Canada, U.S. agree to use each other's troops in civil emergencies

[kuzadd]

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.ht...79d&k=14984

Canada and the U.S. have signed an agreement that paves the way for the militaries from either nation to send troops across each other's borders during an emergency, but some are questioning why the Harper government has kept silent on the deal.

Neither the Canadian government nor the Canadian Forces announced the new agreement, which was signed Feb. 14 in Texas.

The U.S. military's Northern Command, however, publicized the agreement with a statement outlining how its top officer, Gen. Gene Renuart, and Canadian Lt.-Gen. Marc Dumais, head of Canada Command, signed the plan, which allows the military from one nation to support the armed forces of the other nation during a civil emergency.

The new agreement has been greeted with suspicion by the left wing in Canada and the right wing in the U.S.

Trew said there is potential for the agreement to militarize civilian responses to emergency incidents. He noted that work is also underway for the two nations to put in place a joint plan to protect common infrastructure such as roadways and oil pipelines.

"Are we going to see (U.S.) troops on our soil for minor potential threats to a pipeline or a road?" he asked.

Trew also noted the U.S. military does not allow its soldiers to operate under foreign command so there are questions about who controls American forces if they are requested for service in Canada. "We don't know the answers because the government doesn't want to even announce the plan," he said.

who is going to control the American soldiers????

one doesn't have to be 'left wing' or 'right wing' to find numerous issues with this one, always with the labels, how petty!

Why didn't Harper or his gov announce it?

Why is this even necessary?

Gosh, did we in this democracy vote to have foreign troops on our soil?

Aren't foreign troops on someone else's soil generally invaders? occupiers?

Did the Americans vote for foreign troops to rule them?

North American Union here we come?!

The integration of the use of the two militaries on each others soil could indicate that?

Or is it simply that the american soldiers not being our countrymen would have less of a qualm about shooting a canadian and vise versa?

Or is it something else?

Personally I find this quite worrisome, clearly Harper gov did not announce the agreement, because of the bad press it would have inevitably got had he stood in front of the camera's.

I don't recall an election platform that would allow foreign troops on our soil being ok'd?

[margrace]

I have been asked on here by poster why I dislike Harper. I don't dislike him I am afraid of him and this is a prime example of how manipulate and controlling this man is. Canadians should be very wary of this government. They are busy doing things behind the electorates back with no accountability what so ever. Now I am even more frightened of him.

[Guest American Woman]

I have been asked on here by poster why I dislike Harper. I don't dislike him I am afraid of him and this is a prime example of how manipulate and controlling this man is. Canadians should be very wary of this government. They are busy doing things behind the electorates back with no accountability what so ever. Now I am even more frightened of him.

I've always felt that Harper is just Canada's version of Bush.

[Regulus de Leo]

I have been asked on here by poster why I dislike Harper. I don't dislike him I am afraid of him and this is a prime example of how manipulate and controlling this man is. Canadians should be very wary of this government. They are busy doing things behind the electorates back with no accountability what so ever. Now I am even more frightened of him.

Your fear has no basis in fact.

Please provide us with examples of things they are doing behind the electorate's back without accountability.

I can't think of a government more accountable than one in a minority government situation can you?

[margrace]

When I read posts such as the one above I wonder who this person is. Do they have a strong vested interest in promoting a way of life beneficial to them. Are they directly from the Prime Ministers office?

[Regulus de Leo]

When I read posts such as the one above I wonder who this person is. Do they have a strong vested interest in promoting a way of life beneficial to them. Are they directly from the Prime Ministers office?

No one is permitted to have a view different from yours unless they have some sort of sinister ulterior motive?

Curiously you didn't give any examples of what Harper is doing behind the electorate's back that are things for which he is unaccountable for.

Edited February 24, 2008 by Regulus de Leo

[scribblet]

Your fear has no basis in fact.

Please provide us with examples of things they are doing behind the electorate's back without accountability.

I can't think of a government more accountable than one in a minority government situation can you?

Right on

It sounds like a good idea to me, to have co-operation in civil emergencies - we are all in this together. Boy the anti U.S. paranoia is heating up

From someone who is not directly from the PMO's office and interested only in promoting my retirement lifestyle -

maybe we can take over Florida

[kuzadd]

Your fear has no basis in fact.

Please provide us with examples of things they are doing behind the electorate's back without accountability.

I can't think of a government more accountable than one in a minority government situation can you?

Canada and the U.S. have signed an agreement that paves the way for the militaries from either nation to send troops across each other's borders during an emergency, but some are questioning why the Harper government has kept silent on the deal.

Neither the Canadian government nor the Canadian Forces announced the new agreement, which was signed Feb. 14 in Texas.

that qualifies as behind the electorals back, without accountability

[kuzadd]

Right on

It sounds like a good idea to me, to have co-operation in civil emergencies - we are all in this together. Boy the anti U.S. paranoia is heating up

From someone who is not directly from the PMO's office and interested only in promoting my retirement lifestyle -

maybe we can take over Florida

lol and how foolish, Are you at all pro-canadian?

controlling our own sovereign issues?

and civil or domestic issues that concern canadians?

Or are you so anti-canadian, you display zero concern about foreign troops on our soil?

How about UN troops? You okay with them too?

[Regulus de Leo]

It was hardly secret since we know about it and our elected representatives in parliament are free to raise this issue any time and even make it matter of confidence if they so choose. There's no unaccountability there and the policy is part of a widely announced policy of mutual cooperation between Canada and the US on security issues.

[Guest American Woman]

Your fear has no basis in fact.

Please provide us with examples of things they are doing behind the electorate's back without accountability.

What about when he reversed Canada's policy of seeking extradition for Canadians facing the death penalty and when he decided Canada wouldn't back the UN resolution calling for a moratorium on the death penalty, which Canada had previously supported?

[margrace]

No one is permitted to have a view different from yours unless they have some sort of sinister ulterior motive?

Curiously you didn't give any examples of what Harper is doing behind the electorate's back that are things for which he is unaccountable for.

So why are we only finding out now about this deal over sharing armies. Why wasn't there a public signing? I don't like things done behind my back. I have had too much experience of closed meetings where people are accused of something and given no chance to defend themselves and don't even know what they are accused off. Everything should be done in public.

[kuzadd]

When I read posts such as the one above I wonder who this person is. Do they have a strong vested interest in promoting a way of life beneficial to them. Are they directly from the Prime Ministers office?

wow magrace do you notice the rhetoric heat up?

rather then discuss the issue, we got the buzzwords flying around!

I was waiting for the

'anti-american' shrieks of hysteria to start up, isn't it amazing?

No problem with foreign troops possibly killing Canadian citizens during what kind of 'emergencies'????

totally non-specific.

[kuzadd]

It was hardly secret since we know about it and our elected representatives in parliament are free to raise this issue any time and even make it matter of confidence if they so choose. There's no unaccountability there and the policy is part of a widely announced policy of mutual cooperation between Canada and the US on security issues.

we know about it after the fact.

We didn't decide on this,we the electorate did not choose this.

There's no unaccountability there

well where is the accountability??????

[kuzadd]

What about when he reversed Canada's policy of seeking extradition for Canadians facing the death penalty and when he decided Canada wouldn't back the UN resolution calling for a moratorium on the death penalty, which Canada had previously supported?

I don't think Americans would feel to OK with Canadian troops on their soil.

i could be wrong, but I don't think so.

American woman what do you think?

Do you have some issues with this?

[Regulus de Leo]

we know about it after the fact.

We didn't decide on this,we the electorate did not choose this.

well where is the accountability??????

It's called Parliament. The government makes thousands of decisions everyday for which cabinet members are accountable in our democratically elected pariament. If you want to move to a system where citizens have frequent referendums you would have to change our system of government considerably and this would not be an issue worthy of a referendum.

[kuzadd]

It's called Parliament. The government makes thousands of decisions everyday for which cabinet members are accountable in our democratically elected pariament. If you want to move to a system where citizens have frequent referendums you would have to change our system of government considerably and this would not be an issue worthy of a referendum.

was it debated in parliament?

let me know?

[Regulus de Leo]

was it debated in parliament?

let me know?

Are you elected Liberal/NDP/Bloc representatives going to raise it in parliament?

[kuzadd]

Are you elected Liberal/NDP/Bloc representatives going to raise it in parliament?

Was it debated before it was signed, it's already signed , you do realize that?

So your claiming accountability, where is the accountability?

when was there even the debate?

I am not an elected representative btw.

[Regulus de Leo]

Was it debated before it was signed, it's already signed , you do realize that?

So your claiming accountability, where is the accountability?

when was there even the debate?

I am not an elected representative btw.

Not everything governments do is debated in parliament prior to it happening. This type of agreement is within the executive purview and whose cabinet ministers are answerable to the democratically elected parliament.

You did know that didn't you?

[kuzadd]

Another thought?

Canadian troops will be facing a much larger, armed populace then the American troops here, therefore, how do we feel about Canadian troops being potentially shot at by American citizens.

For Americans is this a way for your government to circumvent posse comitatus.

Posse comitatus is a U.S. law that prohibits the use of federal troops from conducting law enforcement duties on domestic soil unless approved by Congress.

Co-operative militaries on Home Soil!" notes one Web site. "The next time your town has a ‘national emergency,' don't be surprised if Canadian soldiers respond. And remember -- Canadian military aren't bound by posse comitatus."

[kuzadd]

Not everything governments do is debated in parliament prior to it happening. This type of agreement is within the executive purview and whose cabinet ministers are answerable to the democratically elected parliament.

You did know that didn't you?

Any foreign troops on Canadian soil is an issue that begs for debate, and the consent and knowledge of the people of Canada.!!!

you said there is accountability , where is it?

Edited February 24, 2008 by kuzadd

[Regulus de Leo]

Any foreign troops on Canadian soil is an issue that begs for debate, and the consent and knowledge of the people of Canada.!!!

you said there is accountability , where is it?

Foreign troops are not being stationed on Canadian soil. They would only be invited onto Canadian soil by the democratically elected Canadian government in a time of serious and probably national emergency.

If you feel so strongly about this issue call you local MP and ask him to get his party to bring the issue up for debate in the House, to call for a vote and make it a matter of confidence in the government if they feel as strongly as you do. That is accountablility.

[Guest American Woman]

I don't think Americans would feel to OK with Canadian troops on their soil.

i could be wrong, but I don't think so.

American woman what do you think?

Do you have some issues with this?

I think I'm more ok as an American having Canadian troops on my soil than I would be as a Canadian having American troops on my soil because the U.S. is more aggressive and more unilateral and more military-minded than Canada is. But yes, I do have some issues with it; mainly I really don't understand what purpose it's supposed to serve. Maybe I'm not understanding it though. Didn't we have Canadian troops on our soil after Katrina? Didn't Canada send troops to help us deal with the aftermath?

Edited February 24, 2008 by American Woman

[kuzadd]

Foreign troops are not being stationed on Canadian soil. They would only be invited onto Canadian soil by the democratically elected Canadian government in a time of serious and probably national emergency.

If you feel so strongly about this issue call you local MP and ask him to get his party to bring the issue up for debate in the House, to call for a vote and make it a matter of confidence in the government if they feel as strongly as you do. That is accountablility.

but, no matter the word dancing, you employ clearly they can be deployed here or `stationed`here.

with there weapons they can kill Canadian citizens in their own country.

Wether by 'invitation' as nonsensically as you put it, or otherwise the end result is the same they, are here, and canadian citizens are under there authority.