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

[Wilber]

what the heck is that?

Those were my questions wrt this agreement. You seemed to be the one with the 'answers'.

Or should I call them speculations or assumptions.

hell I just want to know, what the agreement entails.

Don't you understand your own posts. You say you didn't raise the specter but seeing as you have no information on the agreement and those are the only questions you ask, you are doing exactly that. They aren't questions, they are accusations. Geez Louise, do you take everyone for morons.

[GostHacked]

A massive earthquake hits one of our major cities, say Toronto. Tens of thousands are trapped waiting to be rescued, and our military is unable to reach a tenth of them. Millions more are homeless and need water, shelter, and food. We would need aid quickly to avoid even more casualties, and waiting for international help would take over a week. Having an agreement in place to increase response time would save many lives.

Toronto cannot handle snow, let alone an earthquake. The probability of an earthquake in Toronto is pretty slim.

The other thing I want to know is, why do we need help from a foreign military for domestic emergency issues? Should we not be able to take care of that stuff on our own?? And if not... why not?

Are there too many US soldiers on foreign soil the reason they may need Canadian troops cruising streets of Washington or Dallas or L.A. or Chicago??

Why do we need the military when we should have more than enough civilian capacity to accomplish this task? Why has not the money been spent on civilian emergency responders? Kill the spending for that so we can send in the military??? Does not make sense. The politicians in power seem to make sure that there is less civilian emergency responders to make sure that the military option needs to be taken.

This means that ANYTHING that is delcared as a 'state of emergency' and I mean ANY state of emergency, you have foreign troops on your soil telling YOU what to do. Bad precident, for those troops are not accountable for their actions.

[M.Dancer]

The other thing I want to know is, why do we need help from a foreign military for domestic emergency issues? Should we not be able to take care of that stuff on our own?? And if not... why not?

It would be costly to preposition the military in every major population centre just in case....far easier, like calling in a 6 alarm fire to have help come from where it is closest...whether that would be for Montana or for Manitoba...

Now If....a major quake devasted the west coast, you could say Canada could look after BC and the US could look after the Pacific states but it may be more efficiant to send a Canadian ERT to a Washington State location while an Alaskan unit responds to a northern BC town....hypothetically speaking....in other words if yoiu treat all responders as One Resource rather than a myriad of unique jurisdictions it may by more logistically sound.

[Wilber]

The other thing I want to know is, why do we need help from a foreign military for domestic emergency issues? Should we not be able to take care of that stuff on our own?? And if not... why not?

We quite likely won't but what if we do? Don't you think there should be some pre established procedures for such an eventuality? The US army has an entire Corps based at Fort Lewis 700 km down the I-5 from Vancouver. The nearest Canadian regular army unit is in Edmonton on the other side of the Rockies and at any one time most of them can be in Afghanistan. Our local reserve units could be really strapped under such circumstances. Those who are not in Afghanistan or some other part of the world.

In the event of a major catastrophe on Canada's west coast, it is more likely that any help will come from the US before it can arrive from the rest of Canada. There could be the same possibility on the east coast. After the Halifax explosion the first substantial medical help came in the form of a trainload of Americans from Boston. Several US warships were also either in port or diverted to assist.

It's not a one way street, there are areas along our border where Canadian resources could respond quicker and more effectively in the short term at least.

[M.Dancer]

Our local reserve units could be really strapped under such circumstances.

While reservists are trained to follow orders, which is certainly more and better than a civilian under extreme circumstances.....most are not trained to handle civil disasters.

[Guest American Woman]

Toronto cannot handle snow, let alone an earthquake.

I was going to mention that perhaps you could use our troops to clear the snow in Toronto with this new deal.

[M.Dancer]

I was going to mention that perhaps you could use our troops to clear the snow in Toronto with this new deal.

I second that .....although it would be easier if the politicians simply visited Montreal and saw how it's supposed to be done.

[kuzadd]

Don't you understand your own posts. You say you didn't raise the specter but seeing as you have no information on the agreement and those are the only questions you ask, you are doing exactly that. They aren't questions, they are accusations.

Oh I understand my own posts, when I ask questions and I place question marks at the end, that means.....I am asking questions.

I never said I had information on the agreement, in fact you did seem to be the one providing all manner of information .

I merely had a bunch of questions, which I asked, I queried, I punctuated with question marks.

question mark ? A question mark is used at the end of a question.

If a spectre was raised for you, that is your problem, not mine.

Your interpretation is your own!

Geez Louise, do you take everyone for morons.

I don't take everyone for morons, only some!

[Rue]

Since both Canada and the US have always helped one another out in times of emergency - one must begin to question what exactly this 'new' treaty intends - ie what kind of 'civil' emergency?

There was no need to create this binding document - except perhaps as mentioned before in this thread to circumvent the Posse Comitatus laws in the US.

So, that makes two agreements that our 'oh so transparent' Harper Government has now signed - without any debate or mention to the public. The first being the deal with Israel wrt 'security' (one must ask: whose security???) and now this one with the US warmonger Admin to the south of us. Geez if we keep this up Canada will be unrecognizable as a soveriegn nation. (Which she most likely already is).

1. The need to create this binding document probably was not legally necessary. You raise a valid point of criticism.

2. The lack of debate is another valid point of criticism.

After the above announcement we are now talking about, about two weeks later, it was also announced there will be a Canda-US-Mexico joint military exercise. That one sort of just slipped through the media as well.

[Rue]

It would be costly to preposition the military in every major population centre just in case....far easier, like calling in a 6 alarm fire to have help come from where it is closest...whether that would be for Montana or for Manitoba...

Now If....a major quake devasted the west coast, you could say Canada could look after BC and the US could look after the Pacific states but it may be more efficiant to send a Canadian ERT to a Washington State location while an Alaskan unit responds to a northern BC town....hypothetically speaking....in other words if yoiu treat all responders as One Resource rather than a myriad of unique jurisdictions it may by more logistically sound.

I think that is the point Dancer, but I also appreciate the concerns say Buffy restated that such things should be debated and explained clearly. I am not sure how much of this is not discussed because our governments don't want us to know just how inept and disorganized they now are and how much of it is something sinister. I suspect the former not the latter, but I can see how the lack of public discussion fuels conspiracy theories and anxiety in some.

I personally believe most conspiracies come about because people can't imagine governments as being inefficient and inept, and when they f..ck up, and then try cover up their mistakes, people create conspiracy theories to make it seem as if the government deliberately planned what happened and now hide it because the other alternative-the fact it just may be the government having screwed up, scares people and so these conspriacy theories once again perpetuate the myth of powerful governments in control and who can't possibly be full of idiots f..cking up.

The fact is, our governments' ability to manage wide spread catastrophes and emergencies is very limited and I wonder-just what would happen if the government told the blunt truth and explained their weakness using the terms you mentioned to then explain why they need to incorporate each other's logistics...I think it would cause many people to panic.

Edited March 6, 2008 by Rue

[Topaz]

As far as I'm concern Canada is headed to the same place the US is now. Our liberties will gradually go, some without our knowledge and this is just one, that has already happen. The Conservative governments of the two countries are creating crisis's to have a reason to bring this to be. We know Harper can't be trusted , his word is meanless and the former PC's are so glad to be back in Ottawa, they are blinded by were this government is going.

[sharkman]

Yeah, too bad with all of the years the Liberals had they chose to publicly distance themselves from the Americans but behind closed doors increased commerce with them whenever they could! They even allowed a very low dollar so our goods were cheaper to the Americans. They did nothing about the Free Trade Agreement and nothing about NAFTA.

In other words, even the left wing Liberal Party realized having a relationship with the biggest and strongest empire in the world was not a bad thing, hard lefties harping notwithstanding.

[DrGreenthumb]

Troops in our streets. The Liberal ads were not so far off after all. This is not about co-operating in natural disasters or there would have been no need to do it in secrecy. This is about using each other's military against citizens uprisings. I'd say we would be a lot more likely to see American troops here to help "take care of" a possible future native uprising over land claims and treaty obligations, or to control other groups of protesters like the thousands who march on Ottawa every year to protest the pot laws every april 20th.

You conservatives can pretend this is innocent all you want, all the conservatives I know have been whining about how we should just join the states and become American anyways so I won't be counting on any Conservative to be concerned with Canada's sovereignty.

Harper is selling us out, changing our laws to American laws, and now getting ready to unleash the American Military on Canadians should they get angry enough to try and stop him from destroying our country.

Harper is a weasel always working in secret behind the backs of Canadians. This government is the most underhanded secretive government Canada has ever had. We need an election so we can remove him.

[bush_cheney2004]

...Harper is selling us out, changing our laws to American laws, and now getting ready to unleash the American Military on Canadians should they get angry enough to try and stop him from destroying our country.

Harper is too late for that....PET beat him to it years ago. October crisis....repatriated constitution.....oh...so....AMERICAN!

[capricorn]

Harper is a weasel always working in secret behind the backs of Canadians. This government is the most underhanded secretive government Canada has ever had. We need an election so we can remove him.

Well whatever Harper's doing in secret, Dion and his Liberals must agree with him. They keep propping his government up by voting with the Conservatives, abstaining from votes or not showing up at all for votes. Is this what they call a coalition government?

[sharkman]

Yeah, I think Dion and the NDP are weaseling around with Harper behind DrGreenthumb's back, those dirty so and so's! Canada has used its own military on it's citizens so rarely that clear minded people would clearly see that the chances of an American force being used for that is nil. If our oil industries came under attack by nut bar terrorists or rabid environmentalists, our own military wouldn't have the manpower to cover all the bases. In the event of a big quake in Toronto, we then would also be glad to see american soldiers digging for survivors. Some people worry about everything or nothing, depending on if the Tories are in power. Don't worry be happy.

[DrGreenthumb]

Yeah, I think Dion and the NDP are weaseling around with Harper behind DrGreenthumb's back, those dirty so and so's! Canada has used its own military on it's citizens so rarely that clear minded people would clearly see that the chances of an American force being used for that is nil. If our oil industries came under attack by nut bar terrorists or rabid environmentalists, our own military wouldn't have the manpower to cover all the bases. In the event of a big quake in Toronto, we then would also be glad to see american soldiers digging for survivors. Some people worry about everything or nothing, depending on if the Tories are in power. Don't worry be happy.

Whatever Conservative. If it is so honorable then why be so sneaky? Civil emergencies is a strange way to describe possible natural disasters. Sounds more like a way to describe possible civil unrest or disobedience. They may want to rough some people up but know that their own Candian forces might be a little reluctant to put the beat down on their own citizens. The Harper government may want to let the americans do their dirty work so they can claim to be not responsible for what happens. You Cons seem so willing to welcome the police state with open arms, you do not deserve the freedoms that others have fought and died for.

[sharkman]

Yeah, the freedoms that the left all hold so dearly, abortions, gay marriage, and smoking pot. I'm pretty sure those who died for our freedoms didn't die for those ones.

What police state? The police have soooo many t's to cross and i's to dot just to get a criminal to court only to see the judge throw out the case on the drug dealer because of some slight only the judge can see. It's not a police state but a criminal state. Our laws have given the criminals so many rights they actually have more after they get arrested. In today's local paper, a child molester was given a sentence for molesting two boys. Freedom, since the one year he got was served by a 6 month stint in the slammer while the case dragged on and on. They get double time credit, and miniscule sentences for wrecking someone's life. You are deluded to think we are close to a police state.

Cheers.

[M.Dancer]

Whatever Conservative. If it is so honorable then why be so sneaky? Civil emergencies is a strange way to describe possible natural disasters.

It's the way they've been describes for decades....welcome to 1950....

[Army Guy]

Toronto cannot handle snow, let alone an earthquake. The probability of an earthquake in Toronto is pretty slim.

Perhaps toronto was not the best example but what about Vancover.

Quakes.

The other thing I want to know is, why do we need help from a foreign military for domestic emergency issues? Should we not be able to take care of that stuff on our own?? And if not... why not?

We have had help from the US military on just about every major domestic emergency we've had in the last 20 years. for instance during the Winnipeg floods, US naval and army helo's assisted in rescue op's, during the ICE storm US military transport aircraft assisted with moving equipment to where it was needed...the list is long...

Yes we should be able to take care of that stuff on our own, however our military is the size it is because thats what the avg Canadian wants, it has nothing to do with needs at all.

Why do we need the military when we should have more than enough civilian capacity to accomplish this task?

In which dept, or Are you saying the government could call up all able bodies to assist, and if they did what equipment would they use, what training would they have,

Why has not the money been spent on civilian emergency responders? Kill the spending for that so we can send in the military??? Does not make sense. The politicians in power seem to make sure that there is less civilian emergency responders to make sure that the military option needs to be taken.

There is money spent on civilian responders, and planners, and it does come out of the military budget, because the military is a major componet in our national preparedness plan. It has the manpower available on short notice, it has the equipment, or most of it, and it has assets spread around the country....it makes sense to use the military in this function, Why have 2 completely separate depts, would that make good fiscal sense....

This means that ANYTHING that is delcared as a 'state of emergency' and I mean ANY state of emergency, you have foreign troops on your soil telling YOU what to do. Bad precident, for those troops are not accountable for their actions.

Stop the panick....any foreign troop deployment would be under the national chain of command, and would be limited to certain types of operations....and unless it was a massive domestic emergance like victory island slipped out to sea, i highly dought you'd see US soldiers in a security role....much like how we were used in Katrina, very limited even restricted roles...unarmed.

It's a good policy, and although we have a agreement of limited support in the past...this now makes it official....

What is shopuld do as Rue suggested was make every Canadian think about how they want our government to respond to a crises and what kind of help they are expecting....

To put this in context, the ICE storm, was a major reponse by our military, involving a vast chunk of our deployable troops....and it was not a very big emergency.... a Katrina type emergency would have quickly overwhelmed our entire force, and really brought to light all our shortfalls.

[Rue]

I bet you Army Guy people would be quite suprised if we were able to list all the times the US Armed Forces has engaged in rescue operations for Canadians or vice versa. I totally forgot about Winnipeg until you mentioned it. I remember as a kid on the Quebec Vermont border, US reserves working with Quebec provincial police and Vermont State police, etc. looking for a lost kid. I guess we forget just how many stories like this there are.

We only remember guys in uniform during a crisis I guess....human nature? But then that is another issue.

Edited March 19, 2008 by Rue

[g_bambino]

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??????

Why does everyone think that as a voter they are entitled to know, and personally, directly control every aspect of the government's business? Declarations of war, mobilisation of troops, etc., are made by order of the Governor-in-Council, not by parliament, and not by the general populace. The ministers who advise the Governor General are responsible to the House of Commons; that is where the accountability lies. The opposition parties have critics charged to watch certain ministries; this act of the Cabinet could not have gone completely unheeded by any MP; Ottawa isn't that secret (obviously). So, clearly the agreement - of which we know no details - did not raise any red flags for shadow ministers or other opposition MPs.