|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Bulsajo
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
 Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2005 7:14 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Funny suggestion, particularly funny coming from a nation that professes to be a U.S. ally, and even more funny coming from a nation with at least some naturally-shared security interests.
I'm just wondering how it is enforceable. Covert capabilities and combat readiness of U.S. submarines notwithstanding, is this guy proposing a course of action that might lead to Canadians claiming the right to board U.S. ships and thus create even more tensions, if not hostilities?
I've come to believe that the U.S. should begin breaking all military relations with Canada, no more Pentagon contracts, no more inviting Canadian officers to accompany us as observers, and now, no more cooperation in matters concerning mutual security. If Canada is so committed to opposing the U.S., in the UN G.A. and elsewhere in world and regional affairs, why shouldn't we treat it as an opponent? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2005 7:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Question: Which Canadian party will most likely be first in calling for a defensive alliance with China? Any predictions on who will be the Roh Moo-Hyun of Canada? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Octavius Hite
Joined: 28 Jan 2004
Location: Househunting, looking for a new bunker from which to convert the world to homosexuality.
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2005 7:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Guys, not everything is about us hating the US. Russian subs do it all the time as well. The reason that it is important is because there is tons of oil and gas up there (and diamonds) and we dont want other countries trying to move in, I'm talking to you Danish b*stards out there! Its not about America although the US should be notifying Ottawa when a ship passes through our water. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wrench
Joined: 07 Apr 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2005 7:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
Funny suggestion, particularly funny coming from a nation that professes to be a U.S. ally, and even more funny coming from a nation with at least some naturally-shared security interests.
I'm just wondering how it is enforceable. Covert capabilities and combat readiness of U.S. submarines notwithstanding, is this guy proposing a course of action that might lead to Canadians claiming the right to board U.S. ships and thus create even more tensions, if not hostilities?
I've come to believe that the U.S. should begin breaking all military relations with Canada, no more Pentagon contracts, no more inviting Canadian officers to accompany us as observers, and now, no more cooperation in matters concerning mutual security. If Canada is so committed to opposing the U.S., in the UN G.A. and elsewhere in world and regional affairs, why shouldn't we treat it as an opponent? |
Um before any one jumps to conclusion on the Arctic sovereignty. You guys have to realize
1. Under international Laws if an area is liberally used by any one and is not contested for over 50 years that part becomes international thus the country under effect looses a chunk of its land. (Canada obeys international laws which our southern neighbour doesn't) Imagine a foreign state now being able to build a Militarybase in the international water so close to North America, IE Ruskies, Chinese.
2. Submarines are staffed always under the pretense that its at war. All submarines are at war status all the time. Submarines entering some one else's territorial waters is considered an ACT OF WAR.
3. Under International laws Canada has the right to defend its borders against any incursions. Thus legally we have the right to attack any foreign submarines in our waters, unless the Canadian navy is in a joint op exercises. Other wise all foreign submarines have to have explicit permission to do so by the Canadian Federal government.
4. If any submarine caught or destroyed the aggressor country would deny the existence of the sub, or would have to compensate and apologize for illegally entering another sovereign state.
5. If it means that Canada sinks British or American subs, its too facking bad for you. You have illegally invaded a sovereign state and you must pay the price for such a transgression.
How Do I know this? Well it helps when one of you best family friends is an ex Com officer that served on a Canadian submarine for 7 years.
There is nothing stupid about standing up for Canadian sovereignty.
I don't think America has any reason to travel through Canadian waters illegally, since they have Sub pens in British Columbia. Yanks might be quick to jump the gun but they do things by the book when it comes to their allies.
By the way Canada trains American Pilots, the biggest NATO air force base is in Canada.
Canadian infantry schools train American Rangers, SEALS, and other spec op troops. Canada trains probably more American soldiers then America Canadian. I have a lot of Reg force buddies back home. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2005 8:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Octavius Hite wrote: |
| Guys, not everything is about us hating the US. Russian subs do it all the time as well. The reason that it is important is because there is tons of oil and gas up there (and diamonds) and we dont want other countries trying to move in, I'm talking to you Danish b*stards out there! Its not about America although the US should be notifying Ottawa when a ship passes through our water. |
Ya, the Danish are starting to piss us off.  Soon, you might find all Canadians stop bashing America and start bashing the Danish. By the way, can we change "danishes" to "polar bear" pastries.
But seriously, we do need to show some presence up there. Just the northwest passage is reason enough, outside of fresh water and oil.
But Gopher, we do have the right to patrol our own waters and I think it is only nice to ask if you want to go through. I always played in the backyards of neighbours when I was a kid, but my parents taught me it was only polite to ask first, which I did.
| Quote: |
| I'm just wondering how it is enforceable. |
I don't like this statement at all. It's enforcable because civilized people from civilized nations respect each others borders and wishes. It should not even have to be enforcable. This statement sounds like a bully who wants to go into some kids treehouse. Well, you can let me in, or since I am bigger (covert capabilities of your subs) I will just go in anyways. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
riley
Joined: 08 Feb 2003
Location: where creditors can find me
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2005 9:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This is going to be a stupid question but where does Canadian territory end? I know by international law, there is a three mile limit, but again where is that line in regard to the northern boundary of Canada?
The article isn't very specific about what area of northern Canada American subs are going through to get to the North Pole. Neither was Stephen Harper.
Which leads to my final thought, it seems like he's taking something that isn't important (maybe the U.S. is asking for permission, or is staying out of territorial waters) and making it more important to garner votes. I mean, heaven forbid that a politician attack the current administration on national security issues just to get votes.
That last is my gut feeling and in other words, as a foriegner to Canada, I'm not going to get worked up over it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sundubuman
Joined: 04 Feb 2003
Location: seoul
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2005 11:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Wrench wrote: |
5. If it means that Canada sinks British or American subs, its too facking bad for you. You have illegally invaded a sovereign state and you must pay the price for such a transgression.
How Do I know this? Well it helps when one of you best family friends is an ex Com officer that served on a Canadian submarine for 7 years.
. |
umm remember this???
Submarine rescue gets under way
Rescue effort. Courtesy of Royal Navy
Three men were airlifted to hospital. Picture courtesy of Royal Navy
A rescue operation to retrieve a Canadian submarine adrift off Ireland's west coast is under way.
The salvage vessel Anglian Prince began towing HMCS Chicoutimi, which has more than 50 Canadian sailors on board, after waiting for improved weather.
A fire on Tuesday cut the vessel's power and gales hampered the rescue.
Three seriously injured men were winched to safety but one died and one of the others is "stable but critical" in hospital with smoke inhalation.
The Ministry of Defence said the motorised Anglian Prince was towing the Chicoutimi through the Atlantic at a speed of about three knots towards the Clyde area.
It is expected to reach its destination - which will be decided by the Canadian authorities on Friday - on Sunday.
HMCS CHICOUTIMI
Map graphic
Formerly HMS Upholder, the sub was renamed after a Quebec city
Type: Long-range diesel-electric patrol submarine
Displacement: 2,185 tons (surf.), 2,400 tons (sub.)
Length: 70.26 metres
Speed: 12 kts (surf.), 20 kts (sub.)
Patrol Endurance: approx 8 weeks
Complement: 48 crew, 5 trainees
Diving Depth: 200 metres
Canada defends submarine fleet
Master Seaman Archibald MacMaster was in intensive care at Sligo General Hospital in the Irish Republic.
He suffered extensive lung damage and his condition was described as "critical, but stable".
His colleague, Petty Officer Denis Lafleur, was in a "stable" condition.
Lt Chris Saunders, 32, who was married with two children, died before he got to the hospital at Sligo, in the Irish Republic.
Commodore Tyrone Pile, of the Canadian Navy, said both of the injured men were exhausted and traumatised - especially by the loss of their shipmate.
He added that Mr Saunders' wife was being given "every form of assistance" to help her cope with the news that her husband had died.
A Canadian Navy spokesman told a press conference in Nova Scotia that spirits on board were good although there was "significant sorrow" over the loss of a ship mate.
Meanwhile, Canada's opposition parties have accused the government there of disregarding defence and buying "inferior submarines" on the cheap.
MPs have called for urgent inquiries into the purchase of UK submarines and a possible claim against Britain has been suggested.
Late arrival
HMCS Chicoutimi was on its way to Nova Scotia from the Royal Navy base at Faslane on the Clyde, after being sold to the Canadians by the Royal Navy, when the fire began.
At first it was thought the injuries and damage to the submarine were not serious - the first rescue vessel arrived nearly 24 hours later, hampered by "treacherous" weather.
There are as yet no plans to airl | | |
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
