james rahn

The big US industrial military base is no doubt making a killing (pun intended) off the whole war on terror. Political leaders if not outright corrupt are at least all whores, they'll get into bed with anybody. The media must sell deodorant and soap to pay the bills, so they will go for an angle on a story that causes the most controversy so they can increase readership or viewership. History is politics projected backward (inevitably). None of this changes the fact that we are ina fight against forces that would destroy western civilization if given the opportunity. Bin Laden might be a fashionable dresser, but he is one bad dude. Al Qaeda and the Taliban are nothing but gangs of thugs. When it comes to America, there are things about their media, politics, government, hell, their whole world outlook that ticks me right off. But if the terrorists are going to be stopped, the USandA is the only nation that can do it. And they need to...they're the biggest target.

Gotta agree on this one

Hardly. Canada doesn't have the reputation for beligerance the US often has, but on a day-to-day basis and a person-to-person basis, I don't think the differences are anywhere that pronounced.

Okay, I'm bored now. I quit. Bye

We have Chinese GPS up here...now available at WALMART!!!

I appreciate that so many Americans died just so Canada could be a country. Now shove off and leave our Northwest Passage alone. :angry:

Nobody is who they say they are on here. That's what makes it fun.

Wrong pal, China is one of them. And I can yap about my family all I want. It's my family. Plus I think I recognize you train of thought and your writing style is verrry familiar. If you're who I think you are you not an American. Just a wanabe. Plus it's hard to keep swinging at your yankee smoke. Too busy choking on it.

Yeah right. Your north-south issue was solved by a civil war that cost more American soldiers lives than WW2. Not good enough.

Try to stop acting so paranoid whenever someone disagrees with you. Ditto...so what? You might want to learn some Mandarin, that's what. Look up Rahn Granite on the internet - they're still in Dayton, Ohio. And next time, don't shoot your mouth off about my family history unless you know what the he** you're talking about. If there was ever a justification for anti-Americanism you're making the case.

The original point I was trying to make was that loyalty to Ontario for instance wouldn't be enough to keep Canada together if Alberta wanted to leave, just as warm fuzzy feelings about the great white north and impassioned speeches won't keep the Arctic waters under Canadian control. I think your wrong on the cultural differences aspect of things. I wouldn't assume people in Alberta are culturally closer to the the people of Quebec than they are to the people of Montana. But I suppose you have to make a distinction between social cuture and material culture. I wonder how North American politics would've turned out if the dividing line had been north-south down the centre of the continent instead of east-west across it.

That's a brave statement to make when you consider the amount of oil China is now consuming and the amount of US debt they now hold. Which brings me back to the other point: the Northwest Passage (with the Arctic Ocean possibly sitting atop 25% of the world's undiscovered oil) is not safe from US interests usurping Canadian interests in the region. Lest you think I'm anti-American, I'm not. My father was born in Wausau, Wisconsin and I still have aunts, uncles and cousins there.

I don't even think it's a full two cents. It's a small price to pay.

Dollar for dollar the US Heathcare system is the most inefficient in the developed world. Sounds like the the US is putting up with substandard healthcare bacause of it's paranoia of communists. Great Act of Congress there - and it certainly doesn't dwarf Canada's accomplishments.

"...contact sport." Read: freak show.

At least at South Edmonton Common the parking is free, and it's close to IKEA where you can get really cheap swedish meatballs and drop the kids off in the play area for an hour. I'd take that over downtown anyday, but it's still a developmental eyesore. Add to the energy of downtown all the greenhouse gases produced by vehicles backed up on 109th street trying to get across the High Level Bridge. And don't go on about public transit; it's not much cheaper than the parking rates and the buses stink worse than the air in the downtown core.

That sounds a little presumptuous and I'm not sure I follow your reasoning. If Canada's mission and stated goals are different than NATO's how are they different? If Canada doesn't get more support from NATO (as well as the needed helcopters) and withdraws from the region after Feb 2009, how is our situation in regards to future terrorist attacks any different from any other western nation?

Puerto Rico doesn't have the energy resources or industrial base or agricultural resources Alberta has. But if that's the official American position, it shows why anti-American sentiment might exist in Canada without anyone pandering to it. Talk about pandering...look at the US presidential race very four years!

Hmmm...I don't think Alberta would much care for being an American territory. I think we'd prefer statehood, please.

To address the point Topaz makes, I don't think the NATO forces are losing more lives than the Taliban. But those roadside bombs are doing more than taking lives. They are demoralizing the troops, and causing the NATO alliance to crack. It isn't simply a matter of better weapons or technology. The Taliban have a greater resolve than we do. Historian Stephen Ambrose said the war on terror is not merely a war between the west and east or beween muslim extremists and the United States. Rather it is "...a war between modernity and medievalism." We can't look at the political situation in Afghanistan (or what the Manley Report says about it, for that matter) with one eye closed. Leaving Afghanistan accomplishes nothing but certain failure; garnering greater support from NATO and staying is the only possibility we have of success. When the iconic Twin Towers fell, a message was sent by the terrorists to the western world, and it was a simple message. The message was that they would gladly give their lives to reduce civilization's greatest achievements to rubble and ashes and wouldn't give a second thought to destroying anyone who stood in the way. (Incidentally, the youngest victim on 9/11 was a two year old child.) So do we openly invite them to do that again, or do we do what we can to stop them?

I think the fact there has never been a court challenge works in Canada's favour, but the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea has changed the rules. If a vessel is denied entry to the passage under the AWPPA, there's a risk of a challenge. In order for the AWPPA to survive such a challenge (according to MP John Williams) the arctic waters must officially be recognized as Canadian. This apparently will be done on the basis of the geography and features of the continental shelf. Unfortunately, Canada has not completed mapping the shelf and runs the risk of not being able to do so by the deadline of 2013. It's an approach to sovereignty that ignores environmental concerns and also the Inuit who live in the Arctic and use sea ice as transportation in the winter. I think Canada in a way gave away it's claim right there.

So if we get the help from NATO, is the mission still doomed?

I don't think the Americans are too concerned about our "bristling." Right now the status of the NWP is undetermined, so far as international opinion goes, the US and Europe have as much right to it as we do. Quite frankly I don't think Alberta will ever leave confederation either, but what's to stop it? Love for Ontario?

"Helping to build a more stable, better governed Afghanistan with a growing economy is, we believe, an achievable Canadian objective. But success is not a certainty. The war in Afghanistan is complicated. The future there is dangerous and can frustrate the most confident plan or prediction. After our three months of study, however, it is our conviction that the Recommendations in our Report—with their attached conditions—together carry a reasonable probability of success. In the circumstances now prevailing, that is the strongest assurance that can be credibly given. " Page 39 of the Report. He's not saying it's doomed to failure.

I think Bronconnier is the only credible alternative to Ed Stelmach, but it remains to be seen whether Alberta as a whole would want to take a chance on changing the status-quo for the last 70 years. I'm not sure I'd vote for the guy myself, but you'd think Alberta voters wouldn't be so gutless as to try something new. Have Alberta tories (or Social Credit before them) ever changed their thinking substantially since before WW2?