Canada the next venezuela.

[bush_cheney2004]

4 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

I don’t disagree, but isn’t there appeal in the naive boy scout routine?  I don’t buy into it, but he’s very popular with women and millennials.  

 

Okay...then they can travel to China with a Trudeau smile on their faces.

[Zeitgeist]

Just now, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Okay...then they can travel to China with a Trudeau smile on their faces.

Many do.  I think Trudeau has to go, but I can see him getting back in because of the sycophants who buy his snake oil.  I can say the same for Trump on the right.  He has his loyal followers.  

[bush_cheney2004]

Just now, Zeitgeist said:

Many do.  I think Trudeau has to go, but I can see him getting back in because of the sycophants who buy his snake oil.  I can say the same for Trump on the right.  He has his loyal followers.  

 

You can say the same, but despite all of Trump's faults, he has not earned the United States a label as the West's weakest link vis-a-vis China.

[Zeitgeist]

8 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

You can say the same, but despite all of Trump's faults, he has not earned the United States a label as the West's weakest link vis-a-vis China.

It’s an interesting turn of events because he was probably China’s best hope as a western leader who’d give them a real audience.  Now that they’re losing that, the west might look quite different to China, especially going into a trade war. 

[bush_cheney2004]

4 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

It’s an interesting turn of events because he was probably China’s best hope as a western leader who’d give them a real audience.  Now that they’re losing that, the west might look quite different to China, especially going into a trade war. 

 

Trump can and has confronted China on trade and other matters as the reigning superpower....Trudeau can't, and has positioned himself as the weak back door.

[Zeitgeist]

Just now, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Trump can and has confronted China on trade and other matters as the reigning superpower....Trudeau can't, and has positioned himself as the weak back door.

Well that back door is likely closing. 

[bush_cheney2004]

Just now, Zeitgeist said:

Well that back door is likely closing. 

 

Maybe...maybe not....Trudeau is learning a hard lesson in realpolitik.    His brand and agenda mean far less in such an arena.

[Zeitgeist]

36 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Maybe...maybe not....Trudeau is learning a hard lesson in realpolitik.    His brand and agenda mean far less in such an arena.

I don’t think free and progressive people admire realpolitik. It’s more of an expression of empire and aggressive power, which may win the short game battles but seldom win the war, especially in the Information Age, where it’s all about persuasion.  People would generally rather have hope and believe in the goodwill and support of others than have fear and loathing towards them.  

It comes down to messages that instill fear and insecurity versus messages that inspire hope and connection.  If it’s all a Machiavellian game of gaining by fucking people over and getting away with as much theft as you can before you get caught, the result is a sense of futility or abhorrence towards humanity and even life itself.  People and countries have to believe they can work together for positive change or what’s the point?  I know this is just  hopey feely stuff to some, but psychologically I think it matters.  I mean really, most of what the various political parties do is tinkering.  Outlook has real import.  The best leaders capture people’s imagination.  Yes Trump could use America’s economic power to badger countries in trade negotiations, but every time he said something threatening or nasty, he lost people’s respect and diminished himself publicly.  It’s uninspiring. We need better leaders than that. 

Edited January 19, 2019 by Zeitgeist

[Dougie93]

realpolitik is inherent to the global thermonuclear standoff, which makes all nuclear powers existential threats to each other, wherein the stakes are potentially so dire, you simply cannot afford to govern by virtue signalling.

[bush_cheney2004]

14 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

I don’t think free and progressive people admire realpolitik. It’s more of an expression of empire and aggressive power, which may win the short game battles but seldom win the war, especially in the Information Age, where it’s all about persuasion.  People would generally rather have hope and believe in the goodwill and support of others than have fear and loathing towards them. 

 

Actually, they have won many of the "wars"....permitting western liberalism to survive.   Whining about Putin, or China, or even Trump without having the means to successfully oppose is problematic in the real world.   Trudeau/Canada cannot ride on the backs of those who still carry the most burden, no matter what he and Freeland may think.

[Zeitgeist]

4 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

realpolitik is inherent to the global thermonuclear standoff, which makes all nuclear powers existential threats to each other, wherein the stakes are potentially so dire, you simply cannot afford to govern by virtue signalling.

So nuke your opponents and see where it leads.  I agree with having a certain amount of hard power as a deterrent, but really, the use of force is something that should only be used as a protective force.  If it becomes a means of winning advantages, by threatening to attack and sometimes doing so, that’s the realm of Orwellian fake wars because there must always be an enemy and fear must accompany every decision.  It’s a shitty existence whereby even the master is a slave because the master only has meaning and purpose in relation to the slave.  This is basic Hegel.  

[Zeitgeist]

2 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Actually, they have won many of the "wars"....permitting western liberalism to survive.   Whining about Putin, or China, or even Trump without having the means to successfully oppose is problematic in the real world.   Trudeau/Canada cannot ride on the backs of those who still carry the most burden, no matter what he and Freeland may think.

Right, so start picking up the burden from the geopolitical messes made overseas, such as in Syria, rather than applying the take a dump and leave philosophy.  Canada has contributed a great deal supporting the refugees who fled Syria, but instead of supporting these people, the US president’s answer was to slam the door closed.  Canada has done such things too, like when the government sent a ship of Jewish migrants back to Europe in WW2.  We need real depth of understanding how to fix problems.  Military solution is often an oxymoron.  We need more than just hard power, however much you say that Canada needs more hard power, and I actually believe in boosting Canada’s military.

[Dougie93]

7 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

So nuke your opponents and see where it leads.  I agree with having a certain amount of hard power as a deterrent, but really, the use of force is something that should only be used as a protective force.  If it becomes a means of winning advantages, by threatening to attack and sometimes doing so, that’s the realm of Orwellian fake wars because there must always be an enemy and fear must accompany every decision.  It’s a shitty existence whereby even the master is a slave because the master only has meaning and purpose in relation to the slave.  This is basic Hegel.  

It's not so much that anybody is looking to nuke anybody, it just means the nukes are always the gorilla in the room.  In that, in any confrontation between nuclear Hegemons, they cannot assume that the confrontation will not escalate to the point of somebody brandishing their nukes, de facto nuclear blackmail, and then things get hot really fast.

In order to avoid these crises, nuclear Hegemons cannot be in anyway willy nilly, weaky meeky, squeasy pleasy, nor nicey wicey.

Because any sign of weakness or lack of resolve could incite one side or the other to think that nuclear blackmail might actually work, and that is the stuff nuclear wars are made of.

Edited January 19, 2019 by Dougie93

[Dougie93]

Canada is simply no man's land here, Canada is being used as pawn in a chess game, which is a war. 

Since that war is between the NCA in Washington directing the UKUSSA JSD and the Politburo in Beijing directing the PLA, this is already a nuclear war in progress.

We're just at the lower rungs of the esclatory ladder so the nuclear fangs don't have to come out yet.

[bush_cheney2004]

10 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Right, so start picking up the burden from the geopolitical messes made overseas, such as in Syria, rather than applying the take a dump and leave philosophy.  Canada has contributed a great deal supporting the refugees who fled Syria, but instead of supporting these people, the US president’s answer was to slam the door closed.  Canada has done such things too, like when the government sent a ship of Jewish migrants back to Europe in WW2.  We need real depth of understanding how to fix problems.  Military solution is often an oxymoron.  We need more than just hard power, however much you say that Canada needs more hard power, and I actually believe in boosting Canada’s military.

 

Believing is one thing...doing is quite another.   Canada believes in "hard power" less and less these days, while extolling those who do to carry more of the load.   And don't kid yourself, Canada also had a direct hand in making the messes far beyond the rejection of Jewish refugees.    Today's headlines about Canadian oil services and mining operations experiencing violent blowback are evidence enough of that, as were previous NATO/UN operations.

 

 

[Zeitgeist]

2 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Believing is one thing...doing is quite another.   Canada believes in "hard power" less and less these days, while extolling those who do to carry more of the load.   And don't kid yourself, Canada also had a direct hand in making the messes far beyond the rejection of Jewish refugees.    Today's headlines about Canadian oil services and mining operations experiencing violent blowback are evidence enough of that, as were previous NATO/UN operations.

 

 

No one is pretending to be above the fray.  My whole point is that Canada contributes in many ways.  It has contributed to a very high degree militarily in the past, but that’s probably not what is needed by our alliances anyway, since as you have already said, US military might is so obscenely overblown that another handful of arms won’t make a difference.  Canada has upped military spending and I think it should spend more, but not because I think Canada hasn’t contributed its fair share.  You haven’t seen the level of work supporting refugee children in ESL and PTSD, the impact on shelters, settlement workers, the private donations from citizens and charities.  I think these are very significant contributions.  The fact that current US leadership ignores or mocks this as “deadbeat” speaks volumes about his character. 

[Dougie93]

More military spending is just flushing good money after bad when your military is so broken the money just bleeds out all the orifices into the dirt.  At some point you have to stop giving the patient blood expanders because you need those for patients more likely to survive, the CAF is Priority Four already  in the national triage.

[bush_cheney2004]

1 minute ago, Zeitgeist said:

No one is pretending to be above the fray.  My whole point is that Canada contributes in many ways.  It has contributed to a very high degree militarily in the past, but that’s probably not what is needed by our alliances anyway, since as you have already said, US military might is so obscenely overblown that another handful of arms won’t make a difference. 

 

And there it is...the quintessential Canadian rationalization and justification for doing less.   Today, Canada cannot meet it's NATO and NORAD commitments at the same time, cannot deploy naval resources without allied logistical support, and can't even execute "peacekeeping" as it has in the past.   Bringing in refugees is a lot easier to force on Canadian taxpayers instead.

[Zeitgeist]

8 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

And there it is...the quintessential Canadian rationalization and justification for doing less.   Today, Canada cannot meet it's NATO and NORAD commitments at the same time, cannot deploy naval resources without allied logistical support, and can't even execute "peacekeeping" as it has in the past.   Bringing in refugees is a lot easier to force on Canadian taxpayers instead.

Canada’s contributions in Afghanistan were substantial and the third largest after the US and UK.  Canada’s NATO contributions are similar to most NATO countries.  Canada has made other non military contributions to war torn territories, training police, rebuilding, and resettling populations.  Just because we don’t throw unneeded billions at a military industrial corporate welfare complex doesn’t mean we haven’t made thoughtful contributions.  Canada spoke out for the plight of women in Afghanistan, making Malawi an honorary citizen.  We recently accepted a persecuted 18 year old Saudi woman. Trump only takes a stand for justice when under media pressure to do so, as in the case of Kashoggi. His attempted Muslim band was unconstitutional because it applied prejudice based on creed.  On Putin?  It’s like the theft and occupation of Ukraine territory never happened, let alone the murders of political opponents.  Trump has spun a bunch of harmless emails into a character assasination of Hilary Clinton, rousing the mob with the chant, “Lock her up”.  This is your leader and you’re worried about Trudeau and Canada?   Stop and put the car in reverse.  

[Dougie93]

26 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

And there it is...the quintessential Canadian rationalization and justification for doing less.   Today, Canada cannot meet it's NATO and NORAD commitments at the same time, cannot deploy naval resources without allied logistical support, and can't even execute "peacekeeping" as it has in the past.   Bringing in refugees is a lot easier to force on Canadian taxpayers instead.

Irreparable due to the fatal flaw in Confederation which creates a de facto Liberal Party of Canada dictatorship run from downtown Toronto. 

Downtown Toronto simply has no use for a military.

 

Edited January 19, 2019 by Dougie93

[Dougie93]

This is why  people hate Toronto.  Everybody hates their oppressive overlords.

[bush_cheney2004]

2 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Canada’s contributions in Afghanistan were substantial and the third largest after the US and UK.  Canada’s NATO contributions are similar to most NATO countries.

 

Were....past tense...left in 2011.   Canada is one of the worst NATO deadbeats for defense spending as a percentage of GDP, far below the 2.0% agreed level.

And that would be fine until Trudeau and Freeland had the unmitigated gall to insist that Trump and the Americans continue to do far more, while Canada purposely can/does less.

[Dougie93]

Canada requires its allies to do all the logistics for them, so that's not actually contributions at all, because that's net draining resources, otherwise known as a Boutique Army Token Force.

[Zeitgeist]

7 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Canada requires its allies to do all the logistics for them, so that's not actually contributions at all, because that's net draining resources, otherwise known as a Boutique Army Token Force.

You just discount all the work rebuilding and protecting girls who want to attend school, the training of police, the actual nitty gritty of running a society in one of the harshest Afghan regions.  Nothing boutique about it.  It doesn’t matter.  It’s more disinformation.  You don’t know how Canada has been tasked or why.  It’s leadership was respected.  And we were there for our American allies. 

[Dougie93]

Oh yeah, Nation Building, or as my associate Yzermandias calls it "The Humanitarian Pixie Dust", is a total MIC self licking ice cone.