| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
 Posted: Fri Aug 03, 2007 9:49 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Adventurer wrote: |
| Canadians opened their doors and hearts to Americans after 9/11... |
Sure, Adventurer.
Canada views us -- "the New American Empire," according to but one CBC special series -- as an enemy and is virtually openly contemptuous. You are even taught that we have always wanted to steal your land and resources and enslave you or however it is that you phrase it these days.
Please note that when the American govt thanked its closest friend -- the British govt -- in 9/11's immediate aftermath, we did not mention Canada. Canadians felt snubbed and were outraged, I recall. Tough.
You think that people in the American govt and especially at State do not sense Canada's profound and deeply-ingrained antiAmericanism...? ROFL. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 03, 2007 9:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| darkhorse_NZ wrote: |
| It's just a lot of unnecessary kowtowing and paying tribute at the throne of the Emperor. |
No, that is not it at all.
Is there no middle ground between disagreeing with an ally and denouncing him as an evil emperor? Organizations like NATO, I remind you, remain 100% voluntary. And this is not rhetorical, either.
Encouragingly, both the new govts in London and Paris will disagree without denouncing (in France, this will be a most welcome change). Why do you need to bitterly denounce them as "lackeys" just because they do not talk like Noam Chomsky, Michael Moore, Hugo Chavez, or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad?
Last edited by Gopher on Fri Aug 03, 2007 9:56 pm; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wannago
Joined: 16 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 03, 2007 9:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Very good observation. Most Americans that I know are very aware of the feelings of our neighbors to the North. Most of them anyway.
It seems that Canada and Canadians want to do and say as they please regarding the U.S. but feel indignant when we call them on it. I, for one, get really sick of the attitude that the U.S. only takes and never gives. Sorry, but, as one poster put it, Canada may have ceased to exist long ago without those a**holes to the south. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
darkhorse_NZ
Joined: 20 Feb 2007
Location: South Korea
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 03, 2007 9:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| darkhorse_NZ wrote: |
| It's just a lot of unnecessary kowtowing and paying tribute at the throne of the Emperor. |
No, that is not it at all.
Is there no middle ground between disagreeing with an ally and denouncing him as an evil emperor? Organizations like NATO, I remind you, remain 100% voluntary. And this is not rhetorical, either.
Encouragingly, both the new govts in London and Paris will disagree without denouncing. Why do you need to bitterly denounce them as "lackeys" just because they do not talk like Hugo Chavez or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? |
i only meant that as analogy of Brown and especially Blair's behaviour, not really implying anything about Bush.
That conversation that was taped unknowingly between Blair and Bush was especially sickening. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 03, 2007 10:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| darkhorse_NZ wrote: |
| i only meant that as analogy of Brown and especially Blair's behaviour, not really implying anything about Bush. |
Blair was not the bad guy his detractors here make him out to be. And he started out as an Idealist, I understand. The British govt made this move long ago: after Suez. It was the right move for a declining hegemon and it allowed them to remain at or at least very near the center of power in Western Civ. long after their actual situation no longer warranted it.
In any case, Brown is sending signals that he will forumulate a more independent line in foreign affairs. And he is reassuring us that he will do so professionally and responsibly.
The new French president, Nicolas Sarkozy, has already assured us of the same thing as well...
| CNN Reports wrote: |
...Sarkozy added that he wanted to tell his "American friends that they can rely on our friendship ... France will always be next to them when they need us."
But, he added, "Friends can think differently." |
And I, as just one American, think this is a very good idea. Indeed, I share political scientist and Realist Christopher Layne's vision that we ought to back the emerging, independent French-German regional hegemonic-bloc in European affairs and create an equal partner out of them.
Same thing for China in East-Asia. A new, sustainable, "balance-of-power" state of world affairs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
safeblad
Joined: 17 Jul 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 03, 2007 11:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
How the hell did we get around to discussing World War 2? The OP was about the fight against international terrorism.
Also. For the record, Hitler abandoned plans for the invasion of Britain a year before America even entered the war. All this talk of 'what if' is completely irrelevant and ahistorical.
Furthermore when America's position pre-war and post war is assessed from 1945 up to the present day it is clear that America made a profit from the War. Obviously the 'debts' have already been paid by the rest of the world. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
safeblad
Joined: 17 Jul 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 03, 2007 11:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Maybe we should wait to assess Brown's record through his actions before immediately branding him a 'puppet'.
With some of you it is like Brown will lose whatever he does. What did you honestly expect him to do? Go to America to tell George W. he is baffoon?
Brown is treading a fine line politically, I dont think that there would be too much positive press for any world leader visiting Washington at the moment. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 03, 2007 11:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hitler would have gotten around to nuking Britain.
He also came sort of close to knocking out Britain with air power. He would have done it for a long time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
safeblad
Joined: 17 Jul 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 03, 2007 11:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
Hitler would have gotten around to nuking Britain.
He also came sort of close to knocking out Britain with air power. He would have done it for a long time. |
I guess we can all be happy that Hitler declared war on America then. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
darkhorse_NZ
Joined: 20 Feb 2007
Location: South Korea
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 04, 2007 2:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
And I, as just one American, think this is a very good idea. Indeed, I share political scientist and Realist Christopher Layne's vision that we ought to back the emerging, independent French-German regional hegemonic-bloc in European affairs and create an equal partner out of them.
Same thing for China in East-Asia. A new, sustainable, "balance-of-power" state of world affairs. |
that's cool, you're one of the few Americans that I've seen speak in favour of a multi-polar international system.
We all grew up with America as a superpower that it's hard to conceive of a different arrangement.
However, where would Britain fit into a Franco-German regional hegemony? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Perfect Cup of Coffee
Joined: 17 Jun 2007
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 04, 2007 2:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| darkhorse_NZ wrote: |
However, where would Britain fit into a Franco-German regional hegemony? |
That's easy, hiding behind America's skirts, standing beside Canada I believe. Although I think "Franco-German regional hegemony" is the newest entry into the dictionary of political oxymorons. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
safeblad
Joined: 17 Jul 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 04, 2007 4:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The Perfect Cup of Coffee wrote: |
| darkhorse_NZ wrote: |
However, where would Britain fit into a Franco-German regional hegemony? |
That's easy, hiding behind America's skirts, standing beside Canada I believe. Although I think "Franco-German regional hegemony" is the newest entry into the dictionary of political oxymorons. |
why dont you describe how that is an oxymoron you moron |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Perfect Cup of Coffee
Joined: 17 Jun 2007
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 04, 2007 4:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Franco-German hegemony? Yeah that'll last long. About as long as it takes the French and Germans to figure out they still don't trust one another as nations, much less respect each other. And hegemony? Please. These 2 nations couldn't put there mutual dislike and lack of respect for each aside long enough to spell hegemony. If you want me to make it easier, how about a similar oxymoron: "safeblad-intelligent comment". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sundubuman
Joined: 04 Feb 2003
Location: seoul
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 04, 2007 4:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Dome Vans wrote: |
America joined at the end of WW2 when they thought they could be heros (the real heros were the russians.)
|
Wow...eurocentric thinking at its finest. The Brits and Russians were a big help with the Japanese Empire. Just like the Canadians in Iraq. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SPINOZA
Joined: 10 Jun 2005
Location: $eoul
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 04, 2007 6:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| If there's one thing on this planet I hate, it's bickering between Americans and Europeans. They should be cleansed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
