SPare Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 Being a Canadian, and hence seeing the world through slightly different eyes, I am left a little perturbed about what I'm seeing these days. I wonder if things have gone past the breaking point between France and the US. I get the impression that Chirac started down a road, and started to see some success with it, and so is continuing along it. The problem, is that the road that he's following is set to cause a potentially irreparable split between his country and his most important ally. I think that this is caused by a fundamental lack of understanding that he is dealing with a US president who is taking a strategic approach, and that for that reason, the normal rules have changed. The question is: has he already past the point where the damage is irreparable? Out of interest, I listened to a documentary on the CBC this morning which essentially consisted of interviews with citizens of St Lo, which was one of the first towns in Normandy liberated by the US. While they still show great thanks to the US for doing that, and have a festival each year commemorating that fact, I really got the impression that they have no clue of what is making Americans tick these days. Something that really came across is that they do not understand that the world really was different on September 12, 2001: at least to American eyes. They trotted out the old saws about oil, and the Cowboy leadership, and such. They really don't understand that this is about security and protecting America from another attack. You have to think that Chirac has the same problem. ________________________________ Oh, and don't get me started on my own government. Mean Gene Crouton has been a laughing stock for a good 10 years now. During the election in '93 when he came to power, the Conservative party ran an ad on him with one of his typical rambling idiocies, and asked : would you trust this man to be your leader. It got them in a lot of hot water because it was seen to be making fun of his lack of mastery of the English language, and his speech impediment. But really, I am embarrased by him and by Bill "the florist" Graham our Foreign Affairs minister. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy-the-Greek Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 When we remove all of our buried servicemen from France. Maybe that just might help the ungrateful SOB's understand how we feel right now about them. I believe the servicemen buried there should come back home. They cannot rest in peace in that contaminated soil. Every thing they did and stood for has just been dishonored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn X Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 Originally posted by SPare Being a Canadian, and hence seeing the world through slightly different eyes... SPare, the other day I was watching Your World with Neil Cavuto, a business news program on the Fox News Channel, and Cavuto conducted an interview with a Canadian journalist (whose name currently escapes me) about Canada's latest suggestions regarding a new U.N. resolution on The Iraq Question. What caught my ear during this interview were the following (loosely paraphrased) comments from the aforementioned Canadian journalist:"The thing you must understand about Canada is that while public opinion up here is mostly pro-American, the opinion of the Canadian political sphere is not. Also, things aren't set up in Canada as they are in America. We have a limited democracy up here, in which a coterie in Ottawa basically determines who is going to be Prime Minister and then he [the Prime Minister] holds enormous sway, getting to determine the entire direction of the country with very little resistance and very few checks & balances." Is this accurate, SPare? In addition, I've heard that satellite television is illegal in Canada. Is this true? Thanks in advance for your responses, SPare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brown 43 Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 The French are being such dicks about this that they vetoed the British proposal of today. In the proposal they want Saddam on T.V. announceing that he will start destroying all wmd's and a few other points! The French are hiding something?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 hey....enough already...we should honoring Chirac for the loyalty he is displaying to his friends!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins24 Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 The question is: has he already past the point where the damage is irreparable? maybe, maybe not. We don't like the French, they don't like us. That's just how it is, even without this Iraq situation. Does it really matter though, they need us more than we need them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golgo-13 Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 Originally posted by rskin24 Does it really matter though, they need us more than we need them. [/b] Yea, and the best thing is, is that they know it and it drives them NUTS!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EagleSteve Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 I can certainly understand a disagreement among allies. This is, unfortunately, not the case. The French are actively blocking our attempts to solve what we consider a national security issue through the United Nations. Before 9/11, there is no way that the American public back a so-called pre-emptive war with Iraq. Since then, however, it is abundantly clear to us that any nation that supports terrorism and has/is attempting to develop WMD is a direct threat to the national security of the United States. We understand this, therefore public support for the war in the US has been fairly high and has even grown steadily since the French shenanigans. I hope France is happy. By engaging in activities that could diminish our national security, they are the ones who have damaged the UN, NATO, and our friendship. They may also have caused a war with Iraq. If France and Germany and Russia had stood up with us and supported us, Saddam may have backed down or been removed. With all the international bickering, he has gained time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy-the-Greek Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 I hate the French with a passion. If it were up to me I would round up a few hundred VFW posts and invade it. We could call it a geriatrickrieg and take over the whole country in 3 weeks. But alas who the hell would want it anyway?:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golgo-13 Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 Originally posted by tommy-the-greek I hate the French with a passion. If it were up to me I would round up a few hundred VFW posts and invade it. We could call it a geriatrickrieg and take over the whole country in 3 weeks. But alas who the hell would want it anyway?:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: Not true, France itself is a very beautiful place. Get rid of the people and you're set. :laugh: Kind of like California.....did I just say that?? :shutup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy-the-Greek Posted March 15, 2003 Share Posted March 15, 2003 Do you have any idea the cost of fumigating that country? The orcon man is gonna have a heart attack when he sees what i brought him. I think of the guy from Jaws when he said the taxidermist back home is gonna have a heart attack when he sees what I brought him.:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted March 15, 2003 Share Posted March 15, 2003 I've hated the French since the first time I was in Toulon back in 1988. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted March 15, 2003 Share Posted March 15, 2003 escholz.....so true!!!:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted March 15, 2003 Share Posted March 15, 2003 when this is all done...we need to turn to Europe and begin exploiting the divisions that exist within the European Union, between East and West European countries.......this ought to be fun!!!!! short-sighted?....probably...can we weather it?....yes. flexibility is the new watch word........ here's another interesting twist...eventually there will be another dem President.....how far will they go to resubordinate American security to the UN? how far will they go to undo the "damage" they will claim has been wrought internationally? how much death and genocide will they tolerate overseas? how afraid will they be of American power and values? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarhog Posted March 15, 2003 Share Posted March 15, 2003 If there still is a UN by the next time we have a Dem in the White House (assuming GW weathers the '04 election)? I think theres going to be a genuine movement to withdraw from the UN....I don't think we ultimately will, as we have generally avoided anything approaching isolationism, but I think there will be some serious consideration of withdrawing. If all we can really count on the UN for is humanitarian aid, do we need them at all? Probably not, but the price we'd pay for pulling out entirely in terms of 'world opinion' would be too great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SPare Posted March 15, 2003 Author Share Posted March 15, 2003 Glenn, The problem in Canada right now is that there is a real leadership vacuum in our politics. There is basically only one party that has enough support nationally to make a majority government, and the leader of that party (Crouton) is renowned for keeping an iron grip on power. Right leaning voters essentially have 3 options: 1. vote for the Conservative party, which ironically enough is a pretty middle of the road party, with decent support in the Atlantic Provinces (think Maine, but poor), and a smattering of support across the country 2. vote for the Canadian Alliance, right wing populist party, with huge support in the West (think mixture of Minnesota, Wyoming and Texas) and almost nothing anywhere else. 3. hold their noses and vote for the liberals, since you know that at least the fiscal side is going to be conservative enough. Then there's the whole Balkanized situation that is Quebec. This splits the vote, which means that the Liberals always win. Because they always win, it's the leadership of that party that decides government position. Unfortunately, the only thing that Crouton believes in is holding power for power's sake. His one major preoccupation is right now with creating a legacy, by which he means lots of construction projects and money for health care. I honestly think that his belief is that if the can keeps getting kicked down the road long enough, he will have retired and will not have had to make the choice between friends (US vs. France). Moreover, because of the "natural governing party" status, you get a wierd mix of people in the cabinet. So, you've got people like John "Beaker" Manley, who is as pro-american as it comes in Canada, and is pretty right leaning, at the same time as Bill "the Florist" Graham, who's an anti-American lefty, firmly on the So, if it sounds like there's a schitzophrenic policy in Canada, it's because there is. Take another example that is illustrative: in 1993, the outgoing Conservative government purchased new maritime helicopters for the Air Force (really Navy, but that's one of the things about our military). The contract was for something like $3B (canuck bucks). One of the campaign promises that Crouton made was to cancel the contract, which had not yet reached the fulfillment stage. So, he invoked a $500M penalty on the contract, which got us exactly ZERO helicopters. Now, 10 years later, there is still no replacement for the Sea King, largely because the only suitable replacement for it is the helicopter that he canned in '93. It's very well known that there will be no helicopter purchased until he steps down next February. Meanwhile, our command ship going to the Gulf right now had to turn back because its helicopter crashed after massive engine failure. There was no replacement, so the ship is now headed there with no helicopter. (Navy Dave can appreciate what that means). I should point out that the Sea King is a 40 year old helicopter, and now requires 40 hours of maintenance for every 1 hour of flight time. That should be an instructive example of how decisions get made in this country. .:doh: As for satellite TV, we have 2 providers: ExpressVu (Bell) and StarChoice (Shaw). We also have a cable carrier (Rogers) who provides full digital service. Around 10 years ago, there was a substantial grey market that existed where Canadians would go down and buy direct TV dishes. That's pretty well dried up now that there are 2 domestic providers. And, BTW, almost the only reason that people get dishes is for 1. American Sports 2. American Movies 3. American TV series Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted March 15, 2003 Share Posted March 15, 2003 well....halifax is still a great party town!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.