Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 2 of 3
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
biggie





Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 1738
Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44
votes: 10
Location: Ottawa, Ontario

PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2006 9:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Buddy Kat wrote:
Biggie says

"How do you justify disagreeing with having the ability to blast ICBMs out of the sky before they hit North American targets - more specifically, how do you think that not being part of us makes us safer? Do you honestly believe that the States won't blow the missiles out of the sky over us as opposed to over their cities? Do you not think it would be safer to destroy them when they aren't flying over our land?"


Well that's the catch you see ...Canada IS the buffer zone. Consider placeing a missle defence systems along the can/us border ..Canadian controlled and see then what happens. The US would not allow it..that's right , they would be the buffer zone.

Yes I believe the US would not hesitate for 1 second to protect what has now become the more valuable american. As t is right now the US USES Canada as a warning system to protect their butts , not ours.


To take a defence system seriously the missles would have to be both along the canadian north as well as along the border and preferably Canadian operated. That way Canada is insured of it's protection from both sides in a US foriegn war. Canada should be protecting it's own country from the east and west also.

This present protect the US system under guise of protecting Canada will not work for Canada but rather the US only.


Thats right - and yet your arguments simply go further to make me wonder WHY you would disagree with us taking part - and having those missile defence systems installed on our soil. Face it, if roles were reversed, we would protect the US for our own protection, not for theirs.. Why shouldn't we use our "buffer zone" status to our advantage. The US can't afford to have us invaded, or our cities destroyed. They can't attack us - we're the independent "buffer zone" that they need - we're also an independent state that provides them with great trade and a strong ally. Why you would trust ANYONE else in this world other than the US is completely beyond me. They provide us with incredible military power - they support us on international affairs, and they protect us with their own military might.

Our country owes what military might we do have to the US, we owe our entire economy to the success of the American economy.

Don't forget- Mr. Martin is the person who felt that "canada's sovereignty" was more important that Canada's security. Had he made the RIGHT decision(incidently one he was originally going to make), and not the vote-buying decision, perhaps we'de be in a bit closer to being safer and being prepared for a catastrophic event. Even the Senate commitee has suggested we sign on to the deal...

As it is right now, Canada USES the US as a military workhorse and shield.. we get more out of the deal than they do - and don't for a second think that its any other way - they owe us nothing... Tell me one country on this planet who IS looking out for our best interests - other than us. Iran?
Cool Blue





Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 3130
Reputation: 114.9
votes: 10
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2006 10:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Our country owes what military might we do have to the US, we owe our entire economy to the success of the American economy.


Well, I'll admit that the Libs did a decent job on our economy (after Reform forced them to take action).

However, the idiot Libs allowed the USA to be our #1 consumer with around 80% of all exports.

The US government would never allow their economy to have all its eggs in one basket.

In 13 years of Lib rule, we only got free trade agreements with 2 counties, Israel and Brazil (not exactly economic powerhouses), while the USA negotiated dozens more than us.

We need to diversity our export market and probably the easiest way to do this is by approach the commonwealth, "Anglosphere" countries first.

Our common language, history, traditions and political/legal systems will make it much easier to negotiate agreements.

We should contact, the UK, South Africa, Australia, New Zealand and India first.

India itself would be a major prize and at the very least, with the warm relationship between Harper and the Australian PM, we should be moving on this.

Can you imagine a such a super-free trade zone?
cbasu





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 391
Reputation: 131.3
votes: 2

PostPosted: Mon Oct 16, 2006 9:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cool Blue wrote:
India itself would be a major prize and at the very least, with the warm relationship between Harper and the Australian PM, we should be moving on this.


Off-topic, but how is Howard going to help with India?
cosmostein





Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 7431
Reputation: 297.2
votes: 21
Location: The World

PostPosted: Mon Oct 16, 2006 1:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Craig wrote:
I have a theory. I think Mr. Harper and the Conservatives are waiting to see who wins the Liberal leadership before they target Quebec and Ontario. Iggy and Rae will each require entirely different strategies for both Ontario and Quebec. After the leadership is over you can bet the real fun begins.


I agree,
Each potential leader will take a very different approach in terms of the image of the Liberal Party, and each one will require a very different strategy to deal with.
Cool Blue





Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 3130
Reputation: 114.9
votes: 10
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 8:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Off-topic, but how is Howard going to help with India?


I wrote it a little ackwardly.

What I meant to say was that with such a major prize as India and with close relations with Australia, that we should get moving on a Commonwealth Free Trade Zone now.[/quote]
cosmostein





Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 7431
Reputation: 297.2
votes: 21
Location: The World

PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2006 9:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cool Blue wrote:
Quote:
Our country owes what military might we do have to the US, we owe our entire economy to the success of the American economy.


Well, I'll admit that the Libs did a decent job on our economy (after Reform forced them to take action).

However, the idiot Libs allowed the USA to be our #1 consumer with around 80% of all exports.

The US government would never allow their economy to have all its eggs in one basket.

In 13 years of Lib rule, we only got free trade agreements with 2 counties, Israel and Brazil (not exactly economic powerhouses), while the USA negotiated dozens more than us.

We need to diversity our export market and probably the easiest way to do this is by approach the commonwealth, "Anglosphere" countries first.

Our common language, history, traditions and political/legal systems will make it much easier to negotiate agreements.

We should contact, the UK, South Africa, Australia, New Zealand and India first.

India itself would be a major prize and at the very least, with the warm relationship between Harper and the Australian PM, we should be moving on this.

Can you imagine a such a super-free trade zone?


I wish we had a free trade agreement with Brazil, you are actually thinking Costa Rica or Peru, but it does not change your point that we have not really opened our doors to "economic powerhouses"

Mexico was able to hammer out a free trade agreement with Japan for goodness sake.

There was talk in the late 1980's of creating a trade network along the lines of the commonwealth, Allowing us access to markets like Australia, India, New Zealand, Malaysia, Singapore and basically letting us take our eggs out of one basket as you suggested.


Last edited by cosmostein on Wed Oct 18, 2006 12:50 pm; edited 1 time in total
Buddy Kat





Joined: 24 Sep 2006
Posts: 94
Reputation: 24.6Reputation: 24.6
votes: 1
Location: Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2006 12:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

biggie rection wrote:
Buddy Kat wrote:
Biggie says

"How do you justify disagreeing with having the ability to blast ICBMs out of the sky before they hit North American targets - more specifically, how do you think that not being part of us makes us safer? Do you honestly believe that the States won't blow the missiles out of the sky over us as opposed to over their cities? Do you not think it would be safer to destroy them when they aren't flying over our land?"


Well that's the catch you see ...Canada IS the buffer zone. Consider placeing a missle defence systems along the can/us border ..Canadian controlled and see then what happens. The US would not allow it..that's right , they would be the buffer zone.

Yes I believe the US would not hesitate for 1 second to protect what has now become the more valuable american. As t is right now the US USES Canada as a warning system to protect their butts , not ours.


To take a defence system seriously the missles would have to be both along the canadian north as well as along the border and preferably Canadian operated. That way Canada is insured of it's protection from both sides in a US foriegn war. Canada should be protecting it's own country from the east and west also.

This present protect the US system under guise of protecting Canada will not work for Canada but rather the US only.


Thats right - and yet your arguments simply go further to make me wonder WHY you would disagree with us taking part - and having those missile defence systems installed on our soil. Face it, if roles were reversed, we would protect the US for our own protection, not for theirs.. Why shouldn't we use our "buffer zone" status to our advantage. The US can't afford to have us invaded, or our cities destroyed. They can't attack us - we're the independent "buffer zone" that they need - we're also an independent state that provides them with great trade and a strong ally. Why you would trust ANYONE else in this world other than the US is completely beyond me. They provide us with incredible military power - they support us on international affairs, and they protect us with their own military might.

Our country owes what military might we do have to the US, we owe our entire economy to the success of the American economy.

Don't forget- Mr. Martin is the person who felt that "canada's sovereignty" was more important that Canada's security. Had he made the RIGHT decision(incidently one he was originally going to make), and not the vote-buying decision, perhaps we'de be in a bit closer to being safer and being prepared for a catastrophic event. Even the Senate commitee has suggested we sign on to the deal...

As it is right now, Canada USES the US as a military workhorse and shield.. we get more out of the deal than they do - and don't for a second think that its any other way - they owe us nothing... Tell me one country on this planet who IS looking out for our best interests - other than us. Iran?


That's the catch..letting the fox look after the hen house.We know the US is a trigger happy kill kill kill nation…they react with knee jerk reactions to everything. As it is right now they use another nation (Canada) to warn them of an incoming threat. Where are there silos? In the USA mostly along the border.

If they had missiles where the warning stations are that would be a different story…The threat is detected the intercepting missiles or lasers go off hitting there targets on the other side of the north pole. They launch their icbm from there, also. Everyone is happy! Yada yada yada. However like the patriot fiasco showed during the gulf war…all they can really hope for is the incoming missiles to malfunction.

So the interceptors miss the target …where are the incoming missiles going to hit? The USA.the country they are aimed at.

BUT the US has silos and interceptors etc. in the USA and now they have to shoot these missiles down over Canada and launch over Canada too- THE BIG BUFFER ZONE violating our air space ..killing us to save their pathetic hinds.

So the solution is to have an anti missile system in Canada to make sure that when they shoot a missile over Canadian aerospace it is immediately shot down over THEM not US.

Now having Americans control all this is totally stupid for they would not shoot down there own missiles cause they are going over Canada’s aerospace will they? For crying out loud they think the god awfull terrorists come from here. Plus we have an evil socialist government in Saskatchewan.(right in the heart of North America) gasp, think they give a damn about the socialists. Yes, we must get rid of the socialists before they get rid of us.

NO the only way to protect Canada is if Canada protects itself. Both anti missile systems with missiles along the US/Canadian border and in the north. Run by Canadians not rouge trigger-happy psycho nations. That is the solution and if they want to fund it , fine.

As you can see Canada would rather beg and play stupid in these matters , and cross it’s fingers, pray and suck up to the US and hope they don’t destroy us in the process like a pile of cowards. Our leaders have let us down bigtime. Billion dollar ice breakers when global warming is melting all the ice. We are toast with that kind of thinking, but Canadians suck it up like oh we are so sovereign we have an icebreaker.

We have the energy to supply the demand of the high tec weapons of the future and we should be doing just that..to hell with the US. By the way they have to put on hold their high energy demanding weapon programs cause they don’t have the energy. WE do!!!
biggie





Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 1738
Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44
votes: 10
Location: Ottawa, Ontario

PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2006 1:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Buddy Kat wrote:
We know the US is a trigger happy kill kill kill nation


you are the only one that seems to "know" this - most of us know that that is one of the stupidest things we've ever heard.

Buddy Kat wrote:
If they had missiles where the warning stations are that would be a different story…


Yeah, and leftist conspiracy theory nutjob's would cry foul if that happened - just look at your comment i quoted above...

Buddy Kat wrote:
Yada yada yada. However like the patriot fiasco showed during the gulf war


I don't think you realize how far technology has come since the gulf war - Do you even know how long ago that was? As for the Patriot - It may not be the most effective weapon, although part of the "gulf war fiasco" you speak of was due to the Iraqi's modifications to the weapon, which made it break up upon re-entry. Aside from that, the very reason they're looking at this missile defence system is because of how poorly the current systems(patriots being one) operate.

Buddy Kat wrote:
BUT the US has silos and interceptors etc. in the USA and now they have to shoot these missiles down over Canada and launch over Canada too- THE BIG BUFFER ZONE violating our air space ..killing us to save their pathetic hinds.


WRONG - with canada as a "warning station", they have the ability to shoot down ICBMs before they reach North America - Nice Try though. Perhaps some research on your part would be a good idea.

Buddy Kat wrote:
So the interceptors miss the target …where are the incoming missiles going to hit? The USA.the country they are aimed at.


IF they hit their intended target - and that is a BIG if.. But hey, why not throw caution to the wind...
In war you can kill your enemy by cutting off their supply lines- guess what we are(Hence the Japanese attempts to burn our forests in WWII).

Buddy Kat wrote:
So the solution is to have an anti missile system in Canada to make sure that when they shoot a missile over Canadian aerospace it is immediately shot down over THEM not US.


This is just stupid.

Buddy Kat wrote:
We have the energy to supply the demand of the high tec weapons of the future and we should be doing just that..to hell with the US. By the way they have to put on hold their high energy demanding weapon programs cause they don’t have the energy. WE do!!!"


WHAT are you talking about? High energy weapons programs? you're not even talking about reality now..(I'm not sure you have been at all)

We all get it - You're jealous of the US.. The only way you can be patriotic is by trash talking the US because you know absolutely nothing about Canada. You come in here and spew falsehoods about the US and make up some world domination theory and think that somehow makes you right..
Its people like you that will cause this country(world) to fall into the wrong hands.. Your "stab our best friends in the back" attitude is sickening. Your complete lack of understanding on complex foreign policy, yet complete willingness to misrepresent what little you do know is disturbing. Perhaps you would consider doing some research before you come on to a site like this and spew your anti-american rhetoric.

Next time on the Buddy Kat show - "Jack Layton and the Taliban join us to burn american flags and install sharia law and head tax"
FF_Canuck





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 3360
Reputation: 73.4
votes: 17
Location: Southern Alberta

PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2006 8:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Biggie,

Pretty good points, except for this:
Quote:
WHAT are you talking about? High energy weapons programs? you're not even talking about reality now..(I'm not sure you have been at all)


The US Military is indeed continuing research in high energy space weapons systems. Most of the focus seems to be on high intensity lasers capable of destroying satellites. The same systems have several scientific / technological applications that are being researched simultaneously.

That being said, the idea that they have to shut down the research program due to a shortage of power is rediculous.


Last edited by FF_Canuck on Wed Oct 18, 2006 9:12 pm; edited 1 time in total
Cool Blue





Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 3130
Reputation: 114.9
votes: 10
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2006 8:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I wish we had a free trade agreement with Brazil, you are actually thinking Costa Rica or Peru, but it does not change your point that we have not really opened our doors to "economic powerhouses"


I think you're right.
biggie





Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 1738
Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44
votes: 10
Location: Ottawa, Ontario

PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2006 10:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

FF_Canuck wrote:
Biggie,

Pretty good points, except for this:
Quote:
WHAT are you talking about? High energy weapons programs? you're not even talking about reality now..(I'm not sure you have been at all)


The US Military is indeed continuing research in high energy space weapons systems. Most of the focus seems to be on high intensity lasers capable of destroying satellites. The same systems have several scientific / technological applications that are being researched simultaneously.

That being said, the idea that they have to shut down the research program due to a shortage of power is rediculous.


thanks,
that wasn't the part I was shocked about - I understand the high-intensity lasers ;) there are lasers of the sort crafted to 747s to destroy ICBMs... But all this
Quote:
By the way they have to put on hold their high energy demanding weapon programs cause they don’t have the energy.

nonsense..
Thats what has me shaking my head..
None of these weapons programs are costing energy that the US doesn't have. The very idea is laughable.

I'm sorry I wasn't very clear
cosmostein





Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 7431
Reputation: 297.2
votes: 21
Location: The World

PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2006 3:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cool Blue wrote:
Quote:
I wish we had a free trade agreement with Brazil, you are actually thinking Costa Rica or Peru, but it does not change your point that we have not really opened our doors to "economic powerhouses"


I think you're right.


If memory serves its currently:
NAFTA
Israel
Peru
Costa Rica

Which as you said, is hardly giving Canadian industry many options in terms of who we can do business with.
Cool Blue





Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 3130
Reputation: 114.9
votes: 10
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2006 5:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Which as you said, is hardly giving Canadian industry many options in terms of who we can do business with.


Its a no brainer that we go for a commonwealth free trade zone (In fact, I believe its actually CPC policy):

- stable democracies
- high level of human rights, though in negotiating with India we could persuade them to tighten up their labour laws
- common language
- similar legal/justice system
- similar culture (good for labour mobility)
- high level of technology
- more of less pro-free market

In a world that is becoming increasingly unstable, along with the emergence of China's economy, we NEED this common trade zone!

(this topic should maybe be split off into its own thread)
Duck Tory





Joined: 01 Dec 2006
Posts: 826
Reputation: 40.3Reputation: 40.3Reputation: 40.3Reputation: 40.3
votes: 4

PostPosted: Sun Dec 10, 2006 3:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

To say Stephen Harper is finish is a absolute Lie, The Conservatives and Harper are undoinging the damage that the Liberal Insurgency is cause during 13 years of Liberal Regime rule and 11 years under a tyrant such as Trudeau.
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 12:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Buddy Kat wrote:
As t is right now the US USES Canada as a warning system to protect their butts , not ours.


We have a common enemy. If we can help the US defeat it when we aren't the target then it is in our interest.

Quote:
To take a defence system seriously the missles would have to be both along the canadian north as well as along the border and preferably Canadian operated. That way Canada is insured of it's protection from both sides in a US foriegn war. Canada should be protecting it's own country from the east and west also.


We don't have the capability or the money. Of course we could give up medicare to finance it. Are you still on board?

Quote:
This present protect the US system under guise of protecting Canada will not work for Canada but rather the US only.


Did you sleep through September 11th, 2001? We have a common enemy.
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 2 of 3

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Stephen Harper is finished.

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB