maplesyrup Posted September 8, 2004 Report Share Posted September 8, 2004 Border may stay closed: Harper And Harper aspires to be prime minister. That's it, blame Ottawa for US policies. What a loser! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted September 8, 2004 Report Share Posted September 8, 2004 The simple fact of the matter is that we wouldn't be in this position if Harper had been elected PM. The Liberals have bungled this issue. In this case, as in others, I agree that Albertan interests are badly represented in Ottawa. If the issue concerned Ontario cars being blocked at the border, it would have been resolved. And Parrish wouldn't have said the nonsense she said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caesar Posted September 8, 2004 Report Share Posted September 8, 2004 It is not A Canadian problem that has kept these borders closed to our beef. If it required Canada to join an unwise vindictive invasion on Iraq and to risk Canadian soldiers to risk their lives for the fraudulent intelligence from the USA. Keep their borders closed. Canada has taken measure to help the beef industry by open and processing more of our own beef cattle. Thank god we didn't elect that turkey Harper as prime minister. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmy Posted September 8, 2004 Report Share Posted September 8, 2004 Did Harper say anything that wasn't plain truth? Harper said the problem is protectionism, and it is. Harper said the border isn't likely to reopen soon, and it isn't. Harper said that the Liberals' handling of Canada-US relations has not helped the situation, and you'd have to be an idiot to think otherwise. Anybody care to offer a factual dispute of anything Harper said in the article? I'm looking forward to it. Should be a treat to read As usual, there seems to be an element on this board that fires of an ill-informed knee-jerk reaction at anything involving Harper or the Conservative party. -kimmy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caesar Posted September 8, 2004 Report Share Posted September 8, 2004 Harper said that the Liberals' handling of Canada-US relations has not helped the situation, and you'd have to be an idiot to think otherwise. It is NOT the Liberals handling of Canada / USA relations that have caused our problems with the USA. It is the USA bully tactics and unjust trading policies that have caused the Liberal and many many Canadian"s disgust with the USA government authorities. Harper going down to the USA and apologizing for Canada not backing the USA in the Iraq invasion was a big dumb stupid blunder and not mandated by the public Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slavik44 Posted September 8, 2004 Report Share Posted September 8, 2004 Did Harper say anything that wasn't plain truth?Harper said the problem is protectionism, and it is. Harper said the border isn't likely to reopen soon, and it isn't. Harper said that the Liberals' handling of Canada-US relations has not helped the situation, and you'd have to be an idiot to think otherwise. Anybody care to offer a factual dispute of anything Harper said in the article? I'm looking forward to it. Should be a treat to read As usual, there seems to be an element on this board that fires of an ill-informed knee-jerk reaction at anything involving Harper or the Conservative party. -kimmy I don't think anyone has a problem with the positive (factual) statements harper made. however the normative (opinionated) statements is where people will differ. It comes down to a trade off, do we want to reduce Canadian sovriegnty and risk soldiers lives for better relations with the U.S and a free market. Then it comes down to personal opinion, which kimmy, in most cases you cannot critisize someone for saying that Harpers solution to the problem comes at to high of price. You can most certainly disagree. There is a fine line between information and solution and finding wich solution is the right one based on the information and people like MS and ceaser and myself partially, will look at the information presented by harper and decided that his solution is not worth it, considering we are dealing with both fiscal and social policies the word cost is relative to the person, and theirfore the answer the person comes up with will be relative to their values, and in relaity who is the one to be the judge of anothers values? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmy Posted September 8, 2004 Report Share Posted September 8, 2004 Oh, is this just about the war in Iraq? Or is there more to it? Have the Liberals been antagonistic towards the Bush regime since "Dubya" took office? So if Harper says that the Liberals have done a poor job handling Canada-US relations, he's an idiot, a sell-out, he's a politician trying to score some cheap political mileage with baseless accusations... So what would you say about an Ontario Liberal MP who says the same thing? http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/c...ican_liberals_1 "There appear to be people who are anti-American or just anti-Republican - I can't make that distinction," MP Roger Gallaway, whose Sarnia, Ont., riding includes Canada's second busiest border crossing, said in an interview."They're certainly anti-this American government. That's been very pervasive. I think it complicates the prime minister's life." Now, with Americans mired in one of the most polarized presidential races in a generation, Gallaway believes Martin is going to have a tough time juggling the charged U.S. rhetoric, his fractious caucus and the need for improved Canada-U.S. trade relations."I don't know how you balance that line, particularly within our caucus at the moment." We're all excited about Canadian sovereignty... let's at least recognize the flip side of the coin. -kimmy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I miss Reagan Posted September 8, 2004 Report Share Posted September 8, 2004 Harper is right on the money. It's all about diplomacy. It's the same reason the Germans are crying right now because the US is removing their bases. Canada should get ready for some hard times if it doesn't shape up. With China ready to take over as the the US's largest trading partner in the next few years, the US will have little need for Canada. (Except for us US friendly Albertans and our oil ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maplesyrup Posted September 8, 2004 Author Report Share Posted September 8, 2004 The simple fact of the matter is that we wouldn't be in this position if Harper had been elected PM.The Liberals have bungled this issue. In this case, as in others, I agree that Albertan interests are badly represented in Ottawa. If the issue concerned Ontario cars being blocked at the border, it would have been resolved. And Parrish wouldn't have said the nonsense she said. Really! The reality is it is election year in the US for starters. How many times have the US positions been found wanting on trade agreements and yet they continue to ignore the decisions and act as bullies? Come off it - it has absolutely nothing to do with Ottawa and everything to do with the US farming lobby. The sooner Canada begins to trade more with the rest of the world and less with the Americans the better off Canadians will be as Trudeau said a long time ago. Trudeau saw the US business community/government for what it is - a bunch of hoods! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I miss Reagan Posted September 8, 2004 Report Share Posted September 8, 2004 When will the self-righteous Canadians realize the inevitablity of consequences for poor diplomacy, such as calling the US President a moron or calling Americans idiots and bastards. Common sense would dictate that making such insults would not appeal to US leaders good nature. But still Canadians feel entitled to everything without cost. Still, Canadians are just as protectionist with their precious Can-cult laws. Oddly most Canadians want Kerry to win, who is completely protectionistic in comparison to Bush. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted September 8, 2004 Report Share Posted September 8, 2004 Harper is right in one respect: the ongoing border closure is about protectionism and can be attributed to the power of the U.S. beef lobby. However, the "Liberal bungling of Canada US relations" is simple Conservative boilerplate. Haerper knowss the view that: When will the self-righteous Canadians realize the inevitablity of consequences for poor diplomacy, such as calling the US President a moron or calling Americans idiots and bastards. is fairly common, despite the fact that, if you asked your average Congeressman, Senator or, heck, even the PUS himself, they'd problay have no idea what you're talking about. Parrish's comments, or even the war in Iraq, have bupkis to do with the BSE crisis, softwood lumber or anything else. It's about money, babies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Terrible Sweal Posted September 8, 2004 Report Share Posted September 8, 2004 The simple fact of the matter is that we wouldn't be in this position if Harper had been elected PM. What's he going to do, wave his magic wand? Or sit on George's? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Terrible Sweal Posted September 8, 2004 Report Share Posted September 8, 2004 Have the Liberals been antagonistic towards the Bush regime since "Dubya" took office? Which Liberals? Some Liberals feel antagonistic toward the criminal Bush regime, certainly. But the government of Canada has shown no antagonism whatsoever. Do you mean to suggest that the American government under Bush is playing petty politics with an entire continental industry? Shurely not! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted September 8, 2004 Report Share Posted September 8, 2004 Harper is right in one respect: the ongoing border closure is about protectionism and can be attributed to the power of the U.S. beef lobby.I fully agree BD.But Klein got a meeting with Cheney about this - and you can be sure Bush was briefed before meeting PM PM. The point is that this is nowhere on the agenda right now (election and all) and in all likelihood won't be for some time after. Read A World Transformed to understand how often a Prez and a PM can consult. Ours are not talking. I think that was Harper's point. the criminal Bush regimeWTF? Does that make Harper a running dog lackey? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Terrible Sweal Posted September 8, 2004 Report Share Posted September 8, 2004 the criminal Bush regimeWTF? Does that make Harper a running dog lackey? I think the only other choice is 'dupe'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maplesyrup Posted September 9, 2004 Author Report Share Posted September 9, 2004 Harper rides trade winds Harper seems to think that the US will play fair in trade disputes, and all Canada has to do is kiss George Bush's ass - what kind of la la land is he living in? The US designs all these trade agreements to benefit themselves - they will never abide by the rules and the sooner Canada gets out of them the better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
playfullfellow Posted September 10, 2004 Report Share Posted September 10, 2004 The US designs all these trade agreements to benefit themselves - they will never abide by the rules and the sooner Canada gets out of them the better. MS, exactly how do you propose that Canada get out of these deals and maintain our export markets at the current levels they are at? Have you actually sat down and thought this idea through? I think not because you do not think of the repurcussions of such an action. Firstly, we all know that the US is a protectionist state and fights tooth and nail to protect it's domestic industries. At least right now we do have appeal boards to take our complaints to. Yeah, the US does not always listen or abide by these rulings but that is life. Secondly, these agreements allow "us" (Canada) access to US products we need with less paper work and stress hence a lower cost to us. Thirdly, where the heck do you propose we will sell all these products that the US will tell us to stick up our arses because we are having a hissy fit? We will be right back in dealing with trade wars and such with the US and we are definately in no position to win such a war. What happens when duties and tariffs double on current products? Your proposition is an invitation to bankrupt Canada and its industry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caesar Posted September 10, 2004 Report Share Posted September 10, 2004 We will be right back in dealing with trade wars and such with the US and we are definately in no position to win such a war. What happens when duties and tariffs double on current products? Your proposition is an invitation to bankrupt Canada and its industry. When did they stop???? That is what is happening now. Nobody expects us to stop trading completely with the USA; but we better get busy and start courting China. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caesar Posted September 10, 2004 Report Share Posted September 10, 2004 and all Canada has to do is kiss George Bush's ass Even if this were true; that is too high a price to pay. We do not want to commit Canada to follow in the footsteps of the USA. They only lead to trouble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
playfullfellow Posted September 10, 2004 Report Share Posted September 10, 2004 but we better get busy and start courting China. China is even more protectionist than the US. You fail to see the logistics of trading with a country that is several days sailing away compared to a day or two by truck which the US offers. You figure to send 20 or so tonnes by truck to anywhere in the US costs around 3000 dollars, what would the cost be to send the same amount to China? Yes, I agree that Canada has to diversify it's export market but exactly to where? China is only interested in our raw resources, they have 2 billion people to keep fed and working. Agricultural groups have been trying to get into China for the past 10 years without much success. Plenty of agreements have been signed but they are all short term and conditional. The US remains the main market for all our agricultural items. The EU is even more hopeless than the US and Russia is broke. Not too many choices caesar and that is frustrating. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caesar Posted September 10, 2004 Report Share Posted September 10, 2004 well the USA is trading with China and China will soon surpass Canada as the USA's largest trading partner. So I think it is not quite as you suggest.The USA is only interested in our raw products, too. so where's the big difference. Perhaps China would abide by trade agreements; that would be a breath of fresh air after our dealings with our good southern neighbour Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmy Posted September 10, 2004 Report Share Posted September 10, 2004 When did they stop???? That is what is happening now. Nobody expects us to stop trading completely with the USA; but we better get busy and start courting China. Are you under the impression that we're not already doing our best to open doors with China and other East Asian nations? -kimmy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slavik44 Posted September 10, 2004 Report Share Posted September 10, 2004 When did they stop???? That is what is happening now. Nobody expects us to stop trading completely with the USA; but we better get busy and start courting China. Are you under the impression that we're not already doing our best to open doors with China and other East Asian nations? -kimmy no i think he is under the impression of, just like someone would want to diversify their stock portfolio we should also want to diversify our trade portfolio, in otherwords instead of having all are eggs in one nest put them in fifteen because if a storm comes, and a nest flips its eggs I would rather it be one of 15. however many people seem to be giving off the impression that what is foremost is to rely solely on good trade with the U.S, when in reality not only do we need good trade with the U.S, but we need to start relying on others for trade not only will that offer us security in times of storm but it can also lead to an increased amount of goods flowing into and out of the country as well as increased production of goods from our country, this woudl lead to an increased standard of living. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caesar Posted September 10, 2004 Report Share Posted September 10, 2004 Are you under the impression that we're not already doing our best to open doors with China and other East Asian nations? I do realizw that we are making overtures to increase trade with China; I just think that a better effort is needed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maplesyrup Posted September 10, 2004 Author Report Share Posted September 10, 2004 I think we are already in a trade war with the US. We always have been, and we always will be, until the US learns to respect us, and stops bullying us. Canada would be better off if the US want to screw us on softwood, then we will screw them on energy. Tit fir tat. Canada, rather than sit idly by while our industires are devastated by protectionist US policies, needs to kick ass and stand up to our southern neighbours. Of couse I am not suggesting that we completely stop trading with the US, but the more we diversify our trading partners the better off we will be. 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.