BS: War with Canada?

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Apr 02 - 09:18 PM

Yeah, Ebbie, it's a two-bit, depressing little place a way down the road from Sudbury. Sudbury is a much larger, but similarly depressing place, although they've cleaned it up some...it used to look like the surface of the moon would after a major war (it's a mining town).

Shane (BDiBR) is one of Blind River's most articulate young fellas, and he surfs the Net between 6-packs. He is God's gift to stupid people everywhere...

Mind you, his patriotism is really quite touching, isn't it? I feel safer at night knowing that guys like Shane are out there holding the fort against all comers. :-)

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Ebbie
Date: 11 Apr 02 - 07:58 PM

Whoa... Had I realized Blind River is in *Canada* I would've watched my tongue. I'm shakin' in zee boots.

Ebbie

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: GUEST,Blind DRunk in Blind River
Date: 11 Apr 02 - 01:52 PM

EBbie = Hey, dom't gtet sarcastic with us Canadidans, eh? We don't like have to like bend over and take your abouse eh! We run a tight ship up here and we don[t need no flippin sarcasm from readneck yanks neether! Your beer sucks majorly! Your hockey players are all from Timmins and Trois-Riveriere (or however the flip ya spell it). We got Don Cherry too, eh, and his dog, eh, and they can whup yer little ice right off the ice, eh? We got Tim Hortons donut shops on every corner, and you loosers just got lousy old Dunkin Donuts! We got Export and Canadian and you don't! We are the best!!!

You guys, you thibnk yu gotta have 2 hbillioin nucular bombs and B52's to be safe...ya know what we have in Canada? A couple truckloads of old rifles, 3 old destroyers and a squad of mounties. That's all we NEED to feel safe, man! Cos we kick butt. NOOOObody messes with Canada, flipface! You can flippin quote me on that, loser!!!

You wnat a war, just come to Blind River. Any time.

BDiBR

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Apr 02 - 10:51 PM

A war with Mexico is more to my liking.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Lepus Rex
Date: 10 Apr 02 - 12:40 AM

Aw, why does everyone want to ditch Duluth? I'd give them everything west of St.Cloud and south of downtown Mpls. And Wisconsin. All of it. But, dammit, I like Duluth! :o

---Lepus Rex

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: SDShad
Date: 10 Apr 02 - 12:30 AM

Okay, Mousethief, they can have Duluth, but we keep the North Shore, dammit!

Shad

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Apr 02 - 12:06 AM

TRADE WAR? WITH CANADA?

The United States recently increased a 19% tariff and penalties to 31.88% on imported Canadian softwood lumber. The U.S. wants to further increase this penalty. British Columbia residences propose retaliation by adding a 300% export tariff on Softwood lumber heading into the United States. Other proposals put forward to the Province of B.C. which controls B.C. Hydro is to limit or cut off Natural Gas and Hydroelectricity power to the U.S., which is expected to cause long term rolling blackouts down the entire west coast of the United States. Oil rich Alberta also affected by the softwood lumber penalties could join British Columbia to cease selling Oil to the U.S., as gasoline prices in U.S. would be expected to jump above $5.00 U.S. per gallon. Suffering U.S. airline industry would be expected to collapse, as jet fuel costs could double ticket prices. The domino effect on the U.S. economy would result in the worst economic collapse since the Depression.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Apr 02 - 04:30 AM

The Canadian dollar is becoming worthless. No need for war they can buy the country, all except for Quebec which is best left to worthless froggs.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Hrothgar
Date: 08 Apr 02 - 07:03 AM

I'm a bit late coming into this thread, and from my more detached Australian viewpoint, I'd just like to clear up a small detail.

Wasn't the British-American war from 1776-1783 the American Revolution, and the war from 1812-1814 called the War of 1812 or the American War of Independence?

And if you really want some good stuff about the Canucks doing over the Yanks, look up the Stan Rogers website, and read the background for songs like "The Nancy," "McDonell on the Heights" and "Billy Green."

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Apr 02 - 04:21 AM

Interesting to read the references to 1066 in the thread. The misconception that Britain has successfully defended against invasion since that date seems to be widely held. Britain has been invaded nine times since 1066, the last time being 1688.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Ebbie
Date: 07 Apr 02 - 04:51 AM

Owlkat, I take a bit of exception to your all-encompassing rant. Among other things, you seem to be using a double standard of measurement. On the one hand, you present yourselves as the hapless, helpless victims of U.S. greed and aggression, and you ask us to stop. So, are you saying that you, as an individual, are unhappy with what we, as individuals, are doing? Or are we individuals somehow responsible for governmental policies? If U.S. citizens are responsible for what the U.S. is doing to Canada, why aren't Canadian citizens (subjects, citizens, whatever) responsible for what Canada is doing?

You say that the U.S. is competing unfairly with Canada because our products are privately owned and "the prices are jacked up." What?

Incidentally, you say, BC Hydro has been piping electricity to California for months to help out with the power shortage and hasn't recieved a dime for it yet. If BC Hydro/Canada are worried about payment for the electricity, why in the world are they continuing to send it?

And don't forget that it is *Canada*, not the U.S. or Alaska, that wants to route the projected Alaska gasline (not oil, if we are thinking about the same event) across Canada. My guess is that Canada anticipates a bit of profit in that transaction.

I'm sure you are smart enough to know and accept that each country every where whines and grubs for advantage, that each of them consider themselves in danger of being harmed. The U.S. is no different from Canada in that.

"You people have no idea what it's like on this side of the line, watching successive governments posting FOR RENT signs on our foreheads, watching our culture (such as it is) being McDonaldized, watching our health care systems being privatized to follow the American model, seeing our publishing industry weakened to the point that our school textbooks are being printed in New Jersey, watching the processess of our national elections being pulled down in the American muckraking style of mudslinging, and even seeing the spelling of the language we use being altered to fit the American model." You poor, poor things.

Ebbie

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Lucius
Date: 07 Apr 02 - 12:12 AM

Canada invade the U.S.? Not all bad, I wouldn't mind some progressive gun laws on the books, and a little less jingoism. But with my luck, they'd invade New Hampshire and make us part of Quebec.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Apr 02 - 11:17 PM

Interesting.... God spelled the continents with CAPITOL letters and chose to relegate "canada" to lower case letters.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: GUEST,Canada
Date: 05 Apr 02 - 11:29 PM

One time the Lord disappeared for seven days and seven nights,when he returned the angel michael asked him where he went.The Lord replied I was making a new planet called Earth,Imade a country called Africa for people with dark skin so they can stand the heat,then I made Asia for people with lighter skin,then I made Europe for white people.Then I made this Large beautiful country full of rivers and steams,and forests where people will be able to live in peace and prosperity for all time,I call it canada.The angel Michael asked why did these people deserve such a great place,to which the Lord replied just wait until they see the loud mouth braggards like that large lump of shit Matt R that I put to the south of them.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Beer
Date: 05 Apr 02 - 11:00 PM

I live in an area called "The Chateauguy Valley" which is located in Quebec,Canada. During the war of 1812 the Americans were pushed back and Quebec was saved by the the farmers and the help of the British. On my lawn I have a granet rock about 3 feet in diameter which has carved into it "U.S.A.". Quite often I look at it and wonder if my American friend ever made it home.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Apr 02 - 05:41 PM

A top Canadian official said: The Kyoto agreement to fight global warming is not dead and Canada still intends to meet its environmental commitments, despite the withdrawal of White House support for the international accord. We're going to discuss with them what those reservations are, and we'll try to overcome them." Canada is now pumping out 13 percent more greenhouse gases than in 1990, but Fauteux iterated the nation's commitment to meeting its target of a 6 percent reduction below 1990. April 3rd, Prime Minister Jean Chretien called on the United States to stick with the Kyoto accord to combat global warming, and iterated Canada's intention to honor its commitment to cut greenhouse gases. Jean Chretien is worried by what he sees as a confrontational and isolationist tone by the new U.S. administration and is getting ready to adopt a harder line with Washington if necessary.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: bob schwarer
Date: 05 Apr 02 - 10:09 AM

Plus gators, skeeters, Palmetto bugs (roaches), fire ants,and coral snakes. Maybe I'll leave too. There's a song somewhere about damn Winnabagos from Michigan. Happy sight is a Michigan car heading North.

It's about that time so I guess I'll head for the interstate and cheer. Need to get there early and get a good seat.

Bob S.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Apr 02 - 12:59 AM

Look, Bob S....three quarters of the most annoying jerks in Canada go to Florida every winter, and leave the rest of us Canucks in relative peace here. Please do not suggest making them stay home! That's all we need.

With any luck, the snowbirds will like Florida so much that they will never come back...(hasn't worked yet, but I've got my fingers crossed...maybe if you put in more drive-in urinals or something).

Face it, Bob, anyone who likes Florida, with its astounding crime rate, its unhealthy humidity, and its tacky T-shirts and hanging chads has gotta be a couple short of a 6-pack anyway. Those snowbirds are nuts, and you can have 'em.

(*just joking, okay?)

- LH (in Ontario, Canada)

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Lepus Rex
Date: 04 Apr 02 - 07:50 PM

Uh, holy crap, it's mousethief! Welcome back. :)

Oh, yeah: Duluth?! They can have Duluth, if they can pry it from my cold, dead, vacation!

---Lepus Rex

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: bob schwarer
Date: 04 Apr 02 - 03:00 PM

Maybe Canada will keep their tourists at home. Oh joy.

Bob S in Florida. Ontario plates to the right of me. Ontario plates to the left of me. HELP

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: mousethief
Date: 04 Apr 02 - 09:59 AM

They can have Duluth, too.

Alex

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Rolfyboy6
Date: 04 Apr 02 - 07:34 AM

Proof. Canadian Imperialism

Beware the bland bomb. It is clever that the US is reducing the ozone layer so that invading Canadian forces will be struck with skin cancer. Nevertheless, I think we should surrender now and give them North Dakota. So what if they rename it South Manitoba?

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: gnu
Date: 04 Apr 02 - 05:40 AM

So start a new thread... this one is dead.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: GUEST,fe
Date: 04 Apr 02 - 05:38 AM

We have obviously become involved in trade war.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: JedMarum
Date: 12 Apr 01 - 12:49 PM

The War with Canada has already started, and Dallas won the first major battle last night; 2-1 in OT on a goal by Jamie Langenbrunner. Great battle for a Dallas fan - but the Oilers look strong.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: kendall
Date: 12 Apr 01 - 06:46 AM

Owlkat, some of us know exactly what you are talking about. We have an old saying here, "Money makes the mare go." Sad, but, true.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: RichM
Date: 12 Apr 01 - 03:36 AM

Best comment in this thread?

Art Thieme's:

"A man will die for an idea---providing that idea isn't quite clear to him."

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Owlkat
Date: 12 Apr 01 - 12:01 AM

Hi, War with Canada is hardly a question. We're already at war. PEI potatoes have been totally unfairly declared unfit for the US market, which is going a long way to destroying the economy of an entire province. This is nothing more than a malicious trade sanction. Our higher quality softwood lumber exports are being pummeled and penalized, because all yours are privately owned and the prices are jacked up. NAFTA has trashed our magazine and film industries. It also is being used as a lever to pave the way for guaranteed fresh water exports from Canada whether we want to or not. BC Hydro has been piping electricity to California for months to help out with the power shortage and hasn't recieved a dime for it yet. You want to drill out the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and destroy the calving grounds of the caribou herd that feeds and supports a good portion of the indigenous population of the Yukon Territory (Yes, it's in Canada) for a mere SIX MONTH supply of oil. There's an American oil pipeline being planned for the North West Territory that goes from Alaska under the ice in the Beaufort Sea to Inuvik. A blowout in this underwater pipe (they all have blowouts sooner or later) would wipe marine life for thousands of square kilometres.
Every time we try to defend our sovereignty in any way, some congressman stands up on his hind legs, and bellows in elephantine rage that we taking unfair advantage of trade with a country with ten times the population, and a history of nuclear bomb use. It is with no small amount of chagrin that I watch our Prime Minister kiss yankee butt and beg for a north american dollar, and yet more American imperialism, while we get kicked in the head. By the time the US has finished draining Canada of all its resources, there would be no point for a war since there'd be nothing left worth taking.
You people have no idea what it's like on this side of the line, watching successive governments posting FOR RENT signs on our foreheads, watching our culture (such as it is) being McDonaldized, watching our health care systems being privatized to follow the American model, seeing our publishing industry weakened to the point that our school textbooks are being printed in New Jersey, watching the processess of our national elections being pulled down in the American muckraking style of mudslinging, and even seeing the spelling of the language we use being altered to fit the American model.
You may talk about war with Canada as if it were some amusing little sidebar to the end of the 11:00 news. Well, some of us up here don't see it that way. There's a world out there that has a myriad of histories, languages, economies, and cultures that have nothing to do with the US. Canadians are part of that world. We don't want to be sucked up and spat out by anyone. If we are at war, and I think trade wars can be no more condoned than the ones where you drop napalm and agent orange on someone else's kids, then on my behalf and that of my family, I'd like to ask you to please stop. If there are those reading this who have no idea where I'm coming from, figure it out. Just like the whos in Dr. Suess's book(yes, I know it's American, but hey, it IS Dr.Suess), we are here, we are here, we are heeeeeeeeeeere...SPLAT. Fuming
Owl.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: ollaimh
Date: 11 Apr 01 - 09:47 PM

ya know we in canada did make an unusually large contribution to the second worls war effort.in fact one of five invasion beaches on d day was fully canadian--juno i think. for a nation of about ten million it was a major effort. we did make a lot of money off the war though--it wasn'tall altruism.

and although the prevailing sentiment among anglo canadians is tobe a bit anti american, the frencj scotts and irish--most of canada from the ottawa valley east is actuallu more often pro american.it may sound hookey,but for gaelic people who were ethnically cleanses from the celtic isles america has always been the land of liberty.we may not have benn first class all the time but people in america gave those of us whosurrived the crossing a fair shake.most gaelic eastern canadian have many american relatives as well and strong culturallinks with new england. now we franco/gaels are not well represented in the news media so that opinion doesn'talways get across.

from my personal experience americans are musc nicer tostrangers than anglocanadians. several decades ago i was traveling broke across the us tolook for work out in alberta(we used to call foert mcmurry fort mcmoney back east), and we croke down in an ols van with seven obviously poor guys out in minnesota near the dakotas.

we rather glummly began walking as we had nomoney to fix the thing and at the first truck stop we had a coffey and contemplated what looked like a realbad month or two and we told a waitress oursob story and a few minutes later some stranger came upand asked us about the tale then another and another and in a few hours they towed our van to the local garage, repaired it and gave us enough money to finish the trip. now i've broken down in canada too and nothiing like that has ever happened tome unless it was in the maritimes. i've never forgatten what nice people they were. and we must have looked like death warmed over. we hadn't eaten a decent mealin weeks and we all had long hair and beard and a few guitars. so i like americans.

i just don'tunderstand why they vote for such wierd politicians--but what the hell it's their country .

as to why do english women like american men.well when i was over there they seemed rather fond of canadian men too.i have a theory.i found english women to be sweet as the day is long,but english men to be rather means and far too ften violent.american and canadian men are more well healed by our more aggressive women and when the two meet the english women love being pampered and the american and canadian men love the sweet temperment of so many english women--they always seem to want to do something nice for you.

that ought to get me into more trouble

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Blackcatter
Date: 10 Apr 01 - 04:59 PM

The earlier point (and a comon one) was that England and later Britain hasn't been SUCCESSFULLY invaded since 1066. 1066 was a war that England lost to the point that the government was over-thrown. after that (with the exception of civil war) England and Britain have never been taken over. - Yes there have been many battles - even successful ones on English soil, but the English have always been able to eventually win whatever war that was going on.

This can encompass the battles with the Scots, although it is usually the shores of Britain that are mentioned with invasion. And the Scots never over threw the government (although they did end up adding their blood-line to the English throne. But James the Vi (James I of England) wasn't much of a Scot, if you ask me (which you haven't)

For that matter the United States and Canada both have never been successfully invaded, though our histories are a bit shorter.

pax yall

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Art Thieme
Date: 09 Apr 01 - 10:10 PM

This all proves the following :

A man will die for an idea---providing that idea isn't quite clear to him.

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Naemanson
Date: 09 Apr 01 - 09:57 AM

"...sneeking around with a box of matches..." LOL

I love the imagery!

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Les from Hull
Date: 09 Apr 01 - 09:54 AM

Naemanson - If sneeking around with a box of matches counts as an invasion (more or less what Wallace did in England), then the USA invaded England (or Whitehaven) in its War of Independence.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: GUEST,#1
Date: 09 Apr 01 - 09:12 AM

Don't let the politico's assinine statements fool anyone. Americans know they have no better friends in the world than Canadians. We sort of think of them as an extension of the US, which they don't like very well, but who else is more like US?

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Naemanson
Date: 09 Apr 01 - 07:29 AM

Speaking of invasions of England didn't William Wallace take York?

Of course, shortly thereafter he went all to pieces over a little failure....

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 09 Apr 01 - 06:09 AM

Hey TJ!

If you are so good then why did we have to save your ass during those last two scraps with German? ;-)

Or was it that you only picked sides when you could see which side which way it was going anyway...? :-0

And

But more importantly why do British women prefer American guys?

Because the American guys are richer, more gullible and easier to take money from? You didn't realy think it was anything to do with dress sense, manners or sense of humour did you??? *BG*

LOL

Dave the Gnome

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Les from Hull
Date: 09 Apr 01 - 05:53 AM

We were even invaded by some French who landed at Fishguard in Wales and were frightened into surrender by some Welsh women.

German Kings and Dutch Kings have only 'invaded' by invitation. We've been invaded by Scottish 'Non-Kings' or 'Would-be-Kings' as well as real Kings, Dukes, Earls and so on down. If you read 'The Steel Bonnets' by George Macdonald Fraser you can find out all about Border Reivers. There are lots of old ballads which mention them, including Chevvy Chase (the ballad, not the actor). Many Americans and Canadians will be descended from these border families. They might be the ones who will start the next war for you! **bg**

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: artbrooks
Date: 09 Apr 01 - 01:24 AM

The British haven't been invaded since 1066? Haven't there been Scottish kings, German kings and at least one Dutch king since then?

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Blackcatter
Date: 08 Apr 01 - 11:43 PM

We like the Canadians who visit Florida each year. We like the British too - After a few years you can do a good job estimating how long they've been in Florida by how lobster-like their skin appears.

I've got one word for yall - sunblock.

pax yall

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Naemanson
Date: 08 Apr 01 - 09:05 PM

You haven't lived till you've mingled with the Canadian Exploratory teams that invade Old Orchard Beach (Maine) every year.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Dicho (Frank Staplin)
Date: 08 Apr 01 - 07:30 PM

The Canadians send good-sized invasion forces to Hawai'i and Florida every winter, including me. The natives do a good job of resistance, cleaning us out before we go home.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 08 Apr 01 - 07:14 PM

Good points there. I invaded the USA on several occasions too, with no apparent effect whatsoever...on them, that is. There are a lot of nice places to invade down there, as long as you avoid the inner cities.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: ollaimh
Date: 07 Apr 01 - 08:33 PM

well you'all sound consider that the western part of canada has more oil reserves than ever existed in the middle east--they are the most expensive oil reserves to extract but they are likely figured large in the pentagon's long range planning. and canada has between 20 and 40 percent of the world's fresh water--depending upon the estimate. with a population of 30 million we wouldn't be that hard to absorb.

i'm not advocating anything, but it has long been my suspicion that the reform party was funded by the cia in the beginning to facilitate just such a resources grab if quebec were to separate. the old leader of the reform--preston manning was an employee of a cia funded think tank of a decade.and he was the media darling with no obvious reason except the corporate interests were backing him.

i'd also like to say about chretien that he has his good qualities . he is the youngest of thirteen children born in poverty in rural quebec, and with a degenerative nervous disease that keeps him partiallt paralized on one side of his body, and he made it to the top with more strikes against him than any other politician i can think of. he's a genuie fighter. the other canadian leaders are a joke compared to him as far as their toughness. now toughness isn't the only quality but he's sure got it. that is the seceret to his appeal in three elections. he genuinely appeals to working class people as a hard working fighter, warts and all. that's something the right wing parties and the media consistently under estimate.

he is also the leader of the moderate to left wing of the liberal party so a lot of people who want martin as the new leader(the leader of the ringht wing of the liberals)forget that chretain has a lot of support within the party as there is presently no other left leaning leader who could beat martin in a leadership fight..

i persinally have invaded the united states many times but no one seemed to notice . i mat invade again this summer and go on a busking trip across the union. anybioy got any sugestions for good placces to claim for canada.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: kendall
Date: 07 Apr 01 - 03:18 PM

Thats probably the reason the Canadians dont annex us!

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Amergin
Date: 07 Apr 01 - 01:15 PM

Sometimes I wonder why we just don't go and annex Canada....then I remember who we would be forced to call countrymen....

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 07 Apr 01 - 12:44 PM

Yes, Bill, we miss you. Oh how we miss you! When does Hilary get to run again?

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Naemanson
Date: 07 Apr 01 - 09:58 AM

All of the above reminds me of a scene from the movie Hallelujah Trail:

Cavalry, dismounted, along a ridge, fighting Indians in a sandstorm. A round comes in from behind. The lieutenant calls, "Protect your rear!" The soldiers scramble over the ridge and fire back. Another round comes in from behind again. The lieutenant calls, "Protect your other rear!" The soldiers again scramble over the ridge and fire back. Yet another round comes in from behind. The lieutenant calls, "Protect both rears simultaneously!" Half the soldiers scramble over the ridge and come up to face each other!

It doesn't read well but it's one of the funniest scenes from comedy westerns.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: GUEST,TJ
Date: 07 Apr 01 - 09:53 AM

Sorry for the harassing, just a little good natured fun.

The truth is we have no interest in acquiring Canada, asides from being too damn cold up there, it would be too difficult for us to teach you all to think in terms of miles and inches, etc. Besides who could live with all those French Quebecians? Not me. ;-)

Good day all!

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: gnu
Date: 07 Apr 01 - 09:48 AM

I agree.... just don't use the bugle to sound retreat.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Willie-O
Date: 07 Apr 01 - 09:33 AM

The assertion that the UK hasn't lost a war since 1066 is entirely incorrect. Or did they actually win the American War of Independence and we were all misinformed?

And stretching definitions a bit, you could argue that Mahatma Gandhi declared (a pacifist) war on the UK, and won. The tactics were unconventional, but the result is not in doubt.

Fact is, though, that no one has been successful since 1066 at INVADING Great Britain. Nor, since 1763, has anyone successfully (as in, caused a change of recognized ownership) invaded what is now Canada, neither has anyone invaded the United States.

(Except the Beatles)

Now let's all strategically retreat with honour intact.

By the way ollaimh, you make a good point. I was speaking rather broadly. But fifteen seats helps the Liberals maintain a comfortable majority, doesn't win or lose the election for them.

I just wish the Liberals in power weren't so damn Conservative!

Willie-O

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: gnu
Date: 07 Apr 01 - 07:04 AM

It's morming and I am sober. Hungover, but thinking considerably more clearly than last night. I just read my posts of last night. Anyone know if a breathalizer can be connected to a keyboard ?

That's why they call me gnu. Every time I go to the waterhole, I drink like a wild beast.... and then act like an ass.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Blackcatter
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 11:54 PM

First of all - while Briatian is fairly good at winning war they suck at winning peace (or maybe they just good-naturely gave up nearly their entire empire.

Secondly, If I was Canada, I'd worry about St. Pierre & Miquelon. Their police force might just give the good old Mounties a run. At the very least the U.S. doesn't let a bunch of French people own a few islands that should be ours. It's bad enough that we have to drive through Canada to get to Alaska.

What's up with St. Pierre & Miquelon anyway? Are they going to leave France when Canada finally tells Quebec to leave? And if Quebec goes independent - will the Eastern povinces split and create New Canada? And will Canada finally give province status to the territories (including Nunavut?

Enquiring minds want to know.

As you know, we will never let Puerto Rico become a state - not because of racism or anything like that- but because U.S.ers are more comfortable with even numbers and our flag would look wierd with 51 stars (3 rows of 17 stars, maybe?)

just joking yall

have a great weekend

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Naemanson
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 11:25 PM

Charlie said earlier this evening that this thread was getting serious. I'm glad I missed it.

Can we persuade any of the Canadians to invade and burn the White House again? I really don't like this decor any better than the Puce House and the occupant is truly a pain in my backside.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: kendall
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 09:12 PM

As the "Invincible knight said in Monty Python and the holy grail when Arthur cut off his arms and legs, "Alright, we'll call it a draw". FYI Gnu, my ancestors invaded England with Wm. the conqueror in 1066.They were originally Vikings who settled in Normandy, so,I love a good heated debate, and, I've even been called a "berserker" by an old shipmate. However, I do not like to fight. My dark side loves it, so, I dont let it out if I can help it. TO ALL CANADIANS...LIVE LONG AND PROSPER!

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: GUEST,TJ
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 08:57 PM

gne wrote "The Brits haven't lost a war since 1066 !!!! Get used to it !!!!"

If you are so good then why did we have to save your ass during those last two scraps with German? ;-)

But more importantly why do British women prefer American guys?

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: gnu
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 08:21 PM

No quarrel. No comment. No winner. No draw. No animosity.

Long live the true north strong and free. God bless America.

I apologize for my rancorous comments and baiting. Twas uncalled for and I just was looking for a fight. Common amongst my upbringing and shameful, to say the least.

Kendall.... I am sincerely sorry for my posts above. They were, at best, pathetically pompous and arrogant.

gnu

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: ollaimh
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 08:18 PM

no daddy was otherwise occupied leaving us almost a state. THE BRITS did try to beat the usa and were rather embarrassed in the effort back in the previous war

as a part acadien and part cape breton scott i have to say i am definetely ambivalent about the idea. aacadiens did quite a bit better down in louissainna than in the old home land (untill recently anyway--trudeau did a lot for the out lying french minorities in canada)and scotts from nova scotia used to go to boston for work. i still have relatives there.

i might like being american.

in fact i've thought of going down to new orleans to busk and maybe wander out on the bayou and see if there are any relatives ... common ca va eh!

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Kelticgrasshopper
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 08:15 PM

OOPS I SLIPPED

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Kelticgrasshopper
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 08:13 PM

If any politician living can make an enemy out of Canada it will be BUSH.. he has now named one of the most pompus , and I hate to say it but I will STUPID leaders to be ambassador. Cellucci has raised havoc with the education system here in Massachusetts, he lives in a dream world. I'm sure he hasn't a clue where PEI is and I doubt that he cares. The only war going on now is the potato WAR..and that is sad and devistating to small farmers on PEI.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Kelticgrasshopper
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 08:12 PM

If any politician living and make an enemy out of Canada it will be BUSH.. he has now named one of the most pompus , and I hate to say it but I will STUPID leaders to be ambassador. Cellucci has raised havoc with the education system here in Massachusetts, he lives in a dream world. I'm sure he hasn't a clue where PEI is and I doubt that he cares. The only war going on now is the potato WAR..and that is sad and devistating to small farmers on PEI.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Ebbie
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 08:09 PM

gnu, are you saying your daddy can beat my daddy?

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: ollaimh
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 08:07 PM

well actually i'm canadian but no brit. but the brits have lost a few . remeber the irish revolution. or maybe the kenyan revolt that led to the pull out from africa. the old empire often pulled out and declared vistory! good pr but poor history.

i remain with my position that canada won a well deserved draw. we didn't participate in the events at new orleans or the burning of washington.

the usa did by the way burn york--our capital at the time which resulted in the capital being moved to ottawa. giving us the second coldest capital in the world.. ulan bator in mongolia is colder. moscow is the tropic compared to an ottawa winter. maybe the yanks won after all.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: kendall
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 08:05 PM

GNU I have no quarrel with Canada. I dont want a quarrel with Canada. So, when you say the Brits havn't lost a war since 1066, there is a damn good reason. The USA has always been on their side since the War of 1812. How do you account for the British surrender at Yorktown? Are you going to turn that into a victory? Explain...

Now, for all to see, to our friends across the border, and to anyone else who may be upset by my cavalier comments about the War of 1812. I was trying to head off a pissing contest by downplaying the importance of that war. you took offence, and that was not my intent at all. So, to you or anyone else who may have misread me, I do most sincerely apologize.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: gnu
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 07:49 PM

ollaimh said... we didn't manage to conquer the us so it was realistically a draw.

Say what ? Conquer the US ? Never a consideration. Therefore, never a draw. Why do so many people try to defend the fact that the US lost the WAR OF 1812 by slighting it ? Are you Yanks so insecure that you cannot even admit to the fact that you lost to the most advanced war machine on the planet ? The Brits haven't lost a war since 1066 !!!! Get used to it !!!!

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: GUEST,ollaimh
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 07:25 PM

no one3 can honestly claim a victory in the war of 1812.

the americans did very badly considering they invaded canada twice with numbers almost equal to the whole canadian population, but they were ill trained conscripts and the natives were on canada's side and provided valuable raiding strength and reconance, while denying the americans supplies off the land and stoping them sending out any effective reconosance raids. however canada only rebuffed two invasions we didn't manage to conquer the us so it was realistically a draw.

from canad's point of view that's pretty good as canad's population was aproximately one twentieth of the us and the brits had little help tp send as they were rather tired up with that bum napolean.

as for cretien having no western support--that's a total myth. the liberals hold 15 seats out west out of 82, a significant presence on the caucaus. they have strenght out west in all the urban ridings and a few northern ones where the native vote swings the day. it the waspy rural west--still a significant force out there--that suppoert the right wing parties. the liberals have traditionally held together a coalition of catholics, urban poor and middle calss and new immigrants. in modern canada that will get you elected ten times out of ten. in fact the success of the tories under mulroney was because he stole the liberal postions successfully. this got him to power butleft his traditional western right wingers sorely disapointed as they had little more influence than under the liberals. these waspy rightists have a real problem with being a minority in a country they once ran like a private club, but as the western urban vote grows they will fade into well deserved obscurity.

the leader of the reform/alliance(one of the right wing parties, based in the west) didn't know that canada was majority catholic in an interview before the last election. well he's was in the alberta government and catholics a few and far between out there but in the population centers of canada they are huge in numbers especially east of the ottawa river.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: gnu
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 06:43 PM

Kendall said, in response to my request for an explanation of why he stated above, "Even though we sorta won the War of 1812, .... " .... gnu..are you serious? The war of 1812 didnt even rate a name. Hell, it was more of a mis-understanding than a war. The way I read it, both sides simply said "Screw it, lets go back to the way we were."

SIMPLY SAID !!!!???? Tell that to all the Americans that lay dead and suffering at the feet of Brock in the WAR OF 1812. A lot of Americans tried to get up that hill in the main battle and were cut down in the line of fire. THEY GAVE THIER LIVES FOR AMERICA. And you call it a "mis-understanding" !!!!???? C'mon, man. You said you "sorta won". Was that idle banter or Yankee puffing ? or WHAT ?

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: GUEST,Bill Clinton
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 03:23 PM

Miss me , don't you? I feel your pain my Canadian friends, I feel your pain.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: kendall
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 01:17 PM

gnu..are you serious? The war of 1812 didnt even rate a name. Hell, it was more of a mis-understanding than a war. The way I read it, both sides simply said "Screw it, lets go back to the way we were."

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Naemanson
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 12:43 PM

Actually, in reading Nagle's journal it was a bit of a problem getting home. Plus, as you say, he had made it his career. I had the sense, in reading it, that there was an ulterior reason for not going home. It may have been that he never got the chance.

There is a great description of walking the streets of London and meeting a young prostitute. Plus Nagle was present at some of the great events of the time. He was in China for the Jupiter incident and on the ship that delivered the first convicts to New Zealand. He was shipwrecked on NZ for quite some time.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Les from Hull
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 12:34 PM

Naemanson - I'd love those words. I would eventually like to put together some sort of presentation about the Sailing Navy (with songs of course). There's plenty of shanty stuff done but not so much about men-o-war's-men.

Some Americans served in the Royal Navy as a career. People forget that to some this was a career. They fairly dreaded peace breaking out!

Les

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Naemanson
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 12:20 PM

Les from Hull, I was once looking through a book of broadsides and came upon a song of the women attacking a press gang and taking their men back from them. the song described a great battle. I should go back and get the words.

Impressment was a tough thing to deal with if you were an English subject in an English town. Imagine how tough it was to be captain of an American vessel and have it stopped on the high seas and searched for "English citizens"! And with the Revolution such recent history it was difficult to tell English from Americans. So mistakes were made and the wrong men were pressed into the English Navy.

BTW, though his story begins during the Revolution Joseph Nagle's journal makes fascinating reading. He started out as a Continental soldier fighting in land battles. Somehow he ended up on an American privateer, was captured by the English while on one of the French Carribean islands, was pressed into the English Navy and served the next 20+ years as a British tar. He ended his days wandering from family member to family member in Western Pennsyvania living off of their chrity and a modest pension from his time in the Contiental Army. Good story and it's all true!

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Willie-O
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 12:01 PM

Well, the trouble with Chretien is not that he's dumb. He's not, he's very shrewd although he mangles the English language in a fashion which makes Dubya, Dubya Senior or Dan Quayle look downright erudite. (It's not his native tongue).

But he's widely regarded these days as being arrogant and indifferent to the popular will. Because he HAS a majority mandate to govern, which we have given him twice, (although with a conspicuous absence of support west of Ontario. Canadian political demographics make the west irrelevant, which pisses them off endlessly.)

Rick Mercer said last week "Chretien could show up at a press conference tomorrow, pull out a crack pipe and fire it up, tell us all to go to hell and then declare war on the aliens, and he's still govern the country and do whatever the hell he wants with it for the next three years."

Both the right wing parties and the sadly diminished and scattered left are equally pissed off about all this. They're even cooperating strategically in some ways to combat the MANDATED government, but there's not a damn thing they can do until they can figure out how to get more votes than the Liberals. Or at least deny them a majority next time.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 10:51 AM

Perhaps South Park the Movie was far more serious than I thought!

Has the USA arrested any Canadian Terence or Philip for corrupting young minds recently? And can we expect the news that Saddam Hussain has been trampled to death by Wild Pigs to be made public in the next few days....?

If you need to ask just watch the Movie (but don't blame me!)

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: annamill
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 10:44 AM

Willie-O and Peter and everyone, thank you for the other side of this situation. I feel so much better knowing Bush isn't the only stupid one ;-) I've got to get over to the Kyoto thread and do some more learning.

Love, annamill

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Willie-O
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 10:22 AM

Annamill, that original post is not really very accurate in its overall suggestion that Canada-US relations are "usually trouble-free". We almost always have resource-based trade disputes going on, and the softwood lumber thing is not real relevant to who won the White House. The reason it is happening now is that the five-year Softwood Lumber Agreement expired last week without an extension or new treaty in place and the American producers are of course looking for terms more favourable to them. (They can only frame it as an issue of government subsidy, namely low stumpage fees paid by timber companies that log Crown land. Probably a bigger factor in the low price of Canadian lumber in the US is the Canadian dollar being at an all-time low of 63.5 cents US, which gives us a huge free-market economy trading advantage right now..)

Incidentally, I think they're right about the stumpage fees being too low. Many environmental groups on both sides of the border are supporting the US timber producers. And the biggest "Canadian" companies benefiting are actually ...Weyerhauser, Stone Consolidated and other US multinationals.

Canada's response to Bush's shameless reneging on Kyoto has been embarrassingly wimpy. Poutine finally said something? Whoopee. Peter's right in his assessment.

Willie-O

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: MichaelM
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 10:05 AM

From a outsider's viewpoint it seems the wars get started when the administration needs to distract the populace from some major domestic screw-up (bread and circus maximus). Give the President lots of busy work without too much national strife and maybe he won't feel the need for the foreign fireworks display.

N.B. Without getting into a just/unjust dialogue I am not slagging the U.S. military wholesale.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: annamill
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 09:29 AM

We just keep learning with Mudcat.. Bush scares the hell out of me.. Can we keep him from starting a war for four years?...

Love, annamill

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Peter T.
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 09:05 AM

Jean Chretien is a one-faced liar and hypocrite. He is currently trying to sell off the rest of Canada to the United States through a continental energy grid. He is even boasting about pumping billions into the Alberta tar sands, and opening up the Northwest Territories to keep the Americans from their own Refuge. And simultaneously talking about how Canada will meet its Kyoto committments, and worrying about the Americans. They are both idiots, are bent on degrading the planet, and deserve each other.

yours, Peter T.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: gnu
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 08:36 AM

MichaelM.... excellent !!!! ROTFL !!!!

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: MichaelM
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 08:17 AM

So, Naemanson, the whole war was merely cover for a torch job for the insurance money. Clever,bloody clever.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Les from Hull
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 08:15 AM

Naemanson, you didn't have green cards then. So quite a few British merchant sailors took the opportunity to swear before an American Justice that they were Americans and so got a paper that they hoped would save them from impressment. Also there were a number of cases of British sailore deserting to American ships, who refused to hand them back.

I'm not defending impressment. In my home town there were cases of women attacking the press gang to get their husbands back. But it wasn't piracy.

It's a good point about Maine, though. Apparantly there were quite a few British sympathisers up there that worked out a good deal with their enemies. Loyalists, I think they were called. God knows why!

Didn't they try to smooth out the Maine border out at that time? What was all that about?

Little Hawk - by the time of the Battle of New Orleans we had already finished the big war with Napoleon (and we hadn't started the little one yet) so the British troops were largely veterans of that conflict. The trouble was that the generals were all second division ones. The good ones didn't want to get involved in a litte war with a minor nation!

Les from Hull (not the one in Canada and nothing to do with the Commodore of that name).

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: gnu
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 08:14 AM

Kendall... Even though we sorta won the War of 1812 ??? Please do share your knowledge and insight. I would welcome a second opinion - the history books are so boring, what with all those facts and such.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: kendall
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 08:03 AM

The PUCE HOUSE? that is funny! Even though we sorta won the War of 1812, the British military didn't leave until 1835. Their last outpost was vacated at Castine.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: gnu
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 07:49 AM

Naemanson... piratical British Navy.... and privateers, scoundrels and thieves. "Oh, the Yankee lay low down with gold,...

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Naemanson
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 07:07 AM

Little Hawk wrote, "It was the War of 1812 I was talking about. The one where the USA tried to invade Canada several times. Nobody exactly won that one in a decisive sense...it just eventually petered out..."

Actually there was a winner. It was the economies of Eastport and southern New Brunswick. During the embargo and the blockade Eastport, Maine, was the busiest port in the USA. The accounts I've read describe the regular "discovery" of abandoned, fully loaded schooners in the seas off Eastport. The schooners would be taken into port and unloaded and the goods would be carried down the coast by ox cart. The newspapers took to announcing the arrivals of these carts just as they used to announce the arrivals of ships in the pre-embargo days.

By the way, the harbors of the US were closed BEFORE the War of 1812 by presidential decree when Monroe(?) declared an embargo to protect American sailors from the depredations of the piratical British Navy.

And, by the way, we let the British burn the White House. We didn't like the decor. It used to be the Puce House.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: gnu
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 07:04 AM

Change that last sentence as follows..... to the point that he questions your abilities, MORE OR LESS, PUBLICALLY, you've got to be a little stunned.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: gnu
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 06:57 AM

Heard on the radio yesterday that Jean complained about Bush in Cabinet ( or some such venue, can't remember exactly ). Apparently, when he started to discuss the PEI potato crisis with Garge, he had to explain to him where and what PEI is. And he had some none too kind words for Bush's knowledege of the US's largest trading partner.

Now, if you can piss off one of the most politically astute persons on this earth to the point that he questions your abilities, you've got to be a little stunned.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: mkebenn
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 06:40 AM

I don't know, I'd miss my Sleeman's, maybe I'll defect, I'm only 15 miles from Fort Erie..Mike

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: gnu
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 06:40 AM

Roll&Go-C said... you can have all of Old Orchard Beach to yourselves.

No thanks. Too cold. We prefer to beach along the Northumberland Straight - the warmest waters north of the Carolinas.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: gnu
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 06:36 AM

Kendall. Re Maine going deep into Canada. The story I heard is that the Brits leading the peace negotiating committee didn't know which river system was which and simply screwed up at the talks. Otherwise, Irving would own most of north/east Maine as well. Of course, that's underway as we speak, er, type.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: katlaughing
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 03:23 AM

Besides what Ebbie says, I think we are constantly reminded of our own country's sorry history of slavery because the discrimination is still very prevalent. Abolishing slavery had not brought about true equality, but then we may never see that, unless we all went colour blind and also asexual, so that gender-bias was gone, too.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Ebbie
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 01:31 AM

Because we don't see it, don't live with it? We are not directly confronted by it, we don't have a face to go with it. It is not personal to us.

As good as the media are in creating appetites and attitudes in the populace, why aren't they showing this on our evening news? And why are we not demanding it?

So, Troll, do you know anyone who is haranguing the media on the subject?

Ebbie

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Troll
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 12:34 AM

On the subject of slavery, where is the great public outcry about the documented practice of slavery in northern Africa?
Where is the outrage?
The US is still being castigated some 135 years after the abolition of slavery but no one mentions its continued practice in places like the Sudan.
Why is that?

troll

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Dicho (Frank Staplin)
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 12:12 AM

In the news yesterday, indications were given that Cretien and his cabinet may back down on the Kyoto accord. It's the old story of the mouse living with the elephant. All Canada can do is try to put its views forward, but will have to bend to some extent. Bush has called for a global energy policy- I hope Canada has the will to resist the possible pillage of its remaining resources.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: artbrooks
Date: 06 Apr 01 - 12:02 AM

In the ways of weasel-wording politicians everywhere and in all times, please note that the language of that article refers to the abolition of the traffic in slaves and not to the institution itself. The African slave trade was actually, legally, outlawed in the US in 1807. That certainly doesn't mean it stopped, however, but this article pledged the two nations to work together to reduce it.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Ebbie
Date: 05 Apr 01 - 10:45 PM

Now I am miffed at the United States; how can we as a nation have continued practicing and protecting the institution of slavery until 1864 when it was forcibly negated when we had, as a nation, agreed as early as 1814 that it was wrong and we would try to abolish it?

Treaty of Ghent

ARTICLE THE TENTH.

Whereas the Traffic in Slaves is irreconcilable with the principles of humanity and Justice, and whereas both His Majesty and the United States are desirous of continuing their efforts to promote its entire abolition, it is hereby agreed that both the contracting parties shall use their best endeavours to accomplish so desirable an object.

Ebbie

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: kendall
Date: 05 Apr 01 - 10:30 PM

ever hear of 54 40 or fight?

The Webster Ashburton treaty of 1843? ever notice how the state of Maine goes deep into Canada? Were these losses? On second thought, northern Maine is no great prize.. Seriously, let's not lose the humor here. If this thread becomes rancorus, I'm gone.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Extra Stout
Date: 05 Apr 01 - 10:11 PM

I am unalterably opposed to war with Canada. We're still paying for rebuilding Germany and Japan. We can't afford to win another war just now.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: artbrooks
Date: 05 Apr 01 - 09:27 PM

Don't forget the THIRD invasion of Canada from the US, when Irish Fenians, mostly Civil War veterans, raided north several times in the late 1860s and early 1870s.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Matt_R
Date: 05 Apr 01 - 09:20 PM

Oh I wish I was back in old Canada
A land which I never shall lampoon
How I pine for the ice covering Lake Manitoba
And the beauty that is Saskatoon

I wish I was stuck in the hills of Alberta
Drinking beer with some big dumb guy trapping fur
As he scraped and he chiselled all the moose dung off his boots
I would learn that he was the Prime Minister

Oh I wish I was in the land that gave us Peter Jennings
Alanis Morissette, Mike Myers too
No I take that back, I wouldn't go there even if you paid me
O Canada, you are a place I must eschew

Oh I wish I was blowing up Prince Edward Island
And going on to bomb Ontario
The destruction of Canada and all of it's culture
Is by far my favorite scenario

Just where the Hell does Canada get off sharing a border
With countries far superior to it?
Well, you lousy, stinking francophonic bacon-loving bastards
Your country's just a giant piece of s***t!

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: GUEST,TJ
Date: 05 Apr 01 - 08:19 PM

Well Little Hawk, maybe it's time we finally finish that war of 1812 and send our tanks into Canada.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Apr 01 - 08:17 PM

Oh, yeah? We're ready, ya hosers! We'll bore you into submission by forcing you to listen to lectures on Canadian history until you start singing The Maple Leaf Forever...or just die in your tracks like unwatered wildebeests. :-)

Spaw - Or what. You knew that, didn't you?

Kendall - Okay, I have consulted my encyclopedia, concerning the Treaty of Ghent. It states that: "The United States had fared so badly in the war that it was in no position to ask cessions of territory and finally dropped even its demand for the abandonment of impressment (of ex-British sailors off American vessels). It proposed merely a return to the situation before the war."

The British, whose primary concern was concluding the long war with Napoleon, agreed to simply return to the former status quo in North America.

And in another place it says: "Though the treaty (of Ghent) fulfilled not one of the U.S. objectives in the war, it received unanimous approval of the senate on Feb. 16th, 1815, and was joyously hailed by the public."

And: "Though the United States gained none of its avowed aims in the war, popular mythology soon converted defeat into victory."

When it comes to building a sense of national confidence, it's clearly more important what people think happened that what actually happened.

And denial is a wonderful thing isn't it?

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: GUEST,Roll&Go-C
Date: 05 Apr 01 - 07:55 PM

THAT BRIDGE BETWEEN MAINE AND NEW HAMPSHIRE HAS TO BE BLOWN! You Canadians are ignoring our desparate plea; you can have all of Old Orchard Beach to yourselves! Now hurry up and do your thing!

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: GUEST,SeanMsansacookie
Date: 05 Apr 01 - 07:40 PM

Well, this at least explains some of Bush's comments to the effect that if the American public wouldn't accept drilling in the Alaskan reserves, he'd start looking at the Northwestern Territories instead.

Die for oil, Canada! We took down Iraq, put Saddam in his place, and you're next!

Err...

Wait a minute...

M

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Apr 01 - 07:37 PM

I didn't say anything about the War of American Independence, Kendall. You guys definitely won that one. It was the War of 1812 I was talking about. The one where the USA tried to invade Canada several times. Nobody exactly won that one in a decisive sense...it just eventually petered out...but the Americans on the whole did not do terribly well in it...not to say that they weren't brave on the battlefield. As were both sides.

Funnily enough, we Canadians drive on the right side of the road too. As for the other stuff you mentioned, that was due to the War of Independence 1775-1779 was it(?), not the War of 1812.

The Treaty of Ghent? Ah...I did intend to read the Treaty of Ghent just last week, but the hamster got sick, and I put it off. I must consult my encyclopedia about it right away. The treaty, I mean...not the hamster. :-)

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: catspaw49
Date: 05 Apr 01 - 07:31 PM

So Hawk.......you got a fockin' screw loose or what? (the answer is not "or what").......Clinton is a Canadjun........Y'all kinda' preachin' to the congregation.

I think Bush is instilling some wonderful family values......you know, like paranoia and keeping up with the Jones'. Like I keep saying, I don't mind him being an ignorant, smirking, uncaring asshole. I mind that he is a dangerous ignorant, smirking, uncaring asshole.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: kendall
Date: 05 Apr 01 - 07:25 PM

Hawk, how did we end up with a president instead of a King?Or a prime minister? How come we drive on the right side of the road? Have you read the treaty of Ghent?

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Apr 01 - 07:19 PM

Or "some purr he'pless victim of temptayshyun"

As Hank Williams would say.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: GUEST,Ickle dorritt
Date: 05 Apr 01 - 07:08 PM

Yeh! your right Bert- but some poor deperate soul must be up for it!

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Bert
Date: 05 Apr 01 - 07:03 PM

Oh I dunno Ickle, that's asking a lot.

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Apr 01 - 06:55 PM

Clinton - After you "won" the War of 1812??? "Won"????

What you won was the Battle of New Orleans and some minor naval battles (Constitution's defeat of the Guerriere and the Java, etc.). These were brief moments of triumph in a war that did not go very well at all for the USA.

Meanwhile British North America (now Canada) repulsed several land invasions, stripped much of the American merchant marine off the seas, won a couple of minor naval battles of its own (like the Chesapeake's defeat by the British frigate Shannon), and BURNED DOWN MUCH OF WASHINGTON!!! Including the White House!!! Imagine how many people in this world would love to accomplish that!

Got that? Burn, baby, burn! Ya-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!

Why, son, we hoss-whipped yore little asses clear across the dang continent! We had you runnin' through the bushes where a rabbit couldn't go! Yeehaw!

Now, of course, we prefer to just provide you with great hockey players, great musicians, and weird comedians.

Ah! How the glories of the past have faded to a dull murmur in these commercialized and trivial times... :-)

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: GUEST,Ickle Dorritt
Date: 05 Apr 01 - 06:50 PM

Surely there must be some young woman intern, who for the sake of her country and for the future of world peace, it prepared to shag Bush in the oval office?

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Bert
Date: 05 Apr 01 - 06:16 PM

Grenouille? Isn't that a breakfast cereal?

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Rick Fielding
Date: 05 Apr 01 - 06:09 PM

I surrender!!

Could I have some reparations please/merci.

Jacques La Grenouille

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 05 Apr 01 - 05:18 PM

LOL!!

We GAVE up on you after we won the war of 1812...

:-)

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: Bill D
Date: 05 Apr 01 - 05:16 PM

I quietly predicted...(well, ok, maybe not so quietly) that Bush would screw up so bad and offend so many within a year that we'd be begging Florida to keep recounting!

It's just too bad that one idiot has the potential to make entire international relationships sour.

Don't give up on us, Canada...we'll try again REAL soon!

Subject: RE: BS: War with Canada?
From: GUEST,Roll&Go-C
Date: 05 Apr 01 - 05:09 PM

Please invade Maine first, and then blow up the bridge to NH (sorry, our friends at the Press Room but desparate measures are called for).

Subject: War with Canada?
From: annamill
Date: 05 Apr 01 - 05:05 PM

I just read this in my Netscape news:

OTTAWA (Reuters) - Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien is worried by what he sees as a confrontational and isolationist tone by the new U.S. administration and is getting ready to adopt a harder line with Washington if necessary, political sources said on Thursday.

Members of Chretien's ruling Liberal Party said the prime minister had taken the unusual step of expressing concern about relations with the United States -- which is by far Canada's most important ally and trading partner -- at a weekly meeting of legislators on Wednesday.

"They're getting tougher to deal with...and we're going to have to examine getting tough with them," one person in the room quoted Chretien as saying.

Canada's usually trouble-free relations with the United States have deteriorated steadily since President Bush took power, at least in part because Ottawa gave clear signs that it preferred Democrat Al Gore in last November's U.S. election.

The two countries are now mired in an ugly dispute over Canadian softwood lumber exports, which could escalate into a crippling trade war.

Canada, under U.S. pressure to agree to a controversial missile defense plan, is also angry that Washington abandoned the Kyoto climate change accord last week on the grounds it could damage the U.S. economy.

"Chretien definitely signaled a shift in attitude after a series of increasing problems. It was not a declaration of war on the United States but he said 'Look, things aren't going well'," said another Liberal source.

Chretien, by far the most experienced leader in the Group of Seven leading industrialized nations, expressed dismay at the Bush administration's tougher approach on sensitive issues such as Russia, China, North Korea and the Middle East peace process.

"(Chretien said) 'Bush has got his problems, he's got problems with China, he's got problems with I don't know who else. They're becoming more inward-looking, protectionist'," said one legislator.

Chretien -- who will meet Bush at an April 20-22 summit of Western Hemisphere leaders in Quebec -- did not specify how he might crack down on Washington.

His options would appear to be limited, especially as he ruled out linking the lumber dispute to Canada's profitable energy exports to the United States.

"All the signs are that this is a problematic relationship so it may partly become a matter of Canada bunkering down," said David Rudd, executive director of the Canadian Institute

of Strategic Studies.

"But it would not be responsible if we just sat back and took it (the U.S. stance) on lumber, missile defense or the environment," he told Reuters.

The prime minister's frank words could also create tensions with new Foreign Minister John Manley, whose overriding priority is to strengthen ties with Washington.

But sentiment within the Liberal party does appear to have hardened, with several members of Parliament openly admitting concern about the Bush administration.

"The Americans are becoming very arrogant. The expression goes 'It's either my way or the highway'...that's the American way," Liberal legislator Sarkis Assadourian told Reuters.

The legislators say Chretien is particularly vexed by the U.S. lumber industry's hard-line approach on the softwood issue, which he feels violates the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

U.S. lumber producers, who allege Canada is unfairly subsidizing its timber industry, asked the U.S. Commerce Department this week to impose stiff countervailing and anti-dumping duties on Canadian lumber imports.

Stephen Clarkson, a professor of political economy at the University of Toronto, who is currently a fellow at Washington's Woodrow Wilson Center, said Canada's options for getting tough with the United States are limited.

"(But) Canada can be firmer than it has been in the past and not give into U.S. violations of NAFTA. We could take them to the World Trade Organization (over lumber) and probably win," he said.

*********************************************************

We only have a little less than 4 years left. Then he's got to go!

Love for all of you, not Bush.., annamill