Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic - dear Canadians, from an American

Speak Korean Now!

Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!

Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

dear Canadians, from an American
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Next

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Off-Topic Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

joe_doufu

Joined: 09 May 2005
Location: Elsewhere

Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 7:44 pm Post subject:

Pyongshin Sangja wrote:

No, I see it as a clear manifestation of national characters. Why are you people on here talking smack about Canada, anyway? We didn't hijack your thread, you hijacked ours. Again.

Uh, okay, note that this thread was a friendly message from an American who LIKES Canada, and it was the Canadians who hijacked it with all this "you Americans just celebrate your bloodlust" stuff.

Gopher

Joined: 04 Jun 2005

Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 7:49 pm Post subject:

[deleted] Last edited by Gopher on Wed Jul 06, 2005 7:51 pm; edited 1 time in total

joe_doufu

Joined: 09 May 2005
Location: Elsewhere

Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 7:50 pm Post subject:

Pyongshin Sangja wrote:

Quote:

Only in unity did the British North American colonies have any chance to protect themselves against the American behemoth. The British government also had a motive of its own in encouraging the colonies to unite. Once they were more or less able to stand on their own feet, Britain could withdraw its garrison, leaving the responsibility for the defence of Canada squarely on Canadian shoulders and wallets. The settlement of outstanding differences with the Americans would be a boon to the British taxpayer.

Sure, fear of the Americans was a factor. However, this article states that only united colonies in Canada would have a chance against America. It does, however, clearly support my thesis that Britain left because Canada had become a drain on British funds. How you read this to state that the British left out of fear, I don't know. They left to save money. You fail reading comprehension.

It means they left because they didn't want to fight. Canada wasn't a "burden" on Britain, but a war with the USA over Canada would have been "costly" however you want to define that. It doesn't mean Canada was not profitable. If Canada wasn't profitable, it would have died out shortly after independence. Re-read the article. If Britain hadn't lent its support to the pro-slavery CSA, it wouldn't have had to fear a US attack, and there would have been no need to defend Canada from a war, or expend the money in question.

mithridates

Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency

Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 7:52 pm Post subject:

Here's where it all started:

shortskirt_longjacket wrote:

It's so heartwarming that Canada has a celebration every year, marking the day they fought for their independence.

What? What's that you say? Canada didn't fight for their independence? It was just handed to them? Well, shoot...why didn't they just pick any old random day on the calendar to "celebrate" their non-event? What? That's what they actually did? In July, huh? That's funny. Why'd they pick July? Are you suggesting Canada copied the United States? Are you saying they are unoriginal and lackluster?

Gopher, anyone try to scam you when you were in Vancouver? I-just-got-out-of-the-hospital-and-I-need-two-dollars-for-the-bus-so-I-can-go-to-my-lawyer's-office-to-sue-someone kind if thing.

Gopher

Joined: 04 Jun 2005

Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 7:55 pm Post subject:

Negative. I was there for Expo '86. Ten day high school field-trip. Very nice experience. No scam artists or pick-pockets. But then, the city must have been putting on its happy face, too, given the global attention it was receiving. Most memorable thing was that I saw Diana walking around there. And the garden on Vancouver Island. Worst part of it: my teacher walked in on me and my best friend playing strip poker with two choir girls and the Mexican exchange student late one night and I was grounded for two days of the trip.

sparkx

Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: thekimchipot.com

Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 8:01 pm Post subject:

Gopher wrote:

And for the record, if you look back a few pages, I did express my disappointment that so many Americans were taking the same meaningless pot shots against the Canadians that the Canadians take against Americans.

Some of it is just healthy joshing. For others, like P.S. above, it is pure bitterness and hatred. It's dysfunctional, on both sides.

Wow, so democratic of you..and i'm sure you'd be saying the exact same thing if some Canadian jumped into the 4th of July thread, completely unprovoked and called Americans a bunch of lame ass pussies right?

If you take the first "pot shot(s)" you deserved to be knocked square on your ass..simple as that.

(this is coming from the most unpatriotic person you'll ever meet too)

[/politcial talk]

Gopher

Joined: 04 Jun 2005

Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 8:09 pm Post subject:

Sorry, but if anyone called America or Americans "lame ass pussies" I'd have to take it in its context: some kind of grade-school level remark unworthy of comment. It's like the kids in my class that get all upset when they call each other "crazy." I say: what's the big deal? Are you crazy? No? Well, what do you care what he calls you, then? Besides, it doesn't touch any issue near and dear to my heart. And as far as whether I'd be saying the exact same thing were this happening on the other thread -- which I haven't even read, by the way -- I like to think I would, yeah. In case you haven't noticed, I'm way more interested in dispassionate historical accuracy than nationalism. But who knows? It's all hypothetical. Maybe I would go ballistic.

Grotto

Joined: 21 Mar 2004

Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 8:35 pm Post subject:

Quote:

We Americans may lack the righteousness of the Candadians, but your manners and conversational skills are sorely lacking...Whatever our faults are as a nation-state, at least we aren't bitter about our neighbors.

Your bitterness -- personally, yes you -- stands out and is impossible to miss:

Yup I dont sense any bitterness from this American he seems downright civil!

Our manners are lacking? If you say so...but then again you have been known to be wrong before.

Conversational skills....perhaps you should look up the word conversation...oh the heck with it...i'll do it for you...:oral exchange of sentiments, observations, opinions, or ideas (2) : an instance of such exchange.

See the key word here is exchange....this is where you make a point(eventually I hope) and we rebut it or make one of our own.

You dont like that Canada became a nation without fighting someone for it....why is that? Why could it possible matter to you?

Now you apparently take great pride that the USA almost destroyed itself, where 618,000 men died in battle and from disease and you claim that that makes your country better than mine?

Canadians dont say that we are better we just say we're less worse Wink

sparkx

Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: thekimchipot.com

Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 8:36 pm Post subject:

gopher wrote:

And as far as whether I'd be saying the exact same thing were this happening on the other thread -- which I haven't even read, by the way -- I like to think I would, yeah. In case you haven't noticed, I'm way more interested in dispassionate historical accuracy than nationalism. But who knows? It's all hypothetical. Maybe I would go ballistic.

Fair enough

Happy belated 7/4th by the way...always a great time when i'm down visiting relatives or friends in the States.

Gopher

Joined: 04 Jun 2005

Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 8:41 pm Post subject:

sparkx wrote:

gopher wrote:

Fair enough

Happy belated 7/4th by the way...always a great time when i'm down visiting relatives or friends in the States.

Same to you, dude.

Gopher

Joined: 04 Jun 2005

Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 8:44 pm Post subject:

Grotto wrote:

Quote:

"I don't care who's wrong or right"
"I don't really wanna fight no more."

Tina Turner. Wise woman.

thorin

Joined: 14 Apr 2003

Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 8:47 pm Post subject:

Gopher wrote:

kermo wrote:

Gopher wrote:

Be sure to include in your research agenda a search for the point where Canada had an empire thrown at its feet and declined to pick up the strings...

America built its empire because it felt it was the right thing to do. The world hasn't been a ripe plum for the taking-- America crafted strategies, made sacrifices and carefully steered itself toward its current stature.
Canada didn't, and doesn't intend to achieve greatness through military intervention or expansion. She rarely has the stomach for bloodshed (see her policy for Indian Affairs) and tends to err on the side of socialist-style generosity when it comes to internal affairs (welfare programs, pensions, health care, etc.) Whether Canada should now be considered "great" is a matter for another thread.

Canada has pursued her own path, and shouldn't be mistaken for an also-ran. There are things about Canada that make me proud, and things that make me ashamed. I would like to see Canada take a stronger position in world affairs, through aid, development, dialogue and by setting an example. I don't agree with current American policy, and I don't want to see her follow in those steps. If she were offered an empire, I would hope she would decline. Confused

No this is wrong. It had nothing to do with morality or moral choices. Don't get caught up in the propaganda or the empire mystique -- although the U.S. clearly aspired to greatness at an early date. Look at the history of the thing as it really developed.

The U.S. had generated a certain economic energy following the Civil War. This energy came to maturity in the late nineteenth century. (The scholarship is pretty strong on this point, but I can't recall any particuarly author to cite at the moment.)

This kind of energy cannot easily be contained, particularly where a world capitalist system already existed and was pulling it in that direction naturally (see Wallerstein or Gunder Frank). As the U.S. economy reached out to the world outside of it, it was necessary to defend her interests with a "blue water" navy (see Mahan's famous book on sea power). This included seizing coaling stations, not only the ones necessary to fuel the new navy, but also to deny the coaling stations to competitors, particularly in the Caribbean and the Pacific (all eyes were on China!), for those were the markets the U.S. was expanding into at that time, not to mention its industrial products reaching markets as far away as Germany. Once that navy got to a certain size, and once the U.S. economy breached a certain threshhold in the world system, Washington started projecting its power abroad, first in Central America and the Caribbean, then beyond this (see LaFeber's Inevitable Revolutions or Peter H. Smith's Talons of the Eagle). When the U.S. dictated terms to the British over a Venezuelan border dispute in 1895, and the British fleet subsequently withdrew from the Caribbean, this is generally recognized as the birth of the U.S. as a global power. It had seized a sphere of influence and other imperial powers -- namely Britain, France, and Spain -- recognized it, if not explicitly, then tacitly.

There was nothing planned about it, though. It was kind of serendipitous. Don't be confused by the Manifest Destiny nonsense that policians and their like spew. (Have you ever read the Foundation books? It was kind of like that. There were powerful currents under the surface that supported such developments. The decisions of the people at the time were, in the bigger picture, simply irrelevant. Consider also that there was no conceivable decision the Aztecs might have made to prevent the Spaniards from colonizing their world -- some things unfold inevitably. Again, there are forces underneath the surface at work -- see esp. Jared Diamond's Guns, Germs, and Steel.)

Then the two world wars occurred, basically self-destruction in Europe and her colonial empires. This left the U.S. as the only major economic force standing. And it was a nuclear power. Now we're clearly talking about a random rise to empire. Esp. important because the war distorted things, and this was clearly an accidental and not a planned development: it left the U.S. with a bloated military-industrial complex and a dangerous enemy -- the Soviets.

It's particularly significant when you consider how disorganized and petty the Latin American states are, perpetually intriguing and infighting over nonsense. They were and still are no competition to us in our hemisphere.

Also significant when you consider that the only other competition in the Western Hemisphere was Canada, a much smaller political economy that was just not capable of getting into the power projection business. (You say it was a moral choice! What evidence to you have to support this?)

This does not mean that Canada is inferior to the United States in any way, which it certainly is not. Indeed, Canada stands in the ranks among the most advanced countries in the world. On the other hand, you can't argue that should Canada have been caught up in a similar trajectory as the United States, that her leaders would have simply stopped and said, wait, we're superior to imperialism and power projection, so let's limit our economy and show the world how nice and peaceful we can be. It's a really hollow argument, dude. It's like saying that if you won the lottery, you'd donate it all to charity and keep your job, 'cause you're such a nice guy.

Can Grotto read? Dude, it's over. You and Kermo got schooled. Go somewhere else. THE END.

joe_doufu

Joined: 09 May 2005
Location: Elsewhere

Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 9:25 pm Post subject:

Grotto wrote:

You dont like that Canada became a nation without fighting someone for it....why is that? Why could it possible matter to you?

Hey, I was only upset because somebody insulted my knowledge of history. Not only do I really like history, I WAS RIGHT and he was wrong. I rather like Canada. Especially Quebecoises girls.

Grotto wrote:

Now you apparently take great pride that the USA almost destroyed itself, where 618,000 men died in battle and from disease and you claim that that makes your country better than mine?

Civil wars happen. We could have just let the South go without a fight, and left hundreds of thousands of slaves in bondage. Your predecessors were sponsoring and abetting the slavers, don't forget that.

Moldy Rutabaga

Joined: 01 Jul 2003
Location: Ansan, Korea

Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 10:05 pm Post subject:

Quote:

Uh, okay, note that this thread was a friendly message from an American who LIKES Canada, and it was the Canadians who hijacked it with all this "you Americans just celebrate your bloodlust" stuff.

Very true. I feel ashamed. When Koreans ask me how Canadians and Americans get along, I usually tell them that Canadians feel like a little brother. Your older brother bullies you and takes more candy sometimes, but he is family and will defend you if you are threatened. This thread and the petty quibbles in it seems to justify that way of thinking. We're arguing over how much Britain wanted us-- i.e. Who was liked more by mom.

Quote:

This does not happen in real life. Who told you this fairy tale? Just because "it was too much to think about" or "they had their minds on other things" doesn't mean they would throw away near-limitless land and natural wealth.

The reasons for Britain "letting Canada go" are complex, and have been discussed here. Partly Britain saw confederation as getting the benefits of colonialization (trade and emigration) without the costs (maintaining government in hostile lands). And we see this from the 21st century. In 1867, Canada was a frozen land with depleted stocks of fur and bison, and hungry natives. The British had no idea that Canada would contain usable oil or precious minerals. The American public was furious that its government "wasted" money buying Alaska from Russia. People in the 23rd century may think it very, very strange that countries didn't fight over Antarctica when it's full with precious dilithium crystal.

Quote:

Worst part of it: my teacher walked in on me and my best friend playing strip poker with two choir girls and the Mexican exchange student late one night and I was grounded for two days of the trip.

Hehe. Wish I'd done that. Good story, useful posts, Gopher.

I generally like Americans and have met far more ugly, overpatriotic Canadians than Americans in my life. I hope to live in the states someday and look forward to a time when I could come and go and invisible borders won't mean so much to people.

Ken:>

Pyongshin Sangja

Joined: 20 Apr 2003
Location: I love baby!

Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 10:18 pm Post subject:

Quote:

Uh, okay, note that this thread was a friendly message from an American who LIKES Canada, and it was the Canadians who hijacked it with all this "you Americans just celebrate your bloodlust" stuff.

You got a weird way of showing friendship, you lame-ass *beep*.

As for the history, America at the time was feared in Canada. The American way of life was seen as synonymous with death and war. Were America to have invaded they would not have been welcomed. That's what Americans don't get, there wasn't a feeling of repression in Canada.
These prejudices continue today. We don't see you as more free, either.

This article does say that settling disputes with America was Britain's chief concern at the time. However, I maintain that Canada was no longer cost-effective as a colony. The choice to pass the BNA Act was made in London, not in Canada. The primary motivation was economical, and also to create a united front against America should a war come. I don't see this as the British cutting and running, I see this as them creating a political entity that could compete with America.

Quote:

Hey, I was only upset because somebody insulted my knowledge of history. Not only do I really like history, I WAS RIGHT and he was wrong. I rather like Canada. Especially Quebecoises girls.

See, sexual innuendo. You see Canada as a country to be raped and exploited in the name of freedom. Your freedom. It's the same old song.

I like America. Especially those big booty black girls. How does that sound? Seriously, take your back-handed compliments and piss off.

Quote:

Donny Rumsfeld sold arms to Iraq, remember that. Our predecessors were supporting the South out of convenience. Slavery was long illegal in Canada and the rest of the British Empire by the time of the American Civil War. By the way, effective freedom for blacks didn't come until the 1960's anyway. It wasn't about the blacks, it was about money.

Quote:

As for you, Gopher, this is a horse-and-cart argument. We like to think we have made choices freely, you like to think it's because of our relationship to you. Canada has a more equal society than America, economically, educationally, medically and culturally. We're proud of it, you can't just say "What if?" and say we would have been exactly like you. I doubt it. Call it Canadian exceptionalism, whatever. It's the way we are, hypothesising doesn't change anything.

Display posts from previous:

	Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Off-Topic Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Next
Page 7 of 9

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe