Is Harper Canada's George Bush

[Hawk]

Notice that Alberta is Conservative homeland, fear left-wingers... fear the west, your pathetic and incompetent Liberal government is about to take a serious blow... I almost hope the Liberals win a minority government, so the Conservatives can destroy their reputation even more and next election dooming the Liberals entirely

and could you provide sources for all this vast wisdom in knowing what all the Canadians thought? You do realize only a little over 30% of voting Canadians are for the Liberals (according to these polls: http://www.nodice.ca/election2004/polls.html)

Notice I used a reference and supported it with evidence, please follow suit

PS The Kyoto accord is a TERRIBLE waste of tax dollars and completely pointless, its just another excuse for Liberals to make tax money dissapear

Source: http://www.cato.org/dailys/03-30-01.html

[Reverend Blair]

The CATO Institute? Man, that's just goofy.

We've all seen the polls on how Canadians feel about Iraq. I challenge you to look it up. Learn. Go to Google and type it in. The majority of Canadian people were against the invasion of Iraq and that number has grown.

Notice, I'm not giving specific references. I'm telling people to go out and learn. I'm not afraid that they might read the wrong thing.

[Hawk]

CATO isn't even CLOSE to as goofy as CNN or CBC or such Liberal media networks =p lol

Also I am a Canadian, every Canadian I know (except a select few) thinks we should have at least helped the States economically at the START of this all rather than make a show of being against the whole thing. You might not agree with your friends, but does that mean you wring them out to dry when they make a mistake? Heck no, and regardless of your opinion on the war we should have at least been there for them since they would have, and have been, there for us =p

Also for future references simply saying go look it up doesn't cut it in the real world, because I could say something is so and tell you to look it up.. but how am I supposed to address you and your view if I dont know what source you got your information from that you are using as a defence? Doesn't make logical sense sorry =)

[caesar]

You must have very money hungry friends that prefer the American dollar to Canadian pride in doing the right thing. We do not need to support our "friends" (Bush has NOT treated Canada as "friends" since taking office.) when they do the wrong thing.

Look at all our trade problems with the USA and their refusal to abide by NAFTA agreements when Canada wins.

Why have they not opened the border to Canadian beef? Why do they try to blame Canada for everything that goes wrong, terrorists, blackouts, mad cow disease?

Canada did support the war on the terrorists. Canada did not support invading a country which was still cooperating with the UN.

[redwhite]

That Canadians were AGAINST the invasion of Iraq is common knowledge.

That the quiet majority of Canadians were in support of the ousting of Saddam Hussein is common knowledge.

Just because you prefer to support a sadistic dictatorial regime does not mean clear thinking Canadians agree with you.

"Once the war in Iraq began, Canada was far from neutral. The only satisfactory outcome was a defeat of Saddam Hussein and his removal from power."

(Paul Martin, Speech in Toronto, April 30, 2003)

"I don't think there is any doubt about just how evil Saddam Hussein is."

(Paul Martin, Calgary Herald, March 7, 2003)

"I don't think there is any doubt, if there ever was… that he does have weapons of mass destruction. Biological weapons that they discovered were very clear evidence of not only the fact that he had them, but that he had lied and that he is continuing to lie."

(Paul Martin, Calgary Herald, March 7, 2003)

"I really think Canada should get over to Iraq as quickly as possible..."

(Paul Martin, North Bay Nugget, April 30, 2003)

"I think we have to take sides (with the U.S.)," Guarnieri said. "Canada can't just opt out."

(Albina Guarnieri, Associate Minister of National Defence, Leader-Post, March 7, 2003)

I think we made the wrong decision in not supporting them, and we’re obviously encountering the fallout from that in terms of various aspects of Canadian-American relations, which is not healthy."

(David Pratt, Minister of National Defence, Hansard, March 29, 2003)

"In all likelihood just a few weeks from now I think our closest allies will be at war with a murderous regime that gases its own people and has weapons that threaten North American security. We are going to have to make a choice. Are we going to support our closest allies or are we going to give Iraq a vote of confidence by remaining neutral?"

(Albina Guarnieri, Associate Minister of National Defence, Leader-Post, Hansard, January 29, 2003)

"What right do we have to make any criticisms of American foreign policy when we don’t accept the costs of pulling our weight?"

(David Pratt, Minister of National Defence, Kingston Whig-Standard, January 17, 2003)

"I think it’s unfortunate that this is the first time where the Australians and the British and the Americans have been involved in a conflict that we haven’t as Canadians. That’s something of a precedent."

(David Pratt, Minister of National Defence, Times Colonist, March 24, 2003)

"I think that the basis of the American and British position is the right one."

(David Pratt, Minister of National Defence, National Post, March 18, 2003)

"Mr. Chairman, I fear the former leader of the official opposition [stockwell Day, who had just spoken] may have had a peek at my speech.... Should the United Nations fail to accept its responsibility and enforce its resolutions, I believe that this country working with our traditional allies, the United States, Great Britain, Australia and others, should, indeed must, keep its options open in terms of participating in a coalition of like-minded countries to disarm the regime."

(David Pratt, Minister of National Defence, Hansard, January 29, 2003)

"By removing the sword of Damocles that was hanging over the Middle East in terms of the Iraqi regime, the Americans, the British and the other coalition allies that were involved have done the world a great favour.” Pratt said Canada “got caught up too much in the multilateral aspect of this – seeing multilateralism as an end in itself rather than looking at the morality of what was right under the circumstances… And in my view, getting rid of Saddam Hussein was always the right thing to do."

(David Pratt, Minister of National Defence, Hansard, April 9, 2003)

"[T]he government’s ambiguity, hesitancy and poll mongering has served to reduce Canada’s role to that of an irrelevant bystander… If Canada had stood by the U.S., the United Kingdom and Australia and helped those countries to shape UN support, that would have been far better."

(Scott Brison, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister, March 17, 2003)

"[T]he government’s foreign policy is shaped more by anti-Americanism than it is by respect for institutional institutions. It is also shaped, it would seem, by the Prime Minister’s affinity for dictators."

(Scott Brison, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister, March 17, 2003)

"Clearly the current approach is not working. Obviously there is a strong case to be made for action against Mr. Hussein and regime change in Iraq."

(Scott Brison, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister, March 17, 2003)

"The UN Security Council led by France has chosen to give Mr. Hussein more time. After 12 years it believes that more time is warranted. The UN was not right in Somalia or in Rwanda. The UN is not without fault or flaws. Libya after all is the chairman of the UN human rights commission. We should not blindly follow the UN."

(Scott Brison, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister, March 17, 2003)

"We are failing to protect our national interest by thumbing our nose at our greatest trading partner and ally, the United States, and at our traditional ally, the United Kingdom. We are choosing to be pulled around by the nose by France, while at the same time thumbing our nose at our best allies."

(Scott Brison, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister, March 17, 2003)

That the quiet majority of Canadians were disgusted and ashamed by Chretien's shameful posturing and self righteous attitude is also common knowledge.

[willy]

We were in Iraq, 30 troops and 2 ships. With the size of our military and the deployment in Afghanistan how many more troops could we have sent?

How bad would the Liberals have looked if one of these young men or women would have died in Iraq where the Liberal government sent them?

Most Canadians thought we should have followed the UN and the security council lead. Do most Canadians realize the power politics the French, Germans and Russians were playing? It had nothing to do with what was right and all to do with the balance of power and domestic politics in these countries.

The war is over, but the occupation is real. Should we now support the US in stabilizing a new government in Iraq or should we righteously stand by and watch the country tear itself apart. Our hands are not clean. Doing nothing is not a defense but an embarrassment.

If we thought it was principally wrong our troops should have been out of there and if we supported it internationally we should have said so.

[August1991]

Look at all our trade problems with the USA and their refusal to abide by NAFTA agreements when Canada wins.

The major (only?) trade dispute is software lumber.

We export about $US 250 billion in goods and services to the US each year. About $US 7 billion is softwood lumber.

The US government's imposition of duties and now a quota for softwood lumber means that the 7 billion is lower than it otherwise would be. How much higher should it be?

My point is that to state that we have "trade problems" with the US is an exaggeration.

Hundreds of business people show up for work in the morning at a shopping mall. During the day, thousands of people go to the shopping mall and buy stuff. No doubt some of the shoppers will disagree with some of the shop clerks. That is the proper way to view trade between Canadians and Americans.

Incidentally, this US policy may hurt Canadian producers but it hurts primarily US consumers, people buying new home.

[Hawk]

You must have very money hungry friends that prefer the American dollar to Canadian pride in doing the right thing.

Rofl who DOESNT prefer the American dollar these days? Another thing you can thank the Liberals for

Look at all our trade problems with the USA and their refusal to abide by NAFTA agreements when Canada wins.

Ummm ever thought that maybe the trade problems are a result of the anti-American sentiment people like you and the current administration harbor? Hate is a nasty thing, be careful with it

Why have they not opened the border to Canadian beef?

Because:

#1. They are punishing us

#2. Liberals dont care about the west so it isn't a big priority until election time

#3. Because they are trying to damage our beef industry, you guys left us wide open to it too

Why do they try to blame Canada for everything that goes wrong, terrorists, blackouts, mad cow disease?

Perhaps because in some of those cases they have a point? We share borders, that means we have a responsibility (I dont know if you know the meaning of the word or not if you are a Liberal) and that means if we harbor terrorists (which is common knowledge) and they abuse the easy access to the USA they have every right to be concerned and blame us. Mad Cow was also Canadian, but it was blown WAY out of proportion and if we hadn't screwed them over this War on Terror they wouldn't have screwed us over so bad on the mad cow... its their way of getting back at us.

Canada did support the war on the terrorists.  Canada did not support invading a country which was still cooperating with the UN.

Butler himself said Iraq was NOT cooperating (and he was Chief U.N. weapons inspector) =p Where are you getting your sources from?

[playfullfellow]

Incidentally, this US policy may hurt Canadian producers but it hurts primarily US consumers, people buying new home.

This is true for the softwood industry and can also be said for the beef industry in the US. The consumers and killing plants down there are taking a butt kicking but the producers are raking in the big money. The US Agricultural lobby groups are huge and have tremendous power. They are not really interested in opening the borders yet. And in all reality, the US is only doing what Canada does to other countries that have been BSE positive. A total import ban for 7 years as long as that country stays BSE free. So in all reality, why should we expect any different treatment ourselves?

[playfullfellow]

Our Supreme Court is appointed. They are all qualified people. Their decisions are based on the constitution, human rights laws, and previous case law. Do I agree with every one of their decisions? No. Do I think we need such an institution to protect us against politicians who have little respect for human rights and don't understand Canadian law? You bet I do.

As you stated, they are appointed and they are appointed by the PM. I am certain they have to have certain qualifications but what is stopping the PM appointing judges that only support his/her point of view? Nothing! Have you ever read a law book? I am not being sarcastic here, have you ever tried to read through a law book and tried to understand what is being said and exactly what the law means? A lot of laws are so confusing and so full of legalize that they can have 2 or more meanings. As for human rights laws, the supreme court make up their own version as they go. Case law? The supreme court does not have to and can over turn any previous decisions by any court of this country, no matter how many times these courts have made the same decisions. How many amnendments to the charter have been instituted by Supreme Court decisions? We have 9 people making decisions that affect over 30 million people. Wow, scary thought if you ask me.

[playfullfellow]

Why is it that L'il Stevie Harper stands alone among the leaders in opposing Kyoto?

Maybe because Kyoto is a joke. Kyoto is almost impossible to make the agreed to levels of CO2. As for global warming, yeah. it is happening but is it really caused by CO2 levels? I used to think so, was sort of in favour of Kyoto, didn't understand the implications enough to firmly make up my mind. Then I saw a presentation by Dr. Timothy Ball a couple of years ago and saw his research. Made me go hmmmmmmmmmm, looks like Chretien was kissing UN butt again to get his legacy, no matter what the implications are. Just so you understand, Dr. Ball is very pro-enviroment, he just has evidence that blows the whole Kyoto farce out of the water and feels we could better spend our money on other areas to protect the enviroment. Check the following link and read for yourself.

Dr. Tim Ball

[Reverend Blair]

You should have a hard look at Ball and his cronies. Check out their resumes and where their funding comes from.

Kyoto isn't just possible though, it can also be an economic engine that drives us forward. Quebec and Manitoba are well-situated to become major hydrogen producers. Same with hydroelectric power.

We have some provinces that are excellent candidates for wind power, others that can produce energy with tidal power. Some "have-not" provinces can become "have" provinces through this.

We already make some of the most efficient windows and doors on the planet because of our climate. We now have an opportunity to export those. There are opportunities for new technologies around every corner and new technologies have historically driven economic growth.

I realise that Kyoto scares the hell out of the boys in the oil patch, especially little weasels like Harper who would trade their children's futures for a few American dollars. Oil still has many uses though, so while it might reduce their income it will not leave them broke.

[caesar]

yet. And in all reality, the US is only doing what Canada does to other countries that have been BSE positive. A total import ban for 7 years as long as that country stays BSE free. So in all reality, why should we expect any different treatment ourselves?

Canada had one case of BSE as did the USA (another USA cow is suspect at this time) As experts; International, Canadian, and USA; state; Our beef industry in North America are so intertwined that what effects one country effects the other. Canada has the required safeguards in that surpass those of the USA. The USA is now putting in many of those safeguards.

Any Countries that Canada has banned for 7 years (which it is now reviewing) had many more cases. Brazil was banned because they neglected to do the required testing.

Howeve, that is what "right wing" governments do; They back rich business owners over the ordinary working man .

Kyoto may not be doable overnight but it is certainly worth supporting and working towards