arrested with a trunk full of explosives. His mission: to blow up Los Angeles International Airport.
Mr. MacKinnon stirs our emotions here by mentioning his family comes from Canada and states the Canadian Government willingly allows Islamic terrorists into Canada.
Most Americans are too wise too accept that idea without question. Did Mr. Wilkins forget to mention that everyone entering the USA from Canada is carefully checked by competent US border guards? Explosives discovered in Ressam’s trunk were intercepted by skilled American guards doing a professional job and they would be offended by the term *luck*.
The duty of Canadian border guards is to carefully check persons entering Canada, not persons leaving Canada.
Next were two Pakistani men on the “no fly” list, with possible terrorist connections, who were arrested in Seattle. They were caught buying one-way tickets to New York City with cash. How did these potential terrorists get into our country? From Canada. One of the men even had a driver’s license from British Columbia.
For years, our intelligence services have warned and even begged Canadian officials to do something about its dangerous open immigration policies. Immigration policies that continually allow highly suspicious people into Canada with a free shot at the United States.
MacKinnon fails to inform us of pertinent background here. East Indians and Pakistanis started up logging enterprises in Southern British Columbia around 1910.
There are huge communities in Vancouver, Surrey, Mapleridge and other areas and the vast majority are good citizens. Thousands have driver’s licenses.
Having a driver’s license from British Columbia is not a crime and neither is it a sure fire way to identify a *terrorist.
U.S. politicians from both sides of the aisle have joined with U.S. law enforcement personnel to ask Canada to address this growing security threat. In response, Canadian politicians from the left have basically said, “Drop dead.” [surmise?] We may yet. And how tragic it would be if the deaths of thousands of innocent Americans came at the hands of a terrorist that Canada willingly allowed into their country.
Comedian Jon Stewart once joked that “A Canadian woman kept asking me, ‘What do Americans really think about Canada? What do Americans really think about Canada?’ ” And Mr. Stewart answered, “We don’t.” Well, the day has come when we need to not only start thinking about them, but holding some Canadians accountable for their irresponsible actions.
[MacKinnon has an obligation not to generalize here, but to provide actual documented evidence of irresponsible events.]
Our once great friend is turning against us. Common sense and our national security dictate that we can no longer afford to ignore that fact.
[Surmise? – what real evidence?]]
Thousands of us spend winter in Florida , Texas, Arizona and California.
Americans are easy to like! We don‘t live and spend among people we hate.]
Douglas MacKinnon served as press secretary to former Sen. Bob Dole. He is also a former White House and Pentagon official and an author.
My only qualification to comment on Mr. MacKinnon’s writing is simply that I live in the area upon which he passes judgment without visiting. I suggest Mr. MacKinnon’s writings may be vastly altered following a pleasant three week visit to Victoria and Vancouver British Columbia. Is this a writing based more upon emotions rather than actual fact? [TG]
Douglas Mackinnon may be permitted to stir up hate in free opinion, but I think a Washington Times editor may not have had time to view this piece.
In other words, hate mongering may be fun, but validate your wilder rants…please [TG]
“I guess we are no longer family.”
Even sadder is that unlike our English speaking cousins globally so many English speaking Canadian Liberals chose the French route of smarmy spinelessness in the face of evil.
Britian and Australia have stood behind us since 9/11 much to Canada’s shame. What a different Canada since the common cause of WWII united the English speaking world against fascism.
Trusting the Liberals in Canada to assist in our safety isn’t an option. Sad. Prior to 9/11, I loved every visit I made to Canada(Toronto and Nova Scotia). Now, I feel it is another insipid dhimmitude European country with little in common with my values. Sad.
Is Paul Martin a good sport?
While the USA is bogged down with the greatest of demands holding back the immoral terrorists who would destroy the freedoms of North America and democracies everywhere. Also while the USA is recovering from multiple natural disasters and trying to protect themselves from terrorist cells from within.
This is the time when Martin, on the ropes, chooses to score political points by calling the USA on Kyoto. Not only is he a poor sport, but stupid too. Canada only scores a 27 on a scale of 30 countries regarding Kyoto.
Would Paul Martin be considered a good sport if he had kept Canadian crews on Canada Steamship Lines, instead of replacing them with third world crews. Would Paul Martin be considered more politically wise if he had kept his CSLines under the Canadian flag instead of registering under Lybian and Barbados flags to avoid paying Canadian taxes?
What does it take before Canadians can see when a politician is addicted to the almighty dollar at Canada’s expense and not Canada the country?
TG
Penny not all of us are like that . Take hope winds of change are coming.
The thing that kills me about this is that it is all completely unnecessary.
American and Canadian conservatives constantly post here on Small Dead Animals and other blogs, and it’s obvious that the largest percentage of us get along just fine. Our political views are almost indistinguishable. I would love to have most of the people that post on SDA come to the US and vote in our next election.
Does anyone honestly believe that if the cruise that Kate was on had been made up of half American conservatives and half Canadian conservatives that people wouldn’t have gotten along? Doesn’t everyone believe that just as many Canadians and Americans would have slipped off together after having one too many in the bar? Wouldn’t our conversations have basically been along the same lines, with the same general, common agreements?
This artificially contrived hostility between Americans and Canadians by Liberal politicians is infuriating, dangerous, and absurd.
Americans have no particular desire for Canadians to be on the exact same page. We just want for our two countries to be in the same book! After all, as most of you know, America is constructed to try to have 50 kinds of experiments with democracy. Each state having sufficient power and autonomy to construct a kind of government and life that seems to work best for that state’s people. So why should Canadians think that Americans want them to walk in lock step with everything the US thinks or does?
There is always room for differences, but there is no room for this ridiculous antagonism.
Bush to address the nation on Iraq Sunday
Mercury News ^ | Dec. 17, 2005 | TERENCE HUNT, AP
Posted on 12/17/2005 4:37:53 PM PST by FairOpinion
President Bush will address the nation about Iraq on Sunday evening, his first speech from the Oval Office since he announced the beginning of the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003.
The address at 9 p.m. EST comes on the heels of a two-week, four-speech blitz to build support for a war that a majority of Americans now say was a mistake. The White House said it was asking television networks for live coverage of the president’s address, expected to run less than 20 minutes.
“The Iraqi people have just concluded a historic election, and we now are entering a critical period for our mission in Iraq,” White House press secretary Scott McClellan said Friday.
“The president will talk about the importance of our mission and the way forward in 2006,” he said. >>> http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1542583/posts
“Britian and Australia have stood behind us since 9/11 much to Canada’s shame. What a different Canada since the common cause of WWII united the English speaking world against fascism.
Trusting the Liberals in Canada to assist in our safety isn’t an option. Sad. Prior to 9/11, I loved every visit I made to Canada(Toronto and Nova Scotia). Now, I feel it is another insipid dhimmitude European country with little in common with my values. Sad.
Posted by penny at December 17, 2005 05:51 PM”
penny . . what’s happening now is a shame and as a very proud Canadian I am embarassed, but . . . in WW1 you guys were tres late to the events – the war started in 1914 not ’17 and WW2 was well underway before Pearl harbour.
Regardless, I concur – the current powers that be in Canada are acting like Frenchie/euros than a nation with conviction.
Put up the wall, re-patriate the auto industry etc, send a bill to Ottawa for living as squatters under your defence umbrella, but don’t give me the WW1/WW2 story . . won’t wash.
Jean Lapierre ne sleep pas? Has nightmare. Mon Dieu, Paul, dodo somethin. uh, to make it clear,understanably, of course, Jack and me, Jean said, da poof is da poof, fundamemtally, ahahaha Merry Cgfhjytcs, Bill, er Hill, er Geo… >>>
Re: “By Order of the President”, W.E.B. Griffin
� Reply #2 on: February 07, 2005, 08:41:14 �
By strange coincidence, this was in today’s Toronto Star:
Fending off terror minister’s ‘top priority’
Canada, U.S. have divergent takes on security, Lapierre says
Jim Bronskill, CP – Feb. 6, 2005. 02:41 PM
OTTAWA – The federal transport czar’s “worst nightmare” is the chilling prospect of a terrorist strike on the United States via Canada.
Jean Lapierre fears Canada “could be used as a springboard” to assault its southern neighbour � an event that would paralyse the border and cause untold economic fallout.
“That’s what I’m trying to avoid, and this is my top priority as minister of Transport,” Lapierre told The Canadian Press in an interview.
“Obviously, they would close the borders and things like that, and that would have a major impact,” he said.
“That’s my worst nightmare.”
Canada has long been perceived by critics as a convenient staging ground for extremists seeking to raise money, forge documents and plan operations abroad.
Since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States, the federal government has earmarked more than $8 billion for improving intelligence gathering, policing, and security at border crossings, seaports and airports.
Auditor General Sheila Fraser has pointedly questioned some of these efforts and the Senate security committee has noted numerous holes in Canada’s anti-terrorism net.
In opinion polls, Canadians often rank security concerns well below other priorities such as health care, the economy and the environment.
Lapierre said Canadians and Americans see the issue of national security differently.
“We have to adjust, because we were never a nation that was worried about its own security,” he said.
“We don’t have a culture of security here. We’ve been pretty easygoing on it. And I think we’ve got to learn fast.”
That’s one reason Lapierre is planning to visit Israel to take a first-hand look at its renowned security apparatus, including extraordinarily tight air passenger screening.
“When I travel here, people talk to me a lot about their system and they say they close all the loopholes and everything. And I want to see it for myself.”
Lapierre interprets Canadians’ relative lack of concern about security not as indifference but as evidence they believe the state will look out for the safety of its people.
“I think they’re counting on government and that’s why I take that responsibility fully,” he said.
The duty extends not only to Canadians “but also to our neighbours that may be targets. And you want to be sure that you protect your side of the border.”
The usually loquacious minister said little when asked whether the volume of terrorist “chatter” being picked up by spy services had increased recently.
The government has been criticized for not moving quickly enough to implement air security measures.
Electronic screening of of all baggage and cargo loaded aboard flights is due to be in place next year. Only a percentage is currently scanned.
“The number is improving as fast as we get the equipment. It’s climbing,” Lapierre insisted.
Canadians should feel confident when they fly, he added.
“Obviously, you’ll never have 100-per-cent security. I mean, there’s always a risk management. But I think Canada’s airports are some of the safest in the world.” he said.
“We’re improving the system, we’re looking at all the new technologies and anything we can do to improve, we do.” >>>
http://forums.army.ca/forums/index.php?topic=26383.msg176602
Your point well taken, Fred.
9/11 was the wake up call Canada didn’t have to process like us. The same sickening forces of socialistic, multicultural, pc, nanny state forces are being fought on the ground here too. Conservatives here are more galvanized and ahead because of our 9/11 wake up call.
Canada is still behind England and Australia in joining forces with the traditional English speaking world when faced with today’s evil. We people of the Anglosphere had always found ourselves on the same page eventually. That’s a history to be proud of, in my opinion.
Except for one warship on Lake Ontario and two on the “upper lakes”, (all limited to 100 Tons or under) the US may not maintain warships on the Great Lakes unless it wants to abrogate the Rush-Bagot Treaty of 1817. (It probably would not want to do that since it is this treaty that avoids the US having to put substantial forces on the Great Lakes for general defensive purposes, especially having regard to the fact that all the canals and locks are in Canada.)
Building some kind of floating impenetrable barrier along the middle of the Great Lakes is forbidden by the Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909.
So if it wants to prevent clandestine invasions by fresh water, its going to have build and constantly patrol a high fence all along the “south” shore of all of the Great Lakes, including the whole shore of Lake Michigan. Interesting–the people of Rochester will have to take adequate identification to go swimming off the beach at Rochester and every American will need such identification to go boating on the Great Lakes; otherwise they might be denied re-entry.
Mr. Dill, you’re really in a pickle. The Great Lakes “fence” is the US Coast Guard, and a large part of the Saint Lawrence Sea Way stretches along the northern border of New York.
Nearly every post here proves how deeply ingrained anti-Americansim is in Canada. Tredeau would be very proud of himself. Commmie rat bastard.
Re-read post #1.
We’re saved.
Let them build a wall. Then block the airwaves too. It’s getting crazy down there.
Penny…it’s not about evil…it’s the oil. Crushing evil is always a good reason to go to war but long term, it’s for oil. And I agree Canada should have been there. The area is too important for the needs we have to not be there, getting our share and paying for it.
But you can’t even fight a war right. You’re killing more of your kids because you didn’t have enough boots to do the job. Blow em up, lock it down and secure the assets, power, security, water. Whether it’s a good war or they lied to have it…at least do it right.
And I have kids, a grandaughter and many friends in the states.
Personally, Steve, if we seized Saudi oil fields tomorrow I could give a damn. They deserve it. Oil money in the ME has bankrolled terrorism for decades.
I respect Bush.
With the smarmy leftist MSM here always carping at him, old alleged allies treating us like pariahs, and the cesspool that is the ME, the man deserves support in finally drawing a line in the sand even if his plan wasn’t perfect.
The carping leftist moonbats in this country haven’t figured out that you can’t drive a car on Pepsi. Their naive grasp of history, economics and statescraft is that countries have relationships like people with the goal to be liked by everyone.
When Israel finally has to take out Iranian nuclear installations, the usual suspects will be screaming their heads off in indignation, but sleeping all the better at night for it.
I’ve really grown to hate hypocrites.
Sorry to go a bit off topic but there is another place that could use a fence to stop traffic ..
Why Harper and gang won’t just relent on this idiotic social issue and get their asses elected so they can get on with the more important issues like cleaning up corruption, crime and waste in Ottawa is beyond understanding.
These unsavory social issues may have a better chance of being dealt with in the future once we have repaired the damage with the Americans and built some confidence in our justice system and don’t forget the ecomomy stupid.
No one care what’s going on in the rectums of the nation if there is no investment or law and order in the country and that’s the way we are headed.
A couple of thoughts on the same-sex argument that continues to dog the Conservatives .. Stop sign included .. in one of two top posts listed.
See a conclusion to the point at
http://dukemcgoo.blogspot.com/
There, I got that off my chest.
HEY, CANADA! Pay attention. The wall is between U.S. and Mexico. Nothing was said about Canada. GOD I can’t stand stupid.
HEY, CANADA! Pay attention. The wall is between U.S. and Mexico. Nothing was said about Canada. GOD I can’t stand stupid.
A physical wall is of course an absurdity, but a smarter “wall” with e.g. identity checks is more necessary every day.
The single most irritating aspect of this problem is that terrorists seeking to attack America are indifferent to Canada and won’t likely do much damage there. If I tell my neighbor that burglers are passing through his back yard to get to my house, I would not expect him to say “Well, the burglers are your problem. They don’t have anything to do with me.” I would rather expect to hear “Well, let’s figure out a way to address this. But since you are the attractive nuisance here, how about you bear the lion’s share of the necessary costs?”
Now, if I tell my neighbor and he says and does nothing, what am I supposed to do? Answer: whatever I can.
Ray:
“to consider erecting “physical barriers” along the American border with Canada, the firmest step yet toward building the kinds of fences now in place on the Mexican frontier”
We know it’s only an idea that we’re talking about.
Read Sheila Copps in today’s Toronto Sun. Paul Martin, around the time he became PM, proposed just such a fence. He also wanted to send troops to Iraq, he argued in caucus. Damning stuff from Tequila. http://www.torontosun.com All Tory, all the time.
A wall? Why – it’s not as if there are any known terrorists in Canada, right?
—
Al-Qaeda Suspect Arrested in Canada, Toronto Star Reports
Dec. 18 (Bloomberg) — Abdullah Khadr, the oldest son of a reputed al-Qaeda financier, was arrested on terrorism-related charges by federal police in Toronto yesterday at the request of the U.S. Department of Justice, the Toronto Star reported.
Dennis Edney, Khadr’s lawyer said the 25-year-old Canadian faces charges of possession and use of a destructive device and conspiracy to murder a U.S. national outside the U.S., the newspaper said…
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000082&sid=aCs5bx0itVic&refer=canada
Penny:
Make no mistake invading Iraq was a bandit act. It was intended to consolidate military and economic control of the Middle East masquerading as liberation.
And if Canada wants oil for the oil culture…they should have been there.
Attention Fred..
Just because the USA followed the allies into WW1 and WW2 does not negate or mitigate the fact that the USA saved all their asses.
Notice Clinton said “… only bin Laden and the Iranians…”. And the Iranians… the Iranians.
The left liberal/socialists are stuck on stupid.>>
CHRIS MATTHEWS: ‘BUSH BELONGS ON MOUNT RUSHMORE’ IF WINS ‘GREATEST GAMBLE SINCE FDR BACKED BRITS’
Hardball with Chris Matthews | 12.18.05 | Mia T
Posted on 12/18/2005 9:00:39 AM PST by Mia T
CHRIS MATTHEWS: ‘BUSH BELONGS ON MOUNT RUSHMORE’
IF HE WINS ‘GREATEST GAMBLE SINCE ROOSEVELT BACKED BRITAIN BEFORE WWII’
…..
“Mr. bin Laden used to live in Sudan. He was expelled from Saudi Arabia in ’91 and he went to the Sudan.
We’d been hearing that the Sudanese wanted America to start dealing with them again. They released him [bin Laden].
At the time, ’96, he had committed no crime against America, so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America.
So I pleaded with the Saudis to take him, ’cause they could have; but they thought it was a hot potato. They didn’t and that’s how he wound up in Afghanistan.”
bill clinton
Sunday, Aug. 11, 2002
Clinton Reveals on Secret Audio:
I Nixed Bin Laden Extradition Offer
“I remember exactly what happened. Bruce Lindsey said to me on the phone, ‘My God, a second plane has hit the tower.’ And I said, ‘Bin Laden did this.’ that’s the first thing I said. He said, ‘How can you be sure?’ I said ‘Because only bin Laden and the Iranians could set up the network to do this and they [the Iranians] wouldn’t do it because they have a country in targets. Bin Laden did it.’
I thought that my virtual obsession with him was well placed and I was full of regret that I didn’t get him.
bill clinton
Sunday, Sept 3, 2002
Larry King Live >>>
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1542863/posts
The first job of any American President is to protect the American people. To say that President Bush spent 200 billion and 2000 American lives to get oil is ridiculous there are other places he could have spent that kind of money and gotten secure oil without all the pain and political cost of a war.
President Bush went to war in Iraq because he can accomplish a number of things that have nothing to do with Oil.
First if he can turn Iraq into a Democracy that tends to grow and spread. The Americans have tried over throwing Dictators planting their own dictators none of these solutions has been successful, what has worked is planting Democracies. When people control their own destiny they are far less likely to go to war for reasons other than National Defence.
The American Military has acted as a lightening Rod for terrorists. Cannon Fodder if you will. They are attacking the Americans in the Middle East not in America. I believe this was part of the strategy. Since 9/11 there have been no further attacks on US soil. Drawing the terrorists to one place and slowly eliminating them on foriegn soil is far preferable to trying to prevent them from attacking you from multiple places that are difficult to find and track.
Jeff…come on…they’ve overthrown democracies too.
In the long run it’s oil…this has got to be locked down within 35 years…plenty of time for me to be right.
Either way…the war should have been what the generals wanted…more soldiers and an after initial hostilities plan that wasn’t delusional about being greeted with flowers but addressed the kind of sect violence that would be unleased with a strong central gov’t gone
A security barrier with cameras along the border would go a long way to stemming the tide of smuggling of illicit goods in both directions and would be of benefit to both countries. If such a project looked feasible to do I would suggest both Canada and the United States build and operate such a system in partnership. To those who are the rabid raving anti-Americans, I say you have the collective mental agility of a rabbit dropping.
Steve my boy, you’re on the right track with the oil, you just haven’t gone far enough.
Why Marriott, Burger King, Jack in the Box, and hundreds of other American businesses are scurrying around Iraq picking the best locations. Why oil is a fairly insignificant element when you consider it over and against the vast commercial possibilities for US business interests.
The gambling casinos and the brothels alone (managed by Iraqis, mind you) would help to turn Iraq into a tremendous American Disneyland for American executives. (The Iraqi Flamingo equipped with the special Halliburton penthouse.)
Steve my boy, within 5 years the IPOs in Iraq will be popping like firecrackers. There will be so much money for Americans to make there, that even the odd Canadian can get in on the profits, provided you suck up enough. It’s going to be bigger than Miami Beach. Every grain of sand worth its weight in gold.
So you’re on the right track with the oil, but since you come from a small and insignificant country, you are just not able to see the Big Picture. This thing is a commercial Renaissance that makes Oil smalltime.
Just keep those champagne corks popping.
(Incidentally, thanks for your profound expertise on our military matters drawn from your experience.)
Steve, I’m sorry but you are “stuck on stupid”. We all know our (the U.S.’) Army has made some mistakes in learning how to engage in Iraq, but anyone who thinks loosing approx. 2,000 troops out of the several hundred thousand who’ve rotated in and out of that theater in almost 3 years is definitely “stuck on stupid”. God knows I regret and honor each of those soldiers, but any military campaigner from the past would give his right arm for a casualty ratio like that (especially, I’m sure, the genius allied command from WWI – do they prove your point that “the war should have been what the generals wanted”? Or was that just “different”?) Believe me, I’ve been as critical as anyone of *how* we’ve done things there (take Paul Bremer – please), but overall we have done well and *are* making Iraq more stable.
Jeff Cosford and Concrete say the other things I wanted to say.
Does any of this mean that oil is not a strategic national interest of the United States’? No. Only that it, by itself, without the other regional concerns, would hardly motivate us into a war the way that a terrorist attack in our country shown live on television involving those other concerns would. And the President could never ever ever mention oil as a strategic concern (one among several), because as soon as he did, all the left-wingers, the NYT and the WaPo would be off saying that was the only reason we were involved there, the President said so himself!!!!!
(Actually, maybe the President should just go ahead and do this. It would totally fit this ultimate idiot/evil genius duality the left has settled on for Bush, it would be out in the open, and then we could all move on to something else . . . well, except the leftists. Linda McQuaig would have a new book out in 30 days, I expect.)
Greg – LOLOLOL! Thank goodness I was not drinking a beverage or I would have had major sprayage on the monitor!
Though we don’t mean to gang up on Steve. But, living in Canada, I can start to see how people can believe that governments are the tools of certain companies/industries (Power Corp., Bombardier, CSL . . . anyone?) in ways that simply would not be allowed or are just plain unthinkable in the U.S. (Not that there hasn’t been cronyism – I’m sure we’ll be peppered with examples of American corporate/govt-sponsored perfidy – but it simply can’t work on a large scale b/c of how things are set up.) It starts to explain that outsiders, anyway, are projecting their experiences onto U.S. policy, when most Americans have no idea how kleptocratic many other developed countries are (including especially a certain lovely, chilly country just to the north currently trying to figure out which way to go, IMHO).
To me one odd thing about all this is that if Bush is willing to admit this week NSA surviellance and tell people that they (and by extension Canada, the world) should grow up and get serious about national security, then why not say the truth that we are entering a permanent global energy crisis that will force us to live differently? 2/3 rds of the world’s oil is there.
I don’t doubt the business opportunities for ice cream makers will be big someday in Iraq. Soon as there is reliable electricity.
hope the yanks run a fence across the whole thing.
why would anyone want to be neighbours with this looney bin??
Second best laugh I’ve had today!
Goes a long way to showing what kind of fools the US congress tolerates! True Dumbasses.