BS: Congratulations to Canada

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Amos
Date: 15 Mar 03 - 10:39 AM

Puck 'em all, Metchosin! :>) If I may say so I think LH is over-emphasizing the corrupt side of business relationships. In my experience those who actually rise tot he top levels of MOST companies are highly intelligent, communicative people with a strong desire to make things better.

It's the exceptions, of course, that get all the press -- the ruthless boondogglers and the power-addicts.

But I think they number no more than 20% of senior executives in both our nations.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: *daylia*
Date: 15 Mar 03 - 12:06 PM

Metchosin, the Maple Leaf of my heart wilted a little at your comments and at the article "Canadian Complicity". Yeah, the back-thumping is fun for a while, but the truth about Canadian military and economic involvement in the arms race and in past and present American wars, legit or no, is no cause for celebration.

The first thing I thought about after reading your posts was how Canada approved the testing of the Cruise Missiles over the Northwest Territories in the 80s, in spite of the fact that we have declared ourselves a "nuclear-free zone" and that over 80,000 Canadians joined in the protests against the tests. For information click here
and scroll down to the entry "Trudeau Defends Missiles".

Check out Dieter Birk's article Why is Canada at war with Serbia? for a concise history of Canadian military 'strategy'. It's nothing to write home to mama about:

" In summary: We are not a sovereign state, we are at war when our foreign rulers dictate so. We have never been sovereign in foreign affairs since John Cabot claimed these lands in the name of King Henry VII."

This picture kinda says it all about the current situation with Iraq.

:(

Rebuttals anyone? Please!!

daylia

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: gnu
Date: 15 Mar 03 - 12:39 PM

Our "foreign rulers" are not our rulers. We belong to the Commonwealth, and thank goodness we do. Being part of the largest military force on earth not only has it's advantages, it has it's responsibilities. Are we "ruled" or do we "participate" ? If you disagree with this relationship and it's responsibilities, what do you suggest as an alternative ?

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: *daylia*
Date: 15 Mar 03 - 01:48 PM

Well it seems to me we've always been caught in a classic dilemna - damned if we do and damned if we don't. If we are 'ruled' by anything in these matters, it's by our most vital need to participate in the affairs of the Commonwealth, of NATO, of the USA and most recently of the G-8 economic globalization tactics. IMO.

daylia

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 15 Mar 03 - 05:02 PM

The other side of the "Corporate America" argument is the creation of wealth in the "puppet states" of Korea and Taiwan. Credit for their prosperity is owed in large part to the US. America exploits but America also builds.

I proudly stand by my post of 13 Mar 03 - 12:37 AM. Canada is a loyal ally of the CommonWealth of NATO and of the United States Canada has always steadfastly suported and respected the UN and Canada has often been a voice for moderation and peace within her alliances. There is nothing wrong with Canada's participation in the Arms Race. There is no doubt that the USSR would have pushed into Western Europe had they been allow. We have friends and allies in Western Europe. We had an obligation to aid our allies against the Soviets.

Each country in NATO must bend to the will of the other countries or the Alliance will fall apart. Currently the US Administration does not realise this. But they won't be around for ever. Mr. Bush is now learning that the US is not the only voice in NATO, that they are not our masters. That we have wills of our own.

I think that the Bush Administration

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 15 Mar 03 - 05:03 PM

Oops that last line is a typo.

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: *daylia*
Date: 16 Mar 03 - 09:39 AM

Jack said "Canada has always steadfastly suported and respected the UN and Canada has often been a voice for moderation and peace within her alliances."

That's so, Jack, but unfortunately her soldiers are not trained for moderation and peace, but for dehumanized killing. Last night on CBC Roughcuts, Kyle Brown of the now disbanded 1st Canadian Airborne Regiment was interviewed. It's eleven years ago today that a 16yr old Somalian teenager was tortured and murdered by the Canadian "peacekeepers" there.
Disturbing memories indeed.

Somalia 1992-93.

And a disturbing article comparing recent Canadian "peacekeeping" mission in Afghanistan with the criminal activities of Canadian troops in Somalia.

"Canada's army, like that of the US, went into Somalia to extend the economic and military influence of the western powers. All the talk of feeding the hungry was nothing but a smoke screen for imperialism ...
The Canadian Airborne was keeping the "peace" by torturing and imprisoning innocent citizens in a poor Third World country. The same soldiers are now doing the clean up operation for an imperialist war in Afghanistan.

"Peacekeeping" and war making in the hands of the Canadian forces, and under the direction of the Canadian state, are one and the same."

Again, let's not thump each other on the back too hard - might end up choking.

Peace - daylia

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: *daylia*
Date: 16 Mar 03 - 10:15 AM

Sorry that should have read "It's ten years ago today that a 16yr old Somalian was tortured and killed by Canadian "peacekeepers" there."
March 16, 1993.

daylia

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Little Hawk
Date: 16 Mar 03 - 10:48 AM

Jack - You said that "There is no doubt that the USSR would have pushed into Western Europe had they been allow(ed)" (during the 50 years following WWII).

Yeah. Uh-huh. What is never stated in the sacrosanct West, however, is this:

There is no doubt that the West (primarily the USA and the UK at the helm, with their allies of convenience) would have pushed into Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and Asia had they been allowed! The Soviets and the Chinese did not allow them to.

They would have pushed in by economic means, political means, or military force, if necessary (upon some excuse)...whatever worked.

There have been 2 (no, make that 3...) great empires of power trying to dominate the World since 1945 by "all means necessary" (to quote one of George Bush's favourite terms). They were the capitalist corporate West, the Soviets, and the Communist Chinese.

They used the following methods:

1. a barrage of political propaganda

2. a barrage of arms sales to interested parties everywhere

3. the encouragement of regional conflicts in disputed areas

4. the fomenting of revolutions and civil wars in small countries

5. the overthrow of regimes by a variety of methods

6. assassinations of uncooperative leaders (at home and abroad)

7. massive marketing of consumer goods (primarily on the part of the capitalist West, but now also on the part of China, which seems to be taking over that effort as an apparently handy surrogate of the corporate machine)

8. threats of all-out war (terrorism, in other words, since the intent IS to terrorize people into compliance)

9. economic warfare of many types

10. the militarization of space

11. the constant development of more and more deadly weapons, including biological, nuclear, chemical, and other weapons.

Most of the above, in fact, is terrorism.

The empire least successful in these efforts, ultimately, was the Soviets, as they effectively went bankrupt both economically and politically speaking, by the late 80's. The empire most successful (so far) has been the USA/UK/West. That may change fairly soon, since their credibility is almost completely shot at this point.

All 3 empires have falsely depicted themselves as the defender and hope of humanity, when they are anything but! They are the tripartite oppressors of humanity.

To support any one of them naively against the others is to miss the point.

Now I return to my 3rd paragraph:

There is no doubt that the West would have pushed into Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and Asia had they been allowed! The Soviets and the Chinese did not allow them to.

The West did try to push into Vietnam and Cambodia, but failed. They tried to push into a variety of places in the Middle East, Latin America, and Africa....sometimes with success, sometimes not. The Soviets tried to do the same thing, with similar results. Each served as a counterbalance to the other, which was actually helpful in maintaining a certain level of stability in the World.

Now....since the Soviets fell in '89, the West (USA/UK) has indeed been enthusiastically pushing into areas that they were formerly not allowed to by the presence, strength, and influence of the Soviets...and this has resulted in:

1. The complete breakup and ruination of the former Yugoslavia, and a whole series of terrible wars there.

2. The loss to Russia of most of its Eastern and Southern border areas, most particularly the vital oil region of the Caspian!

3. The invasion and occupying of Afghanistan by Western forces in a war which was being planned long before Sep 11, and which has allowed the West to start building its cherished oil pipline from the Caspian, and to resume growing the Afghan opium crop for export to the World.

4. A first Gulf War on Iraq in '91, and a follow-up finishing stroke any day now if Bush gets his way.

5. The destabilization of many other societies, especially in the Middle East.

6. The constant and increasing erosion of the social safety net in North America, and the increasing abrogation of our civil rights.

What you had in Europe at the end of World War II was Al Capone on one side of the Line and Lucky Luciano on the other. Now you may prefer Luciano to Capone, but watch what happens to your little neighborhood store when the rival gang collapses and Capone takes over the whole city.

Not good. Those guys play for keeps.

And yes, I'd far rather have lived in the West than under Stalin, but I fear a World with no checks and balances, and I fear a superpower that has so little respect for World opinion that it simply ignores it and does whatever it pleases! While the Soviets stood strong, it couldn't do that.

Who will now police the renegade cop?

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Metchosin
Date: 16 Mar 03 - 11:43 AM

daylia, truly sorry to wilt the maple leaf there with my "icing", don't know if its a national trait or just perversity on my part, but whenever I get truly pumped and proud of my country, eventually this little naggling feeling crops up and a little voice says "not so fast, hosehead" and I eventually throw my own wet blanket on my enthusiastic nationalism. Not that I would want to live any where else in the world for moment, but my wholehearted enthusiasm for this country rests more with the outright, overwhealming, awesomeness of the land itself and a bit less with it's political machinations.

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Metchosin
Date: 16 Mar 03 - 11:46 AM

not to mention the wonderful people, they really count for something too.

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Rustic Rebel
Date: 16 Mar 03 - 12:46 PM

Thanks to all for the insight into Canada. A lot of interesting read here. So say it if I am wrong, but I can assume any war US was involved, so was Canada, and/or visa-versa? Does that include the Korean war?
Peace. Rustic
PS. We have no hockey here. Our team The North Stars moved to Dallas. Imagine that, all that ice and no hockey team!

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Metchosin
Date: 16 Mar 03 - 01:01 PM

RR, we were deeply involved in the Korean War.

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 16 Mar 03 - 01:49 PM

Rustic Rebel!!! do I have good news for you! click here

You people seem to be holding Canada to an astoundingly high standard of perfection.

Daylia, the lesson to be taken from Somalia is that Canada did something about it. Those men were punished even though that 16 year old was one of hundreds thieves who were trying to steal food slated to be given to those less fortunate. What they did was wrong but most other countries would not have punished then and certainly would not have disbanded the regiment.

No Little Hawk I didn't mention that the West would have also pushed East if it were not for the Soviets. But the West Germany, France, Belgium etc are out Allies, we were sworn to protect them.

Point by Point.
1. The states of the Balkins have experienced hundreds of years of near constant fighting. The only thing that kept "Peace" from 1945 to 1989 was the dictatorship of Marsha, Tito, The UN went in there to disarmthem and bring peace. The use of uranium ammunition is very questionable, but the only reason for UN involvement was Peace and stability.

2. Those states were not the borders of Russia, they were the borders of the Russian Empire. In 1866 the Border between canada and the US was not the British border

3. There are thousands of such plans covering every possible situation. What is your point?   

4. The first Gulf war was supported by the Russians.

5. There weren't any countries in the Middle East before Britian defeated the Turks. The tribes on the Arabian Peninsula were contantly fighting over water and treasure, killing one another and taking slaves. One of the problems with stability in the Middle East is that the countries are so new. For something to be destabilized it has to be stable in the first place. The last time these places were stable was just befor the British governors left. Do you think they should still be under occupation to preserve their stability?

6. The erosion of the "safety net" has nothing to do with the conflict with the Soviets.

Little Hawk, Al Capone and Lucky Luciano? I guess you are exaggerating to make your point? :) It is the real world. I am proud of the choices Canada has made.

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Little Hawk
Date: 16 Mar 03 - 06:29 PM

I wasn't exaggerating by much, Jack! :-)

Replace the word "protect" in your sentence (West Germany, France, Belgium etc are our Allies, we were sworn to protect them.) with "exploit and make use of" and I'm right with you. The USA is mightily peeved right now that the French are not allowing themselves to be made use of. I wonder in what way the USA will retaliate? Economic moves, probably...

The erosion of our safety net has a very great deal to do with the fact that the world's great socialist powers have been in disarray since '89. It is the key. Remember the "peace dividend" that everyone was supposed to gain from the end of the Cold War? Remember how things were going to get better without all that need for building huge armed forces?

That was a lie. The very opposite has happened, and not because of Muslim fundamentalists either...they are another sorry byproduct of the same policies and policymakers from which the peace dividend lie emanated, because those guys built up Osama, Saddam and the Mujahedeen, armed them, and trained their soldiers. The scorpion they created to attack Russia and Iran has now stung them in the hand.

I was in no way excusing the Russians...I was merely saying that they served as a useful check and balance in some ways between 1945 and 1990. They are just as obvious in their naked self-interest as is corporate America and its bloodhound, Tony Blair's U.K.

To mention 3 opportunistic powers...there are others too.

Haven't time for the rest now. Too bad we can't just meet at the restaurant and talk or something.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Rustic Rebel
Date: 16 Mar 03 - 08:30 PM

Little Hawk- I'll tell you how the US is retaliating against the French right now. It's called alcohol abuse. Ignorant people dumping perfectly good French wine down the drains. Not to mention some off the wall theory to change the names of French toast and French fries into liberty toast and freedom fries. Now that is sad if you ask me.I heard a comment about that this morning and it's like what next? Egg-freedom-young and German potato salad will be just plain potato salad?!

Jack! show's how hockey ignorant I am doesn't it! I never heard of this team but I see they beat the Dallas Stars. That's a good thing. Thanks for showing me that site.
Peace. Rustic

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 16 Mar 03 - 09:42 PM

A conversation in restaurant would be fun. We could meet in Cincinati, an eleven hour drive for both of us. :)As "much" is a relative term, I will point out that if you replace "protect" with "tickle (our allies) with a feather". You get a completely valid meaning, which is quite different than yours. The present diplomatic debacle is due to the Bush Administration's particular arrogance,    complete disregard for history, and extraordinary incompetance. Simply put, Bush is having a tough time with France either because Rumsfeld and the other hawks in the administration want to       discredit the UN or because Bush is an idiot. It has nothing to do with the cold war, likewise the erosion of social programs have nothing to do with the demise of socialism and everthing to do with spoiled, selfish ex-yuppie baby boomers whinging and voting themselves lower taxes. That brings me to the point of this points.

I haven't lived in Ontario for a while so I have forgotten the unwritten rule that every time we start to feel patriotic then Canadians are obliged to feel guilty and whinge about the littleist things which "prove" how bad we are. People in the US are constantly saying that they have the greatest country in the world saying that the USA can do no wrong. Maybe we can learn from each other.

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Little Hawk
Date: 16 Mar 03 - 10:52 PM

Jack, I am not willing to drive to Cincinnati for a meal! :-) Matter of fact, I am going to stay north of that border until there is "regime change" in the USA, I think. I consider that country more dangerous with every passing day. I kid you not. And not because of muslim terrorists, either...

Where exactly are you these days?

It has never ceased to amaze me how Americans can say they have the "greatest country in the world", but I'm sure a lot of Germans said that too about the Reich, between 1933 and 1944 or thereabouts. It's typical of the populations of great powers. The British believed for hundreds of years that they were living in the greatest society and the greatest democracy of all time.

Canada is a modest country, a very good one in many ways, and modesty is a virtue worth cultivating, since it tends to promote tolerance and the willingness to live and let live.

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 17 Mar 03 - 12:20 AM

LH

Patriotism is a good thing when it stops short of arrogance. If we are proud of the good things that our leaders do rather than whining about the bad, more Canadians, like Philippe Kirsch will be inspired to build upon these successes and go out and help change the world for the better.

Modesty is good when it allows the people of a country to ask its leaders to step back a bit and listen to its allies, to try to build consensus rather than coerce. To at least be polite when addressing the UN.

The people of our countries have lessons for each other.

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Little Hawk
Date: 17 Mar 03 - 10:56 AM

Yup, and courage is a good thing when it stops short of arrogant violence and brutality.

Every nation is a part of the quilt that makes up one humanity, and its particular virtues add beautiful color to that quilt.

When one nation begins imagining that the rest of the quilt revolves around it, however, the whole quilt is in danger of unraveling...as is now happening.

When one nation assumes that it is intrinsically superior to all other nations it becomes a danger to its own people, to its neighbours, and even to the whole world, and yet this has happened over and over again throughout history.

It has happened with countries like:

Assyria

Persia

Greece

Rome

Spain

Great Britain

France

Germany

Japan

China

Kampuchea (the Khymer Rouge)

Iraq

The USA

Israel

When this obsession of supposed superiority over others takes over a nation, it commonly uses the ideal of patriotism to justify police state tactics at home and invasion and destruction abroad.

One thing is certain: Such a nation finally ends up with much of the rest of the World forming a grand alliance against it, and it is finally brought down from its tower of hubris, and frequently crushed utterly in the process, thus inheriting the whirlwind it released upon the community of nations. That is the fate of tyrants, large and small.

It happened to Spain. It happened to Germany. It happened to Japan.

Bear it in mind.

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 17 Mar 03 - 11:35 AM

For the sake of this conversation, how about If I admit the the US sucks and you admit that Canada doesn't.

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: gnu
Date: 17 Mar 03 - 11:47 AM

Tsk tsk. Not very Canuck of you.

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 17 Mar 03 - 12:01 PM

Yeah Gnu, I know. I really do love it here. But SOME of the things I see make me really appreciate Canada.

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Rustic Rebel
Date: 17 Mar 03 - 04:54 PM

Canada announced today that it was not going to back the US in this war. And the people cheered.
Little Hawk, I sadly agree with you on your last post about getting brought down to a level of, for better words, reality. I personally have always had a problem with the US trying to be the leaders of the world. I have stated my opinion on that many times over. Matter of fact my protest sign reads "we don't control the world." It actually sickens me at what is happening here and perhaps this will be a lesson we will have to learn a hard way.
Peace. Rustic

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Peter T.
Date: 17 Mar 03 - 04:55 PM

It is worth pointing out that our Prime Minister, about whom I have said some bad things in my time, has just announced that Canada will not participate in this war. Hat off to you, sir: you know well what this is going to cost us. yours, Peter T.

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Little Hawk
Date: 17 Mar 03 - 05:57 PM

Jack - Well, I would never say of any country that it "sucks"...but...hmmm...

Okay, I'll say this. I greatly prefer Canada to the USA in a general sense, though I feel that both countries have some good points and some fine characteristics as well as some bad points and some real problem areas.

The main problem I have with the USA is the few rich people at the top, and the ceaseless flow of false propaganda with which they brainwash their population. I like most ordinary Americans. I could say the same about Canada and Canadians.

How's that?

Bravo, Jean Chretien! Bravo!

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Amos
Date: 17 Mar 03 - 06:50 PM

A second cheer for the Canadian nation for their stand on the Iraq war. At the very least they are sticking to what they believe in the face of extreme suasion, and that is worth a cheer all by itself.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: CarolC
Date: 17 Mar 03 - 07:00 PM

Congratulations to Canada for its Prime Minister's announcement today.

Congratulations, also, for this article in the CBC's website:

Reality Check: A New American Century

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: *daylia*
Date: 17 Mar 03 - 07:29 PM

Yahooooo ... Canada is not going to war?!? And I heard it first right here on Mudcat!! I can hardly believe it ... like, we're finally standing on our own two feet no matter how overwhelming the storms around us get? Could Canada finally be coming of age? Yahooooooooooooo!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Metchosin
Date: 17 Mar 03 - 08:52 PM

Thank you Mr. Chretien!.....even if you are a Liberal.*BG* ya done good.

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Hester
Date: 17 Mar 03 - 10:46 PM

>>>In my experience those who actually rise tot he top levels of MOST companies are highly intelligent, communicative people with a strong desire to make things better.<<<

Yowza! Amos, what planet are you living on? Sounds like a nice place.

I spent 5 years as an editor of corporate documents, mostly written by Canadian CEOs. Prior to that experience, I thought such people were greedy and evil, but very smart and good at what they did. After seeing the gobbledygook they spewed out of their word processors, I realized that, not only were they greedy and evil, most of them were illiterate and incompetent too. Half of them left their "Marketing Strategies" blank and left me (a freelance editor with no experience in business and fairly radical left-wing politics) to come up with a strategy for them. The client for whom I worked on sub-contract used to tell me to just "make something up" and "wing it".

Now, happily, I just write about folklore. Doesn't pay much, but it doesn't make me crazy either.

To quote Rhett Miller (who's kinda folky in an alt.country kind of way):

"This is what I do ... for a living!"

Cheers, Hester ... and geez, looks like I'll have to check the National at 11pm and see what old Jean actually said. So far, he's shown a surprising amount of backbone for a weasley Liberal (plus some tricky subterfuge).

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: gnu
Date: 18 Mar 03 - 07:03 AM

Well, I think what he said was just plain Canuck. However, we are not "out of the woods" just yet. There is still a possibility of a UN vote to join in the fray, depending upon the events that unfold in Iraq in the next few weeks. Let's just wait and see what happens.

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: *daylia*
Date: 18 Mar 03 - 07:31 AM

Mr. Chretien's statement in the Commons yesterday did not mention the withdrawal of Canadian troops and equipment already stationed in Afghanistan and the Persian Gulf. And he did make it clear that we are still actively engaged in the so-called "war against terrorism" with our ally, the United States.

I, for one, highly suspect that the "war against terrorism" is nothing but American propoganda supporting Western "imperialism" in third world countries. So although this is a step in the right direction, as it supports the UN and international law, as gnu said we'll just have to wait and see.

Peace

daylia

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Amos
Date: 18 Mar 03 - 08:40 AM

Daylia:

I am as skeptical of the current government as y9ou are, generally -- but as to the legitimacy of the war on terrorism, there is no question that it is a real and serious issue. Surely you don't need a replay of the unilateral warmongering undertaken by a small group of well-organized fanatics two Septembers ago?

A

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: *daylia*
Date: 18 Mar 03 - 11:03 AM

Amos I certainly need no repeat of Sept 11 to convince me that "terrorism" exists! However, I am highly suspicious about who those terrorists really are, especially considering the timing of the attacks in the context of George Bush's plans for America even before he was (supposedly) "elected".

This is a documentary report aired on CBC's "The National" last night.   (The page was not "link-friendly" - sorry bout that). It presents disturbing evidence that the conflict with Iraq is only a small part of Bush et al's agenda of "conquest" of the entire world in the interests of the USA. I've emphasized the parts I feel are most relevant.


Confrontation scripted years ago

"PETER MANSBRIDGE: As the prospect of an attack on Iraq moves closer to reality, some people are still wondering whether it was all pre-determined. Tonight Neil Macdonald presents evidence that suggests the answer is yes, but the current confrontation with Iraq was actually scripted years ago.

GEORGE W. BUSH (U.S. President): (October 11, 2000) ...in the market places.

NEIL MACDONALD (Reporter): These words were once uttered by George W. Bush, presidential candidate.

BUSH: But I think one way for us to end up being viewed as the ugly American is for us to go around the world saying we do it this way so should you.

MACDONALD: Now, one of the President's more recent assertions.

BUSH: The world has a clear interest in the spread of democratic values because stable and free nations do not breed the ideologies of murder. By the resolve and purpose of America and of our friends and allies, we will make this an age of progress and liberty.

MACDONALD: So, what happened? Well, September 11th happened obviously and George W. Bush had to rethink. But for many of those around Bush, there was no rethink. There didn't have to be. Long before September 11th, a small influential group of neo-Conservatives here in Washington had wanted to see the United States transformed into a sort of benevolent ruler, unchallenged, astride the world. And long before George W. Bush was elected, they sat down and wrote down a manifesto.

JAY BOOKMAN (Deputy Editorial Page Editor, The Atlanta Journal Constitution): It basically saying the United States has to take responsibility to enforce peace around the world and enforce what they call American principles and American interests.

MACDONALD: The document was effectively a charter of the project for a new American century, a neo-Conservative think tank in Washington.

BOOKMAN: The founding members included Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Wolfowitz, Paul Wolfowitz of the Defence Department, Richard Pearl, head of Defence Advisory Board, Lewis Libby, Cheney's chief of staff, John Bolton under Secretary of State for arms control, Eliot Cohen who's on the defence policy board.

MACDONALD: Much of what these men wanted is coming true. They urged U.S. abandon the anti-ballistic missile treaty. It has. They wanted establishment of more permanent U.S. military bases abroad. That is happening in the Philippines and in Georgia and will likely happen in Iraq. They urge regime change as a goal of foreign wars, not just in Iraq. They wanted the U.S. as a global constabulary - their word - unburdened by the UN or world opinion preventing any challenge to U.S. dominance. But, they wrote, a year before September 11th, such aspirations are unlikely to be realized without a catastrophic and catalyzing event, like in Pearl Harbour. William Crystal, a leading neo-Conservative and director of the project for a new American century believes such goals are good and right and he's delighted with all the success but he says there's more to do.

WILLIAM CRYSTAL: We haven't persuaded the Bush administration of everything. I think we need to spend more on defence. I think they need to rethink their policy towards Saudi Arabia. They kicked the can down the road on North Korea but obviously they're going to have to deal with that.

MACDONALD: The U.S. has Gary Cooper in High Noon, says critics, standing tall, all alone, building a new American empire in a new American century. Neil Macdonald, CBC News, Washington."


I have quite a few problems with Bush's statements:

How can Bush claim that "stable and free countries [I assume he means the US] do not breed the ideologies of murder" when the US has one of the highest homicide rates in the world? This 1997 report shows that America has the highest rates of childhood homicide, suicide and firearm-related death among industrialized nations. Wouldn't the rest of the planet would be much better off if the Americans kept their "stable and free" (choke!) culture to themselves!

How the H*** does one "enforce peace" in the world? Seems to me   
that "peace" must be freely chosen, or it's not "peace" at all!

What, or Who gives Americans the right to enforce "American principles and American interests" on anyone else? Oh, maybe it's that "God" in "In God We Trust"?!    ;)

The US as a "global constabulatory", unburdened by global opinion, the UN and international law? Now that's a chilling prospect indeed!

But not half as chilling as the statement "before September 11th, such aspirations are unlikely to be realized without a catastrophic and catalyzing event, like in Pearl Harbour."

So Bush needed a "catastrophic and catalyzing event" to get his plans for world domination off the ground? Geez, and then, just like a miracle, those pesky "terrorists" came through for him on Sept 11! What a very odd coincidence indeed! Betcha our Dreaded Guest would have a heyday with that one!

When the CBC starts playing much the same tunes as the "infowars" conspiracy theorists, I really start to wonder! Time will tell ...

daylia

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 18 Mar 03 - 01:17 PM

I really don't think that The Republicans are responsible for 9/11. But I do think the 9/11 was the deciding factor in the implimentation of Wolfawitz's plan. Its a response to the question. How can the US guarantee that a terrorist group can never again cause mass destruction. I can see their reasoning. I just don't think it will work.

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Hester
Date: 18 Mar 03 - 01:59 PM

>>>the United States transformed into a sort of benevolent ruler, unchallenged, astride the world<<<

Um ... how would that predicted future differ from the status quo we've lived with ever since the end of the Cold War?

Oh, I see! In future, the U.S. government is going to be "benevolent" in its attempts at world domination.

Scary times.

Sigh, Hester

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Amos
Date: 18 Mar 03 - 02:51 PM

Daylia:

The coincidence of thought in the document you mention and the fact that Bushwah's principals were part of the group that wrote it is definitely unsettling as far as insight into their real "vision". But I think the notion of their manipulating a terrorist strike killing thousands in order to march into their dreams is farfetched.

And far as the power of the United States, the ideology of murder is not part of our (the U.S.') collective character--certainly, at least, not an acknowledged part; it arises all too often in the most suppressed and psychotic of our citizens, and that seems to include those guiding Mister Bush's so-called policies in the world. This is generally not true, however, of self-defence. Unfortunately Mister Bush seems to have confused the two. I believe that he is mentally...challenged.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: CarolC
Date: 18 Mar 03 - 03:06 PM

Um ... how would that predicted future differ from the status quo we've lived with ever since the end of the Cold War?

Oh, I see! In future, the U.S. government is going to be "benevolent" in its attempts at world domination.

Hester, I think you miss the point. In the scenario envisioned by the Project for a New American Century, you can remove the word "attempts at" from your second sentence, ie: "In future, the U.S. government is going to be "benevolent" in its domination of the world".

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 18 Mar 03 - 05:42 PM

Hmmmm, :) in the past the US has constantly waivered between involvement and isolationism. Now they want to get VERY involved. at least we'll all be taking our orders from "the best country in the World".

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Little Hawk
Date: 18 Mar 03 - 11:03 PM

Amos - I've been reading some interesting stuff about Bush in a book called "Bush's Brain - How Karl Rove Made George W. Bush Presidential".

It's a good and balanced book, I think, by two respected Texan journalists who've known Bush and Rove personally for many years, and who seem to rather like George Bush on a personal level, while disagreeing with his policies.

The impression I get very strongly is this: Bush is NOT stupid, he's no moron...neither is he brilliant or what you would call extremely smart. He's a man of fairly average intelligence, with the benefit of a good deal of personal charm (though that's been less evident of late, given the crisis he is involved in now).

Karl Rove (Bush's chief political and campaign advisor) is a brilliant man and an almost completely amoral one who will do absolutley anything to win. That's all he wants in any situation, he wants to win and to utterly crush his opponents. To read about his career guiding G.W. and other Republicans to electoral victories is to experience cold chills.

I think Bush is a rather ordinary, once quite likeable guy...who has been corrupted to a great extent by his handlers, most notably by Rove.

I think the present administration is now the most dangerous regime the World has seen since 1939, and maybe even more dangerous than that.

Check out the book if you have the time. It's fascinating, though very detailed reading, and it does not bode well for the future of either America or the World in general. These guys take no prisoners, if you know what I mean...

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Dave Bryant
Date: 19 Mar 03 - 06:36 AM

*Daylia*

It's often said that the sacrifice the Canadians made at the slaughter of Dieppe (almost 4000 casualties out of a landing party of 5000) was vital to the success of the D-Day landing a couple days later.

Over a year and a half later !

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Amos
Date: 19 Mar 03 - 08:12 AM

LH:

Thanks for the book. I'm aware of Rove, the quiet hand behind the throne. Between Rove, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, and two or three other second stringers, the Administration is a nasty den indeed, although nowhere as nasty as Hussein & Sons. It really seems Berkeley was tight about the corruption that comes with power in human affairs.

You might also enjoy "The Bush Dyslexicon", a telling analysis. I still object to him, although I know he's in a very difficult position. I haven't seen any of the charm you mention.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Teribus
Date: 19 Mar 03 - 08:43 AM

Re: Dieppe Raid:

The attack upon Dieppe took place on August 19, 1942. The troops involved totaled 6,100 of whom roughly 5,000 were Canadians, the remainder being British Commandos and 50 American Rangers.

Of the 4,963 Canadians who embarked for the operation only 2,210 returned to England, and many of these were wounded. There were 3,367 casualties, including 1,946 prisoners of war; 907 Canadians lost their lives.

As "Daylia" mentioned the lessons learned were vital to the success of D-day, all of the following came about as direct or indirect results of the Dieppe Raid:

Mulberry Harbours
Steer clear of towns
Don't land on shingle beaches
Perform detailed and accurate beach surveys prior to landing
Requirement for specialist armour to overcome strong-points and obstacles - "Hobarts Funnies"
Improved co-ordination of joint arms operations
Improved fire control plans
Invention of Decca navigation system
PLUTO

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: *daylia*
Date: 19 Mar 03 - 10:01 AM

Thanks Teribus for clearing up my error re the time lapse between Dieppe and D-Day (again)!

Yesterday I noted that in his statement to Parliament March 17, Prime Minister Chretien did not mention the withdrawal of Canadian troops already stationed in Afghanistan and the Persian Gulf. Looks like I spoke too soon ... withdrawal of Canadian troops from Qatar began yesterday. Article here.

A couple days ago my father, a Canadian Armed Forces veteran, told the family that the most pressing reason for Chretien's decision is that most of our military equipment is out-dated and in deplorable condition (unlike our fine servicemen and women of course). Last night's CBC story about our Sea King helicopters seems to confirm his statement. Apparently, Canada's
"failure to provide new electronic night vision gear has forced missions to be scrapped, and makes Sea Kings unwelcome as participants in missions with allied forces." Not exactly a proud Canadian moment!

However, kudos to Jean Chretien for refusing to participate in an illegal invasion of a sovereign nation. According to his statement in the Commons yesterday, "the goal of disarming Saddam Hussein could have been achieved if Iraq was given a few more weeks to comply with UN weapons inspections," and "forcing a regime change is not desirable. Many leaders in the world are not his friends, but, he adds, only the local people have the right to change government. "If we change every government we don't like in the world where do we start? Who is next?" Good question!

Way back in Sept 2002, Mr. Chretien said he needed clear evidence that Hussein possessed WMD before he would join in a US-led attack without UN auspice. He said ""A proof is a proof. What kind of a proof? It's a proof. A proof is a proof. And when you have a good proof, it's because it's proven."

Not exactly Shakespeare, but his level-headed eloquence still outshines Dubya's in my opinion!

And he makes a lot more sense, from the perspective of humanitarianism and international law than the Canadian Alliance Party's Stephen Harper, who says "The important thing is that always Canada should work closely with its closest allies, particularly its military allies… That's where our bread is buttered."

Hey Mr. Harper - ever tried your bread without butter? Still tasty, less calories and a lot better for your health!

daylia

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: *daylia*
Date: 19 Mar 03 - 10:48 AM

Oh yes, I wanted to respond to Amos who said And far as the power of the United States, the ideology of murder is not part of our (the U.S.') collective character--certainly, at least, not an acknowledged part..."

As a Canadian inundated with American "culture" via TV and movies all my life, I know very well the American love of and fascination with murder, war and violent crime. American murderers end to become cultural 'icons' - almost 'heroes'. Look at Jeffrey Dahmer and OJ Simpson! Violence and crime continue to be Hollywood staples, the more graphic and demented the better - and especially if sex is combined with the violence. TV cop/forensic science shows are top of the ratings lists. And American weapons manufacturers make a huge killing every year providing guns to anyone who wants them, that the slaughter continue.

American history is just one bloody conquest after another. It speaks for itself.

And the statistics speak for themselves too. According to the article I linked you to above," The homicide rate for children in the United States was five times higher than that for children in the other 25 countries combined (2.57 per 100,000 compared with 0.51)"

Yes, American children are born and bred for dehumanized violence and war. US Army video games are now free for the downloading for any American teenager. Now Big Brother can train them for killing, in the comfort of their own homes without even having to pay them a salary! What a breakthrough for those revered American principles and foreign interests!

IMO this world would become a much safer, peaceful place if Americans honestly acknowledged who they really are, and worked to change it.

daylia

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Rick Fielding
Date: 19 Mar 03 - 11:03 AM

WHOOPS, payback time has begun!

They started X-RAYING trucks crossing the border at three points, the Peace bridge, Fort Erie, and Lewiston (which they subsequently closed with a five km. long line of trucks.)

Just the beginning. Ohhhhh, are we gonna get our little Soviet Canuckistanian wrists slapped!

Cheers

Rick

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: *daylia*
Date: 19 Mar 03 - 11:11 AM

Oh well, Rick. Looks like we may just have to get used to having our bread without the butter, so to speak. Good.

At least we have the bread - unlike the Iraqis.

daylia

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Little Hawk
Date: 19 Mar 03 - 02:32 PM

Uh-huh. They can do what the hell they like at the border (I speak somewhat facetiously when I say that)...I am not going to the USA anyway. I am not going near the USA. The USA is a rogue nation out of control.

I may consider going there again, after regime change. I hope it doesn't take too long.

I am sorry that George Bush has such crazy advisors.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to Canada
From: Amos
Date: 19 Mar 03 - 04:12 PM

You know how it is, daylia -- you can never find a cop around when you need one!! But when you don't they're all over your front yard.

Seriously, I submit you are confusing our culture with the barbarian rituals of our most uncultured. THis is like asserting that the entire Chinese civilization is characterized by MahJonng, opium and Mao.

This nation was not founded on the principles of daytime television or Hollywood, anymore than Canada was. I concur that it deeply unsettling to see the US invading a foreign country uninvited and arguably unprovoked, or at least only indirectly. It hasn't happened since the first quarter of the 20th century with the Phillipines. On the other hand we have never been invaded before, at least since 1812, and clearly we are not handling it very well, collectively. I have nothing to say about the mass stupidity of some of our individual citizens. Our public communication channels have never been in worse condition, from news to music.

A