BS: War with Canada?

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