Canada Better off with European Union or North American Union?

[Soldier_33D]

HI, i'm new to this forum so let me introduce myself. I served in the U.S Army 3rd Infantry Division (Abrams Tanker) for 3 1/2 years. Completed a 14 month combat tour from May 2007 - July 2008 as part of the Surge. Currently looking forward to going to school .

Now onto the topic. I know lots of Canadians in favor of joining the EU instead of NAU or vice versa (google search), tell me as military men, what is your opinion on that. A Supra North American Continent or A new member of the Supra European Continent?

 

[GAP]

My personal opinion is that while there might be avenues to develop freer trade with the EU, there is little in the EU compared to a NAU that would stand the light of day......

 

[Fusaki]

I think you'd find more around here in favour of an ABCA (America, Britain, Canada, Australia) union - at least as a military alliance anyways.

 

[Soldier_33D]

The ABCA alliance is definitely the strongest and most trusted among our nations. But the NAU and EU goes far beyond just a military alliance. Personally i'm NOT in favor of the NAU as i see there would be little to gain from it, but would rather have Canada join the U.S than the EU since we're on the same continent and eachother's biggest trading partners. TOO many similiarities between us and the only little or real difference is our governments and laws.

 

[CBH99]

Throwing details to the side and being purely hypothetical...

Given the choice between a North American Union and the EU, I'd rather us join the EU.  Our judicial system has much more in common with various EU countries, our foreign policy is more aligned with that of the EU compared to that of the US, and economically the EU is a much more viable entity.  We have a Queen on our currency, fight and serve for Her Majesty, and have much history with Europe.  (Obviously with the US as well.)

In my own personal opinion, I think the EU would be a better bet.  Geographically it might not work out, obviously, but in terms of economic & foreign policy, economic health and viability, judicial systems, etc, etc - I think we have more on common with the EU than the US. 

 

[Journeyman]

To what end would you have Canada favour the EU or some super-NAFTA? That is, what particular aspects are you thinking are important?

I mean, personally, I think we should take Wisconsin and Minnesota, Quebec (having absorbed St Pierre & Miquelon) can be governed from Louisiana, and Richmond BC should belong to Washington State. If you want to split Alberta around Wainwright, and amalgamate the southern half with Montana, fine -- inevitably a Reform-esque Party will govern both.

Mind you, I've been drinking both Unibroue and Big Rock products out of a Grolsch glass while watching TV, so my Euro-Northcom musings may be suspect    YMMV

 

[Soldier_33D]

You can take Wisconsin but not Minnesota . That's where i'm from and living at the moment .

 

[Kat Stevens]

And you can leave Alberta just the way it is, thanks!

 

[Journeyman]

Last time I rode across Minnesota, it poured the entire time. So I'm in no great hurry to absorb another maritime-wannabe state.

And Kat, I'm just saying, if Montana needs some adult leadership, they're welcome to join us -- but too many cowboys may be too much for Edmonton (to say nothing of the Newfoundland suburbs of Ft McMurray).

Mods - move to Radio Chatter yet?  :nod:

 

[armyvern]

Hell, JM - You're taking Wisconsin & Minnesota, but leaving the state that borders them to the South West alone?!!? I'm actually mildly amused.  8)

 

[Journeyman]

That 'SW bordering state' would be an awesome place for testing NBC capabilities.....except for one week in August -- and even that is centered on a village of 6700 gap-toothed souls for the other 51 weeks.

After enduring mile after mile after mile of freakin' Wall Drug SD billboards year after year, I'd invite the North Koreans in to practice their nuke skills!


[If you haven't caught Vern's point, click here. She doesn't just know loggie stuff  :nod: ]

 

[armyvern]

freakin' Wall Drug

LMAO. Been there, have the t-shirt and pic to prove it.

At least it's on the interstate --- beats some of them gravelly country roads (and visions of certain helmet-less death) I endured on my mile after mile after mile.

 

[Xiang]

The whole subject of the North American Union is somewhat troubling.  Regardless of whether or not one believes the conspiracy theories, the fact remains that this union is being pushed under the noses of Canadians (as well as Americans and Mexicans) by our leaders with very little (I will go as far as to say none at all) input by the Canadian people at all.

Canada would have the most to lose in this union in my opinion.  It would give a near free reign to our natural resources, and could potentially shift most manufacturing to Mexico for cheap labor (even more so than now), causing a massive loss of jobs.

I am also not too keen on simply giving up our ability to make sovereign decisions based on the fact that we would now be a part of a 3 member union, and any decisions we do make would need to be approved and in the collective interests of said union.

I joined this army to serve Canada, protect Canada's interests, fight for Canada and defend its sovereignty...  Not protect the interests of some union being planned behind our backs.

Sorry, but I just see more bad than good coming out of this.

 

[Edward Campbell]

HI, i'm new to this forum so let me introduce myself. I served in the U.S Army 3rd Infantry Division (Abrams Tanker) for 3 1/2 years. Completed a 14 month combat tour from May 2007 - July 2008 as part of the Surge. Currently looking forward to going to school .

Now onto the topic. I know lots of Canadians in favor of joining the EU instead of NAU or vice versa (google search), tell me as military men, what is your opinion on that. A Supra North American Continent or A new member of the Supra European Continent?

"... lots of Canadians [are] in favor of joining the EU ..." Very true, but at least an equal number are in favour of believing in the tooth fairy.

This may come as an awful shock, but the European Union is intended <gasp> for Europeans. Canada is not a European nation.

I'm with Journeyman,; it was good of the Mods to move this from wherever it started to here, but you didn't go far enough; his belongs in Radio Chatter, at best.

 

[Old Sweat]

The whole subject of the North American Union is somewhat troubling.  Regardless of whether or not one believes the conspiracy theories, the fact remains that this union is being pushed under the noses of Canadians (as well as Americans and Mexicans) by our leaders with very little (I will go as far as to say none at all) input by the Canadian people at all.

Could you please provide some proof that supports your above statement? By proof I mean material such as documents obtained under access to information, and not internet chatter or appeals for funding by various special interest groups.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

I moved it here as I thought it MIGHT turn into a debate but, once again, I was mistaken so......

 

[armyvern]

I'll take the blame for that Bruce ...

I don't believe in tooth fairies. Look at Cornwall; we've got a govnt too chicken shit to take a stand and enforce our already existing international borders --- I can't see them ordering us down for the Wisconsin/Minnesota/Sturgis (the only bit of that state important; well no, the Firehouse Saloon in Rapid City was worth it too) anytime soon.

Perhaps, when we get a grip on our own house --- we can actually whip down and take over Soldier_33D's. 

 

[Old Sweat]

Don't be too hard on yourself, Vern. The rest of us are quite capable of dumping on you, thank you very much.

In my opinion, this thread was destined to go flying off in all directions. The North American Union (NAU) doesn't pass the say what test, while no sane person would want to tie us to the bureaucratic insanity that has evolved from the EU. Consider the NAU from the point of view of the US which is much larger than the other two members in any category - population, economy, etc - except geographic area that matters. In my opinion there is no way that the US would surrender its sovereignty to a three-party arrangement with a rotating chair and a legislature based on equal representation of the three states. (On a slight tangent, that is why the position put forward by certain Quebec nationalists for a two party governing body (Quebec and the ROC) with equal representation would not fly.)

 

[Michael OLeary]

Well, we could always revisit proposals for an expanded confederation with a few Caribbean islands.

 

[c_canuk]

I think making it easier to shift resource ownership from one state to another would be a mistake, because Canada's government tends to approach trade negotiations like a neighbor borrowing the lawn mower, while the US tends to approach like a used car salesman.

We tend to not get the best deals we could because our government isn't prepared to put up a stink and do any hard negotiating while the US expects to do just that from the start, and rightfully so.

I fear we'd end up in a Flanders/Homer relationship with the US.