• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

NORAD renewed indefinitely and to have maritime surveillance

CanuckTroop: The Star piece is paranoid fantasty.

I suggest you read Prof. Byers' bio:
http://www.ligi.ubc.ca/about/index.cfm?fuseaction=bio&peopleID=24

Mark
Ottawa
 
aesop081 said:
Explain to me how NORAD doing maritime surveillance hurts our sovereinty ?

It's tying us in to US foreign policy that worries me, not whether we are "joining forces" to do maritime surveillance. You guys are missing the point. Norad is fine for the time being. It's one ocean so it doesn't make sense  to not be "somewhat" integrated. What I 'm saying is that's as far as this better go. The point I was trying to consider is that what this group that's coming up with "complete integration of our military and foreign policy with the US" is trying to do. I tried to start a thread discussing them and their ideas, as its own conversation, but the moderators who apparently are Harper/US puppets as well locked it! There's  some democracy for ya!
 
MarkOttawa said:
CanuckTroop: The Star piece is paranoid fantasty.

I suggest you read Prof. Byers' bio:
http://www.ligi.ubc.ca/about/index.cfm?fuseaction=bio&peopleID=24

Mark
Ottawa

Okay I read it. He's a smart guy with lots of time on his hands to think about the issues. What's your point? Or are you completely anti-acedemia (ie smart people are dumb)
It's short enough so here's the whole thing....

Dr. Michael Byers holds a Canada Research Chair (Tier 1) in Global Politics and International Law at the University of British Columbia, where he also serves as Academic Director of the Liu Institute for Global Issues. Prior to July 2004, he was a tenured Professor of Law and Director of Canadian Studies at Duke University. From 1996-1999, he was a Fellow of Jesus College, Oxford University. His work focuses on the interaction of international law and international politics, especially with regard to international organizations, the use of military force, the law of the sea, human rights and Canada-United States relations. He is a regular contributor to the London Review of Books and Toronto Globe and Mail, and is the author, most recently, of War Law (London: Atlantic Books, 2005; Vancouver: Douglas & McIntyre, 2005).
 
CanuckTroop said:
It's tying us in to US foreign policy that worries me, not whether we are "joining forces" to do maritime surveillance. You guys are missing the point. Norad is fine for the time being. It's one ocean so it doesn't make sense  to not be "somewhat" integrated. What I 'm saying is that's as far as this better go. The point I was trying to consider is that what this group that's coming up with "complete integration of our military and foreign policy with the US" is trying to do. I tried to start a thread discussing them and their ideas, as its own conversation, but the moderators who apparently are Harper/US puppets as well locked it! There's  some democracy for ya!

Everyone who disagrees with you is a puppet, Whacko, out of their tree, or right wing-wing nuts. Why should anyone listen to you? Canada is a Constitutional Monarchy by the way. If you want democracy head south.  ;D

Think for yourself. We occupy the same continent- we have to be integrated to a certain degree. Picking fights with your neighbour and trading partner over some teenage douchebags "my view is right screw everyone else" opinion is not constructive.

If you dont like Harpers direction- next election vote against him. If the rest of the country disagrees with you dont tell them they are puppets or whacko. Just be glad you got to vote- since you are such a democratic enthusist you should be glad the majority got its way.

Screw
 
I'd argue in this thread, but really, what's the point?  I'm just a puppet...
 
CanuckTroop:
Dr. Michael Byers...is a regular contributor to the London Review of Books...

The London Review of Books is a rather leftish publication.  I should know as I subscribe to it--know your enemy!
http://www.lrb.co.uk/

Mark
Ottawa
 
Screw said:
Everyone who disagrees with you is a puppet, Whacko, out of their tree, or right wing-wing nuts. Why should anyone listen to you? Canada is a Constitutional Monarchy by the way. If you want democracy head south.  ;D

Think for yourself. We occupy the same continent- we have to be integrated to a certain degree. Picking fights with your neighbour and trading partner over some teenage douchebags "my view is right screw everyone else" opinion is not constructive.

If you dont like Harpers direction- next election vote against him. If the rest of the country disagrees with you dont tell them they are puppets or whacko. Just be glad you got to vote- since you are such a democratic enthusist you should be glad the majority got its way.

Screw

Hey I never said EVERYONE IS A PUPPET. Don't mis-quote me. This is what I said....

We as Canadians DO NOT NEED closer ties to US foreign policy! If you think that you're out of your tree IMO.

Are you saying that we should incorporate US foreign policy into our own? If you say yes, then I'm saying you're a whacko, or out of your tree, unless you can come up with any good reason.
 
CanuckTroop said:
I tried to start a thread discussing them and their ideas, as its own conversation, but the moderators who apparently are Harper/US puppets as well locked it! There's  some democracy for ya!

mis quote was it you say?

CanuckTroop said:
It's not a tin foil hat, bub, it's my interplanitary electrocapacitor. 

do you even know what an electrocapacitor is?
 
MarkOttawa said:
CanuckTroop:
The London Review of Books is a rather leftish publication.  I should know as I subscribe to it--know your enemy!
http://www.lrb.co.uk/

Mark
Ottawa

No offense intended here. I believe that "left" and "right" are political slogans intended to divide and conquer the populace, so I don't subscribe to any such generality and do not look at ANYTHING as being one or the other. That's for politicians. If I were forced to characterize myself, as one or the other on a spectrum, I'd be closer to the right, since i think:

1) gun control is stupid
2) small government is better than large
3) well funded military= better international credability

That being said, I also believe in doing what's best for the country, and so far, other than increasing funding to the military, I haven't been impressed by what Harper's up to. He's giving nuclear tech to India (not a member of the non - proliferation treaty) he's not showing us the dead coming home from Afghanistan and having lots of cozy photo ops with Bush. Oh and then there's the crappy soft wood lumber agreement that basically says no tariffs as long as lumber prices remain high.......we all know that the housing thing will crash soon....so that brings back the tariffs.........thanks Harper. ALL I'M SAYING IS WATCH THE MAN. If you believe in doing what's in Canada's best interests, and if you're in the military I'm assuming you do, then you won't take sides based on outdated US models like "left and right" and make up your own mind on things. I like what Harper is doing(mostly) for the military, but that's just one issues of many many others. If he gets too close to the US I'm saying we give him the boot. And common, honor the dead for fuggs sake! We in Canada aren't that wimpy that we'll "give up" if we see our dead returning in caskets. He's not giving us much credit there.

 
That being said, I also believe in doing what's best for the country, and so far, other than increasing funding to the military, I haven't been impressed by what Harper's up to. He's giving nuclear tech to India (not a member of the non - proliferation treaty) he's not showing us the dead coming home from Afghanistan and having lots of cozy photo ops with Bush. Oh and then there's the crappy soft wood lumber agreement that basically says no tariffs as long as lumber prices remain high.......we all know that the housing thing will crash soon....so that brings back the tariffs.........thanks Harper. ALL I'M SAYING IS WATCH THE MAN. If you believe in doing what's in Canada's best interests, and if you're in the military I'm assuming you do, then you won't take sides based on outdated US models like "left and right" and make up your own mind on things. I like what Harper is doing(mostly) for the military, but that's just one issues of many many others. If he gets too close to the US I'm saying we give him the boot. And common, honor the dead for fuggs sake! We in Canada aren't that wimpy that we'll "give up" if we see our dead returning in caskets. He's not giving us much credit there.

Well, I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm convinced.  Let's march on Ottawa immediately and unshackle ourselves!!!!

Ok- I might be kidding...

Canuck, buddy- most of this has been argued to death for the past week in about 6 other threads.  I think you are going to find it difficult to get many of us terribly worked up over your rant. 

It's not a tin foil hat, bub, it's my interplanitary electrocapacitor. 

Hey, at least you have a sense of humour (boy, I hope you were kidding...)
 
CanuckTroop:

I haven't been impressed by what Harper's up to. He's giving nuclear tech to India
.

Are you not confusing PM Harper with President Bush? 
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-04-05-riceindia_x.htm

Perhaps in more than this way?

You might also look at this guest-post at "Daimnation!":

"Why the US/India nuclear agreement is a Good Thing" (March 2)
http://www.damianpenny.com/archived/005915.html

Mark
Ottawa
 
is it in the water lately?

Why is it the loons with the weirdest agendas are always the ones least capable of making sense, but most capable of finding this site?
 
I see in your pic that you are a medic, stick to doing FA and patching up bullet wounds and dont criticize how i do my job.
Remember, I'm a reserve medic, I've never been near a real bullet wound in my life. I have done FA though. ;)
Seriously though, I didn't mean to criticize your job. What I was trying to say is that with this new agreement there will be more cooperation with on the maritime surveillance front, which is good, since Canada doesn't have a series of bases strung throughout the Pacific like the US, making maritime interdiction more likely, at least on the west coast.

I did more research on  the ships carrying the illegal migrants, it was in 99, there were four boats, the first one arriving on July 20th in Nootka sound, the last on Sep 9th in Nootka sound, all intercepted by the coast guard once they crossed into Canadian waters. I think I was a bit hasty in saying that a ball was dropped in regards to these incidents, though since there has not been, to my knowledge another case like this in almost 7 years I would say everybody is doing a great job in stopping this, wether stopping it in China or intercepting the boats sooner.

Also, I don't know if this agreement will mean that the US can help patrol just outside Canadian waters or even Canadian waters, I wouldn't mind since NAS Whidbey has 4 Patrol, 2 Fleet Air Reconnaissance squadrons, while Comox has 1 Patrol squadron. I think BC has more coastline than Washington state, but I could stand to be corrected.
All the best,
Bart
P.S. I have just written my MP to say I want more maritime patrol planes and crews.
http://webinfo.parl.gc.ca/MembersOfParliament/MainMPsCompleteList.aspx?TimePeriod=Current&Language=E sure comes in handy.
 
MarkOttawa said:
CanuckTroop:
Are you not confusing PM Harper with President Bush? 
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-04-05-riceindia_x.htm
"Why the US/India nuclear agreement is a Good Thing" (March 2)
http://www.damianpenny.com/archived/005915.html
Mark
Ottawa

Food for thought; did you know that the first Indian reactors were based on the Canadian CANDU?  What does that suggest to you?
 
Centurian1985 said:
Food for thought; did you know that the first Indian reactors were based on the Canadian CANDU?  What does that suggest to you?

espionage?
 
Centurian1985 said:
Food for thought; did you know that the first Indian reactors were based on the Canadian CANDU?  What does that suggest to you?

It suggests they quite likely used a taxi meter for the countdown to light her up?
 
Screw: No Indian espionage.  See:

"The Canadian contribution to India's nuclear weapons"
http://www.damianpenny.com/archived/006304.html

Mark
Ottawa
 
MarkOttawa said:
Screw: No Indian espionage.  See:

"The Canadian contribution to India's nuclear weapons"
http://www.damianpenny.com/archived/006304.html

Mark
Ottawa

Thanks for the link- I was a little confused because he said "based on".  However now I understand.

whiskey601 said:
Thye used a taxi meter for the countdown to light her up?

;D

Screw
 
Back
Top