Topaz Posted September 29, 2011 Report Share Posted September 29, 2011 DO they really want to do that? The last time they talked about the GW was president and then they said it would cost too much. Of course, if the US wants it they they can pay for it and built it high. I wonder what the Tories are thinking about this? If Tories are going to pay well over 500 mil-1 billion for the Windsor-Detroit new bridge, then they can pay for their own fence. http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2011/09/29/fence-border-canada.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted September 29, 2011 Report Share Posted September 29, 2011 I think we should look at the advantages and disadvantages of more open borders and having this discussion with the Yanks (if they care to have it). Less work on building fences and moving more to the European Union model of crossing borders.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted September 29, 2011 Report Share Posted September 29, 2011 According to the article, the consideration was for trouble spots that are difficult to patrol. Hardly a fence along the entire Canadian and U.S. border, as the title of the thread suggests. But yeah, if the U.S. wanted it, they'd pay for it. That pretty much goes without saying..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted September 30, 2011 Report Share Posted September 30, 2011 The US would benefit more by concentrating on the border with Mexico. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted September 30, 2011 Report Share Posted September 30, 2011 The US would benefit more by concentrating on the border with Mexico. Bush calls up Fox of Mexico and says "send all your used up servants across the boarder and we will put them to work" - so they don't need a fence...The Mexican problem of natuarl migration of human beings is about the dumping of slave labour - someone in Mexico figured out that it was cheaper to have the Americans feed the throw aways.. As for a boarder along the 49th - and a fence...it does not matter much - some fence manufacturing company will make a few billion--and I wonder who is getting the contract - certainly not a Canadian firm. The fence idea would be base on profit much like the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan.....America does nothing unless their is a material pay back involved - I with an old crimminal record and being of good behavour would be denied entry into America..where as a gun running truck driver or dope dealer - comes and goes freely - it's about the money and not the protection of the realm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted September 30, 2011 Report Share Posted September 30, 2011 Further more - a pair of Canadian Tire bolt cutters and a moonless night in some remote area will totally defeat the purpose of a 5000 mile long ten billion dollar fence . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted September 30, 2011 Report Share Posted September 30, 2011 Further more - a pair of Canadian Tire bolt cutters and a moonless night in some remote area will totally defeat the purpose of a 5000 mile long ten billion dollar fence . Yea, but it will make you spend your cigarette money on a some cheap bolt cutters! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted September 30, 2011 Report Share Posted September 30, 2011 As for a boarder along the 49th - and a fence...it does not matter much - some fence manufacturing company will make a few billion--and I wonder who is getting the contract - certainly not a Canadian firm. The fence idea would be base on profit much like the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan... Wait...it gets better...we will build the palisade barrier using Canadian softwood lumber! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted September 30, 2011 Report Share Posted September 30, 2011 Yea, but it will make you spend your cigarette money on a some cheap bolt cutters! Smokes are cheaper south of the border anyways. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted September 30, 2011 Report Share Posted September 30, 2011 Yea, but it will make you spend your cigarette money on a some cheap bolt cutters! Don't worry - I went to Quebec for a week and came back with enough to buy smokes and bolt cutters - and a flash light - and a small bottle of Jack....and a nice meal once I am on the southern side----oooops - I am on welfare...I hope the feds don't find out I took a bit of Frech cash across provincal lines....okay - it was a paid holiday but I am not going to make any public declarations at this point....The French in Quebec really like smart and hard working people from Ontario - cos all they have are crooks and lazy ass cheese eaters there - who by the way all smoke like a coal powered train..and they do every thing back wards.....so BC - whatchyah think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted September 30, 2011 Report Share Posted September 30, 2011 .....so BC - whatchyah think? Well, to be honest, I'm thinking that if "America SUCKS!" so much, why the hell does it need fences and minefields to keep Canadians and Mexicans out? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlight Graham Posted September 30, 2011 Report Share Posted September 30, 2011 According to the article, the consideration was for trouble spots that are difficult to patrol. Hardly a fence along the entire Canadian and U.S. border, as the title of the thread suggests. But yeah, if the U.S. wanted it, they'd pay for it. That pretty much goes without saying..... Agreed. I'm neutral on the subject. Doesn't really affect us much, minus disrupting/destroying wildlife (and their habitat) that travel back and forth our border, but it's still your land to do as you please. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted September 30, 2011 Report Share Posted September 30, 2011 I think America would do better, in light of the perimeter agreement, to focus on working with Canada to secure continental borders under a common security standard while easing travel across the US-Canada border, which accounts for tens of billions in trade annually. Of course, that's just my opinion, American can do and will do whatever it wants Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted September 30, 2011 Report Share Posted September 30, 2011 I think America would do better, in light of the perimeter agreement, to focus on working with Canada to secure continental borders under a common security standard.... This is already happening, but does nothing to satisfy the very political perception of porous borders every election cycle. It's a hot button (if not simpleminded) issue for many Americans, as in "Secure the Borders". During an economic downturn, passions rise even higher despite any such counterproductive action. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted September 30, 2011 Report Share Posted September 30, 2011 (edited) This is already happening, but does nothing to satisfy the very political perception of porous borders every election cycle. It's a hot button (if not simpleminded) issue for many Americans, as in "Secure the Borders". During an economic downturn, passions rise even higher despite any such counterproductive action. I dunno, I live in the states now, and while I sometimes hear grumbling about the porous border with Mexico and illegal immigration there, I've yet to ever hear someone complain about the porous border with Canada. In fact, the only complaints I've heard about the border with Canada is that it takes too damn long to cross sometimes, and how people wish it was more like the EU where you can just drive right across many national borders. I don't think any politician is gonna gain many votes by proclaiming "I'll fence off Canada!" Edited September 30, 2011 by Bonam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted September 30, 2011 Report Share Posted September 30, 2011 I dunno, I live in the states now, and while I sometimes hear grumbling about the porous border with Mexico and illegal immigration there, I've yet to ever hear someone complain about the porous border with Canada. Perhaps you were not in the "states" when the Millennium Bomber attempted to cross the border with explosives bound for LAX. Drug smuggling tunnels just like those found on the Mexican border exist between Canada and the US as well. A few years back they caught some yahoo trying to enter the US illegally by surfing on an ice floe. In fact, the only complaints I've heard about the border with Canada is that it takes too damn long to cross sometimes, and how people wish it was more like the EU where you can just drive right across many national borders. I don't think any politician is gonna gain many votes by proclaiming "I'll fence off Canada!" He/she would have in late 2001. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted September 30, 2011 Report Share Posted September 30, 2011 He/she would have in late 2001. It's not 2001. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted September 30, 2011 Report Share Posted September 30, 2011 It's not 2001. Maybe not for you....others will never forget 2001. Americans want that false sense of security at "the border". It's a litmus test for any politician. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted September 30, 2011 Report Share Posted September 30, 2011 Well, to be honest, I'm thinking that if "America SUCKS!" so much, why the hell does it need fences and minefields to keep Canadians and Mexicans out? Perhaps it's to keep Americans in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted September 30, 2011 Report Share Posted September 30, 2011 I dunno, I live in the states now, and while I sometimes hear grumbling about the porous border with Mexico and illegal immigration there, I've yet to ever hear someone complain about the porous border with Canada. In fact, the only complaints I've heard about the border with Canada is that it takes too damn long to cross sometimes, and how people wish it was more like the EU where you can just drive right across many national borders. I don't think any politician is gonna gain many votes by proclaiming "I'll fence off Canada!" I don't hear of anyone worrying about the porous border with Canada either, but at the same time, I don't know anyone who wishes it was more like the EU where we could just drive on in and out unchecked. Our nations are huge, which IMO makes a difference. Also, we don't have any common union. Even within the EU, though, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Ireland, Romania and the United Kingdom require passports. I can't imagine the UK not requiring it. We have to pass through state check points in some instances, so I can't imagine just coming and going between our two nations. We do have enough differences in policies to make that a bad idea, IMO. I agree, though - I don't think any politician has much to gain from the masses with the desire to fence off Canada. But again, that wasn't the idea - it was only to fence off the more porous, difficult to patrol sections. I can't imagine that causing anyone any hardships. I doubt it would change anything for anyone who wasn't trying to get into the country illegally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.