US/Canada

[Cartman]

Has everyone looked at this story already?

http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/200...erry041026.html

[Newfie Canadian]

I don't know.

I have heard some pundits ay Bush would be better because:

1) He don't have to worry about getting re-elected, so he would have a freer reign, and

2) Kerry and Edwards, especially Edwards, are considered more protectionist than Bush. (I believe that has been mentioned in earlier threads as well.)

In my opinion, no matter who wins on Nov. 2, Canada will still get the proverbial cold shoulder.

[August1991]

I was going to say that, like the Shania Twain song, it can only go up from here. But then, true, Edwards certainly ran as a protectionist.

In fact, protectionism in the States is not ideological. It's pragmatic politics. Neither Bush nor Kerry has the political will to say no to a pushy lobby group.

We weren't insignificant before. Considering our US relationship, Chretien appeared to get along with Clinton, and Mulroney made a big deal of getting along with Reagan and Bush Snr. Our guys got more face time than say, the Governor of California. I'm sure Trudeau held his own in the G-7 meanings.

[caesar]

International relations are more important than protectionist leaders at this time. Bush is making this world a more dangerous place and inflaming terroristic behavior. I think he has made more terrorists than he has destroyed.

Bush's arrogant attitude towards Canada began from day one and only increased after Canada refused to join the INVASION of Iraq. It is and was not a war; none was declared. In fact, did not Bush declare an end to hostilities. hmmmmm guess he made a little error there

[Newfie Canadian]

Neither Bush nor Kerry has the political will to say no to a pushy lobby group.

A politician that does have that political will isn't a politician for very long, I would argue.

I'm sure Trudeau held his own in the G-7 meanings.

I bet they were interesting meetings.

There's no magic bullet for the complexities of the Canada/US relationship. There are too many areas where conflict arise and the only thing to do about it is compromise and cooperate. That hasn't been happening lately.

[caesar]

There is no magic bullet but Bush's departure with his puppet master Cheny would go a long way towards normalizing relations with the USA. Hopefully, Kerry would be a little more respectful of other countries right to their own decisions.

[Newfie Canadian]

A few months ago I might have agreed with you caesar, but I have seen very little during the campaign to show that.

[Slavik44]

There is no magic bullet but Bush's departure with his puppet master Cheny would go a long way towards normalizing relations with the USA. Hopefully, Kerry would be a little more respectful of other countries right to their own decisions.

I don't feel that to be a magic bullet either, while I may be more closely aligned to kerry, I don;t want him to take power. We have seen Bush's evil's, his millitary is over extended, he can't attack anyone else, with otu wide international support. Bush's ability to do evil was severly thined in Iraq, besides that the population is now on alert, watching Bush. To me that is the best situation possible, if Kerry ends up in power, we haven't seen his possible protectionism, and the damage it can do, and I doubt a tarrif happy president will do anything for international relation's, as far as i am concerned Bush can't invade anyone anymore, making Bush the lesser of the two losers.

[Guest eureka]

Interesting points, Slavik. I have bn wondering of ot might not be better to suffer 4 more years of Bush, too.

I would far rather see Kerry, but I am not impressed with him. I do not think he will sign on to Kyoto. I do not think he will do much diffrently about Iraq or terrorism. He will make some attempt to engage with the international community but I think it will be more of America first with him. He would not sign on to the International Criminal Court either, or, rejoin the international agreements that Bush has pulled out of. I also think he believes in preventive wars which are simply aggression by another name. He would be far better for America nad the world than Bush but would keep it on its wrong path.

Might it be better for us to be stuck with Bush a little longer rather than have half a loaf from Kerry and be forced to be grateful and accepting simply because it is netter than dealing with Bush? Would the longer term perhaps be worse because America would be entrenched in its unilateralism?

[caesar]

Under no circumstance would I wish for four more years of Bush/ Cheney. I do not believe that he can do no more harm. I think that if America re-elects him it will appear to be condoning his actions and that may fuel even more terrorism. I think that many more people here will lose any respect and faith in the American people acting in good faith. I would sure cross them off my X MAS card list.

[caesar]

I think this article says it all; that Bush's action are unjustified and evil.

War has killed 100,000 Iraqis: study

Last Updated Thu, 28 Oct 2004 22:25:58 EDT

LONDON - Nearly 100,000 more Iraqis have died during the American-led occupation than would have died otherwise, a study posted on The Lancet medical journal's website Thursday estimates.

[caesar]

Bush is one of us, say French

By Henry Samuel in Paris

(Filed: 30/10/2004)

Knocking John Kerry's Gallic roots could be a thing of the past for George W Bush's camp after a claim that the president, too, is descended from the people his supporters call "cheese-eating surrender monkeys".

Anyone who would vote for a man that uses this type of racial slurs should hang their heads in shame. Any Quebeckers who wish to separate and become better friends and trading partners with the USA; should re think the idea.

[Big Blue Machine]

At least give Bush credit, because he thinks what he is doing is right for the country.